NVidia's Geforce 7800 GTX

[Xaroxantu Zero]

http://images.tigerdirect.ca/skuimages/large/B52-7802-main3.jpg

Take a look at the review here (http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20050622/index.html).

The benchmark results are amazing. You should check out the tech demos (http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce7_demos.html) at NVidia's site as well. If only I had $810. :rolleyes:

[ciscoboi]

Watch that video card churn out some impresive Freecell and Solitaire numbers...

[b_t]

wow, it performs so well... but it costs SOOOO much money! why does this shit have to cost so much?

[Kamen]

Well...it's not THAT much if you think about it...besides, price will drop accordingly.
My 6600GT can still max out pretty much anything so meh for now :D

[hampstor]

from what i've been told, this will NOT replace the 6600 line at this time... merely be ontop of the 6600 w/o affecting the prices below it significantly.

[Xtrema]

Well that'll definitely hit the 6800 line since fanboys are abandoninit.

Which also explains why there are some many Sub-$400 6800 on the market lately.

[Xaroxantu Zero]

Originally posted by hampstor
from what i've been told, this will NOT replace the 6600 line at this time... merely be ontop of the 6600 w/o affecting the prices below it significantly.

Just wait till the 7600 and 7200 comes out. xD

[seer_claw]

Keep in mind that the review was also on Toms Hardware, a site notorious for slightly skewed outlooks on some vendors. :rolleyes:

[hampstor]

having seen the cost of the new 7800 gtx... wow. I don't know who on earth is going to buy this...

However, an FX-57 + a 7800gtx would be a killer rig :D

[ZEDGE]

$800 for a goddamn video card....

:thumbsdow

Thats just sick.

Pc gaming will die when new consoles come out.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by ZEDGE

Pc gaming will die when new consoles come out.

Somehow, I really doubt that.

The 7800 is more or less the same as the RSX unit found in the PS3. When the PS3 comes out, it will have amazing graphics. But then again, so will computers. And then computers will advance, as computers do, and the computers will regain the technology throne.

PC gaming is going nowhere any time soon.

[b_t]

no kidding, every time a new generation of consoles come out everybody says computer gaming is going to die but it still seems to be going strong to me :dunno: not to mention computers have had far superior graphics to anything on the PS2 for the past couple years now.

[Xaroxantu Zero]

Don't forget that strategy games and MMORPGs are strongest on the PC platform, as well as FPS games. Can you mod console games? Well, there ya go. :D

All new high-end video cards are expensive. The Geforce 2 GTS was mad expensive; the Geforce 3 Ti was; the Geforce 4 Ti was; the Geforce 5950 was and the Geforce 6800 was. Now that the Geforce 7800 came out, it's gonna be mad expensive (and it is). So chances are, when they're gonna release the 8800 (or similar) in the future, it's gonna be mad expensive. ;)

[ZEDGE]

I think it will be a couple of years before there is a home pc more powerful than the new consoles, and even then it will cost 10x as much. :rolleyes:

And with 20+gb hd on 360, possibly ps3, there could be mods for console games. Xbox already has downloadable content now.

:dunno:

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by b_t
no kidding, every time a new generation of consoles come out everybody says computer gaming is going to die but it still seems to be going strong to me :dunno: not to mention computers have had far superior graphics to anything on the PS2 for the past couple years now.

fair enough but a ps2 can be had for 200, how much does it cost to build a pc that can play todays games at full detail?

$1000? More?

yea

[b_t]

Originally posted by ZEDGE


fair enough but a ps2 can be had for 200, how much does it cost to build a pc that can play todays games at full detail?

$1000? More?

yea

mine was $1500 with windows XP installed
and last I checked, PC games at full detail look far better then any console game out right now and just as good as the few screenshots released for Xbox 360 games. as well, PC games come from a different school of design - do you think playing Halo 2 in a map ten times the size of Coagulation with four times as many players would work on an Xbox?

[ZEDGE]

Originally posted by b_t


mine was $1500 with windows XP installed
and last I checked, PC games at full detail look far better then any console game out right now and just as good as the few screenshots released for Xbox 360 games. as well, PC games come from a different school of design - do you think playing Halo 2 in a map ten times the size of Coagulation with four times as many players would work on an Xbox?

thats fine but..

gameplay > graphics

*Fact*

[b_t]

Originally posted by ZEDGE


thats fine but..

gameplay > graphics

*Fact*

Half Life 2 > anything on consoles except maybe God of War
Total Annihaltion is eight years old and still one of the best strategy games to come out, I don't see Falcon 3.0, Grand Prix Legends, Flight Simulator, Rise of Nations, Farcry, Dark Forces II, etc etc etc coming out on consoles. and remember, Grand Theft Auto started out on computers. plus, there are thousands more free games on the computer then there is for any console, and some of those free games are better then 90% of the garbage that comes out on consoles.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by ZEDGE


thats fine but..

gameplay > graphics

*Fact*

Thank you for basically proving my point. Have you ever tried playing a good strategy game (ie RTS) or FPS on a console ,then switched over to PC? The difference is incredible.

Strategy games are near-impossible to control well using a controller.
FPS games are much easier to control with a mouse.

This pretty much leaves RPG's for the consoles, which is fine by me. I'll wait till it's ported to PC.


BTW: :hijack: :D

[sync]

yeah, keyboard and mouse owns dpad every single time.

it would be a complete fucking slaughter if they had people on putes going up against consolers and their controllers in first person shooter multiplayer games.

a complete slaughter. :guns:

[Kamen]

This whole console vs PC is a stupid and timeless debate.
Both have their strengths and weaknesses and neither are going anywhere soon.

Personally I like to play strategy, multiplayer FPS games on the PC but I like games like driving, action/adventure, or RPGs on console. This is probably due to the much mentioned comfortability factor.

My computer cost $1500 cuz I pretty much bought all the high end parts which enables me to max out games like HL2 or Battlefield 2. Don't forget that consoles don't have to run an OS and other resource wasting programs, they are purely for games.

blah blah blah:whocares:

[natejj]

Pshhh.... its not the PC in front of the man, its the man in front of the PC.... if anyone here buy this, please let me know... we will play some CS, some BF2, ANYTHING! And we will see who wins. haha me and my 9600 pro love to trash talk.

[heavyD]

For $800 you could buy an Xbox 360 & PS3 which which will provide better performance than any top of the line PC today or in the next year or more. HDTV will be the final nail in PC gaming's coffin as now consoles will have PC resolution in your living room. PC gaming has been on a steady decline for years as even games like Half Life 2 that are hyped for years sell less than Madden sells annually on the PS2.

The controller vs mouse argument is getting pretty weak as the highest selling FPS series ever is played on a controller.

I don't want to start a flame war but who would be foolish enough to spend that kind of money on a video card which will depreciate over 50% in one year's time.

[Shoebox//Racer]

Originally posted by heavyD
The controller vs mouse argument is getting pretty weak as the highest selling FPS series ever is played on a controller.


Highest selling doesnt mean the most played....

As far as i know CS is still the most played FPS.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by Shoebox//Racer
Highest selling doesnt mean the most played....

As far as i know CS is still the most played FPS.

I'm willing to bet more people have played Halo or Halo 2 or know of it than CS. CS is mostly played by the same people over & over on the internet plus it's freeware. Nice comparison.:rolleyes:

[Shoebox//Racer]

Originally posted by heavyD


I'm willing to bet more people have played Halo or Halo 2 or know of it than CS. CS is mostly played by the same people over & over on the internet plus it's freeware. Nice comparison.:rolleyes:

what does it matter whether its freeware or not? you are comparing mice to controller... and the same people play halo over and over again too... just like cs players... :dunno: anyways.... this debate is kinda pointless without any hard numbers so.... :rolleyes:

[b_t]

Originally posted by heavyD
For $800 you could buy an Xbox 360 & PS3 which which will provide better performance than any top of the line PC today or in the next year or more. HDTV will be the final nail in PC gaming's coffin as now consoles will have PC resolution in your living room. PC gaming has been on a steady decline for years as even games like Half Life 2 that are hyped for years sell less than Madden sells annually on the PS2.

The controller vs mouse argument is getting pretty weak as the highest selling FPS series ever is played on a controller.

I don't want to start a flame war but who would be foolish enough to spend that kind of money on a video card which will depreciate over 50% in one year's time.

too bad a top of the line computer has already surpassed what the PS3 and Xbox 360 can do (albeit costing $4,500) and has a comparable lifespan, not to mention is compatible with any game ever made for any platform other then the PS2, Xbox, and the next gen consoles. plus, computers have for a long time been able to go far, far beyond the resolutions offered by next gen consoles (a version of Links that came out some time around the turn of the century - as in five or six years ago - can run in 2048x1536 if you find a monitor that can handle it) and the online support currently offered by consoles is about on par with what you could do on computers in 1997.

and these video cards actually depreciate very little until the next generation of cards comes out, because the next generation typically demolishes the previous generation in terms of everything except performance per dollar. remember, computer processing power doubles once every two years and a bit, and it has been a long time since it doubled. by the time the PS3 and Xbox 360 hit the shelves, there will be computers approaching the 5 gigahertz level and graphics cards even better then the 7800.

and let's not forget, you can use word, excel, internet explorer, winamp, limewire, bittorrent, burn CDs and DVDs, and if you are a super-geek, wire up your entire house to be controlled by a computer.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by b_t
too bad a top of the line computer has already surpassed what the PS3 and Xbox 360 can do (albeit costing $4,500)

100% pure horseshit. Take a look at the specs for Xbox 360 or PS3. There is no comercial PC that can come close at the moment.

[b_t]

Originally posted by heavyD


100% pure horseshit. Take a look at the specs for Xbox 360 or PS3. There is no comercial PC that can come close at the moment.

console manufacturers are awesome at exagerrating them. for instance, anything they say about fill rate and so on is for untextured polygons. the only console you can really compare on even terms to a computer is the Gamecube, since they actually did real-world tests, and the Gamecude is completely outclassed by any above-average computer.
until I see real demos for Killzone and the Xbox 360 games (The screenshot for Quake 4 looks exactly as good as Doom 3 already does), I am just assuming computers will still be better because historically they improve far too fast for consoles to ever keep up

[b_t]

here's a great article I just read: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2461
basically, it talks about how the CPUs are crap and inferior to the Athlon 64 and Pentium D that are already out today, and how the NVIDIA GPU used in the PS3 (I think, it might have been the Xbo 360) is equivalent or maybe slightly better then this card we are supposed to be talking about (7800 GTX). as well, they also talk about how nobody is making games for 1080p because while the console supports it, the system itself is not powerful enough to actually run a next generation game in that high of resolution. if you directly ported a current PS2 game to the PS3, then you could get 1080p. otherwise, no. they are all making them for 720p.

[heavyD]

Is this pic real? No it's a pic from Project Gotham 3 running on Xbox 360. I think this puts to rest any more arguing about PC's being more powerful than Xbox360.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/629/629779p1.html

There is a link to how Bizarre Creations make the street backgrounds. Pretty neat. PC's will eventually catch up but games like HL2 are going to look pretty dated in the next year.

[koopkoop2]

Originally posted by heavyD
Is this pic real? No it's a pic from Project Gotham 3 running on Xbox 360. I think this puts to rest any more arguing about PC's being more powerful than Xbox360.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/629/629779p1.html

There is a link to how Bizarre Creations make the street backgrounds. Pretty neat. PC's will eventually catch up but games like HL2 are going to look pretty dated in the next year.

"These teasers have only made us more excited to see how the game will look in motion. Because as we saw at E3, all the remarkable detail of HD falls to the wayside when the frame rate drops too low for a smooth presentation. We'll keep you updated with any further developments regarding PGR3 and every other upcoming 360 game."

It would put the argument to rest, if it were actually playable.

[heavyD]

Originally posted by koopkoop2
It would put the argument to rest, if it were actually playable.

I honesly think in motion it will be pretty hard to have that shear amount of detail but I believe it will be close. That background as well as the other pic will be in the game though and there is no Half Life 2 still that comes even minutely close to that sort of detail. According to b_t though, framerate doesn't matter.:rolleyes:

Also that link he posted was taken down from the site and removed a since it was complete bullshit. Why do fanboys and even internet editors have to get so desperate to make up complete false articles to support their beloved platform is beyond me.

Back to the original topic though. Why would you shell out that kind of dough on a piece of hardware when no PC games will even be able to take full advantage of it until the next greatest hardware arrives.

[b_t]

I'd be really interested to see if the xbox will do this...
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/145/926742_20050526_screen004.jpg
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/145/926742_20050526_screen006.jpg
...it won't. The Xbox doesn't have enough processing power to break a car up like that, and render it at that high level of detail in real-time.

and I don't even think you looked at this http://forums.gaminghorizon.com/showthread.php?p=512
This is a better one: http://www.gamershell.com/news/22905.html
and remember, the new race driver game comes out before the end of the year and that HL2 update comes out within a couple months, and you have to wait until spring for your xbox, and I can't even imagine what kind of things PCs will be able to accomplish then. and its easy to have good looking environments. rendering people is what takes all a computer's power.
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2004/screen0/914642_20041116_screen040.jpg
and that is something HL2 has completely nailed down. its hard to notice in that picture, but you can see the reflection of the environment in everybody's eyes. also, the people in HL2 move completely lifelike (except they walk backwards really fast) and everything is properly set up. I don't even think you've played the game, so you would really have no idea how impressive HL2's graphics are until you see them in motion. as well, its the best coded engine out there right now. The doom 3 engine is an inefficient train wreck compared to the HL2 engine, although Doom 3 does have per-pixel lighting.
and look at that video really carefully - even though both shots are at maximum detail, the HDR lighting makes the right side shot look a hundred times better.
These shots are not pre-rendered. this is the 7800 GTX pack-in demo...
http://www.nzone.com/docs/IO/23040/screenshot3.jpg
http://www.nzone.com/docs/IO/23040/screenshot1.jpg
http://www.nzone.com/docs/IO/23040/screenshot2.jpg

and here is what seals the deal
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/137/928117_20050518_screen001.jpg
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/128/reviews/928117_20050509_screen004.jpg
that is not pre-rendered either. That is from Unreal Tournament 2007. And while you might point out that the PS3 uses an Nvidia chip, remember that the next gen consoles have only 512mb RAM and half the processing power of your average computer. They will not be able to do anything like this, at least until the very end of their lifespan.

You have no argument here so just give up.

and here's another comparo, between Doom 3's PC and Xbox version.
Xbox:
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/090/reviews/914444_20050401_screen011.jpg
PC:
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2004/reviews/469881_20040804_screen006.jpg
The edge goes to the PC yet again. The most telling difference is the normal mapping on his shirt that is absent in the Xbox shot, and the drastically reduced resolution on the monitor in the Xbox version.

[Kamen]

Did you mix up the last two pics because right now the image listed under XBOX is WAY better than PC.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

No, the PC one is much sharper than the XBOX one.

The first picture, with the car crash, looks amazing! :eek:

[Kamen]

The pic is sharper but it is also much edgier? :dunno:
oh well, I should stay out of this shit...

[b_t]

Originally posted by Kamen
The pic is sharper but it is also much edgier? :dunno:
oh well, I should stay out of this shit...

that pic isn't a very good one, they didn't have AA or anything on so it looks kind of messed up. I might take one, but Doom 3 isn't a fun game to play so I don't even really want to go to the trouble.

plus I was playing Halo 2 with my buddies last night and these is no way that game runs at 60fps. In a cutscene at the start of the level where the Brutes have to pay for what they have done (Haha I can't remember the name) it was slowing down and there was noticeable jerkiness in the guys' movements. the Xbox doesn't even really work with my TV, either, there is a delay after every button press and movement of the joystick. it makes it impossible to play

edit: and if Microsoft makes something like this http://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Main_Page for Halo 3 then I might actually buy my first Halo game...