Post Comment - Blue's News

Out of the Blue

[Nov 02, 2007, 10:07 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments

A side effect of the minimal action we got on Halloween is that we have an extraordinary amount of leftover candy, in spite of the dent I made in our stash before the holiday. I guess my Cornholio days are not yet over.

Are you threatening me?

R.I.P.: Sign-language chimp dies.

Linkholio!	Thanks Ant and Mike Martinez.
Stories:	Heimlich-performing dog among ASPCA honorees. Broken finger delays Zeppelin gig. E. coli fears prompt recall of millions of frozen pizzas.
Science!:	Humans will love, marry robots by 2050. Lab creates 'long-distance mouse'. How Dry You Are.
Images:	Portal Costume.
Media:	Awesome BioShock Halloween Costumes. Thanks FloridaHoudini. Cyr Wheel Practice. World Race-Walking Champ Attacked By Samurai -- Will He Run?
Follow-up:	Shock Jock Don Imus Returns to Airwaves.

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

12.

Re: Video Card

Nov 2, 2007, 12:02

Warhawk

Which one did you get first?
I thought we had the same card?

the 8800GTS 640.

The new GT is a better all-around card:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3140&p=7

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/29/geforce_8800_gt/page12.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/29/geforce_8800_gt/page13.html

Per Tom's article:

As a reminder, the 1680 x 1050 on 22" monitors is only 8% less demanding than the 1600 x 1200 mode, and is therefore very close.

I'm running at 1680x1050. When you look at the performance differences for 1600x1200 (35% in Crysis! - the GTX is only about 6% faster!), I think it's worth it for the cost of shipping for a 4-year investment.

Edit - also per Tom:

In the end, Nvidia has taken its time, but offers an exceptional card with the GeForce 8800GT. For about $230 it nearly displays the power of a GeForce 8800GTX (under 3% ) twice as expensive, with the only downside being a slightly lower memory capacity (512 MB instead of 768 MB) and a bandwidth 10% lower than that of a GeForce 8800GTS. However, in games, the latter is usually outperformed by 30% without filters (using the 320 MB version) by the GeForce 8800GT and the GTX is only 12% higher. We have to say that the transition to the 65 nm process meant the arrival of more than just a couple of G92 on a wafer. By the way, this chip boasts 754 million transistors. It's small, consumes less than a GeForce 8800GTS 320 MB, and the 8800GT is also quite silent despite its single slot cooling system.

Now these points of data make a beautiful line
And we’re out of beta, we’re releasing on time
So I’m GLaD I got burned, think of all the things we learned
For the people who are still alive

This comment was edited on Nov 2, 12:05.




Have I lied to you? I mean, in this room? Trust me, leave that thing alone. - GLaDOS Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away? - Ripley

Subject

Comment [quote="Warhawk"Nov 2, 2007, 12:02]q[Which one did you get first? I thought we had the same card?]q the 8800GTS 640. The new GT is a better all-around card: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3140&p=7 http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/29/geforce_8800_gt/page12.html http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/29/geforce_8800_gt/page13.html Per Tom's article: q[As a reminder, the 1680 x 1050 on 22" monitors is only 8% less demanding than the 1600 x 1200 mode, and is therefore very close.]q I'm running at 1680x1050. When you look at the performance differences for 1600x1200 (35% in Crysis! - the GTX is only about 6% faster!), I think it's worth it for the cost of shipping for a 4-year investment. Edit - also per Tom: q[In the end, Nvidia has taken its time, but offers an exceptional card with the GeForce 8800GT. For about $230 it nearly displays the power of a GeForce 8800GTX (under 3% ) twice as expensive, with the only downside being a slightly lower memory capacity (512 MB instead of 768 MB) and a bandwidth 10% lower than that of a GeForce 8800GTS. However, in games, the latter is usually outperformed by 30% without filters (using the 320 MB version) by the GeForce 8800GT and the GTX is only 12% higher. We have to say that the transition to the 65 nm process meant the arrival of more than just a couple of G92 on a wafer. By the way, this chip boasts 754 million transistors. It's small, consumes less than a GeForce 8800GTS 320 MB, and the 8800GT is also quite silent despite its single slot cooling system.]q b{ Now these points of data make a beautiful line And we’re out of beta, we’re releasing on time So I’m GLaD I got burned, think of all the things we learned For the people who are still alive }b [/quote]

;) :( :o %) :) :| ;P X| :D More

If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.

Email me when this topic is updated.

Special Codes

b[bold text]b
i[italic text]i
u[underline text]u
-[~~strikethrough text~~]-
c[code text]c
+[bullet point]+
q[quote text (indented)]q
[quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
[url=Link]text[/url]
r{red text}r
g{green text}g
b{blue text}b
m{maroon text}m
s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.