GeForce 8800 Performance Comparison

Despite numerous reviews of every GeForce 8800 graphics card since NVIDIA first launched the series, many consumers are still left without any real information to compare their choices when shopping for their gaming system. Graphics performance is the most importance function of a video card, and Benchmark Reviews offers this comparison of the three most popular GeForce 8800 video card models on the market. Our tests will include benchmarks on the: ZOTAC 8800 GT vs. the FOXCONN 8800 GTS vs. the MSI 8800 GTX.

When Benchmark Reviews first tested the FOXCONN GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB video card it seemed as though NVIDIA had finally offered an excellent price point for high-end performance. Making the GTS series even more popular was the launch of a more affordable XFX GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB XXX Edition, which shed some vRAM in return for a lower shelf price. Without much argument, the GeForce 8800 GTS quickly became most popular video card of NVIDIA's 8th generation of products.

Although the GTS was still third in line for the performance crown, well behind the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra, and notably trailing the 8800 GTX, that didn't stop this video card from quickly becoming a favorite among gamers. While the 8800 GTX was admired by high-performance gamers and enthusiasts, it just didn't offer the same value. The 8800 Ultra would ultimately become a niche product for those who couldn't overclock their GTS to the same rating or didn't mind the exorbitant amount charged for the product.

GeForce 8800 Test Product Specifications

Not long ago the new GT series was launched, and Benchmark Reviews was fortunate enough to test the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB ZT-88TES2P-FSP. Not since the GTS series was released have we seen so much performance out of such a small product. After such an impressive display of graphics processing power, it would be very easy to simply make a blanket recommendation to jump on the G92 with both hands. But one size doesn't always fit all. In this article, Benchmark Reviews will compare the big three against one another, and you can decide what works best for your own needs.

In the next few pages, Benchmark Reviews will breakdown the cost per frame for each graphics card, as well as list the individual benefits (and pitfalls) for each. Please continue as we detail the finer points of each product.

FOXCONN 8800 GTS Details

When NVIDIA launched the G80 GTS GPU, I was quick to make the jump from my old GeForce 7900 GT graphics card. There were more than just a few problems which plagued the 7900 GT, but more than anything else it was the heat. The GeForce 8800 GTS and GTX were the first cards which used rear-exiting heat ventilation in their reference design. Prior to my purchase of the GTS, I had been using an Arctic Cooling NV Silencer to achieve this same function for my GT. The concept is common-sense, and the finished product certainly benefited from the new double-size design.

Presently the FOXCONN FV-N88SMBD2-ONOC sells for $319.99 at NewEgg.com. As you can see for yourself based on the information I have provided in the image above, you'll be paying 19 cents per point in 3DMark06, over $14.26 per frame per second in Crysis, and $9.70 in World in Conflict. If you're on a budget, this old favorite may not make the financial sense that it once did prior to the 8800 GT.

The specifications listed above illustrate the difference between the reference NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS, and the extremely overclocked results of my efforts in the guide: How To Overclock the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Series. Clearly, the GTS I have used in these test is nowhere near the original specifications. With 100MHz over the stock GPU speed and a DDR3 vRAM increase of 230MHz, this GeForce 8800 GTS should be considered the highest-end of its particular series. Keep this in mind as you analyze our test results.

ZOTAC 8800 GT Details

The only graphics card product that has eclipsed the initial launch of NVIDIA's G80 GPU has been the G92. With such a high demand for the GeForce 8800 GT, it comes as no surprise that they are in scarce quantity. Unlike the 8800 GTS and GTX, which had a sticker price heavy enough to keep the shelves stocked, the new 8800 GT is going to become one of the hottest items to have in 2008. Until NVIDIA launches the 9600 GT in another month, this is going to be a short-term king of the hill.

Presently the ZOTAC 8800 GT is available at NewEgg for $269.99. As evidenced by the information I have provided in the image above, you'll be paying 14 cents per point in 3DMark06, only $8.80 per frame per second in Crysis, and $7.71 in World in Conflict.

The system specifications listed above compare the difference between a reference NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT when compared to a factory overclocked ZOTAC 8800 GT. In some cases, there may still be some additional performance to be gained, especially for anyone willing to take the time and test the different configurations with aftermarket cooling. Aside from the performance of GPU and vRAM tweaking, there is still the clear benefit to having the bandwidth of PCI Express 2.0 in this new edition to the GeForce 8 family (on supported motherboards).

MSI 8800 GTX Details

Over the past year, only one card has been considered a realistic king to the performance throne: the GeForce 8800 GTX. Sure, there was the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra, but for hundreds of dollars less you could simply overclock your GeForce 8800 GTX to the exact same specifications. For this reason alone, many gamers passed on the unnecessary cost associated with an incremental performance gain. Ultimately though, the GTX would have fewer fans than the slightly more value-orientated GTS and GT video cards.

Presently the MSI NX8800GTX-T2D768E-HD OC GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB video card sells for $469.99 at NewEgg.com. As you can see for the information I provided in the image above, you'll be paying 21 cents per point in 3DMark06, at least $18.88 per frame per second in Crysis, and $10.44 in World in Conflict. The mighty GTS proves that performance doesn't come for free, but it also proves that better value lies in other graphic products.

Based on the chart above, it's easy to see how a product right out of the box can perform nearly the same as another that is priced for hundred more. With a similar core clock between the MSI NX8800GTX-T2D768E-HD OC GeForce 8800 GTX and the reference NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra, it wouldn't take too much more effort to push a GTX into the specifications of an Ultra.

Video Card Testing Methodology

For this article, I have tested and compared the FOXCONN GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB against the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB and MSI NX8800GTX-T2D768E-HD OC GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB video card. The GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB version is currently the the most widely used video card since the introduction of the GeForce 8 series, but these tests will prove if there's a better value and performance to be found elsewhere.

The synthetic benchmark tests in 3DMark06 will utilize shader models 2.0 and 3.0. Every test was conducted at the following resolutions: 1600x1200 (20.1/21" Standard LCD's), 1280x1024 (19" Standard LCD), and 1024x768 (17" Standard LCD). Each program will run after a system restart, and the the first benchmark for every test will be ignored. This process proved extremely important in the World in Conflict and Crysis benchmarks, as the first run served to cache maps; subsequent tests performed much better than the first. Each test will be run in succession three times, and the final results will be averaged.

Since all of these benchmarks represent different gaming engine technology and graphic rendering processes, I feel that this battery of tests will provide a diverse range of tests for you to gauge performance. Since most gamers and enthusiasts are still using Windows XP, it was decided that DirectX 9 would be used for all tests.

Using the GPU-Z utility available for free from our affiliate website techPowerUp!, we can verify the internal specifications for the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB Video Card ZT-88TES2P-FSP PN:151-01080-076VU.

The GeForce 8800 GTS is the direct competition for the GeForce 8800 GT 512MB video card. Although NVIDIA released a new 256-bit version of the card, the older 320-bit version (offered with either 640 or 320MB) is still the most widely used video card by PC gamers today. Note that the default GeForce 8800 GTS core clock is 500MHz, while the FOXCONN GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB has been carefully overclocked to 600MHz. The standard GeForce 8800 GTS vRAM speed is 800MHz and has also been overclocked to 1030MHz while the shader clock remains at the standard 1200MHz.

Benchmark Applications

• 3DMark06 SM 2.0 Test (8x Anti Aliasing & 16x Anisotropic Filtering)
• 3DMark06 HDR/SM 3.0 Test (8x Anti Aliasing & 16x Anisotropic Filtering)
• Company of Heroes v2.201.0 Performance Test (Shadow and Model Quality High, No AA, Texture Detail Ultra)
• World in Conflict v1.0.0.5 Performance Test (Very High Setting)
• Crysis v1.0.0.1 Benchmark (High Settings, No Anti Aliasing)
• Maxon Cinebench Release 10.0

Test System

• Motherboard: ASUS P5K3 Deluxe (Intel P35 chipset) with version 1001 BIOS
• Processor: Intel E6550 Core 2 Duo 2.33GHz operating at 3.31GHz
• System Memory: Corsair PC3-14400 DDR3 1800MHz 2GB RAM Kit @ 1889MHz
• Cooling: Xigmatek HDT-S1283 Exposed Copper Heatpipe CPU Cooler
• Audio: HT Omega Claro Plus+ AD8620BR Op Amp HD Sound Card
• Hard Disk 1: Western Digital WD360GD 10,000 RPM SATA
• Hard Disk 2 (Paging File): Mtron MOBI 3000 2.5-Inch 16GB SSD MSD-SATA3025
• Optical Drive: Toshiba Samsung SH-S203 SATA 20x DVD R/W
• Enclosure: Lian Li PC-B25B Black Aluminum Mid-Tower ATX Case
• Power Supply: Kingwin Mach 1 ABT-800MA1S 800W Modular PSU
• Operating System: Windows XP Professional SP-2 (optimized to 16 processes at idle)

Maxon Cinebench OpenGL Results

Cinebench is a real-world test suite that assesses the computer's performance capabilities. Maxon Cinebench is based on Maxon's award-winning animation software, Cinema 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. Maxon software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia and many more.

Maxon Cinebenchm runs several tests on your computer to measure the performance of the main processor and the graphics card under real world circumstances. The benchmark application makes use of up to 16 CPUs or CPU cores and is available for Windows (32-bit and 64-Bit) and Macintosh (PPC and Intel-based). The resulting values among different operating systems are 100% comparable and therefore very useful with regard to purchasing decision-making. It can also be used as a marketing tool for hardware vendors or simply to compare hardware among colleagues or friends.

The OpenGL test measures graphics card performance and is run inside the 3D editor window. The project file used can test all graphics cards that support the OpenGL standard. In this scene, only the camera was animated. This scene places medium to low demands on graphics cards and tests the maximum speed with which the scene can be properly displayed at the 800x580 resolution. Essentially, the Cinebench test removes the system hardware from the scoring influence, and centers the results around the GPU.

Since Cinebench only applies such a light load on the three GeForce 8800 products tested, the benchmark scores are all very high. Much like the Company of Heroes benchmarks which will follow in the next section, Cinebench doesn't load the GPU enough to indicate a large-margin winner. However, from the results we received, the order of performance gives the GT a 24 point lead over the GTX, which has a mere 13 point lead over the overclocked GTS.

Company of Heroes Benchmark Results

Company of Heroes is Relic's first title to make use of a new type of engine, known as the "Essence Engine". This engine was designed and coded from scratch by Relic in order to make use of special graphical effects, including high dynamic range lighting, dynamic lighting & shadows, advanced shader effects and normal mapping. COH is rendered in 3D with intricate detailing on the infantry, vehicles and structures while still retaining a solid frame-rate, without, Relic claims, the need for a high-end gaming system. It claims that there are nearly 2,000 different animations for a basic infantry unit alone.

Company of Heroes also utilizes the Havok 3 physics engine, giving it a more realistic physics system than previous RTS games. Parts of buildings can be destroyed by grenades, satchels or mortars, and tanks can drive through sections of walls or other barriers. Smoke created from explosions is programmed to behave as realistically as possible and can even be influenced by wind. Debris is also influenced by explosions; a blast can send barrels flying and shower troops in dirt, whilst leaving behind a large crater. When infantry are bombarded by artillery, body parts sometimes detach and are dispersed over, and some units even getting thrown about in the immediate area. Bridges and buildings can be destroyed by engineers using demolitions.

In our first series of benchmarks for Company of Heroes (v2.201.0), the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT performed nearly identical to the older GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB. At 1024x768 resolution, there should be a much larger disparity between test results. At the lower resolutions, a game that is more GPU dependant than CPU dependant will show favor to these results. This was the first piece of evidence that an GT could beat out a GTX in real world gaming.

There might be more explanations, but I can only think of two possibilities:

1. The Essence engine in CoH doesn't stress the 8800 series of video cards like other games, especially since all graphics cards down to the NVIDIA GeForce3/Ti series are supported by the game.
2. THQ and Relic have optimized the game (there have been countless patches) to use a maximum frame rate and thus restrict the results to a more narrow range.

At any rate, the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB does show that a minor performance difference over the overclocked GeForce 8800 GTS and GTX, even if CoH makes it look much less than it is. In our next benchmark tests, World in Conflict offers a more contrasting view between the three video cards.

World in Conflict Benchmark Results

The latest version of Massive's proprietary Masstech engine utilizes DX10 technology and features advanced lighting and physics effects, and allows for a full 360 degree range of camera control. Massive's MassTech engine scales down to accommodate a wide range of PC specifications, if you've played a modern PC game within the last two years, you'll be able to play World in Conflict.

World in Conflict's FPS-like control scheme and 360-degree camera make its action-strategy gameplay accessible to strategy fans and fans of other genres... if you love strategy, you'll love World in Conflict. If you've never played strategy, World in Conflict is the strategy game to try.

Personally, I think WiC is going to be one of the most popular games of 2007... and it deserves every bit of attention it receives.

First tested was the 1024x768 resolution. Based on the test results, it's clear that WiC doesn't place a limit on the maximum frame rate; which is good for our benchmarking tests but not so great for power bills. The average frame rate showed that the ZOTAC 8800 GT could noticeably outpace the overclocked GeForce 8800 GTS by over 12% with the settings on Very High. In a stark contrast to CoH, the MSI 8800 GTX offered almost identical results in the minimum and average frame rates, but it jumped way ahead when it came to the shear power of a maximum frame rate.

A cautionary word about maximum frame rates is necessary, however. Although these readings are worth noting, the maximum framerate is nearly worthless in determining GPU power. The reason for this is simple: those maximum frame rates are collected from scenes with little to no movement or graphical demand. Obviously this shifts the importance over to the minimum framerate, which will indicate how smooth the performance will remain under heavy demand.

With a balanced demand for CPU and GPU power, the 1280x1024 resolution proved to be the turning point for performance. While still proving a better performer than the GTS, the average frame rate gave the 8800 GT graphics card more than a 13% performance advantage. Once again however, the maximum frame rate is an area that is dominated by the older products, with the GTX clearly pulling far ahead of the GT.

At the highest settings the Masstech engine begins to strain the three GeForce 8800 series products. Minimum frame rates were barely acceptable for the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB and FOXCONN 8800 GTS OC. Practically identical in high-end performance in regards to WiC, the GT and GTS are only separated by price. On the other hand, the MSI NX8800GTX-T2D768E-HD OC GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB video card goes on to show us that paying a little more can sometimes yield more return than you would think.

World in Conflict did its best, but Crysis will certainly apply the pressure needed to create a very noticeable difference between the three top dogs.

Crysis Benchmark Results

Crysis uses a new graphics engine: the CryENGINE2, which is the successor to Far Cry's CryENGINE. CryENGINE2 is among the first engines to use the Direct3D 10 (DirectX 10) framework of Windows Vista, but can also run using DirectX9, both on Vista and Windows XP.

Roy Taylor, Vice President of Content Relations at NVIDIA, has spoken on the subject of the engine's complexity, stating that Crysis has over a million lines of code, 1GB of texture data, and 85,000 shaders. To get the most out of modern multicore processor architectures, CPU intensive subsystems of CryENGINE 2 such as physics, networking and sound, have been re-written to support multi-threading.

Crysis offers an in-game benchmark tool, which is similar to World in Conflict. This short test does place some high amounts of stress on a graphics card, since there are so many landscape features rendered. For benchmarking purposes, Crysis can mean trouble as it places a high demand on both GPU and CPU resources.

The smaller resolutions are used to concentrate the testing and place demand onto the GPU, thus offloading some dependency on system resources. Even still, Crysis appears to have a preference for the new graphical interface; even if it only hints at it in our results.

Even without Anti-Aliasing turned on, Crysis keeps both of the G80-based GPUs well below 60 FPS. It's clear that the CryENGINE2 is a heavy hitter, as the ZOTAC 8800 GT AMP! Edition outperforms the GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB by almost 24%. Alternatively the GT is outperformed by the GTX by just less than 1%. Even with more vRAM available to it, the older 8800 GTX just barely offers the same performance as the G92 GPU paired with the PCI Express 2.0 graphics bus.

At 1280x1024 resolution, the results are still excellent but nearing the 30 FPS performance threshold for acceptability for both G80 units. In terms of performance, all products maintain nearly the same performance ratio, which still gives the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB a very big frame rate improvement over the GTS but slightly behind the GTX.

Surprisingly, the three GeForce 8800 series products maintained a practically constant performance ratio between one-another throughout the Crysis benchmark testing, which is a good thing in terms of test consistency.

At the end of our real-world testing, ZOTAC's 8800 GT outperformed the overclocked G80 GTS by a significant margin, yet is nosed out by the GTX. Perhaps the new G92 core architecture is to be credited, or the new PCI Express 2.0 interface which allows twice as much graphics data bandwidth. Or perhaps MSI's 8800 GTX doesn't offer much more than the overclocked GTS. Either way, our benchmarks certainly indicate that while the GTX beat the GT in the other tests, it matches performance in Crysis.

In our next test series, 3DMark06 offers synthetic benchmarks to the results.

3DMark06 Benchmark Results

3DMark is a computer benchmark by Futuremark (formerly MadOnion) to determine the DirectX performance of 3D game performance with graphics cards. 3DMark06 uses advanced real-time 3D game workloads to measure PC performance using a suite of DirectX9 3D graphics tests, CPU tests, and 3D feature tests.

3DMark06 tests include all new HDR/SM3.0 graphics tests, SM2.0 graphics tests, AI and physics driven single and multiple cores or processor CPU tests and a collection of comprehensive feature tests to reliably measure next generation gaming performance today.

Here at Benchmark Reviews, we believe that synthetic benchmark tools are just as valuable as video games. Since the same test is applied in the same controlled method with each test run, I believe 3DMark is a very reliable tool for comparing graphic cards against one-another.

Using a 1024x768 resolution as a starting point, the maximum settings were applied which included 8x Anti-Aliasing and 16x Anisotropic Filtering. At this level, the GeForce 8800 GT 512MB video card performed over 10% better than the GeForce 8800 GTS in the SM 2.0 tests and only 4% better than the GTS in the HDR/SM 3.0 tests. Conversely, the GeForce 8800 GTX dominated the bunch, and flexed its shader model 3 muscle.

Bumping the GPU strain up a notch with 1280x1024 resolution the scores remain relatively comparable in terms of performance ratio. The ZOTAC 8800 GT performed 11% better in the SM 2.0 tests and 5% in the HDR/SM 3.0 tests over the highly overclocked GTS, but the MSI 8800 GTX was easily ahead of the pack with a near 10% margin in the SM2 test and over 16% in the SM3 test.

Finishing our series of benchmark tests, 3DMark06 showed an unquestionable favoritism for the MSI GeForce 8800 GTX and the ZOTAC GeForce 8800 GT 512MB video card showed a prevailing strength against the aging GeForce 8800 GTS. In the 1600x1200 tests the GT outperformed the GTS by almost 18% in the shader model 2.0 tests and nearly 8% in the high dynamic-range / shader model 3.0 tests; only to to beaten by 7% in the SM2 test and 16% in the SM3 test. Obviously, the 8800 GTX isn't completely without some merit.

In the next section Benchmark Reviews gives concludes our findings between the three prevailing GeForce video cards.

GeForce 8800 Performance Conclusion

Since the days of Battlefield 2 there haven't been very many games to seriously stress mid and high-performance video cards. The Battlefield 2142 was more of a lukewarm please-all with nearly no landscape to speak of, and until EA and Crytek GmbH came along with Crysis there hadn't been any major milestones to speak of for almost three years. Company of Heroes was (and to some players it still is) one of the most popular games of 2006, but its scalable Havok game engine allowed just about anyone with a personal computer to play the game. World in Conflict could very well be characterized as the CoH for 2007, especially since CoH: Opposing Fronts offered almost nothing new to gamers in regards to performance. WiC is equally scalable, but the large world-scape can have a greater impact on frame rate. When it comes down to PC video games, there are only a handful of titles that stand out more than those which I have tested here in this review. The important lesson is that the GeForce 8800 GT has the modern technology to handle them all at nearly their highest settings without dropping below the acceptable 30 FPS level.

For only a short while longer, the GeForce 8800 GT is third in line for the NVIDIA throne. Our comparison series has been squarely aimed at the upper-end performance segment, picking out the three most dominant product on the market. Some (but not many) gamers have stepped up to the overpriced GeForce 8800 Ultra, and only a few more went as far as the GTX. For over a year now the GeForce 8800 GTS has been the best selling card within the 8 Series lineup, and now it has been replaced by the GeForce 8800 GT. Unlike the GeForce 7900 GT of the past generation, the new 8800 GT offers tremendous performance and power efficiency with a slight reduction in cooling fan noise.

I consider the entire pre-G92 GeForce 8800 series to be very attractive as a whole, primarily because of the double-height heatpipe cooling. While the general appearance of the GeForce 8800 GT video card is attractive, the plastic shell covering the heatsink gives this product too much of a plastic look... very similar to what NVIDIA did with the 8800 Ultra's cover. Overall I think the look will work, but it's tough going from a high-tech middle-end product to a rather low-tech looking middle-end product; even if it is much better on the inside.

Unlike the higher-end 8800 series GeForce products, the 8800 GT does not expose any electronic components. I once owned the GeForce 8800 GTX, but after a errant SATA cable swiped off one of the capacitors, I learned that perhaps I was better off with a graphics card using a smaller footprint. NVIDIA has designed the GT to sustain above-average abuse, and since no components are exposed there is very little chance that you'll have to RMA a product that falls apart on you. The fully covered 8800 GT will work very well in cramped environments where the video card will be in contact with cables and components.

Looking back over our battery of benchmark tests, there were several times when one card seemed to win out over the competition, only to be badly beaten in the next round. One thing is certain: the GeForce 8800 GTS is a no-win product at this point. Made only worse by the recent update to a 512MB and 1GB version, the price for a 256-bit memory interface is hardly worth the small performance gain. Put plainly, the old 8800 GTS was a good price point in the days where you had to choose between either a 7900 GTX/7950 GTX at the low end or an 8800 GTX/Ultra at the high end. Now there are far more graphic cards that put out better performance for less cost, and the new 8800 GTS isn't fitting in quite as well. This leaves us with a showdown between the 8800 GT and the GTX.

Until the GeForce 9800 GTX launches later in April (2008), there is still a large segment of the consumer market that has to shop for the best price-to-performance product for their gaming system. As our test results have indicated, it all comes back to the 8800 GT and GTX. While 3DMark06 clearly favors the 8800 GTX, there isn't much real-world application for a benchmark suite because it's only good for testing. Crysis tests were dominated by the mighty 8800 GT, whereas the GTX barely outperformed the GTS in this GPU-heavy game. Cinebench only gave a very small margin back to the GT over the GTX, but when you get to games like World in Conflict the GeForce 8800 GTX still holds itself supreme. Rather confusing results if you look at them on the surface, but when you take into consideration that the future of gaming will be best benefited by memory frame buffer bandwidth you are left with only one clear-cut winner: GT.

Questions? Comments? Not convinced of our results? Join the heated discussion over this article in our Forum.

Related Articles:

• Sapphire Radeon HD 4770 CrossFireX Performance
• XFX Radeon HD5770 Video Card HD-577A-ZN
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 Video Card Performance
• GIGABYTE Radeon HD 6850 GV-R685OC-1GD
• Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 Video Card 100251SR
• Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 Toxic Video Card
• ASUS EN9400GT GeForce 9400GT HDMI Video Card
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Video Card Performance
• GIGABYTE GeForce GT-240 HDMI Video Card
• NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 Gemini Video Card