Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cheap New GeForce 8800 GT Challenges $400 Cards

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the like-fanless-music-to-my-ears dept.

J. Dzhugashvili writes "What would you say to a video card that performs like a $400 GeForce 8800 GTS for $200-250? Say hello to the GeForce 8800 GT. The Tech Report has tested the new mid-range wonder in Crysis, Unreal Tournament 3, Team Fortress 2, and BioShock. It found that the card keeps up with its $400 big brother overall while drawing significantly less power and — here's the kicker — generating slightly less noise."

2 of 402 comments (clear)

  1. Nice looking card by Emetophobe · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here are the main benefits I see with this card:

    1. Single slot cooler instead of a dual slot like all the other high end cards made over the last 2 years
    2. One 6 pin power connection instead of two like all the other high end G80 cards
    3. Power consumption. According to the article (yes I read it), Nvidia rates the power consumption of the 8800GT at 110 watts.
    4. Supports PCI Express 2.0 (backwards compatible with PCI Express 1.1)
    5. Relatively cheap. I always found $200-300 to be the best price range for a video card (the high end G80 cards on the other hand cost $500-800)

  2. Re:$200-250 is NOT cheap! by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

    All of today's $100 cards perform better than cards from 5 years ago. Happy?

    The same complaint you've just made can be made for -all- computer components. The high-end ($400) stuff -is- insanely expensive, and only for the true die-hard hobbyists. The hobbyist ($200) stuff is for those that want to enjoy the sport, but can't afford to throw their money away. And the cheap stuff ($100) is for those that don't really care and the low-end stuff is good enough.

    I think the OP was getting more at how the price strata of computer equipment has changed over the years.

    CPUs: 5 years ago, ~$1k was top, ~$300 mid-line, ~$125 low-end. Today, same.
    HD: 5 years ago, ~$700 was top, ~$200 mid-line, ~$80 low-end. Today, same, maybe a bit lower.
    RAM: 5 years ago, ~$500 was top, ~$200 mid-line, ~$100 low-end. Today, same, maybe a bit lower.

    Video: 5 years ago, ~$400 was top, ~$150 mid-line, ~$50 low-end. Today, it's gone up. ~$700 top, ~$300 mid-line, ~$100 low-end.

    However, I would argue against the OP: From a market standpoint the reason video card pricing has increased is because the customers are more willing to spend more on a video card than the other components. Certainly GPUs have increased in complexity to where they've equaled or surpassed CPUs in circuits thus increasing manufacturing costs, but ATI and nVidia wouldn't have pushed GPUs to that point if the public weren't willing to buy them. It leaves the folks who can only afford a $150 video card feeling as if they have a smaller penis because the high-end is now $700 instead of $400. But as you point out, any low end card out today would smoke the high-end cards from 5 years ago.

    Now if we can just get the game developers to write code which will run at acceptable FPS on mid- to low-end video hardware...