During the first half of 2007, Nvidia launched two different versions of the 8800 GTS - one with 320MB of RAM and the other with 640MB. However, both cards used the same GPU, and even ran at the same frequency.
Unfortunately, Nvidia appears to have caught a dose of AMD syndrome - using the same name more than once for two completely different products. This is because the latest GPU to bear the 8800 GTS name is nothing like the two models that came before it. While the older 8800 GTS GPUs had 96 stream processors running at 1.2GHz, the 512MB 8800 GTS has 128 stream processors running at a sprightly 1.625GHz. Not only that, but it's a 65nm GPU, rather than a 90nm GPU, so it's far more power-efficient than older 8800 GTS models. In fact, the 512MB 8800 GTS has more in common with the 8800 GT than the older 8800 GTS models, which really begs the question - why did Nvidia decide to name it as it did?
Whatever its name, the 512MB 8800 GTS is currently the highest-performing mid-range GPU available. However, costing around £217, it's considerably more expensive than the 512MB 8800 GT. In most games, this price difference is more than compensated for by the 512MB 8800 GTS's superior performance. For example, it was the only card in this Labs test that was capable of playing Call of Duty 4 smoothly at 1,920 x 1,200 with 4x AA. Curiously, however, it proved to be slower than both 8800 GTs in Crysis. We suspect that this is due to the early drivers with which we tested the 512MB 8800 GTS, as it was much faster in all the other games.
Although the 512MB 8800 GTS allows you to play some games at 1,920 x 1,200, an amazing achievement for a card costing little more than £200, an 8800 GTX would provide more headroom if you wanted to play every game at this resolution. As such, it's hard to justify the 512MB 8800 GTS's additional cost over the much cheaper 512MB 8800 GT.
Author: James Gorbold
Nvidia GeForce 512MB 8800 GTS