8800mGTX Sli benchmarks

[bargegod]

ok, so im considering giving my daughter gpu a parent. how nice. lmao anyhow could anyone with a dual 8800mGTX in Sli system gimme some scores from 3dmark06? would love to see some numbers. my single puts out on avg 9745 marks. thanx all!!

Sager np9262: 17" 1920x1200wuxga, E6850 Core2duo 3.0ghz 1.3ghz fsb 4mb L2 cache, 4mb 800mhz ram, 1x nvidia geforce 8800mgtx 512mb gpu, 3x100gb hdd 7200rpm, Raid 0, vista ultimate x64 os, tv tuner, x-fi 7.1 sound card, triple fan cooler, 2.0 webcam

[pad11]

baregod, i'd love to but 3DMark06 Basic won't let me change the reso to 1920x1200 and since that's my native, there just isn't any legitimacy in the marks...it's frustrating!!!

pat!

[readeh]

pad11 You dont run 3dmark06 with 1920x1200 res.. Do it default and compare with others with same system.

[pad11]

i mean, i would, but i don't do ANYTHING at that resolution, so the numbers don't mean much PLUS since it isn't my native reso, it may, indeed affect those #s...I'd really like to see it w/ my native!!!!

pat!

[bargegod]

awwww, lol its ok. was just wondering. not really wantn to spend 800.00 or better on a 2nd gpu if it isnt worth it, and well numbers really dont lie... ttyl

[readeh]

It really doesnt matter what res you use.. 3dmark is just a program where u can see if ur system performance is optimal to others with same system or to enlarge your e-pen if you got a good system.

[Sanosukeafo]

It really doesnt matter what res you use.. 3dmark is just a program where u can see if ur system performance is optimal to others with same system or to enlarge your e-pen if you got a good system.

Or maybe it's a good way to determine how well your system can run games?

a system that gets 10000 is obviously going to play games better then a system that gets 6000.

anywho, I'm also interested in seeing the numbers of SLI 8800m vs single. Then again, since my current single 7900 GS in my Inspiron plays CoH, Shadowrun, Vanguard, medal of honor : airborne, UT3, Sup-com, and many other newer games, i'm sure the single 8800m is more then enough for everything exept crysis. But even my Inspiron can play Crysis on 1280 x 800 and medium settings. So i'm not too worried about it.

I Might buy another 8800m in the future if there is enough of an increase in performance and if the price ever drops under 500 bucks.

[bargegod]

im with u on that. lol

Sager np9262: 17" 1920x1200wuxga, E6850 Core2duo 3.0ghz 1.3ghz fsb 4mb L2 cache, 4mb 800mhz ram, 1x nvidia geforce 8800mgtx 512mb gpu, 3x100gb hdd 7200rpm, Raid 0, vista ultimate x64 os, tv tuner, x-fi 7.1 sound card, triple fan cooler, 2.0 webcam

[readeh]

It really doesnt matter what res you use.. 3dmark is just a program where u can see if ur system performance is optimal to others with same system or to enlarge your e-pen if you got a good system.

Or maybe it's a good way to determine how well your system can run games?

That's what i said :) but dont put your trust on 3dmark 100%
The HD2900XT scored higher 3dmarks than the 8800gtx but in real performance it didnt have a chance.

Still resolution doesnt matter if 98% of the people use default settings.

[Sanosukeafo]

Ah, well I don't compair ATI to Nvidia with any program or game. Nvidia knows how to make solid cards that work great for all games. ATI has given me nothing but trouble every time I make the mistake of buying one. :)

I wonder why people still insist on buying from ATI? Their prices aren't even great considering the quality of the junk they push out to the public.

[robamb2002]

In my opinion ATI is a necessary evil. They are someone to keep Nvidia on their toes technology-wise and price-wise. With no competition any business will become greedy and complacent with second rate products.

[Kaldor]

Nvidia has a good product yes. The 8XXX series cards are very good and have been for a long time. However the 8800 GTX still is the best hi-res SLI card out there due to the memory. The 9XXX series are nothing but warmed over 8XXX series chips.

ATI is more than a necessary evil. Everyone seems to forget ATI has trumped Nvidia a few times over the years. 9700 Pro was an animal of a card and it took Nvidia a few years to catch up. The same is happening now for ATI. The 8XXX series cards were smoking, and ATI is playing catchup.

I look to ATI to put out a really good part this summer when they release their next gen, 4XXX, cards. I think AMD could really do a heck of a job building laptop chipsets if they want because they can do it all in house.

[bargegod]

well said my friend, well said.

[Sanosukeafo]

ATI sometimes comes out with "faster" cards, but quality of their products suck. I remember buying an ATI card years back and it wouldn't play some games for months untill drivers solved the issue. Then the next year I tried to buy another ATI card and it came to me DOA, so I sent it back RMA and the replacement was DOA too....

ATI gives Nvidia competition sure, but simply put, only because people are dumb enough to buy it.

And now we got Intell coming on board with the Larabee GPU. Even if it is faster then whatever Nvidia card is out at the time, I garentee compatability issues are going to be a huge problem. When it comes down to it, Nvidia is the only way to go. It's always been that way, and it always will be.

[readeh]

Wauw we got some nvidia fanboys in here.. I got a nvidia card myself but i'll rather buy ati, hopefully ati will come out with some good stuff later this year.

dont you think DOA happens for nvidia sanosuke? lol.

[Sanosukeafo]

It happens with anything electronic, but normaly you RMA it and you get a new one that works, but on that ATI card, I traded in a broke card and got another broke card in return. Maybe thats just bad luck, but considering I have never had DOA Nvidia card, and I got 2 ATI DOA's back to back, i'd say it's a quality controll issue, not luck.

Also, ATI cards have a history of running some games good and others bad. Which is rediculous at best. If I buy a $500 card it better play everything I throw at it with no hick-ups. I don't want to have issue after issue and wait for drivers to fix the problem. I want what Nvidia always gives, a great working card that plays what you throw at it.

Fanboy you say, or maybe just a smart consumer?

[robamb2002]

I remember buying an ATI card years back and it wouldn't play some games for months untill drivers solved the issue.
I seem to remember in recent history about a Nvidia card whos drivers held it off the market for almost 4 months :P (at least they didn't release a card that wouldn't work)

[runna03]

I recently was able to play with the Sager np9262 - running dual 8800 gtx , 4gb memory, and a Q6700 - using vista ultimate 32-bit - and the newest nvidia drivers from Sager. - 1 card alone was hitting just over 10,000. With dual - I hit 13,000. I hadn't tweaked the OS at all.

I'd like to see where I could possibly make more improvement with less processes running in the background.

I personally could care less for scores, I just want the best performance in the game.

[pad11]

I personally could care less for scores, I just want the best performance in the game.

BINGO!!!

I fully agree...so far, my machine is eating games up..couldn't be happier right now!

pat!

[TraNceD.gURL]

Might as well post my updated 3DMark06 SLI score: 12996 (again, no tweaks, benching as I run it). And now I'm gonna go play Crysis. :)

[robamb2002]

Might as well post my updated 3DMark06 SLI score: 12996
:twisted: DROOL :twisted:

[Pradege]

Defualt setting on 3DMark 06 no tweaking basic drivers that came with the system ran system as normal turning off nothiung, scored 13155 did run fans at max during the test.

[Kaldor]

Scores mean little to nothing in the grand scheme of things. But if you want to talk scores I think an Intel/ATI combo hold the world 3d mark record, and the funny thing is, the 3870x2 was on air. Nvidia has allready been busted for writing drivers to skew benchmarks in their favor. Another thing of note is that alot of AA is pointless. When your blazin thru a FPS do you pause to say "Man that 8x AA is really nice"? Also, how many Vista crashes has Nvidia drivers cause for the first 4-6 months? And while we are talking about Nvidia screwin the pooch, what about OCing on a 7XX series mobo and it thrashing the image on the HD? Or the massive memory issues the 6XX series mobo's have when OCing?

Im not a fanboi for either. I run a Nvidia right now. Thats because when I bought my 8800 GTX, that was the best card out there. The 680i was the best chipset at that time too. Intel hadnt rolled out there new chipsets yet so Nvidia was the best option for OCing and SLI. Now is slightly different. Intel supports Xfire (AMD, go figgure) and their mobos are far stabler and have less issues overall than Nvidias. The only thing Nvidia really has going for it it atm is SLI. And lets face it, for 90%+ of the population a single card solution is more than enough.

But lets talk about ATI vs Nvidia in the past. Lets see, we will go back quite a ways, circa 96-97. Major players: 3dfx, Nvidia, ATI and some other random junk. 3dfx ruled the schoolyard. They simply had the best 3d solution at that time using either an addin PCI card with a pass thru or a single card solution that was basically 2 graphics cards on 1 card, a 2d and 3d chip with shared RAM. The Nvidia had their own 2d/3d card but the name escapes me atm. I think it was a Riva, or something. ATI was mostly involved with CAD and heavy 3d apps for business. They really werent for average users wanting to run OpenGL, Glide or D3D. Skip ahead a coupla years. TNT came out for Nvidia. Very good card for its day. 3dfx released some Voodoo card. ATI pretty much sat back in the business segment still as thats where the real money is, and the card they released for home user, the Rage decelerator, was kinda trashy.

Nvidia started releasing Geforce cards. At this point 3dfx pretty much crashed and burned. Nvidia pretty much was running the show and bought 3dfx out. I cant remember what year exactly, but Direct X 9 came out and ATI released the 9700 Pro. This card flat out dominated the existing Nvidia stuff. ATI pretty much had Nvidia wrapped up with the 9800 as well. This lasted a coupla years which Nvidia released some righteously crappy 5XXX series cards that just flat out were not as good, in both FPS or quality. They had a coupla bright spots but ATI would fire back and put them down again. Kinda reminds you of the current situation, huh?

Not until Nvidia released the 6XXX did they finally have their s__t together. ATI had the X1XXX cards, which a few of them were pretty solid. Nvidia moved into the 7XXX series and ATI couldnt keep up at this point. The 2XXX cards pretty much sucked.

Then Nvidia released the 8XXX series cards. Smoking. Very fast and high quality. SLI finally worked right. ATI pretty much has sucked since the X1XX cards. The 3870's are OK, but for the money the Nvidia part is always better. I blame some of this in AMD buyout, and the rest on the cycles within the business. Nvidias 9XXX series cards are a joke. They are just renaming current 8XXX cards with a slightly different chip, and voila, you have the 9XXX cards. What a joke. The funny thing, 2 8800 GTXs will still pound 2 9800 GTXs in high res, high detail games ala Crysis.

If history repeats itself, which it will, as it always does, ATI will release a card within the next 6-9 months that will top Nvidias current and future stuff. Why do I say this? AMD lost what, 353 (?) million first quarter this year? I think they have figured out they need to make ATI pay, or the buyout was pointless. AMD/ATI definitely has the facilities and smarts to put Nvidia in their place. Ive seen the specs for the 4XXX cards @ Toms Hardware for the next gen. They are very solid and I have a feeling they will easily run with whatever Nvidia is cooking up.

One thing about card quality. Ive learned over the years that all manufacturers are not the same. Ive RMAed a 9600 XT 3 times, but it was a Powercolor. I put a ASUS 9600XT into another PC, and other than replacing the fan on the card, its still going strong. The same goes for my Diamond 9700 Pro. The fan died, but it now resides in my server/storage box, just as happy as can be. My buddy had 3 5XXX Nvidias burn up on him until he got one that worked. Cant remember his brand name. Had a friend running 6800s in SLI. He had to RMA both cards at least once. Something the manufacturer screwed up with the SLI setup on the card. I had a PNY 7600 Nvidia that wouldnt even let my PC post, DOA. Long story short, doesnt matter ATI or Nvidia. You run across junk all the time. Warranty is where its at. If a company is willing to warranty for 5 years, that tells me the company has a decent product and will stand behind their stuff. However the flip side is true too. You can buy Made in China tools for $1 that have a lifetime warranty, or you can buy the Mac for $5 that you know will last forever. At a dollar a piece the company can afford to constantly replace, but Mac, SnapOn follow that we sell you something once and it will hardly ever let you down. Same rules apply here for video cards.

But I digress. Im no fanboy either way. But I do like good competition. It keeps prices down and innovation up. Long live good competition. Down with clueless fanboys.

Edit: Remembered (kind of) name of Nvidias early card and my crappy typing/spelling

[Kaldor]

ATI sometimes comes out with "faster" cards, but quality of their products suck. I remember buying an ATI card years back and it wouldn't play some games for months untill drivers solved the issue. Then the next year I tried to buy another ATI card and it came to me DOA, so I sent it back RMA and the replacement was DOA too....

ATI gives Nvidia competition sure, but simply put, only because people are dumb enough to buy it.

And now we got Intell coming on board with the Larabee GPU. Even if it is faster then whatever Nvidia card is out at the time, I garentee compatability issues are going to be a huge problem. When it comes down to it, Nvidia is the only way to go. It's always been that way, and it always will be.

See my post above on bad or DOA cards from manufacturers.

I must be one of the dumb ones then. See above timeline and think about what I wrote. ATI has beaten Nvidia more than a few times over the years in both outright speed and quality.

Larabee CPU = :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I think Nvidias own Pres said it best about that can of worms. Go take a look on Anandtech for the complete story. I dont think AMD is worried, the 780g (?) is a great low buck chipset, and is AMD is pushing the right direction with this setup. In a nutshell about Intel. Intel is tryin to do away with discrete (ATI, Nvidia) video solutions. They instead want to dedicate a core from a CPU to do all graphics rendering. While their idea holds water, Nvidia and AMD/ATI are light years ahead in graphics than Intel is. Basically they both have a 8 year lead time on what Intel is offering atm. ATI and Nvidia were offering 8 years ago in a performance card what Intel is offering now. Larabee may work, it may not. Will it supplant dedicated video cards for enthusiasts users?, unlikely. Will it make inroads for the low dollar, low performance crowd?, very likely. Will it have issues?, possibly. Is it the future?, maybe. Who knows, the technology is far too new to make a decision as to whether or not it will work.

As far as compatibility issues. Every manufacturer has had their ups and downs. You just seem to never want to point out Nvidias downs.

[Kaldor]

It happens with anything electronic, but normaly you RMA it and you get a new one that works, but on that ATI card, I traded in a broke card and got another broke card in return. Maybe thats just bad luck, but considering I have never had DOA Nvidia card, and I got 2 ATI DOA's back to back, i'd say it's a quality controll issue, not luck.

Also, ATI cards have a history of running some games good and others bad. Which is rediculous at best. If I buy a $500 card it better play everything I throw at it with no hick-ups. I don't want to have issue after issue and wait for drivers to fix the problem. I want what Nvidia always gives, a great working card that plays what you throw at it.

Fanboy you say, or maybe just a smart consumer?

See my above post about RMAs, manufacturers and such. No company is perfect. Ive gotten 3 bad ATI 9600 pros, and a bad Nvidia 7600. I know far more people that have had issues with Nvidia cards over ATI however. Also keep in mind I work in IT, computer repair and troubleshooting, and networking for the State of WI. My background is pretty broad on the subject of warranties, RMAs and general failure rates.

As far running some games better. Heh, Nvidia was proven that they were tweaking drivers to run benchmarks better so their cards looked better on paper. ATI has never done that as far as anyone can tell. They either kick a__ or suck a__. Nvidia has had a few games like this in the past as well. Its very hard for a company to write drivers for every possible scenario or game on the market. You need to point the finger at the company writing the software. Microsoft has the same issue. If you want totally perfect drivers and software, go buy a Mac. Steve Jobs has all the hardware and software locked down. Except for his crap still isnt perfect either. Its the way the business works.

[bargegod]

thanx all for the 3dmark06 score that you pposted. phenomenal scores too!!! laterz...........

[RaderCad]

:D

Good rant Kaldor! And good posts everyone, great scores on the SLI. Thanks!

I have been around awhile and I remember the times prior to ATI and nVidia, the dark ages, DOS was there. There was nothing. Then ATI came along with it's all in wonder (Ohhh! This person is OLD!.) Then the first 3d decelerator cards came out. It's true! The performance was worse with the card than without. Using software rendering through the cpu was faster than these first 3d cards. Anyway you can't be a fanboy of anything anymore as things change so fast. :?

Even though some architecture is better and 64 bits does scale better with AMD, and their multi-threaded quad cores are true quad cores, the company just can't seem to get it's poop in a group. And now they have ATI to drag down as well. Go figure. They are playing catch up and will continue to do so, unless they skip over a couple of hardware releases and go on to something that is 18 months ahead of everyone else. :)

[Kaldor]

Nvidia has been on top for 2 years now, but times are changing. Its the nature of the beast. Company A is winning, company B works hard and surpasses company A. Rinse - repeat - rinse - repeat over the course of 6-7 years. Intel and AMD have done this very same thing over the years as well.

:D

Good rant Kaldor! And good posts everyone, great scores on the SLI. Thanks!

I have been around awhile and I remember the times prior to ATI and nVidia, the dark ages, DOS was there. There was nothing. Then ATI came along with it's all in wonder (Ohhh! This person is OLD!.) Then the first 3d decelerator cards came out. It's true! The performance was worse with the card than without. Using software rendering through the cpu was faster than these first 3d cards. Anyway you can't be a fanboy of anything anymore as things change so fast. :?


I didnt want to get into the whole DOS and Win 3.1 portion of it. Not only do I not want to date myself too much, lol, but it really isnt pertinent to 3d gaming. We used to laugh a buddy of mine that a Rage 3d decelerator in his PC. We thought we were cool with our single card 3dfx cards and our 2 card pass thru 3dfx setups. Back in the early days you never knew what you were getting as the standards were whack with Glide, Open GL, Direct3d and I think there was 1 or 2 more as well.

[RaderCad]

I didnt want to get into the whole DOS and Win 3.1 portion of it. Not only do I not want to date myself too much, lol, but it really isnt pertinent to 3d gaming. We used to laugh a buddy of mine that a Rage 3d decelerator in his PC. We thought we were cool with our single card 3dfx cards and our 2 card pass thru 3dfx setups. Back in the early days you never knew what you were getting as the standards were whack with Glide, Open GL, Direct3d and I think there was 1 or 2 more as well.


Ah the bad old days. Sigh!

[Sanosukeafo]

Nvidia has been on top for 2 years now, but times are changing. Its the nature of the beast. Company A is winning, company B works hard and surpasses company A. Rinse - repeat - rinse - repeat over the course of 6-7 years. Intel and AMD have done this very same thing over the years as well.



I didnt want to get into the whole DOS and Win 3.1 portion of it. Not only do I not want to date myself too much, lol, but it really isnt pertinent to 3d gaming. We used to laugh a buddy of mine that a Rage 3d decelerator in his PC. We thought we were cool with our single card 3dfx cards and our 2 card pass thru 3dfx setups. Back in the early days you never knew what you were getting as the standards were whack with Glide, Open GL, Direct3d and I think there was 1 or 2 more as well.

I clearly remember buying an ATI card and some games I owned wouldn't play. I updated drivers and such and nothing worked. research on forums confirmed that some games were not compatible with ATI cards. I went with Nvidia from then on out and never had a problem, and thats what I expect when I buy a GPU, it better play everything.

ATI did have a good performance lead over the 5000 series cards released, I agree with that, but games were still very playable with the 5000 cards. I know, I owned 1. and 6xxx 7xxx 8xxx and now the 9xxx series cards are all much better then any ATI card that was put out at the same time.

When I buy a GPU and games wont even run on it, thats downright wrong. ATI can try and get a few FPS faster then Nvidia all they want. In the end, the 9800 GTX runs crysis on max settings, hell so does a 8800GT lol. ATI will never get my money again lol.

[Sanosukeafo]

And you assume I don't know how business works? I know how it works rather well, and you are right, its just like AMD/intel. Hell I used to buy only AMD, but now I buy intel because it's much better. But the difference is simple ; AMD and intel have always WORKED. ATI burned me with a product that didn't even work, and i'll never let them take my money again.

[Kaldor]

"I clearly remember buying an ATI card and some games I owned wouldn't play. I updated drivers and such and nothing worked. research on forums confirmed that some games were not compatible with ATI cards. I went with Nvidia from then on out and never had a problem, and thats what I expect when I buy a GPU, it better play everything"

Name the games that wouldnt play? I cant honestly think of anything my 9700 pro, 9600 XT, 9800 XT, or my 1950 XT wouldnt play. Thats 4 seperate cards, spanning probably 4 years of production. If you didnt notice these were some of the best cards ATI made over the years. Over the course of that time Ive also owned an early 3dfx single card solution, a TNT2 Ultra, a Geforce 2, a 7600, a 7800 and a 8800 GTX. You can say Ive owned one of close to every generation of video card, whether it was 3dfx, ATI, or Nvidia. I cant recall any major release that wouldnt run on ATI hardware. You have to remember that ATI can write drivers for a version of Direct X, or Open GL, but if the games authors dont follow the rules laid down by D3D or OpGL, it wont run on anything. It could be there was one or 2 games that wouldnt run on ATI hardware, Im not claiming there isnt. But Im pretty sure Nvidia has had similar luck over the years. BTW, right now Nvidia is doing horrible on drivers. Whens the last time you seen an update that was pointed at the 8XXX cards? ATI is releasing new drivers like clockwork.

"ATI did have a good performance lead over the 5000 series cards released, I agree with that, but games were still very playable with the 5000 cards. I know, I owned 1. and 6xxx 7xxx 8xxx and now the 9xxx series cards are all much better then any ATI card that was put out at the same time."

ATI flat out killed Nvidia when the 9XXX cards came out. It continued with Nvidias "stellar" 5XXX cards and the early 6XXX cards. It took Nvidia a bit, but they did get their shit together with the 6XXX cards after hey had been out for a bit. But by your thinking, the cards that sucked still could play games so they were OK. Look at whats going on now. You certainly can play games on an ATI 3XXX card, and they arent too bad, so that must make them OK? Im going to bag on ATI here a sec with just 2 letters that sum up their current problems, "AA." Double standard here with your thinking.

"When I buy a GPU and games wont even run on it, thats downright wrong. ATI can try and get a few FPS faster then Nvidia all they want. In the end, the 9800 GTX runs crysis on max settings, hell so does a 8800GT lol. ATI will never get my money again lol."

FYI, Crysis doesnt run on a 9800 GTX or a 8800 GT on max settings unless your playing on a 19" low res LCD. At 1920x1200 on a decent monitor not even the high dollar SLI rigs can run Crysis on hi with all the crap turned on unless you like slideshows. Their getting closer though. Its just too bad Crytech couldnt have done a better job coding the game so it would run smoother on current hardware, rather than having to wait 2 generations to see what the game is really like will all options on.

I buy whats proven to be the best. Thats why I run a 8800 GTX now. Im looking at the future, the 4XXX ATI cards should be smoking, but time will tell.

[Sanosukeafo]

9800GTX plays crysis at 1080p. I have one.

And the 2 games I remember not working with an ATI card were Quake3arena and Jedi Knight 2.

I think it took close to a year before drivers came out that fixed the problem. I remember the Q3A problem was some conflict with OpenGL and the card.

Anywho, you want facts? here are a few.

-AMD CPU's have always worked with every game out.
-Intel CPU's have always worked with every game out.
-Nvidia GPU's have always worked with every game out.

ATI.... not so much

[Kaldor]

9800GTX plays crysis at 1080p. I have one.

And the 2 games I remember not working with an ATI card were Quake3arena and Jedi Knight 2.

I think it took close to a year before drivers came out that fixed the problem. I remember the Q3A problem was some conflict with OpenGL and the card.

Anywho, you want facts? here are a few.

-AMD CPU's have always worked with every game out.
-Intel CPU's have always worked with every game out.
-Nvidia GPU's have always worked with every game out.

ATI.... not so much

Well I did a little research. I actually own both of these games and still have them, somewhere, lol.

I can confirm that JK2 had absolutely no problems running on my 9700 Pro which at that time was pretty shiny and new as the card was released July 2002 and I purchased in August according to my Newegg account history. JK2 was released March 2002. I think I ran JK2 on my Geforce 2 with no issues as well. ATI was most likely running the 8XXX cards at this time. They weren't barn burners in performance but they did work.

As far as Quake 3 Arena goes, it was released in December 1999. I think back in those days I was running a Nvidia TNT2 Ultra. I know this cards had no issues either. I have no point of reference whether or not the ATI cards would run this stuff or not becuase most people I knew were running some Nvidia card or a 3dfx. ATIs cards certainly sucked at this time.

I did just spend the last 30 minutes trying to dig up old info on this problem. I cant really find anything. This is ancient history you are referring to.

But some thoughts of my own, in 1999 ATI was hardly a player in the performance GPU business. 3dfx ha been in control for awhile, and Nvidia was just getting going with their TNT cards. So saying that a crappy ATI card couldnt run Q3A is kind of pointless.

JK2 was released in 2002 which was circa Geforce 3/4 and ATI 8XXX. Geforces were rocking, ATI was simply competent. ATI released the 9700 that summer, and it blew Nvidia away.

Only question I have about you problems are which ATI cards were you actually running when playing these games? Did you pull one from the bottom of the bargain bin and hope it would run or what?

As far as Crysis goes, yup, 1080p is 1920x1200. But I can say without any doubts that you are not running 1920x1200 resolution with all the graphics on high with a single 9800 GTX. Cant even do that with 2 9800 GTXs and 2 9800 GX2s are touchy at best.

[Justin_W@XoticPC]

Please try to keep this forum thread on topic, it was meant for 8800mGTX Sli benchmark scores.

If you would like to PM one another on your discussion of whether ATI or nVidia/AMD or Intel is better you may choose to do so.

[danny_christ]

yer, its 8800m gtx benchmark threat.

[Kaldor]

No problem Justin. I think Ive pretty much proven my point here. I have alot of time on my hands and a 40 Mb down 10 Mb up internet connection at work. Gives me something to do all day, hehe.

[OregonCoastGamer]

Perhaps I will start a "who's the biggest nerd" thread and you two can duke it out there.... Would it be possible for you moderators to clean up this thread and move the stuff that doesn't belong to another thread, just for new readers convienence. Thanks.

[robamb2002]

Perhaps I will start a "who's the biggest nerd" thread.....


says the man with the most posts outside a moderator :-P

[OregonCoastGamer]

I was waiting for you to catch me on that one :p. I check the forums regularly when I get home from school because I like to help out people with their problems or whatever, as I expect they would do the same for me. Soon I will have so many posts, my title will just say "GOD".... what can I say, I am competitive even in the forum world ;).

[readeh]

<3 fanboys

[Sanosukeafo]

Also, I know what 1080p is, it's easier to type then 1920x1200. And correction, I went and looked and I run crysis on high and 2 medium settings. (not max) high. So you're right no card will run the game on "max" settings. But its good enough anywho, and it's just 1 game. Every other game runs max settings and 1080p great.

Also, I did my own research and ATI cards back in 1999 had huge problems with openGL games.

That explains why Q3A wouldn't run for me with the crappy ATI card, but still don't explain why Jedi knight wouldn't run. (Also, it was a miss post. The game I was talking about was Dark Forces 2 ; Jedi knight. Not JK2. Which was released end of 1997). I'm thinking ATI in the 90's was pretty much junk. 3dfx was top dog at that time anywho, so I guess it's a moot point.

Anywho, like you said, ancient history. Who cares about games ATI cards wouldn't run back in 1998 right? This is a 2008 8800m GTX thread.

[Justin_W@XoticPC]

Certain posts have been revised/removed in this thread due to statements said to certain individuals. We prefer to keep our forums clean and friendly towards users and guests.