Line Substitution: 8800 GT vs. 8800 GTS

As we've mentioned, on paper the 8800 GT looks much better in every area except for memory bandwidth. Even though memory size is an advantage for the 640MB card, we know from experience that the added memory size really doesn't net us much in the way of performance except in the most extreme circumstances. So we certainly expect the 8800 GT to outperform both the more expensive 8800 GTS 320MB and (by extension) the 8800 GTS 640MB. Essentially, this should give us the performance of a $400 card for $200 - $250. Quite a good deal no matter how you slice it.

And from the first, our expectations are upheld and then some. The 8800 GT does top the GTS. This seals the deal: the 8800 GTS is no longer a viable product. While NVIDIA has stated that the 320MB part will be dropped very quickly, they expect the 640MB card to stick around for a few months. We don't see this happening unless retailers start selling the 640MB part for $250 as well. While such a drastic price reduction is possible, it isn't very likely. Once people hear about the performance difference of the 8800 GT over the 8800 GTS, there may be a lot of $400+ 8800 GTS inventory sitting on shelves.







The Test NVIDIA Demolishes... NVIDIA? 8800 GT vs. 8600 GTS
POST A COMMENT

90 Comments

View All Comments

  • defter - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    Yes it has VP2 processor for video decoding. But why would you need a fast gaming card for HTPC? Wouldn't 8400/8600 be a cheaper/cooler solution? Reply
  • Hulk - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    Thanks for the reply.
    This card looks to be pretty cool running and when not running 3D intensive apps I'm sure power consumption and noise is really low.
    So it might be nice to be able to play a little on a 52"LCD!
    Reply
  • DerekWilson - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    also, if you go with a less powerful card for HD HTPC you'll want at minimum the 8600 GTS -- which is not a good card. The 8800 GT does offer a lot more bang for the buck, and Sparkle is offering a silent version. Reply
  • spittledip - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    Nothing like cherry picking the games... I don't understand why games like Stalker and Prey weren't tested as the 2900XT has superior performance on those titles, as well as other titles. Seems like a biased test. Reply
  • AssBall - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    They didn't test The Sims2 or DeerHunter either... Reply
  • DerekWilson - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    lol ... stalker and prey?

    we tested quake wars, which is effectively updated prey (id's engine).

    and stalker runs better on nvidia hardware -- when tested properly (many people use demo flybys that point up at the sky way too much rather than fraps run throughs).
    Reply
  • abe88 - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    Hmmm I thought ATI's RV630 and RV610 chips both support PCI-E 2.0? Reply
  • Wirmish - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    Yeah but it's not worth mentioning because theses GPU are not from nVidia. Reply
  • defter - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    quote:

    The G92 is fabbed on a 65nm process, and even though it has fewer SPs, less texturing power


    G92 has the same amount of SPs and MORE texturing power (twice as many addressing units) than G80. However, 8800GT card has some SPs and texture units disabled.

    Reply
  • DerekWilson - Monday, October 29, 2007 - link

    well, first, if G92 has those units disabled, then it can't claim them.

    second, NVIDIA would not confirm that the G92 as incarnate on 8800 GT has units disabled, but it is fair to speculate that this configuration was chosen to work out yields on their first 65nm part.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now