Quote Originally Posted by pdiggs View Post
Well, actually, you are utterly and completely wrong - how do you think that card is much different than an 8800gts 320MB, which doesn't do anything spectacular at higher resolutions (64 MB will not make the difference). Your assumptions are incorrect - it might struggle if you are talking about 1900x1200 with 4x AA 16xAF (and that's only in few games). At 1680x1050 even with full antialiasing, you are still good go go with an 8800gt 256MB card & it performs identical to the 8800gt 512MB in all games except Crysis -- that's a fact, a link below for your reference (Since you can't seem to do your own research) . I am finding this common theme that folks on forums simply aren't doing their homework and have no idea what they are talking about, nor even attempt to gather data to back up there posts. Mental laziness is a bad habit.

Summary: the 8800gs, or the mythical 9600gt , are not going to be able to compete with even a 256MB 8800gt at all resolutions and even 4x antialiasing up to 1680x1050 or 1600x1200.

http://en.expreview.com/?p=64&page=8


Here's one little example for you, and I'd say Call of duty 4 is would be a good example of intensive graphics & representative of a graphics engine good for a year -- the 8800gs would be lucky to simply match the HD3850 here:

please read this

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=171466

as you can see in a few games it is close to the 512mb and in others even not as demanding games it loses out at 1280x1024 with AA and it can't even run crysis 1280x1024 noAA without taking a hit.

this is only the beginning as well, newer games will use more and more. in many of those cases a 8800gs with 384mb vram will win while being cheaper as well.