The original 9800 GTX is on the way out; it now typically costs more than the improved GTX+ version that replaced it - and prices are not likely to drop as stock levels diminish. But is there still value to be had if you can find an old GTX in a bargain bin?

With 128 stream processors and a core clock set at 675MHz, it certainly isn't miles behind the GTX+, and you'll generally find the same amount of memory on both.

The newer card made the move to the 55nm fabrication process, which shaved around 10W off the GTX's maximum power draw in our tests, but otherwise there isn't a great deal of difference between the two - it smacks of Nvidia trying to squeeze a bit more life out of an ageing chipset, rather than any real innovation or progression.

In Crysis, it was left trailing by its newer cousin at lower resolutions, but at those you'll most likely use it wasn't far off - it scored 35fps in high settings to the 37fps of the GTX+. It was a similar story in Far Cry 2, with the GTX+ holding a 2fps advantage at high settings, while the same gap was evident in Call of Juarez at medium settings - 31fps to 33fps.

So the GTX+ isn't actually a particularly useful step up in performance, but as it generally costs less than the plain GTX it's hard to make an argument for this old card.

If you can find one cheap - if you can find one at all - then you may get more for your money with the 9800 GTX than with a GTX+, but at this high price we'd steer clear of both cards in favour of the cheaper and faster ATI Radeon HD 4850.