Tom's Hardware - DX10 Shootout

[Jmac]

DirectX 10 Shootout: Nvidia vs. ATI | Tom's Hardware

Well, the article itself demonstrated how poorly most DX10 cards play the current line-up of DX10 games (except the 8800 GTX and 8800 Ultra, of course), but the last 2 pages are complete BS, IMO. I mean, I know Nvidia is by far winning the battle w/ the GTX and Ultra and I own an 8800 GTS 640 MB myself, but this article just screams bias. At the end, they add up all the FPS scores (from 1024 all the way up to 1920) and then divide by the price to give a price/performance ratio. First of all, who spends $250+ to play games @ 1024x768 w/ no AA or AF ? No one because most people who are running these cards are using a 20" or larger screen, so why bother using this score as if it matters ? Better yet, 60% of the tests are at 1280x1024 or lower which, again, is completely unrealistic for cards of this caliber. If you actually add up the 2 highest resolutions they used (1600x1200 w/ AA+AF and 1920x1200 w/ AA+AF), the scores go a little more like this:

ATI HD2900 XT 512 MB - 299.6 fps (25.0 avg)
Nvidia 8800 GTS 640 MB - 320.2 fps (26.7 avg)
Nvidia 8800 GTS 320 MB - 284.6 fps (23.7 avg)

So, at REALISTIC resolutions, the 8800 GTS 640 MB is still a better choice overall, but it doesn't smoke the HD2900 XT by a whopping 20% as TH would have you believe, but a much more believable 7%. Also, the 320 MB, which TH ranked 12% higher, scores 5% lower than the HD2900 XT. Mind you, this is pretty good given the 8800 GTS 320 MB is well over $100 cheaper.

The second bias is that the HD2900 XT 1 GB and the HD2900 Pro were not included, plus throw in a bunch of overclocked Nvidia cards, and you've got a sea of green all over the place.

[werty316]

I foresee a 8800GTS 320MB in my future once a price cut rolls along unless there is a better bang-for-your-buck GPU out there when new cards arrive later down the road.

[Scratch]

well as Jmac just pointed out the best bang for your buck is the 8800GTS 640mb card.
I have seen other benchmarks and have done some of my own at native resolutions of 1920 1200 and 1600 1080 on my 24" monitor and I have to agree with you that including low res stats in an enthusiast/gamer user card selection comparison skews the results and is solely intended to motivate people to purchase the high end card when its simply not needed
The 8800GTS 640mb card in every comparison I have done and seen is easily the best price v performance ratio card on the market...and no I'm not biased, if Intel put out the best card I would buy it

[b1lk1]

Tom's Hardware is hardly a place to use as the definitive guide and they are very biased. 99% of what you read there is poorly done crap.

[SKYMTL]

Originally Posted by werty316

I foresee a 8800GTS 320MB in my future once a price cut rolls along unless there is a better bang-for-your-buck GPU out there when new cards arrive later down the road.

Don't keep your hopes up for a price cut.

There are still serious shortages of G80 cores in the channel and that won't change for the forseeable future. Prices will stay where they are until the 8800GTS 320MB is discontinued in the very close future.

[Wankerfx]

I think the best value would be the 2900 PRO, apparently you can flash it to an XT without a problem. Plus, it's decently priced at ~$280.00