**official** 7950gtx Vs 8700gt

how am i contradicting myself...i was explaining the resolution issue which does not seem to get to anyone...and the bus makes it worse. continuing with my example, the 8700gt would have one farmer...and the 7950gtx would have two farmers because it can move more memory

its the work cards have to do in general, nothing specifically with the 8700gt, it can do work faster than the 7950gtx because of it higher clock speeds, but it is bottlenecked by the bus.

for example AGAIN, the one farmers machine is faster but cannot compete with the width of the others, even though his is faster, which is pretty much what u just said.

 

Hey -- don't be a ***** just because you're going to be proven wrong. I'm not lying to myself here; I shouldn't have to go out of my way, like I said, to post stupid FRAPS screenies. However I am, or will be, so it'd probably be wise to quiet down.

 

no your right....my day is absolutely ruined becuase i may be proved wrong on an online forum.

you said you can run your games at those settings, so show us then, id like to see if the 8700gt can really do this cause that would be good for it.

and if your right then post the screens, your so confident you have nothing to worry about why be so defensive about it, you proved me wrong then.

 

Stop saying that everyone is lying, and you are the trustful... I had already show you some proofs.

Do I need to repeat again?

If you not believe, is not our problem... just don´t tell that the others are liers because you think otherwise... all you have to do is just don´t buy an 8700M GT... buy an 7950GTX...

Do I made myself clear?

We have 8700M GTs on our machines... you not! So stop saying that everything that we say is a lie!

Just my 2 cents...

 

i didnt say it was a lie, id just like to see that if thats ok with anyone.

 

Very true; Audigy posted screens as well.

Anyways, I took 3 screens of Bioshock only to learn I didn't activate "show FPS in screenshot" on FRAPS. I'll do it again later today.

 

ok thank you, i apologize if i gave you a hard time, i just had a problem with some other person doing this, saying they could do this and this and that, and then showed us screens and it was a complete lie.

 

Lets see some Cysis picks. I cant believe that people with the 8700 GT are so sensitve when someone dares to criticize the 8700. Its proven that DX9 looks just as good as DX10 in Crysis which is going to be the best game released for DX10 titles.

With this being said how can you say that the 8700 GT is better than the 7950 GTX? There is no 8700M GT SLI system that will score higher than my 3DMARK06 score. So I guess that means that the 7950GTX is better. I get just as good eye candy, better frames with higher settings and higher resolution. If you doubt this lets post some screenies with fraps, and direct links to 3DMARK06, not screen shots of your scores.

Anyway the 8800M is comming and will put an end to all the hype surrounding the 8700

 

Your totally lying.
-Bioshock & STALKER at max? I don't think so.
-MoH:AA at max? Definitely not.
-Crysis 1440x900 at high? what are you running at like 10FPS? (Chaz couldn't get more than 25FPS at Crysis DX9 1280x1024 on MEDIUM)...

 

would that do any good to the owners of 7950gtx?! lol of course, there will always be something better in the near future, as for right now, 8700 is a little more future proof than 7950, even tho it perfomrs slower. If the dx10 games will not be only dx10 compatible, my vote goes to 7950.

 

IMAGESHACK.US , just post a direct link to image that will keep the right image size.

Also your not just showing Bioshock cause I could almost believe that one (probably should get like 20FPS at 1920x1200 max). STALKER/Crysis/MOH:AA I don't at all

 

He must think that none of us play these games. lol He definitly does not have shaders or shadows on high for Crysis, they are probably set to medium at best.

 

i dont my comp sucks!

just post the screens dude, if your right then your right and we will all shut up

 

On what GPU? He gets smooth gameplay at everything max setting 1680x1050 with his 8800GTX.

 

Ya they do B/C I am a 7950GTX owner and I will be upgrading when they come out ! The 8700GT is not future proof when you cant get the full effects of DX10.

 

how much do u think that will cost u at the time?! how do u know that you can't get full effects with it? and what do u mean by full effects? can any card that is out right now run crysis maxed out?

 

Are you out of your mind? You can't be expected to be taken seriously on this Forum if you dont back up your claims with some proof.

 

I guess this would be a bad time to mention I am playing crysis with everything on high at 1680 x 1050?

 

"how much do u think that will cost u at the time?!"

1000 USD or so for SLI. I already dropped over 5 grand on it anyway.

"how do u know that you can't get full effects with it and what do u mean by full effects??"

The 8700M GT can't get full DX10 settings on Crysis now, what makes you think that in a year or so this will change. Full effects means the same as all settings on high. LOL

"can any card that is out right now run crysis maxed out?"

Ya, 8800GTX.

 

What's your FPS span? AA? DX10?

And what you detect as smooth is highly personal. Some people can't stand below 30 or 40, while some experience 25 as smooth.

 

Honestly, I thought the 3dmark was good (and proof) enough.

With that being said, I'm still going to prove against your loud accusations. I stand by the fact I've been playing all my games at 1920x1200. I don't know why I'd lie about this. It'd be pretty lame to lie about performance on a video card just to have some kind of annonymous bragging rights.

Still, I have class in 15 minutes. When I come back, I will post screens.

:edit:^When I was going through the game on FRAPS (thinking I was taking SS of the actual FPS but wasn't), I hit lows of 17, and highs of about 30. I found it perfectly playable.

 

Actually, 3Dmark is quite bad. While good to mesure OC performance or (sometimes) driver performance, it's not really adequate to compare over generations (geforce 7 vs geforce 8) or with other brands (geforce vs radeon). Example: a geforce 8400M GS OC'd gets a higher 3dmark05 score than my go7700 OC'd. Mine's still loads better (8400M GS is still worse than a mobility X700).

 

well, hey, if u got the money, shoot for it...
crysis is not even out yet, and i think we might see better results when it comes out. nvidia has also been working really hard on their drivers, that's also a plus.
8800gtx, i've seen some benches and it doesn't really do that well when it comes to higher resolutions like 1920*1200 with everything maxed out. it is playable, but not enjoyable. correct me if i'm wrong.

 

That is hard to believe that a 8800 GTX can't run full settings, when I can run Crysis at 1920x1600 everything on high except shadows and shaders on medium, this is with the tweek to run DX9 in Very High settings. This gives me between 30-35fps and sometimes it drops to 20-15fps.

I can post Screenies with Fraps to prove.

 

dude, no worries. i believe u

 

Oh so suddenly the 8700GT plays newer games at max settings and at 1920x1200? Wow Nvidia! no need for a "high end" GPU for the mobile market we already have one that competes with a desktop 8800GTX and with a 128 bit bus that suddenly makes wonders for the cards and doesn not indeed cripple it at all *sarcasm*. Ridiculous, put out some proof, if you run the games at 20fps I wouldn´t call that playable at all.

Yeah do show Airborne, Bioshock maxed with DX10 effects, STALKER, Oblivion maxed at 1920x1200 so I can cure my doubts about. I would love to compare this card to my 8800GTX that suddenly doesn´t look that fast compared to this 8700GT BEAST!!!.

 

everybody cut the crap already
raiser said he'd post SS ... so you can break him down if he doesn't post them ... untill then: just get off his back

 

I'd really like to see this. I can't even get playable framerates with all high settings at 1280x800 with my 8700m GT SLI rig.

Edit: Referring to BioShock, that is.

 

Maby RaiseR RoofeR finds the games he mentioned playable at max settings, who knows. Most of us certainly wouldn't. Here's some good 8700M GT benchmarks, including Crysis: http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4060

 

I even posted my fraps benchies. getting over 30FPS at 1900x1200 on my rig with my fx2500. everything cranked. - on bio

I also get 30fps outside 60fps inside on oblivion everything maxed. constantly.

 

O M F G, I thought this bs was settled already!!!!

Raiser RoofeR can post whatever he wants, but I'm going to post some screenies too of whatever game he runs to see if it's what the 8700m GT really gets..

I'll do Crysis, CS:S w/HDR, TF2, MOH:A, and BIOSHOCK all in MAX settings DX10 when possible, and 1920x1200 with fraps FPS showing... that should settle this.. I hope :\ 169.04 drivers NON OCed. 2 random screenies per game..

I'll post them here in about an hour or two..

 

Well lets see the god damn screen shots, then we will back off! You gotta be as crazy as he is to believe there are screen shots to support this.

Its taking so long B/C He is (Raiser RoofeR) trying to find a buddy with a 8800GTX SLI rig to take some screen shots for him.

 

Was this unstickied because of all this chaos? Lol

 

Posted where?

 

Filesizes are 6.5 megs. Maximum on imageshack is 1.5mb... lemme see how much I can lower it by converting it.

:edit: converted to jpg. Uploading.

BIOSHOCK:








As you can see, it'll stoop to 17/18 FPS in times of volumetric particles such as smoke, and over the large bodies of water. Those two screenshots with those two FPS are the most intensive I have ever found the game to be, and it's not even noticeable while playing. The game hangs around 23/24FPS.

 

yeah, i asked Chaz to

 

*Awaits response*.

Don't let this thread go dead now that I've posted these pictures, you babies.

 

You are getting 22fps when absolutly nothing is happening. If there are enemy's around you might get 10-15fps in combat. I am taking some sceen shots at 1920x1200 at the same locations of your screen shots to prove that the game is not playable on your system at your current settings. Also I will show screenies of 1920x1200 high settings and compare your shots to mine, IMHO those do not look like maxed setting.

 

1. Enemies don't do FPS hits -- noticeable ones, anyways. Do you honestly think there would be a 40-55% decrease in overall performance (22 to 10-15)? Think about those numbers for a second; that's ridiculous. You're full of ****.
2. Is your card running at 750/1500/1000? I'd hate to repeat myself that I have this rig OCed; you'd look like an idiot trying to disprove me.
3. My resolution is 1920x1200. Not 1920x1600. I thought it was a typo when you first posted that resolution a page or two ago, but there it pops up again.
4. That first screen is actually at 25FPS in a firefight (although it doesn't look it...)
5. How are you going to *prove* that a game that I just played on this system and even took screenshots to show you ISN'T playable? That makes absolutely no sense. I'm in my dorm room with this one computer. How the hell could I have gotten those screenshots then?

:edit: Unknown, how does YOU posting screens "settle" anything?

 

I will take some screens (staring at walls and such) at your locations and show you the FPS I get and then I will go to the tunnels where there is water running and find some action shots. This will campare the performance that I get with a SLI rig to your single card setup. This will show the performance hit I take for the more demanding areas of the game. And surely you are not saying that your single card setup will outperform my SLI rig.


"1. Enemies don't do FPS hits -- noticeable ones, anyways." LOL

 

I have two save points, one where I made those screenshots and the next is the level after where you're *SPOILER* dressed as a big daddy *SPOILER*. I thought it'd be more appropriate to post the former so people can't make any accusations about lowered settings anywhere where in fact it's just a blurred vision.

I edited #1 and made it more thorough. "LOL" doesn't cut it.

Respond to those points if you please. You're such a ****ing idiot if you think you're so almighty by quoting whole posts that contradict you on so many levels and replying with a simple "LOL". Quit wasting my time.

 

Hold on just downloading Bioshock. Dont get your panties in a knot, you dont have to start name calling. If this is a waste of time go away, nobody is holding a gun to your head to be here. And we will pick apart your less than attractive screens shots

 

Wait, hold on a second here, I don't see your logic whatsoever.

You're going to get screenshots at the exact same places. Unless you OCed your card and know how to actually take care of a computer (which I reckon you don't due to your intellect), I KNOW you're not going to get the same FPS.

Now, here's the thing: because you, a complete imbecile, don't get the same FPS that I do, why should that prove me wrong? I don't think it proves anything other than THAT'S the performance YOU get on YOUR computer. Not MINE.

I proved what kind of performance I got on my computer. Posting screenshots won't contradict it, you dumbass. And yes, I am name-calling unless you know how to respond to a post. If all you can do is start debates by making retarded accusations and not follow up on your points, I have nothing else to resort to. You haven't and WILL not prove **** to anyone.

Now, would you like to address my 5 counter-points I made or should you just keep wasting your own time violating copyrights?

*edit*You don't even have the same specs that I do... wow.

 

Two people posting the same , or near the same FPS is far more convincing than just one person.

 

It would help if you had logic. It appears that I am getting into a battle of whits with an unarmed person. This is gonna be fun. I told you to not get your panties in a knot, I will post the screen shots as soon as Bioshock downloads.

 

Not sure who's point you're going to reinforce, but if you have the same setup, drivers, and clocks that I do, I reckon it'd be mine.

What would help if I had logic? This doesn't even make sense. You're avoiding the argument.

I think all things "logical" should coax you into actually trying to refute my claims as oppose to simply make a nullified witty comment.

 

Please start studying and stop drinking so much. I will try to explain my point to you again. This is a thread comparing the 7950GTX to the 8700M GT. I will post my performance at the location on your screen shots, then b/c your not showing us the areas of the game that drag your FPS down to unplayable. I will show everybody what kind of performance hit I take in the intense areas of the game. This will prove that your a lying sack of **** because your system will never keep up with mine so if I get terrible frames this means you will get even worse.

Plus I will post the SS with high settings at 1920x1200 resolution and show that the pics you attached are not at high settings.

 

LMAO

Okay, Einstein. What's your plan? How are you going about to prove that I'm lying about my FPS? Do you really think that posting your own screenshots on an entirely different computer with different specifications is going to prove anything whatsoever?

 

Those Bioshock scores were exactly what I guessed wooo!

Yea I figured Bioshock would be playable, since Chaz got ~38FPS at high settings at 1280x1024 and uping the resolution wouldn't make it that unplayable.

I still can't believe STALKER (with full dynamic lighting etc), Crysis (with shaders/post processing/shadows also on high), or MoH:AA (that game is much more demanding than Bioshock on highest). That I will need to see to believe.

...Go away