8800: GTS vrs GTX

How significant is the performance difference? I am buying a laptop for college and I plan on doing plenty of gaming over the summer (i.e. Mass Effect, Bioshock, COD4, HL2: ep 2, ect.). I know the the GTS is only on select laptops, but its significantly cheaper. Will the difference blow my mind? I havn't played PC games on full since WC3.

 

I think you'll find that they both will do very well with the games that are currently out. Both are very significantly better than the 8700m, and will give you highest settings on a majority of games. For the sake of future proofing I would say go with the 8800 GTX especially if you are getting a rig that doesn't support SLi. Hope this helps!

 

A 8800 GTX is a bit more powerful than 8800GTS.But price to performance ratio,8800GTS is a better buy.

 

Perhaps at the moment, but I think that also depends upon what they are willing to spend...

 

Price is an issue, I'd say $2500 MAX with warranty, tax and shipping

 

i do believe the gts is still only on gateways


I got mine on ebay for 820 in used but as new condition.

I cant really see it as a fair comparison its just a much better deal and its a very nice machine as well.

If you really do want to spend closer to 2000 or whatever maybe they start to compare.

Right out of the box this machine maxes out all known games.

 

Woah man not fair people own an 8800M GTX! I want one!

Anyway probably this list will show you how faster the GTX is compared to GTS... Notebookcheck.com is your friend. Look under the class list.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison-of-Grafic-Cards.130.0.html

It seems like 7950 GTX is still doing a great job despite it was released 2 years back.

 

Yeah the 7950 GTX is really a great GPU that really wasn't with competition until the 8700m came out. XD

 

The GTS is also in the 20.1 inch HP HDX, which I own, and it rocks. It's pretty big though, so a lot of folks wouldn't even consider it. But I'm playing Conan with maxxed settings and it looks beautiful. I have OCed and got just under 9500 3dMark06 score. Cost me 2499 with work discount.

 

well, i dont think your Frames are all that.

 

I have a related question, how much will the performance difference be between the 8800 GTS and the 9800 GTS?

 

Well , That is a question no one can answer with certainty now, cause the 9800m GTS hasnt been released yet, and there are no reliable sources regarding its performance to this date,,, nvidia hasnt officially announced it yet either.

 

Yeah thats pretty much what I thought. The 9800 GTS can already be pre-ordered from pcmicroworks on their 'Edge' notebook. It costs $150 less than the 8800 GTX, if that's any indication.

 

Frames in what? AoC? 45-60 depending on area and action

 

9800m gts might be a renamed 8800m gts, just a guess, after seeing Nvidia's fanatic renaming frenzy.

 

If you`re talking about the desktop version, the GTS 512 is well worth it and VERY close to the GTX.
In the mobile world,the GTS is some 10-20% slower than the GTS, due to having only 66% of the GTXs SPs...

 

you know what? this forum its driving me crazy ...

i've seen people with killer desktops that pwn your setup big time STRUGGLE to play the game on max settings

 

nope that sounds abut right, he did not say what res he was playing it on, maxed means max settings, nothing to do with res, relax

 

Mind posting your res hovercraftdriver?

 

Brainer, doesn't your setup pwn his?

What's your FPS in some of these newer games?

 

My apologies. As Narsnail said, lower res, but settings on high. Just logged off and was hitting 55, relatively constant at 47-48 with a low of 32 using FRAPS. Res is set at 1280 x 1024. But even at native 1680 x 1050, I was still averaging 35-40, but would bottom out in low 20's, which I didn't like. The point is the GTS, even the mobile version, is pretty formidable.
BTW, those numbers are not far off from what I quoted from memory while at work. So shoot me...

 

I think there's around a 33% performance increase for the GTX over the GTS. And as for the question about the 9800M GTX over the 8800M GTX, I don't think it's going to be that big of a difference in terms of performance because the desktop version wasn't all that much of an increase, the specs were the same but only the architecture was different.

 

nope, SLI from what "I" have seen never works correctly, so sometimes its like he only has one card, sometimes it is like he has two, probably the same level, a bit better when it works properly, its about the 8800m GTX level when it works properly.

 

You know, I mainly read these and other boards to try and stay up to date about stuff. Very rarely do I comment. Your's and Brainer's "pwn" comments are one reason why. Someone's system "pwn"s mine but their "o" key doesn't work? Someone needs to get their "o" keys fixed, or learn to speak properly when talking to grown-ups... I very closely stated what my spec's are, and went home to verify, and was good enough to restate what they truly are. I don't see how this topic is about "pwnage".

 

Not necessarily. Just because the GTX has 96 shaders to the GTS 64, doesn't mean 33% better. Only going by the 3dMark06 scores, the GTX is about 12-15% more powerful. But that doesn't always hold true in games...sometimes the performance difference will be wider, sometimes not. The GTS is the best bang for the buck, but that's just my opinion. Unfortunately, isn't available in as many different types of machines.

The Gateway owners got a hell of a deal. Especially those that upgrade their cpu. The only reason I chose the HDX is I wanted a bigger screen and don't move it around much, but do travel on business occasionally and it keeps me from having two PC's.

 

Narsnail have you ever owned a SLI rig? i'm getting over 85% benefit of SLi with the New XG driver, and @ Matt specify some games cause i bet i have most of the games at the market except for mmo's cause they need monthy payment,and @ hovercraftdriver i've never played that game, its just i saw many negative reviews about how the game actually runs, anyhow i'm not a sucker you know, and i dont like people who tend to make thier systems look like a god.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,6..._First_PCGH_graphics_cards_benchmarks/&page=2

even 9800GTX isnt getting your FPS with it "Maxed out" at 1280 x 1024

also do you think your GTS is up to par with the desktop GTS? well if you had the GTX i'd say yes, but even the 8800 desktop GTS with g92 core isnt getting your FPS -.-
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1302354

 

Firstly, I don't think it's close to a desk top GTS. However, and I think Narsnail can attest to this, the mobile GTS has great overclock ability. Again, I have to look when I get back home to VERIFY, but I believe I am at 675/950 right now, very stable and without high temps. That in itself makes a big difference. I don't feel I was trying to make out a godly system...don't have one, can't afford one. But I can back up everything I say with respect to my system.

I'm not claiming anyone is a sucker. I don't feel I have to justify any more than I have, but I guess I still am. I have heard nightmare reviews about playability vs. system specs in AoC as well. I only just eached the city too, so that might make a difference. Don't know why mine plays like it does, but the fact is, it does. I treid to take screen shots using FRAPS, but I haven't figured that out yet. If someone can clue me in, I'll be glad to oblige.

 

clearly you didnt read my post, i said from what "I" HAVE SEEN, totally depends on the game to be honest, if they code it well for SLI support it will work well, but if not its just a crap shoot.

And as said the 33% perfroamnce increase from the GTS to the GTX is only in 3dmark, which is the most useless benchmark for backing up how powerful something is. If a game is not shader dependent, the GTS and GTX will be alot closer because they are the same card.

 

so... the 8700gt is the same as 8800GTS if the game isnt shader intensive?

 

Nope...only 128 vs. 256 memory bandwidth, core and memory clocks are different as well. I don't know all the details, but it's a totally different package. Not nearly as powerful.

 

i know it isnt anything near the GTS, but the GTS being as powerful as 8800GTX doesnt settle in my mind, if they were equal, then why there are to different cards -.- 33% is 33%

 

They're not as powerful. And it's not 33% if you look at performance data. You generally see a spread of 10-20%.

A T9300 with 8800M GTS scores around high 8K+ on Vista out of the box, a T9300 with a 8800M GTX tends to score about high 9K+ on 3dmark06 on the same OS. It's certainly not the most accurate of benchmarks, but there's certainly some truth in there.

Don't worry about it, your SLI's still doing better, especially in programs that are programmed to take advantage of it.

 

That's the key I think. Notebookcheck lists very comparable scores for our respective setups. I don't have or know much about SLI, but it rocks on compatable platforms, and provides less than expected performance and frustrations on apps that don't utilize it properly...from what I have read around the net.

 

The 8800m gtx is a little better, but for the price, the 8800m gts is probably the best price to performance ratio.

 

i Know that mine is better than the 8800GTS on most of the modern games, its just it doesnt feel right for the 8800GTX to be a little margin between it and the 8800GTS as you are saying

 

Nah actually 32 shader processors does a lot to a cards performance, 64 as opposed to 96 on the 8800m GTX. All games uses some kind of shaders, so a 8800m GTS is not on par with a 8800m GTX in terms of performance in games.

Though the 8800m GTX is a crazy overclocker, just like the 8800m GTS. Oh by the way I have two 8800m GTX in SLI. I bet with such clocks as 675 on the core that is a 175MHz + overclock on the core. I would definitely run ATI tool for artifact scanning instead of relying that I don´t see any artifacts in games. If you have artifacts in ATI tool then you are bound to damage your card even if it looks artifact free in games.

Artifacts doesn´t have to do with large polygons shooting out of objects and such, it can be just some minor flashing textures etc etc, can be the driver but most probably the high overclock.

Brainer your SLI setup is not better in most modern games than a 8800m GTS. It still crushes your 7950GTX in shader intensive games.

 

Mangus wanna bet ? -.- i already proved that its better in a previous thread...

 

I couldn't get ATI tool to work with Vista. Think I tried it before I found out about the 'run as admin' thing. Anyway, I use another app which the name escapes me right now. The one with the gremlins hopping around the screen, lol. 10 minute intervals several times over, never shows any issues. Maybe I'll try to get ATI tool to run again. thanks

 

i see no need to overclock my card at this point, although if i recall i got to 620, 930 with no problems, never went over 55C, in the future though I will be glad to overclock.

And like i said, if the game is not shader intensive the GTS and GTX will be roughly within 10% of each other prolly more like 12% or 15%...which is only a few FPS

 

Yes sure, where is the thread? I think I have missed it.

ATI tool has a version compatible with Vista.

 

This is really getting out of hand.
Brainer, SLI is getting good, but today's games, as MAGNUS points out are heavily reliant on shaders,and the GTX is simply not powerful enough.
I know, I have one.
The 8800M GTS will be better in most new games that require shading power : UT3, AC, Grid etc.

 

still, i think i'll outperform 8800GTS owners on those 3 titles if anyone wants to compare..

 

Thanks, I found the most current version. Running it now.

 

My 3DMark06 score on Gateway FX with 8800 GTS and T7800 - 9607

 

Make sure you dont run Fraps while using it, since it will show as artifacts.. (i think ATitool tells you that already but hell with it. just to be on the safe side)

 

Nice score there, i havent seen much people using t7800 in the gateway.

 

Ah but are you running in 1280x1024 resolution? I believe the gatway only has a WXGA+ screen so you won't be, thats why your score is higher.

 

WXGA+ is an equal to 1440x900 which is most likely a 1280x1024?

 

Did you overclock it?My 9262 with E6550 and 8800GTX had aonly about 94xx in 3D mark 06.

 

I have a WXGA+ (1440x900) and IIRC 3DMark06 defaults to a 1280x854 resolution during the test.

Attached are two images, one with the 3DMark06 score running in 1280x854 and the other running in 1280x1024 (external monitor). The former scored 4592 and the latter 4207. The difference is ~10%. Both tests ran on the same computer (specs in sig) and same clocks.

He can't run the test at 1280x1024 simply because there are not enough vertical pixels. Assuming the correlation between scores is identical for the 8800m GTS as it is for the 9500m GS (which very well could be a false assumption), I'd estimate that he would score ~8500 with a resolution of 1280x1024.