[BGS]

Hey im not the best person with video cards so here we go...

1. What is the diffrence between all the 6800 series cards for geforce (GeForce 6800 Ultra, GeForce 6800 GT, GeForce 6800 GS, GeForce 6800)

2. My current card is a ATI radeon 9800pro 256mb but I am getting a new computer and with the new computer comes a new card so I am wondering what card would best suit me ...

-Geforce 6800GS 256MB/256-BIT GDDR3 PCI-E(EVGA)
-Geforce 6800GT 256MB/256-bit GDDR3 PCI-E(XFX)

My main game is 1.6 so I'm guessing I should be getting 100fps even in 3 smokes like I do with my 9800 but I want to know if these cards can be considered 'better' then the 9800?

gig of ram
either getting a 2.8 dual core intel or a 64+ 3200+ amd 2.0ghz

[Advertisements]

Better? The 6800 series owns 9800s at any games, go2 tomshardware.com to compare. The 6800 GT is better than the GS but 6800 GT are way over 200 so its better to get the GS. The GTs performance is maginally better than the GS. Its better to buy a 7800 GT b4 u get a 6800 GT becuase they run on average only $20-40 more.
But if money is an issue the 6800 GS is a great bang for the buck. Dont get a dual core Intel, if u go dual core get AMD. I recomend the 3200 over the dual core Intel, AMDs own graphics. Also i suggest paying the extra $30 or whatever for the 3500, its worth it.

[anoobrew]

Better? The 6800 series owns 9800s at any games, go2 tomshardware.com to compare. The 6800 GT is better than the GS but 6800 GT are way over 200 so its better to get the GS. The GTs performance is maginally better than the GS. Its better to buy a 7800 GT b4 u get a 6800 GT becuase they run on average only $20-40 more.
But if money is an issue the 6800 GS is a great bang for the buck. Dont get a dual core Intel, if u go dual core get AMD. I recomend the 3200 over the dual core Intel, AMDs own graphics. Also i suggest paying the extra $30 or whatever for the 3500, its worth it.

[warriorscot]

Well there isnt a jot of difference between the GS and GT in actual in game performance, the ultra is pretty muc dead since nvidia didnt drop the price, if you are in the us you are better with a 7800GT than a 6800ultra, in the uk and Europe ATI is much cheaper so you are better with them(the cards are better as well from ATI in my opinion).

Dual core intels are useless for a gaming pc they are slower than the single cores of the same speed at games.

Although if you just play 1.6 youre completely wasting your money you might try upgrading to source.

[BGS]

This may sound weird but thogh I play the game becuaes I enjoy it I also play it for competitivness. I am in many leagues and such for 1.6. I dont play source becaues I dont think its fun (at all) and i dont think its ready as a game so I will stick to 1.6 . I know its a waste f money upgrading it even though I am only playing 1.6 but im buying a new computer (old one is custom built) from a company (AND YES I KNOW ITS MORE EXSPENSIVE IF I DO THIS BUT I WANT TO SO I CAN GET TECH SUPPORT) and want a new cad that is under warranty. But I do play the new end games sometimes (except for source) so I will want a card that cna handle it when i do.



You would also reccomend the 64+ 3500 amd over the 2.8 dual core you said? Any reason?

[jrm20]

On the video card. Get a 6800gs they are great priced and will play any game on high settings.

If you get a pny 6800gs they overclock it pretty much from the factory.

[warriorscot]

As i said dual core intels are just poor in general, hot chips that cant run anything that isnt 64bit dual core optimised very well. And no intel is as good at gaming as an AMD of the same price or speed rating

Soure is pretty good i played 1.6 a little and i switched over to source and love it, physics and the gfx are nice change and the game plays the same and the maps are all identical and its got less of the exploitable bugs 1.6 has. Just cooler really and the support for it is amazing valve are still releasing maps and player models for it. And there is absolutely no cheating any more thanks to valves security system i feel its much fairer and its easier to play.

Custom built from a good company is always a good way to go its big manufactued pc builders we hate so much here. I would get a GS its the cheapest gamers card on the market.

If you are in the UK i can point you to some great builders i dont know how much choice there is stateside past tigerdirect and alienware.

[shard92]

I generally recommend you do a little research and find a good local company that has been around awhile. Usually the custom/home built ones are going to be MORE expensive these days.... dell and hp are so cheap with their systems it's tough to beat.... Oh and I'm in the US

[warriorscot]

Dell and HP are absolutley rubbish though they are cheap because they build huge numbers using cheap parts that if you want a high performance sysem are not what you put in them, most of those systems dont have a gfx interface and use AGP they also use linited bios to prevent you doing cheap upgrades yourself, so its not cheaper unless you were building the same system they are but if you were building you wouldnt do that in the first place.

[shard92]

Dell and HP are absolutley rubbish though they are cheap because they build huge numbers using cheap parts that if you want a high performance sysem are not what you put in them, most of those systems dont have a gfx interface and use AGP they also use linited bios to prevent you doing cheap upgrades yourself, so its not cheaper unless you were building the same system they are but if you were building you wouldnt do that in the first place.

I agree I was just refering to them as generally being cheaper than either having one custom built or building one yourself. It may have been cheaper in the past to order parts and build it yourself but in general these days that is not true... at least not completely... I understand what you are saying but most people I have dealt with don't understand the concept you are talking about.... everyone looks at specs not quality or upgradability or any such.....

the way I read BGS's post he is NOT getting a custom build but a company built one.... and he thought it was more expensive that way.... generally not.... you can't compare a custom built to a companies model usually....

[BGS]

Well I am getting a custom built one in the sense i am picking my parts from either dell or abs and they will of course put it together. The dell xps 400 is the #1 rated machine for gaming (company stand point) out there by pc mag. This is not by only the parts but by how much they make the customer pay for th eparts they get and there support...


I am probably going with abs.com

And yes I already have a custom buiilt computer I made from newegg.com but I really am not intrested in anyway, even though i appreciate your suggestion, I will not be building a custom computer and putting it together myself

[jrm20]

Im not fond of dell for gaming.. For school work on business use its fine.

Dell uses cheap internal parts like the motherboard they use cost cheap for them to make or buy it. Probably a $30 motherboard they put in there systems and you end up paying triple for the motherboard with the pc.

Dells mobos are cheapo....

[warriorscot]

It is cheaper to build or get custom built in terms of performance, dells PCs are nice and cheap but a $600 dell will be beaten by any $600 build in my expereince.

Dell also dont do gfx cards in any of the cheaper systems, the ones with gfx cards are quite expensive, they make nice plodder pcs and laptops though.

[anoobrew]

I recomended the AMD 3500 becuase its the best bang for the buck and its owns that dual-core in graphics display lots of other applications

http://www.tomshardware.com/

then go2 CPU and CPU charts

[warriorscot]

I would probably say the 3200+ is better if you are willing to overclock it a bit later, but im an eternal skin flint.