9800 GX2 or GTX 260?

[Vasot02]

Single GPU solution all the way

[LovingSticky]

Well, some people think "newer" cards must be better. Guess what, they are not :-) E.g. 9800GTX was slightly inferior to "old" 8800GTX, yet there are many people swearing on 9800GTX...

Very funny.

Numbers for BioShock @ 1920x1200 are clear:

9800GTX - 116FPS
GTX 260 - 69FPS

The Witcher, Oblivion, all are showing 9800GX2 as a clear winner.

Get it straight -- GTX 260 is (much) slower, yet it is still a good choice, as it is single core and less power hungry.

Depends what you prefer...

[LovingSticky]

Originally Posted by Vasot02

Single GPU solution all the way

If you mean GTX 280 (or better), yes

[parasiteeve]

Originally Posted by LovingSticky

Very funny.

9800GTX - 116FPS
GTX 260 - 69FPS

With no AA.

[parasiteeve]

Originally Posted by LovingSticky

If you mean GTX 280 (or better), yes

Overclocked 260 will hang with a 280 and even out perform it if clocked at 700mhz core which most will do fairly easy. Love the way you keep neglecting this.

[parasiteeve]

Lovingsticky if you have not noticed already no one is agreeing with you, your the only person here that claims this solution to be flawless which couldnt be further from the truth. lol.

[parasiteeve]

Originally Posted by LovingSticky

Well, some people think "newer" cards must be better. Guess what, they are not :-) E.g. 9800GTX was slightly inferior to "old" 8800GTX, yet there are many people swearing on 9800GTX...

The 8800GTX had a slightly better bus and a bit more memory than the 9800GTX (no where near as drastic as the memory and bus difference between a 9800GX2 and a 260) but there were other factors that made the 9800GTX faster.

I had a 9800GTX which would do 850core 2100shader and 2400mem, I found the 9800GTX to be quite a bit faster than the 8800GTX at these speeds vs the 8800GTX's max OC.

Most 8800GTX's would be doing good to break 630core and 1600shader.

[motopen1s]

Originally Posted by LovingSticky

9800GX2 - 116FPS
GTX 260 - 69FPS

fixed


Guys, I think its good that there are people who have a smooth GX2 experience. No need to be quite harsh about it.

My best experience with GX2 was holding it in my hands after getting it out of the package. That evil looking black beasty brick surely may result in a headrush/goosebumps. I think it really looks badass (well, unless you leave the stock cooling as it is).

I also quite enjoyed packing it really nicely and sending back to EVGA after 2 months of use.

That is to say though - only after getting a new card I realized how flawed GX2 really is (at least not suitable to my needs: 1680x1050 high IQ + AA; no go in COH and DIRT with such settings at all).

[ChrisRay]

The GTX 260 is slower in AVG FPS. But percieved FPS might be slightly different. On AVG multi GPU solutuions offer a lower percieved frame per second than a single GPU due to inconsistencies in inter-frame-delays. The 9800GX2 h real big weaknesses when compared to the GTX 260. It doesnt have the improved geometry shader and power management functions. But the even The largest problem is the 9800GX2 is limited to 512 megs of memory. And has shortened the lifespan of the solution tremendously. Above 1680x1050 with over 4xAA you will easily spill over the 9800GX2's memory and then you will suffer tremendous micro stuttering. The 9800GTX cards have the same problem. The severity of the 512 meg problem depends largely on how much AA you are accustomed too or how high your resolution is. At 1920x1200 with no AA or 2xAA the 9800GX2 is extremely viable performing piece of hardware. But memory consumption is going up. Not down. For longetivity the GTX 260 is simply a better long term investment.

[mailman2]

Originally Posted by ChrisRay

The GTX 260 is slower in AVG FPS. But percieved FPS might be slightly different. On AVG multi GPU solutuions offer a lower percieved frame per second than a single GPU due to inconsistencies in inter-frame-delays. The 9800GX2 h real big weaknesses when compared to the GTX 260. It doesnt have the improved geometry shader and power management functions. But the even The largest problem is the 9800GX2 is limited to 512 megs of memory. And has shortened the lifespan of the solution tremendously. Above 1680x1050 with over 4xAA you will easily spill over the 9800GX2's memory and then you will suffer tremendous micro stuttering. The 9800GTX cards have the same problem. The severity of the 512 meg problem depends largely on how much AA you are accustomed too or how high your resolution is. At 1920x1200 with no AA or 2xAA the 9800GX2 is extremely viable performing piece of hardware. But memory consumption is going up. Not down. For longetivity the GTX 260 is simply a better long term investment.

Well said. Agreed 100%. I had both, the GTX260 is far superior for all around gaming and smoothness.

[Coolasmoo]

You know, i play Grid, Clear Sky, Warhead, Cod 4 and many other new release games and have never had a problem with my GX2 at 1920 x 1200 (BFG)

Apart from Warhead which i ran at Enthusiast DX9 , all the other games are stutter free and i have never even seen this micro stuttering you mention,

Im looking forward to upgrading, but it wont be until next year,

GX2 to GTX 280 = your kidding yourself

[john19055]

I have a BFG GTX280 OCX and my two 9800GTx running in SLI at 800/1950/2100 is quite a bit faster in 95% of the games I play and the few games that the GTX280 is faster ,it only by a small amount.I had two GTX280 running in SLI and over half of my games it was faster to just run one of the GTX 280's.I game at 1920x1200 ,you need to game at 2560x1600 and have a very fast CPU because my Quad 6600 at 3.24 is just not fast enough.I never notice any microstudders in my games with my SLI set-up.I would say the 9800GX2 is the best bang for the bulk.But if I had it to do over I would go with two GTX 260 in SLI.You can find them for as low as $249 and with rebate $219 ,so you could get two GTX260 192 for $440.I think as newer games come out the 896mb and the 448bit wider Memory Interface will come in handy.