Darq.... Money means little to me. If you actually bothered to read my bench post (#52) the one after them showing an Ulta getting 10,100
on 3D06 w/a 3GHz proc at 1280x1024 you might why I was disputing the results. You might have also noticed That I recommend the card to anyone that is building a new machine & wants the greatest performance for the price.
So read before you start talking "shyt" as you put it. I posted facts, and I never said it wouldn't be a good card. I said it would not be better than the GTX or Ultra as far as performance is concerend, which is...welll...true...
Yep my Ultra cost quite a bit more, but I have at least a 15% performance edge over the GT. I think you are forgetting that not everyone can use SLi, or wants to for that matter. Not to mention the GTX/Ultra price will drop a bit now because of this new slim line beast they have released.
I'll take my performance ( which is considerably higher than the GTX they used at 575/1500/1800 vs my Ultra @ 713/1654/2150.) Over the GT for 3 reasons.#1 At the time of purchase there was nothing more powerful
#2. By itself it is still the most powerful card available. (price not withstanding)
#3. The GTS is right around the corner, with the 9800 series following right behind it.
GQ's post (and the site I base my current conclusions on )http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/..._gt/index.html
PD, I would tell them that you have been w/o your machine so long that a new video card has now been released & you should be allowed to upgrade to the GT.