9800 GTX compared to 8800 Ultra

Niceone

Gawd
Joined
Jan 14, 2008
Messages
780
20080304_85e8e48b0e7b0d09182cfmzKcRmt2jDU.jpg

Geforce 9800 GTX looks massive and it's power supply system is heavy. Seems that they are preparing one heavy card for 8800 GTS 512 performance..
 
You don't know how it will perform, so don't act like you do.
Well basically one does know since it's specs are known.

-It uses the same GPU as 8800 GTS 512
-It has same amount of processing units
-Core clocks are 4% higher. Memory clocks are yet to be seen.
 
Wow, that IS a large card. I own an Ultra and I've always felt that card was rather massive. Guess there will soon be a new John Holmes GPU in town.
 
Well basically one does know since it's specs are known.

-It uses the same GPU as 8800 GTS 512
-It has same amount of processing units
-Core clocks are 4% higher. Memory clocks are yet to be seen.

I think it's already been noted that specs don't always reflect the actual performance of a card. Go check out the 9600GT article.
 
I think it's already been noted that specs don't always reflect the actual performance of a card. Go check out the 9600GT article.

Agreed and since the 8800GTS needs only 1 6pin cable for power and this needs 2 than logic dictates there is more to the story than what you see on paper. That is if you can believe what you have read as fact. :confused:
 
Sorry, but which is which here? I think the 9800 is on bottom, am I correct?
 
Agreed and since the 8800GTS needs only 1 6pin cable for power and this needs 2 than logic dictates there is more to the story than what you see on paper. That is if you can believe what you have read as fact. :confused:

I agree, even though the spec-sheet tells us it is not much different than the GTS 512, it is significantly larger, has two power plugs and what looks like more memory chips. Looking at the card itself tells me the "leaked" specs are BS, or they left something out.
 
Do we have a pic of a naked 8800GTS 512 AND 9600GT to compare notes?

EDIT: Found an 8800GTS 512 Naked;

63975.jpg


AND 9600GT

87079_img_2242.jpg
 
Considering this card is being shown at a trade show and we are now getting real pictures of it shouldn't we see the official specs by the end of the day or do they keep those (the specs) secret even when the card is being displayed?
 
I think it's already been noted that specs don't always reflect the actual performance of a card. Go check out the 9600GT article.

I dunno. I think the 9600GT only proved that stream processors may just not scale all that well. Double the stream processors on the 9600GT from 64 to 128 and I doubt it would perform much better than the 8800GTS.

Unfortunately I'm also in the camp that is doubtful this 9800GTX will be in any meaningfully way better than the 8800GTS.
 
I dunno. I think the 9600GT only proved that stream processors may just not scale all that well. Double the stream processors on the 9600GT from 64 to 128 and I doubt it would perform much better than the 8800GTS.

Unfortunately I'm also in the camp that is doubtful this 9800GTX will be in any meaningfully way better than the 8800GTS.

The Clock Speeds were the Real Killer with the 9600GT too,
 
Looks good. I think the 9800GTX will perform much better than a lot of you guys are expecting.
 
Thanks to the OP for the picture comparison. First thing I looked at was the mounting holes for the GPU. They look to have the same pattern, but its hard to tell since the 9800GTX picture doesn't have the metal spacer the 8800 series has. I'm hoping to avoid buying another water block if this card performs as well as we all hope.
 
Is there Tiger don't get your Nvidiaroos in a bunch.

I'm not for either side, except for that of truth. Rumors and speculation I can deal with to an extent, but no, I don't feel any of us can say this card will perform so and so yet. The card isn't here, and significant testing has not been done.
 
Wow, that IS a large card. I own an Ultra and I've always felt that card was rather massive. Guess there will soon be a new John Holmes GPU in town.
I don't see what everyone else is seeing. What's so massive about this card? The PCB seems to be approximately the same length as the Ultra. Do you mean the density of the componentry on the card itself? :confused:
 
No sign of a SPDIF connector on it like the GT/GTS have.

It would be completely silly if it only had near the performance of the GTS, Nvidia may be dumb, but they aren;t stooopid. :eek::rolleyes::p
 
I dunno. I think the 9600GT only proved that stream processors may just not scale all that well. Double the stream processors on the 9600GT from 64 to 128 and I doubt it would perform much better than the 8800GTS.

Unfortunately I'm also in the camp that is doubtful this 9800GTX will be in any meaningfully way better than the 8800GTS.
Yeah.. 8800 GT and GTS are both bottlenecked with their memory bandwith and ROP count.

Besides where they would get that extra performance for this card? I mean it uses the same GPU as 8800 GTS 512: G92-A2. I mean Geforce 9600 GT with it's G94 could theoretically have something that doesn't show up on specs.
 
Looks like the GTS's are about to "Fire Sale".. I wouldnt be surprised if they drop off the market in the next month or two with the 9800GTX being the replacement part..

The 8800GT will get re-badged the 9800GT and that will be that..
 
Yeah.. 8800 GT and GTS are both bottlenecked with their memory bandwith and ROP count.

Besides where they would get that extra performance for this card? I mean it uses the same GPU as 8800 GTS 512: G92-A2. I mean Geforce 9600 GT with it's G94 could theoretically have something that doesn't show up on specs.

Why do you insist on saying it's the same G92 revision found in the 8800 GT and 8800 GTS 512 ?
We don't know that for a fact. It's the same with the 9800 GTX specs. We just don't know them.
 
I'll wait for the [H] review before deciding if this is a questionable purchase or not.I am a little surprised they are bothering with this,and the GX2.Makes it seem more likely that the real
worth while upgrades are farther away then thought.
 
Well basically one does know since it's specs are known.

-It uses the same GPU as 8800 GTS 512
-It has same amount of processing units
-Core clocks are 4% higher. Memory clocks are yet to be seen.

Give the 2 power connectors and the amount of stuff on the back of that card compared to a 8800GT let alone an Ultra, there is way more to this card than a die shrunk 8800GTS(G92) chip.
 
The core looks massive, surely there is some extra silicon under there.
Anyone for more PhysX?
 
I just wish Nvidia would accept a logical naming solution. I stared at that damn photo trying to figure out where the second GPU was then realized this was another damn 9800 card and not the X2.

SO... What does this replace? The 8800GTX? Or the 8800GTX Ultra? Already had to save my nephew from buying one of the old GTS cards (He prefers to game... Not keep up with model numbers!) and he still can't fathom how a GTS can be slower than a GT if it has a "bigger name".

I think in the end we just want to get whatever is the replacement for the 8800GTX or at least compare it to the 8800GTX speed wise, and decide from there. Whatever that is a single GPU solution. Don't want to play with SLI headaches in the middle of a game. Leave that to the HARD people! ;)

Thx,
Cagey
 
Why do you insist on saying it's the same G92 revision found in the 8800 GT and 8800 GTS 512 ?
We don't know that for a fact. It's the same with the 9800 GTX specs. We just don't know them.
20080304_0aeab8a96ab29979926bk6odl8873JvS.jpg

Close-up from Geforce 9800 GTX. Reveals it uses G92-420-A2. First part is telling us which GPU this is, second part tells us it's performance level and thir part tells us it's revision

8800 GTS 512: G92-400-A2
9800 GTX 512: G92-420-A2
9800 GX2: G92-450-A2
 
Something is definitely up here that we are not seeing.

That card is simply too beefy. If it _is_ basically still a GTS 512, then I'll bet its a monster overclocker.
 
I just wish Nvidia would accept a logical naming solution. I stared at that damn photo trying to figure out where the second GPU was then realized this was another damn 9800 card and not the X2.

SO... What does this replace? The 8800GTX? Or the 8800GTX Ultra? Already had to save my nephew from buying one of the old GTS cards (He prefers to game... Not keep up with model numbers!) and he still can't fathom how a GTS can be slower than a GT if it has a "bigger name".

I think in the end we just want to get whatever is the replacement for the 8800GTX or at least compare it to the 8800GTX speed wise, and decide from there. Whatever that is a single GPU solution. Don't want to play with SLI headaches in the middle of a game. Leave that to the HARD people! ;)

Thx,
Cagey

The 9800 GX2 is reported to give us at least a 30% increase of speed over the 8800 Ultra.
Ref link: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQzOSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==


The GX2 was also reported to be their single fastest GPU.
Ref link: http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/GeForce_9800_GTX_(D9E-20)_to_launch_in_Late_March/5574.html
"VR-Zone learned that the fastest single card from Nvidia, the GeForce 9800 GTX (D9E-20) will be launched in late March, about 2 weeks after the 9800 GX2".


The question is, where does that leave the 9800 GTX on the speed chart...

We have this: http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/GeForce_9800_GX2,_9800_GTX_&_3870_X2_Compared/5614.html
9800vs3870x2od4.jpg


Is it to be trusted??? :)

This dudes 9800 GTX is showing revision A2..
http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=241354
 
Something is definitely up here that we are not seeing.

That card is simply too beefy. If it _is_ basically still a GTS 512, then I'll bet its a monster overclocker.

You never know.. Damn thing might come with an 800mhz factory clock with a power setup like that..
 
Something is definitely up here that we are not seeing.

That card is simply too beefy. If it _is_ basically still a GTS 512, then I'll bet its a monster overclocker.
Yes..it weird. We know that it uses exactly same GPU as GTS 512, but that PCB simply is much more expensive than GTS 512's..and it has two powerconnectors + it's powersupply-system is even heavier than 8800 Ultra's. GTS 512 uses 15W less than GTS 640MB under load..which does more than well with one power connector (8800 GTX almost doesn't need second power connector when that card is not overclocked (Typically consumption is less than 150W))
 
What exactly is that chip on the first picture near the DVI connectors on the 9800 board? It looks like another type of processor?
 
What exactly is that chip on the first picture near the DVI connectors on the 9800 board? It looks like another type of processor?

That's the 8800 Ultra, and I dont remember exactly what that chip is.
 
Yes..it weird. We know that it uses exactly same GPU as GTS 512, but that PCB simply is much more expensive than GTS 512's..and it has two powerconnectors + it's powersupply-system is even heavier than 8800 Ultra's. GTS 512 uses 15W less than GTS 640MB under load..which does more than well with one power connector (8800 GTX almost doesn't need second power connector when that card is not overclocked (Typically consumption is less than 150W))


AH-HA! Found out where the extra power is going!
They didnt show us what was on the BACK OF THE CARD!



18800gtsbackside2kf7.jpg
 
Looks like I'll be skipping the 9x00 series. Bring on the X arch. :p. Really though, if they've got the same core, then the little performance gain from optimizations isn't going to really do much. The 88's run everything with power to spare right now. The only thing left is something like Crysis, where you really need 50% and HIGHER performance gain for it to mean much and/or be worth your $.

Even if the GX2 is going to be 30-50% over an ultra, a single card solution providing the same leap should be avalaible. If it can't be done (call me spoiled from 88's) then I'll wait till the next gen. after the 9x00. It's too much $ for me to spend and only net 30% at best in a single card solution.
 
That's the 8800 Ultra, and I dont remember exactly what that chip is.
That's nvio chip..for those DVI-connectors. Usually that is integrated part of GPU, but with G80 they decided to do that this way (90nm architecture.. that chip was huge even without nvio integrated
 
My gosh! The 9800GTX is just too massive for only a 4% increase in clock speed over 8800GTS-512. Look at all of those capacitors, compared to an 8800 Ultra!!! With only 8 memory chips and a smaller 65nm core, the amount of stuff on the board seems to be overkill (unless Nvidia wants to allow manufacturers to pre-overclock their cards by like 30% or something)!

It would only make sense if Nvidia is doing a 512-bit interface with 8 additional memory chips on the back, for a 1GB total RAM, which goes to explain this kind of complexity needed... I remember hearing all of those rumors of a 512-bit 1GB of GDDR3 memory (since Nvidia still refuses to touch slightly more expensive GDDR4 memory). Additionally, why would Nvidia refuse to let their 8800GTS-512 cards carry 1GB of memory--perhaps to save the thunder for their upcoming 9800 cards?

If no better reason than this, then I am disappointed in Nvidia. We'd all be just as disappointed in Nvidia as we were when ATI released that monster HD 2900XT along with its lackluster FSAA performance.
 
Back
Top