GTX Owners say Ouch!!

Is there a board that supports 2xQ6600s, two of these babies in SLI, and 816 GB RAM? I want to build such a monster and enclose it in a Stacker 830. Run this under Vista Ultimate or XP x64 and boy...fun fun. Not to mention a nice heating element! You can now grill your chicenz as you grill n00bz on t3h forumz!

But really, if such a board exists, whats the cost :eek:

I'll go for a step-up if the performance warrants it when these guys drop.

edit: Looks like the Skulltrail it is. I wonder how much it is?

Think:
Skulltrail - $300?
2 Q6600s - $540
2 Thermaltake Ultra eXtremes 120s - $110
G.Skill 8 GB RAM - $330
2 of these or even 2 Ultras - ~$500 - $700 (assuming prices by the time Skulltrail hits)
Stacker - $230
A kilowatt of PSU prowess - $250
A nice condition FW-900 - $300
160 Gig Raptor - $160
A SATA DVD Burner - $25

- Total = $2960...yummy.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
Thats what I was responding to when i mentioned refreash rate. I read it wrong, but no HDTV, rayathon, LCD, or plasma, can handle a FPS of 120.
Click to expand...

Actually, the new Sharp 92 and 94 series LCD HDTV (something like that) are capable of processing in 120 Hz (that is equal to 120fps), but they are not capable of accepting 120Hz signal - since there is no 120Hz signal standard yet. That would be the next big HDTV standard - 1920x1080p120, which will solve the problem with 3:2 pull and movie 24 fps vs video 30 fps. 120fps is the common denominator.
 
While your card may have AA + HDR, pfunkman, It's not a Dx10 card so it doesn't have SM4.0 capabilities which allows 128-bit HDR rendering as opposed to your 64-bit HDR in SM3.0 meaning AA + HDR on your card, it won't be nearly as good. It really isn't something to rave over.

It's obvious my card can't handle Dx10 games nearly as good as the 8 series, I'm very very aware of that. Now that more and more Dx10 games are coming out, I can now finally take advantage of the 8 series. I'm not sure what game you're talking about but I'm sure as hell betting that game is new.

Anyways, it's been fun arguing to a wall, I like repeating myself a lot. My comments only sound misinformed to yourself because you can't agree on anything simply because you don't want to. And by the way, playable FPS is at lowest 30, a game is playable at that rate, nothing lower in my book.

MrWizard6600 said:
quake 4... 1024 X 768.... 14" monitor?

you calling 30fps acceptable is ignorant. Its all about preferances. And none of my articals mention minimum FPS.

Thats what I was responding to when i mentioned refreash rate. I read it wrong, but no HDTV, rayathon, LCD, or plasma, can handle a FPS of 120.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is about preference, as is my preference to buy an 8800 a year after release because I did not need it back then. If you check the other pages, theres 1600x1200 resolutions and theres still about a 10FPS difference. Also, about the "no HDTV, rayathon, LCD, or plasma, can handle a FPS of 120", check this out:

http://hometheatermag.com/news/100907jvc/
 
TheGodfather47 said:
Is there a board that supports 2xQ6600s, two of these babies in SLI, and 16GB RAM? I want to build such a monster and enclose it in a Stacker 830. Run this under Vista Ultimate or XP x64 and boy...fun fun. Not to mention a nice heating element! You can now grill your chicenz as you pwn n00bz on t3h forumz!

But really, if such a board exists, whats the cost :eek:

I'll go for a step-up if the performance warrants it when these guys drop.
Click to expand...

The new Intel top of line 45nm quad chip coming out in November is what you need. It cost about $1000, and nearly the twice speed of a Q6600 stock and 12MB cache.

Quad in SLI, AMD already have something like that with their Quad FX-74 (2 x dual core), the heat , watts and implimentation issue actually make them slower than Q6600 in actual condition.
 
Hmm...you can have twice the speed of a Q6600 by putting them in a Skulltrail and for 60 % of the cost of that Penryn...not to mention having 8 cores at your disposal for your computing needs...
 
ManBearPig

That JVC still cannot handle a signal of 120Hz, let alone its 180Hz tripling of a 60Hz signal. It is basically like the current 120Hz sets that are just doubling frames, but in this case it is tripling frames.

Any way, the 8800 series (640 GTS and up) is a great piece of timely architecture that allowed a lot of gamers to survive on the same hardware platform for quite a long time. It still has some legs, and right now is still on top of the heap. Yes we can see some nice new champions over the horizon, but waiting for the newcomer is a bad decision with as many new and fun games coming out. Just play them and have fun.
 
It definetley seems like it..but the price is just flabbergasting, for lack of a better term. That half of my proposeds badget right there...3 times as much as 2 Q6600s.
 
TheGodfather47 said:
Hmm...you can have twice the speed of a Q6600 by putting them in a Skulltrail and for 60 % of the cost of that Penryn...not to mention having 8 cores at your disposal for your computing needs...
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that skulltrail is socket 771 not socket 775.
 
Yea, plus it uses DDR3, and the fact that it only supports 45nm processors...

But one can dream, right? :D
 
TheGodfather47 said:
Hmm...you can have twice the speed of a Q6600 by putting them in a Skulltrail and for 60 % of the cost of that Penryn...not to mention having 8 cores at your disposal for your computing needs...
Click to expand...

Oh, SkullTrail, I forgot about that. Yes, Intel's 2 x 4 cores = 8 cores. It uses server grade components, so the cost would be immense as well.
 
Treyshadow said:
ManBearPig

That JVC still cannot handle a signal of 120Hz, let alone its 180Hz tripling of a 60Hz signal. It is basically like the current 120Hz sets that are just doubling frames, but in this case it is tripling frames.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you'd still notice a significant difference, especially if it has a fast response time.
 
Yeah I was at work, I'm not gonna give you an excuse it's not worth it. I never said I'd stop responding after work...

But I am officially done for today so be happy <3
 
Manbearpig said:
Yeah I was at work, I'm not gonna give you an excuse it's not worth it. I never said I'd stop responding after work...
Click to expand...

Oh no? This was earlier today as well...

Manbearpig said:
I am back, but I wont be after 4:30 if you're that worried.
Click to expand...

Manbearpig said:
But I am officially done for today so be happy <3
Click to expand...

Unlikely, but i have been wrong before. The most fun thing about you trolls is you contradict yourselfs and really do just put on a show for the rest of us.
 
Manbearpig said:
While your card may have AA + HDR, pfunkman, It's not a Dx10 card so it doesn't have SM4.0 capabilities which allows 128-bit HDR rendering as opposed to your 64-bit HDR in SM3.0 meaning AA + HDR on your card, it won't be nearly as good. It really isn't something to rave over.

It's obvious my card can't handle Dx10 games nearly as good as the 8 series, I'm very very aware of that. Now that more and more Dx10 games are coming out, I can now finally take advantage of the 8 series. I'm not sure what game you're talking about but I'm sure as hell betting that game is new.

Anyways, it's been fun arguing to a wall, I like repeating myself a lot. My comments only sound misinformed to yourself because you can't agree on anything simply because you don't want to. And by the way, playable FPS is at lowest 30, a game is playable at that rate, nothing lower in my book.



Yes, it is about preference, as is my preference to buy an 8800 a year after release because I did not need it back then. If you check the other pages, theres 1600x1200 resolutions and theres still about a 10FPS difference. Also, about the "no HDTV, rayathon, LCD, or plasma, can handle a FPS of 120", check this out:

http://hometheatermag.com/news/100907jvc/
Click to expand...

Im sorry i promised myself i wouldn't reply back but damn with such ignorance i cant help it...

The reason your posts seem misinformed to me is the fact that you continually post shit thats far from the truth.

1) You claimed HDR + AA to be a SM4.0 feature. This is a feature dependant upon the architecture of a video card the X1k series had it before there was a such thing as an 8800 series

2) you said your card cant handle DX10 as well as the 8 series. Your card cant render a single frame of DX10 simply put its not compatible

3) You claim your 7900GS is an ultra powerfull monster that plays all games at maximum settings at 1680x1050 with full AA/AF. The 7900GS is a midrange card that has never been able to play all games at max since it was released

Saying stupid things like that destroys your credibility. Trying to hold up an argument by bullshitting ultimately destroys your argument and any good points you made go down the toilet with the bullshit.

Sorry man but the nail in the coffin of your credibility ended here

Manbearpig said:
It's obvious my card can't handle Dx10 games nearly as good as the 8 series, I'm very very aware of that.
Click to expand...
 
Sorry...I haven't been following along.

He stated that the 7900GS can do 1680x1050 maxed out with max AA/AF? My 8800GTS 320 struggles sometimes in such situations.

The 7900GS CAN NOT run DX10 no matter what...this is a fact.

What's the issue? I'm sure that he knows of such things; they are common knowledge.
 
RB30 said:
Let me point out somethings you guys should all agree on:

1. Right now is not the time to buy 8800 series card because Dx 10.1 is coming out and 8800 series do not support that. Wait for until November or December see what nVidia or ATI is coming out that support Dx 10.1. There is no point to buy an obsolete card now so close in time.
Click to expand...

I never said now is the best time to buy a card, I was pointing out the fact that he was wrong in saying that the cards are just now showing their use. They have proven to be the best cards to get since they came out and blew away everything else.

Now, for those people who DO want to buy a new card, buy EVGA so you can step-up to the new stuff if you want to have it and need something now.
 
Damn this thread went south quick, can we get back to the topic people.....




The Inq sux, and anyone that quotes or links it, is either a noob, or loves recieving prison sex.

/.02 cents
 
more important than core, mem and sp speed, is the number of texture and pixel units. the GTX/Ultra have 32/24. no one seems to know how many the 8800 GT will have.
 
who was it that said all threads citing INQ as their source should note it in their title?

Because that should seriously be considered as a new rule.
 
—§urfÅceЗ;1031550059 said:
who was it that said all threads citing INQ as their source should note it in their title?
Click to expand...

i believe it was winston churchill. or possibly ed gein.
 
azuldenial said:
Damn this thread went south quick, can we get back to the topic people.....




The Inq sux, and anyone that quotes or links it, is either a noob, or loves recieving prison sex.

/.02 cents
Click to expand...

No need to bash on prison sex. Don't knock it till you try it...:eek:
 
pfunkman said:
Im sorry i promised myself i wouldn't reply back but damn with such ignorance i cant help it...
Click to expand...

Yes, we can finally agree on something: you are ignorant.

pfunkman said:
The reason your posts seem misinformed to me is the fact that you continually post shit thats far from the truth.
Click to expand...

No, the reason you think my posts seems misinformed is because you are ignorant (as stated by yourself above) and you seem to twist my words around to your liking so you can make me sound misinformed but it's not working too well. Like another wise member said, your home is the Dell community. You aren't part of some elite [H] team and you certainly aren't a representative for the [H] community so stop acting like you are cause you're giving them a bad name.

pfunkman said:
1) You claimed HDR + AA to be a SM4.0 feature. This is a feature dependant upon the architecture of a video card the X1k series had it before there was a such thing as an 8800 series.
Click to expand...

What I said was HDR + AA with SM4.0 is a slight upgrade from SM3.0 which your card has. DirextX10 cards utilize this feature because it can handle full AA + HDR with 128 bit HDR rendering compared to your 64 bit. The X1k series was the first of its kind.

pfunkman said:
2) you said your card cant handle DX10 as well as the 8 series. Your card cant render a single frame of DX10 simply put its not compatible
Click to expand...

This is the part where I start to question your reading comprehension. As quoted under YOUR post, a quote from me stated "I can't handle DX10 games as well as the 8 series can.", which is true, correct? I never once said or ever will say my DX9 card can "handle" the DX10 application. Find a quote of me saying "My DX9 card is compatable with the DX10 application" and reply back to me when you do.

pfunkman said:
3) You claim your 7900GS is an ultra powerfull monster that plays all games at maximum settings at 1680x1050 with full AA/AF.The 7900GS is a midrange card that has never been able to play all games at max since it was released
Click to expand...

I never clained my 7900GS is an "ultra powerful monster", I said it handed all my games just fine with max settings for the past year now and I didn't see any need to buy an 8800 until now. Why can't you get that through your thick head? About the midrange card thing, there are many midrange cards out there that can outperform better cards. Take the 2900pro for example: when flashed and overclocked correctly, they are on par with an 8800GTS 640 so don't give me any of this BS. My card is overclocked as well, it would be a waste not to.

pfunkman said:
Sorry man but the nail in the coffin of your credibility ended here
Click to expand...

I literally laughed out loud from the sheer irony of this quote.
 
Manbearpig said:
I never clained my 7900GS is an "ultra powerful monster", I said it handed all my games just fine with max settings for the past year now and I didn't see any need to buy an 8800 until now. Why can't you get that through your thick head? About the midrange card thing, there are many midrange cards out there that can outperform better cards. Take the 2900pro for example: when flashed and overclocked correctly, they are on par with an 8800GTS 640 so don't give me any of this BS. My card is overclocked as well, it would be a waste not to.
Click to expand...

Before 8 series cards came out, you could probably claim that 7900GS is a mid-range card. I doubt it will run anything with max settings at 1680x1050 higher than 30 fps for the past one year. Probably you just never realize it and you are comfortable with low frame rate. Look at the graph below, even the one time mighty 7900GTX, is trailing at the low ends. UT3 demo is highly optimized compare to what other games out there, so 31.4 fps at res 1920x1200 in UT3, will be even lower at most games.

15786.png


suspense.scaling.png


suspense.scaling.png
 
RB30 said:
Before 8 series cards came out, you could probably claim that 7900GS is a mid-range card. I doubt it will run anything with max settings at 1680x1050 higher than 30 fps for the past one year. Probably you just never realize it and you are comfortable with low frame rate. Look at the graph below, even the one time mighty 7900GTX, is trailing at the low ends. UT3 demo is highly optimized compare to what other games out there, so 31.4 fps at res 1920x1200 in UT3, will be even lower at most games.
Click to expand...


7900GS isnt really a mid-range card. It is in the lower end of the high end tier, however. 7600 is midrange. Now, yes, it could be *considered* mid-range since its getting old, but you stated before the 8 series came out.
 
I'm no part of this little fight, so I don't know who started what, I didn't read that far back. But Manbearpig, if you honestly think the the statement "my video card can't handle dx10 as well as the 8800" to mean anything but it can, albeit poorly, then you seriously need to brush up on your English comprehension. Please go back to school.

But not only could you admit you said it wrong or that you were wrong, YOU tried to twist your own words into something that made sense and actually try to justify your ridiculous statement. That is ignorance at its very best. You didn't just put a nail in your coffin, you were ridiculous to the point of figuratively bashing your head against a cement wall until you were bleeding and unconscious.
 
Highly optimized meaning older cards can handle it fine with the lowest settings possible. Crysis is even highly optimized as the minimum requirements needs a 6800 or higher whereas UT3 only needs a 6200 or higher. UT3 is still a graphically intense game that relies heavily on new shader effects and MSAA. Anyways, on max settings at 1680x1050, I get ~25 FPS which isn't playable unless I lower the settings by a margin. November should be the right time to get a new card for me.

Citizen86 said:
I'm no part of this little fight, so I don't know who started what, I didn't read that far back. But Manbearpig, if you honestly think the the statement "my video card can't handle dx10 as well as the 8800" to mean anything but it can, albeit poorly, then you seriously need to brush up on your English comprehension. Please go back to school. .
Click to expand...

I think you need to go back to school to learn to read things first before you jump to conclusions, kid. Since you "didn't read that far back", I'd take my advice and stop talking shit before you make a fool of yourself because you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

If you really want to dig yourself deeper, the statement "my video card can't handle dx10 as well as the 8800" that I supposedly said was from pfunkman. What I actually said was "my video card can't handle DX10 games as well as the 8 series." which is a whole different meaning. I really hope you don't always jump into conversations to say stupid crap like that.
 
Manbearpig said:
Highly optimized meaning older cards can handle it fine with the lowest settings possible. Crysis is even highly optimized as the minimum requirements needs a 6800 or higher whereas UT3 only needs a 6200 or higher. UT3 is still a graphically intense game that relies heavily on new shader effects and MSAA. Anyways, on max settings at 1680x1050, I get ~25 FPS which isn't playable unless I lower the settings by a margin. November should be the right time to get a new card for me.
Click to expand...

wow.
 
Manbearpig said:
Highly optimized meaning older cards can handle it fine with the lowest settings possible. Crysis is even highly optimized as the minimum requirements needs a 6800 or higher whereas UT3 only needs a 6200 or higher. UT3 is still a graphically intense game that relies heavily on new shader effects and MSAA. Anyways, on max settings at 1680x1050, I get ~25 FPS which isn't playable unless I lower the settings by a margin. November should be the right time to get a new card for me.
Click to expand...

I was right, less than 30fps on your 7900GS. Thank you for coming clean with us. At least we know where your card stands, we will stop bashing you about what you said before.
 
RB30 said:
I was right, less than 30fps on your 7900GS. Thank you for coming clean with us. At least we know where your card stands, we will stop bashing you about what you said before.
Click to expand...

Stop bashing me? No one here was right.. UT3 didn't even come out yet and as I stated a million times, up until a few months ago I handled every game fine... I have no idea why you brought UT3 into this...

Commence the bashing (if you want to call it that). I just call it jealousy and I see no reason for anyone to be jealous. It was just my choice.
 
Manbearpig said:
Yes, we can finally agree on something: you are ignorant. No, the reason you think my posts seems misinformed is because you are ignorant (as stated by yourself above) and you seem to twist my words around to your liking so you can make me sound misinformed but it's not working too well. Like another wise member said, your home is the Dell community. You aren't part of some elite [H] team and you certainly aren't a representative for the [H] community so stop acting like you are cause you're giving them a bad name.
Click to expand...

Since im "twisting your words i will respond to you with exact quotes from yourself. Just watch how easy this is...

Manbearpig said:
What I said was HDR + AA with SM4.0 is a slight upgrade from SM3.0 which your card has. DirextX10 cards utilize this feature because it can handle full AA + HDR with 128 bit HDR rendering compared to your 64 bit. The X1k series was the first of its kind.
Click to expand...

Earlier you said said:
AA + HDR is a Directx10 feature using Shader Model 4.0 which is a slight upgrade from SM3.0
Click to expand...

Manbearpig said:
This is the part where I start to question your reading comprehension. As quoted under YOUR post, a quote from me stated "I can't handle DX10 games as well as the 8 series can.", which is true, correct? I never once said or ever will say my DX9 card can "handle" the DX10 application. Find a quote of me saying "My DX9 card is compatable with the DX10 application" and reply back to me when you do.
Click to expand...

Earlier you said said:
It's obvious my card can't handle Dx10 games nearly as good as the 8 series, I'm very very aware of that.
Click to expand...

Manbearpig said:
I never clained my 7900GS is an "ultra powerful monster", I said it handed all my games just fine with max settings for the past year now and I didn't see any need to buy an 8800 until now. Why can't you get that through your thick head? About the midrange card thing, there are many midrange cards out there that can outperform better cards. Take the 2900pro for example: when flashed and overclocked correctly, they are on par with an 8800GTS 640 so don't give me any of this BS. My card is overclocked as well, it would be a waste not to.
Click to expand...

Either your full of shit or you spent the last year avoiding games your card cant handle because over the last year there have been alot of games you couldnt dream of playing on max. Stalker, Oblivion, Company of heroes, BF2142, G.R.A.W. all come to mind. and all of those games have been out nearly a year or longer these are not new games.
 
Ouch.........I paid $360 for my Evga 8800GTX.........
When the new ones come out I will not pay retail for them either. There are always deals..................just have to be patient.....

I have a 7900GTX on another computer and it has played UT2004 just fine. I havent tried it with UT3 yet...........but im sure it will work fine.
 
And what are you trying to prove here with those quotes?

Anyways, yes I do avoid some games, usually the bad ones.. I did play a few from that list such as Oblivion, G.R.A.W(which I didn't like) and Company Of Heroes. I might try STALKER out to when I get the chance.

I'm gonna try and find a good deal this November if the GTX/Ultras get any lower or I might just get the new GT/GTS.
 
Manbearpig said:
Stop bashing me? No one here was right.. UT3 didn't even come out yet and as I stated a million times, up until a few months ago I handled every game fine... I have no idea why you brought UT3 into this...

Commence the bashing (if you want to call it that). I just call it jealousy and I see no reason for anyone to be jealous. It was just my choice.
Click to expand...

I brought out UT3 because there is AnadTech's extensive UT3 demo review on each component vs every other component, so we will get a sense of things, and UT3 is the most optimized game I have seen so far. It even runs better, smoother overall, than BF2142 which came out a year ago, and evern better than Half-Life 2 although HL2 might have better frame rate but it is a bit chuppy whenever panning really quickly. UT3 has no such problem.

Can you list the games that runs well on your system with everything max at res 1680x1050? Oblivion you should have problem with. Before, I got my 8800 Ultra, I was running Oblivion with X2 3800+ [email protected] and 7800GT SLI at res 1280x1024 and it was slow at times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top