EVGA GeForce GTX 280 Video Card
Posted 24 July 2008 - 06:42 PM
Posted 24 July 2008 - 09:30 PM
Edited by james_8970, 26 July 2008 - 08:46 AM.
Posted 24 July 2008 - 09:52 PM
Posted 25 July 2008 - 04:22 PM
Edited by Grinsa, 25 July 2008 - 04:26 PM.
Posted 27 July 2008 - 07:16 PM
If you see this by the end of the day, the EVGA GTX260 is going for $244 till the end of tonight! If you are looking for a video card, I think this is the one you should get.
Posted 14 October 2008 - 07:50 PM
I play call of duty 4 and I use Adobe Premiere Pro, as well as folding at home....and I can't notice a difference at 1080i between my old 2 8800GTX and my new single GTX 280
If u haven't bought a motherboard yet, look at the ATI 4870, I have put this in my other rig that I use for LAN's and I like the picture quality better.
If u want to see what I mean, look up X-box 360 images vs PS3 (X-box uses ATI and Sony Uses NVIDIA)
Just some thoughts,
also, the ATI cards are smaller, more efficient (55nm vs 65nm)
One more thing to consider, NVIDIA has a driver issue with scaling to certain LCD and PLASMA TV's, not sure what you have but thought I would mention it.
I am in the army and, being the "geek" of my unit, i have seen just about every thing, i have had far less problems with ATI and I cant wait till my GTX 280 sucks so i can change my system back to ATI my self.
Posted 14 October 2008 - 08:29 PM
Of course you won't notice a difference between a 8800GTX SLI setup and a GTX 280 with your uses. Call of Duty 4 can be easily maxed with both setups, and Adobe Premiere Pro and [email protected] are less dependent on the GPU (visually at least, as [email protected] does do plenty of behind-the-scenes calculations on the GPU from what I understand).
The picture quality of NVIDIA and ATI cards is virtually identical these days. Any difference you see in your other rig is probably the result of the display being used, not the GPU.
Bringing up X-Box 360 vs PS3 is irrelevant, as they don't use PC parts. The X-Box 360 has a second graphics processor that allows for anti-aliasing to be applied with no performance hit, which is why it looks better in some cases.
The 9800GTX+ is a 55nm NVIDIA card, and 55nm versions of the GTX 2x0 series are coming shortly, as well. This is not to say that they (or 55nm ATI cards) are any "smaller". They are some of the biggest desktop graphics cards ever made! The difference is that since a smaller fabrication process is being used, more transistors can be fit into the same space.
The scaling issue is typically with the widescreen TV, not the drivers. My 1080p TV won't properly display many non-widescreen resolutions without the help of NVIDIA drivers (whose "resize desktop" feature works wonderfully). And no matter how hard I try, with NVIDIA or ATI, it won't properly display 640x480 (so no Starcraft or Diablo... ).
Despite all of this, I agree with you the HD4870 is the way to go (or the HD4870x2 if you need the best of the best and have money to burn). However, this is solely due to the performance/price it offers (or in the HD4870x2's case... sheer performance). Of course, back when this topic was being actively discussed, the HD4870 didn't exist, which is why it wasn't recommended.
Edited by stettybet0, 14 October 2008 - 08:30 PM.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users