ok, i was told that the current geforce series are about 10-15% faster than their price equivalent radeons. im planning to get one, but having always bought radeons, i dont have a clue what i am looking for.

first of all, what are GT, GS, GTX and ultra? are they better or worse than regular ones.
secondly, how big is the difference between models? i am currently deciding whether to get the cheap 6600 for 75EU, or whether to go up to the 6800 for 175EU.

can anyone recommend a good PCI-E card in the ~130EU range?

6800/7800 is the low-end version. Next fastest is the GT, then the ultra. GTX has now replaced "ultra". I forget where the GS stands though as that's a new one. The 6800 series are all around within 15 FPS of each other.

I'd just grab the 6600 GT as that's a good card for the price and can play most games at full detail except for F.E.A.R. (which even a 7800 GTX 512MB will lag at moments at max), etc. Games from a year ago such as Far Cry and Half-Life 2 are just fine with it on max.

This is also assuming you have an AMD CPU since those are way faster than Intels which means you'd need a better video card to compensate otherwise.

It all basically depends on which games you play and how much detail you like. The more recent the game and more detail you want, the higher up you outta go. For most people though, the 6600 series is just fine.

Although for the price comparison between the two, since the 6800 *is* an option, I'd just get two 6600 GT's and SLI them. :)

- N

yea, but getting a motherboard which supports dual graphics cards is going to set me back at least another 30-40EU, and ive been told that it is cheaper and faster to be running a single 6800 ultra than 2 6600s in sli.

what i really want to know, is; is a 6800 worth 100EU more than a 6600, or is it like the difference between a 1gz and 1.1ghz cpu(back in the days)

There's around a 5-15 average FPS difference, depending on your graphical settings. The higher your settings, the bigger the gap increases.

Since you seem to be on a budget, spending more than twice the amount isn't worth it.

You can go browse the net for some benchmarks of various games. The 6600 series should do just fine. You won't have to worry until more demanding games come out.

And no, it wouldn't be cheaper and faster to run a single 6800 Ultra vs two 6600 GTs since the vanilla 6800 version is 175 compared to 75. You outta be able to get two 6600's and a new motherboard for the price of a vanilla 6800, let alone the Ultra version from the prices you mention.

- N

<a href="http://www.pricespy.co.nz/cat_16.html#g91">here</a> are the prices im looking at

*bump*

im planning to buy the parts on friday, so i really need to know before then.

I'd just get a 6600 GT due to the huge price differences where you're at. I can't imagine paying those prices for last year's gear!

It ought to do just fine for you. I don't know what your normal resolution is you play at or if you put all the eye-candy on in your games. I also don't know if you're playing the most current games that are out or what your CPU is. But if you're an average user, the 6600 GT is perfect. Heck, you should be able to play Half-Life 2 at 1028x768 with max settings, assuming you don't have an old ass system.

- N

im upgrading my whole system, and im getting a 64bit AMD 3200+ to go with it, and dual channel 1gb or ram(will upgrade to 2/4gb when i have some more money) i know that with an overclocked 3000+(3500+ speed) and a 6800 ultra you can run far cry and hl2 at max settings, so the graphics card is really the deciding component in whether it is kick-ass or average

Awesome. Check out hardware sites such as Tom's Hardware Guide (http://www.tomshardware.com/) and such before shelling out a lot of money on a GFX card.

Some games, e.g. Battlefield 2, will destroy most computers if you dare turn the settings to max. I tried with 1Gig Ram / AMD3000 / Radeon 9800 Pro 128 and got about 0.25 fps before system failure. It was a beautiful frame though.

edit: not literally destroy, of course!

ok, ive had a look at those benchmarks, and while a 6800 GT would be ideal, the price of it puts the 6600 in a higher standing. so i think ive found my card.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/09/seven_of_nvidia/page37.html

From the pricing link you supplied is seems that the card comes in 128MB and 256MB flavours.

Sure you don't want to save up just a little longer? :p