GTX or New GTS

C

Cablespider

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
148
Simple question but kind of confused on whether the GTS refresh is really worth it?

A friend built a kick ass rig recently but decided against SLI after the build was complete. As a result, he's willing to sell me a brand new 8800GTX for $350. I can get a new GTS for the same money but not sure which one would be the better buy. At the price he's asking for the GTX, he won't be able to hold onto it for long and I have to buy here in a day or two or let it go.

In this case, is the newer card, better? Had this offer not existed, I would have just bought the GTS and called it a day. Should I be looking at the new GTS as a refresh of both the older cards (GTS and GTX) and pass on the deal?
 
The card is brand new. Still boxed and has never been used. I'm on a 22" LCD @ 1680x1050. I don't intend on running games at anything less than that.
 
oooo go for the GTS than. You won't really benefit from the GTX unless you run a higher res. Plus the GTS you can say is more bleeding edge.

What brand card is it? Your friends card... just being curious.
 
EVGA is the brand of card he's selling.

Since the GTS has been 'refreshed', I just figured it's better but not sure.

FYI.....I'm not an overclocker or Crysis freak. I'm just a weekend warrior that enjoys playing games with as much eye candy as possible for my money at the time. I don't run for numbers or gloat over benchmarks. I stopped that long ago because it drove me mad. I just want the best card of the two as far as the tech goes. If it's really not that big of an issue, I'll buy my friends just to help dig him out so he can recoup some of the cost for the build.
 
If I were you I'd would buy it off your friend. You can step up 90 days from the original purchase date on the receipt.
That SHOULD give you enough time to get whatever, if anything comes out, within that 90 day period.
If not, you can say you have a pretty damn fast card for 350.

But than again, you don't game that high in resolution.... =I
 
The GTX is faster than the GTS. Since new GTS cards are running around the same price $350 - I'd get the GTX he is offering you. I doubt that anything is going to come out in three months that you'd want to step up to, so go with the faster card now.
 
GTX is the sensible option if they're about the same price, yep.. I chose the GTS because I don't play at very high resolutions and it was £50/$100 cheaper, but I'd have got the GTX if they were about the same price.
 
solaris54 said:
GTX......runs cooler and faster
Click to expand...

Says who?


The G92 GTS is faster than the GTX, 8800GT, 640mb/320GTS's. To prove it read the following link:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3175

How is a 90nm gpu cooler than a 65nm one?

To the OP: Go with the GTX because you can step-up to a new card when it comes out (it might be too late but whe nawas the card purchased?) But....if you don't step-up or the 3 months expire before the next best card come out then you've made a wrong choice. The GTS is better than the GTX ..........oh and I forgot it consumes way less power than the GTX.
 
Another vote for the GTS, especially at 1680x1050 the new GTS will definitely be faster than the GTX. If you take overclocking into account at that resolution, it's not even a contest.
 
get a used gtx for about 375 :)


edit: That way if you decide to game on like a 40' tv youll have playable frame rates
 
zombeh said:
get a used gtx for about 375 :)


edit: That way if you decide to game on like a 40' tv youll have playable frame rates
Click to expand...

It's not about physical size, it's about resolution ;) And I agree with you ;)

But the OP can get a BRAND NEW GTX for 350 ;)
 
wopsang said:
It's not about physical size, it's about resolution ;) And I agree with you ;)

But the OP can get a BRAND NEW GTX for 350 ;)
Click to expand...


I didn't read his whole post. If i could buy a GTX for $350 i would do it. It's the king of all cards still and has been for the past 8 monthes. Even with the new G9 series coming out in feb, the card will still perform way up there.

Cablespider said:
Simple question but kind of confused on whether the GTS refresh is really worth it?

A friend built a kick ass rig recently but decided against SLI after the build was complete. As a result, he's willing to sell me a brand new 8800GTX for $350. I can get a new GTS for the same money but not sure which one would be the better buy. At the price he's asking for the GTX, he won't be able to hold onto it for long and I have to buy here in a day or two or let it go.

In this case, is the newer card, better? Had this offer not existed, I would have just bought the GTS and called it a day. Should I be looking at the new GTS as a refresh of both the older cards (GTS and GTX) and pass on the deal?
Click to expand...


IF you get that GTX and you don't like it. I'll trade you a brand new 8800 512mb gts OC edition for it.
 
The price of $350.00 is an excellent price for the GTX. I paid that much for a used one.
As I said the GTX still runs cooler and outperforms the GTS. People have been having problems with cooling on the GTS since it doesnt have the extra vents like the GTX does.
The only good thing about the GTS is the price.
 
solaris54 said:
The price of $350.00 is an excellent price for the GTX. I paid that much for a used one.
As I said the GTX still runs cooler and outperforms the GTS. People have been having problems with cooling on the GTS since it doesnt have the extra vents like the GTX does.
The only good thing about the GTS is the price.
Click to expand...

I don't know what GTX or GTS you've heard about but the GTS still is WAY cooler on stock compared to a GTX. Here's a link to see what I'm talking about:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/3635-xfx-8800gts-512mb-g92-alpha-dog-edition-review-13.html

The GTX idles at 63 and loads at 84;
the GTS idles at 50 and loads at 61 (this is cooler than some ppl have gotten with aftermarket 8800gt coolers.)

My choice sticks : GTS > GTX atleast are far as price, cooling, power consumption are concerned
 
umgill45 said:
I don't know what GTX or GTS you've heard about but the GTS still is WAY cooler on stock compared to a GTX. Here's a link to see what I'm talking about:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/3635-xfx-8800gts-512mb-g92-alpha-dog-edition-review-13.html

The GTX idles at 63 and loads at 84;
the GTS idles at 50 and loads at 61 (this is cooler than some ppl have gotten with aftermarket 8800gt coolers.)

My choice sticks : GTS > GTX atleast are far as price, cooling, power consumption are concerned
Click to expand...
QFT
 
How is this hard? Get the GTX.

"Cheaper" than the GTS coming from your friend
Better than the GTS
EVGA has step up.

For $350 flat, thats a great deal.

If you don't buy it from him, let him know I'll be interested.
 
junglicious said:
How is this hard? Get the GTX.
Click to expand...
Evidently very hard or maybe English isn't the primary language spoken here.
GTX - $350, GTS - $300
GTS overclocks better
GTS runs cooler (see above post).
GTS is overall faster than a GTX at 1680x1050 (its actually on par with the Ultra, and when you bring in overclocking, it spanks them both: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3175&p=3 ).
Why do people insist on spreading misinformation? It's his money though, he can do whatever he wants with it.
 
Mr. K6 said:
Evidently very hard or maybe English isn't the primary language spoken here.
GTX - $350, GTS - $300
GTS overclocks better
GTS runs cooler (see above post).
GTS is overall faster than a GTX at 1680x1050 (its actually on par with the Ultra, and when you bring in overclocking, it spanks them both: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3175&p=3 ).
Why do people insist on spreading misinformation? It's his money though, he can do whatever he wants with it.
Click to expand...


That comparison is irrelevant (8800gts 512 vs 8800gt 256mb)

The gtx still take the gts. Theres only a few benchmarks that show the gts 512 beating the gtx and it was only by 1 fps....
 
Then you didn't read the page I posted, go back and try again. That's an 8800GTS 512 against an 8800Ultra (which is a good bit faster than a GTX) and they're neck and neck at stock settings.
 
Mr. K6 said:
Evidently very hard or maybe English isn't the primary language spoken here.
GTX - $350, GTS - $300
GTS overclocks better
GTS runs cooler (see above post).
GTS is overall faster than a GTX at 1680x1050 (its actually on par with the Ultra, and when you bring in overclocking, it spanks them both: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3175&p=3 ).
Why do people insist on spreading misinformation? It's his money though, he can do whatever he wants with it.
Click to expand...


Please show me where I can buy an EVGA 8800GTS G92 for $300 flat? Why did you mention overclocking the GTS as if you can't do the same to the GTX? For the price, overall the GTX is a better deal.

I look at the review again and saw that the GTS does not SPANK (are we kids?) the GTX Ultra. Yes the GTS does do a LITTLE better than the GTXU, only for some games however, and at 1600x1200. I already know he's not going to go higher than 1600x1050 at the moment, but at least he knows he can go higher if he wants. Also when AA is enable, GTXU is still head. Like I said, for the price, the GTX is the best bang for bucks if thats how you want to put it.

Its fine with me if he doesn't want to buy his friend GTX for that price, send him my way.

Why do people what? Come by me again? Like you, PEOPLE like to give their opinion. It might not be 100% correct but at least they try and its their opinion, and like your opinion, it is not 100% correct either. Maybe I should type "IMO" every time I post or reply to a thread on this forum so people don't confuse opinion with facts.
 
GTS for $300 + shipping - http://www.ncixus.com/products/27246/88ZFF6HUFEXX/Galaxy Technology/
Cards will be available for even less as the supply grows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_supply_and_demand)

Other than that, go read my post again because I don't think you absorbed a single word of it. The GTS performs on par with the Ultra in the review. Now in mathematics there is such a relation called the transitive relation in which if A is related to B, and B is related to C, then A is also related to C. Simplified, this can be if A=B, and B>C, then A>C. Applying this here, if the GTS, as the review shows, is equal to the Ultra, and the Ultra is faster than the GTX, then the GTS is also faster than the GTX at stock speeds (italicized since that was also missed in the post). I then said that once they were overclocked, the Ultra would lose to the GTS because, being almost identical cores, the a very good Ultra only clocks to ~680MHz while the GTS's have been hitting 800MHz+. Since the GTS ends up being faster than the Ultra (let me not use "spank" since colorful language blows you away :rolleyes: ), it is most definitely faster than the GTX. The only way the Ultra gets back into the game is at extremely high resolutions and/or AA where memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor. Since the OP is using a resolution of 1680x1050, this really doesn't matter and for his use, the GTS is going to be cheaper and faster, which in my book is a better buy. Now I've tried my best to simplify this arguement and OP, I hope it helps you if you haven't already finalized your decision. Other than that, I'm done, I can't be bothered to argue with people who don't even read.
 
Mr. K6 said:
GTS for $300 + shipping - http://www.ncixus.com/products/27246/88ZFF6HUFEXX/Galaxy Technology/
Cards will be available for even less as the supply grows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_supply_and_demand)

Other than that, go read my post again because I don't think you absorbed a single word of it. The GTS performs on par with the Ultra in the review. Now in mathematics there is such a relation called the transitive relation in which if A is related to B, and B is related to C, then A is also related to C. Simplified, this can be if A=B, and B>C, then A>C. Applying this here, if the GTS, as the review shows, is equal to the Ultra, and the Ultra is faster than the GTX, then the GTS is also faster than the GTX at stock speeds (italicized since that was also missed in the post). I then said that once they were overclocked, the Ultra would lose to the GTS because, being almost identical cores, the a very good Ultra only clocks to ~680MHz while the GTS's have been hitting 800MHz+. Since the GTS ends up being faster than the Ultra (let me not use "spank" since colorful language blows you away :rolleyes: ), it is most definitely faster than the GTX. The only way the Ultra gets back into the game is at extremely high resolutions and/or AA where memory bandwidth becomes a limiting factor. Since the OP is using a resolution of 1680x1050, this really doesn't matter and for his use, the GTS is going to be cheaper and faster, which in my book is a better buy. Now I've tried my best to simplify this arguement and OP, I hope it helps you if you haven't already finalized your decision. Other than that, I'm done, I can't be bothered to arguement with people who don't even read.
Click to expand...

After reading few sentence I stopped and didn't care to read further. I said EVGA GTS G92. So yea, your telling me to absorb your post when you can't even "absorb" mine. Classic....
 
junglicious said:
After reading few sentence I stopped and didn't care to read further. I said EVGA GTS G92. So yea, your telling me to absorb your post when you can't even "absorb" mine. Classic....
Click to expand...
And read mine. My arguement is about a GTS, it has nothing to do with eVGA, don't bring in foolish variables because your point makes no sense.
 
I have a gtx and love it, the difference in speed isnt probably real noticable either. and those temps for the gtx are high in the link earlier, at least compared to mine, mine is oced to 661/1050/1680 and idles at 48-50 and loads at around 65 all with the fan at 80%, so it by no means runs hot.
 
For what it is worth - when you go to nvidia's website - which card is the 'top of the line' ?

So you can get a top of the line card for the price of a nice midrange card.

I'd take the GTX. One thing to consider when buying PC parts is some will OC, some won't.

I'll get the next top of the line card when it comes out (just like some of us do with each generation of vid card).

Whichever card people get - they will be getting a very nice card.
 
oshia86 said:
I have a gtx and love it, the difference in speed isnt probably real noticable either. and those temps for the gtx are high in the link earlier, at least compared to mine, mine is oced to 661/1050/1680 and idles at 48-50 and loads at around 65 all with the fan at 80%, so it by no means runs hot.
Click to expand...

Just cos yours does it doesn't mean his will too. The person in the above link;SKYTML used constant parameters i.e. 24.2C room where basically all cards were at the same temp and the same case/fan setup was used.

I mean seriously how can you recommend a G80 over a G92 that performs equally well but is much better in other areas such as power consumption, temps etc. For people who post 1-liners like" dude go with the GTX or w/e" please help explain why. Because I think it'll help the OP make a better choice (i.e. if he hasn't already)
 
azure said:
For what it is worth - when you go to nvidia's website - which card is the 'top of the line' ?

So you can get a top of the line card for the price of a nice midrange card.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't really call the 8800GTS 512 or the 8800GT mid-range, though.. that's really more like the 8600 series. It's just unfortunate that the mid-range cards have been pretty poor this generation, but it seems rather odd that the GTX could be top-of-the-line and the GTS mid-range when they often perform within a few fps of each other.
 
i am in same same type of situation as the OP

i have been researching the last 2 days and i am pretty definate on the GTS G92
it runs cooler which is nice. i do have watercooling so it will bring my water temps down a little meaning that i will be able to OC even more!
 
umgill45 said:
Just cos yours does it doesn't mean his will too. The person in the above link;SKYTML used constant parameters i.e. 24.2C room where basically all cards were at the same temp and the same case/fan setup was used.

I mean seriously how can you recommend a G80 over a G92 that performs equally well but is much better in other areas such as power consumption, temps etc. For people who post 1-liners like" dude go with the GTX or w/e" please help explain why. Because I think it'll help the OP make a better choice (i.e. if he hasn't already)
Click to expand...

I haven't made the decision just yet. With the holidays just past, my friend and I haven't had time to discuss the deal until now.

I think you hit the nail on the head though. I asked the question because the one thing that sticks out in my mind is the G92 improvements over the G80. In some cases, newer isn't always better but this may be that exception. If it performs equally, for the most part, runs cooler and uses less power, the GTS is the clear winner for the price. Or is it?

See, that's the dilemma because had I not been offered this deal, I wouldn't even be considering a GTX at the normal price of $400+. I would have already bought the GTS, no questions asked. I just wanted to be sure that I was looking at every angle on both cards before making the purchase.....make sure I wasn't missing something in the decision. I don't get to upgrade often and this has to last me a while. Not only that but I'm a long time ATI buyer and have little experience with Nvidia. This will be my first green card since the 4600Ti.

I do appreciate everyone chiming in though. I got to see a side of things I normally wouldn't have considered. Again, upgrades don't come often in my house and I may have taken the purchase decision a little to serious. I just wanted the best bang for that $350 so that it can carry me through the year until the next complete rebuild.
 
umgill45 said:
Just cos yours does it doesn't mean his will too. The person in the above link;SKYTML used constant parameters i.e. 24.2C room where basically all cards were at the same temp and the same case/fan setup was used.

I mean seriously how can you recommend a G80 over a G92 that performs equally well but is much better in other areas such as power consumption, temps etc. For people who post 1-liners like" dude go with the GTX or w/e" please help explain why. Because I think it'll help the OP make a better choice (i.e. if he hasn't already)
Click to expand...


K6 showed me that one and I am aware that their are some GTS out there that are lower than $350. I have not heard of that brand to know if its any good/reliable. However I mention EVGA because his friend GTX is an EVGA and that he could do a step up if his date is not up. Also he could step up to the new EVGA GTS if later on he does not want the GTX. His friend GTX offers him so many options and is the best bang for the buck for that price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top