NVIDIA Roadmap Outline for 1H08

So, the only interesting thing will be the 9600 which is a completely new architecture.

WTF
 
If yields/availability for the 9800GTX are good, and they do a good job pricing it, it could turn out well enough I think.

The clock speed will probably be ramped up, and it might have some more room for overclocking. Considering how aggressively priced the new GTS and GT are, if NV follows that trend, the 9800GTX could turn out to be a real winner.
(not gonna say the same for the GX2 though...)
 
I might well step up to a 9800 GTX if it comes out in time, but why the move to 9800-series names when the G92 GTS was 8800, and the 9800 is still just a die shrink? Not that I don't think there are already too many 8800 SKUs, but it seems a bit odd.
 
Manny Calavera said:
GeForce 9800 GTX in March or Feb eh ?

I wonder how many SP it will carry? Some on B3D think 192 SP @ 2Ghz.
Click to expand...

a 9800 GTX will simply be a G92 SKU with higher clocks.

there is easily headroom to increase the core to 720 and the memory to 2400.
 
DaNotoriousDOM said:
Nvidia will not spend money on R&D unless ATI trumps it. It was made plain and simple in 07 and continues in 08. If ATI went under right now they would probably not release anything in 08. I wonder what their engineering department is doing or has been doing the last year.
Click to expand...
NV will always spend vast amounts on R&D, whether they release the fruits of that labour onto the market is another question.
 
For those waiting for a new architecture, why would do think a new would come ?
Seems that you are either new to this or never really bothered to read the evaluations of new cards. New architectures appear, when:

1) The previous one was a failure and thus new cards need to based on something better. This means shorter time frame between new architectures.

2) The process goes as usual, where the current architecture is successful and can be used to base, at most, the next couple generations, while R&D efforts are being done in the background, for something new, that should debut in 2-3 years.

So just over a year as passed, since NVIDIA revolutionazed the graphics industry with G80 and it was and still is, quite successful. I'm sure NVIDIA is already focusing resources on a new architecture, but the next couple of generations, including the 9 series, will still be based on G80 and its derivatives i.e. G92.

Anyway, on to the article, this is a roadmap that doesn't surprise me. The lack of competition from AMD, doesn't really forces NVIDIA to do anything. Obviously, we, as consumers, don't like it. I sure am one. But from a money making company perspective, this is the perfect time to make huge profits, while not investing a whole lot of money. I also believe that, if NVIDIA had the chance to crush AMD/ATI, they would, but why would they, if this exact situation, let's them keep making profits, without much costs ?
As Kyle suggested, and if R700 is indeed scheduled for early this year, NVIDIA is surely holding back some cards. Given their advantage in the GPU market, they can afford to play the waiting game and surprise the competition with something much better.
 
R3MF said:
a 9800 GTX will simply be a G92 SKU with higher clocks.

there is easily headroom to increase the core to 720 and the memory to 2400.
Click to expand...

Highly doubtful that it's just that. You can count on an increase of Stream Processors and with at least the same 384 bit memory interface, found on the 8800 GTX/Ultra.
 
Manny Calavera said:
I would not even dignify this as a 'refresh' of G92.As for Larabee,I think the pounding that will come will be inevitable.But also years away.
Click to expand...

If you mean mid-low range, I agree that a third player will make a difference. But if you mean high-end, you need to think again. Intel is NOT going to defy NVIDIA in the high-end GPU market for a while. You can quote me on that.
 
We can all blame this man for the current state of malaise in our beloved video performance sector.

hector-fx.jpg



Please...please...line up in single file ...baseball bats up near the front, shotguns in the rear.



God I hate that man.
 
Big D. said:
What's really sad about this is that AMD might actually have the faster card in March at this rate. We know Crossfire generally scales much better than SLI (up to 100% performance increase where as SLI never comes close to that) so a 3870 X2 might actually be as fast or faster than a 9800GX2. Honestly, a 30% increase after a year-and-a-half or almost two years? Come the fuck on...
Click to expand...

You're assuming that the 9800 GX2 is not as fast or faster than two 8800 Ultras, which we don't know for sure yet.
 
i got 2x 3870, arrived yesterday actually, some does my previous single 2900 beat the 3870 CF which are ran at stock the 2900 XT was ran at 950//1200 mhz. thats fast, 152 gb/sec bandwidth.!!!!!

well, but other than that im pleased with CF, and nvidia will have a really hard time beating CF, to say it ezy, my friends are AWARE of 8800 GT's performance, but they said:

i dont have much money right now, i buy better cpu, and i buy a 3870 or 3850, depends on their budget, i build them, most favours amd aswell, so amd790 all the way there.

they just, ill buy another videocard later on, its damn scaleable.

Amd's cpu's aint much to be yeah of, 5600+ is fairly cheap when its on what ever its called(norwegian, not english, sorry for the bad english etc.) well, like less than the normal price, the ati cards are at MSPR, damn cheap cause of 55 nm, however, for people who play alot of games, and aint impressed by CF or anything like it. go nvidia, for single solutions.

ati CF goes with intel chipsets and amd, and legacy amd, ATI in other words. thats like the main chipsets out there!
 
Silus said:
Having a hard time reading ? It says "at least 30%". That's worst case scenario. Real World performance is what will settle it and we don't know it yet.
Click to expand...

So the worst case would be 30% faster than a single 8800Ultra but the best case, it can be faster than two Ultras? :rolleyes: But looking at the SLi scaling, matching the two 8800Ultra in SLi is not too hard actually :D
 
alg7_munif said:
So the worst case would be 30% faster than a single 8800Ultra but the best case, it can be faster than two Ultras? :rolleyes: But looking at the SLi scaling, matching the two 8800Ultra in SLi is not too hard actually :D
Click to expand...

As I said, no one knows it yet. You can speculate all you want, but what Kyle wrote is clear as water. It's "at least 30%" faster than a single 8800 Ultra.
 
Silus said:
If you mean mid-low range, I agree that a third player will make a difference. But if you mean high-end, you need to think again. Intel is NOT going to defy NVIDIA in the high-end GPU market for a while. You can quote me on that.
Click to expand...


Thats why I said years away. :D
 
InorganicMatter said:
So what it comes down to is, they are shuffling around their product line a bit to better compete with ATI's midrange parts, and holding back everything else due to a lack of competition.
Click to expand...

Exactly. For all those that wanted AMD/ATI to go down... Consequences are being seen at Intel and NVIDIA. Why release something 10x faster when the competition is releasing something 2x faster... Keep something in the back just in case, I guess.

Prices better be equal or lower than that the current lineup or I don't see this doing much. I'm looking for a new card, but if the 8800 series drops in price, I'm picking up one of those. The 9800 series just isn't doing it for me. HOPEFULLY, there will be something there that makes me want one. I really would like to want one. Hell, if it was given to me, I wouldn't complain, but I don't know how much of a price premium I would pay to have one.
 
bsoft said:
NV, you did so well with the 8800GT, then you pooched availability. Now that the 8800GT is getting more common, we're all waiting for the next-generation parts. I don't see them. I purchased my 8600GT (for $120) almost 9 months ago, and I'm looking for something new to replace it with. I don't want a 120W card (330W PSU, MicroATX case), I don't want to pay $260, I don't have a 30" monitor, and I don't play Crysis. I want a nice, sensible, $150, 75W card with the kind of performance you delivered on the old 8800GTS.

ATI's Radeon HD3850 is looking pretty darn attractive at $170 now, considering that you can't even buy a GeForce 8800-series card (256M or 512M) for under $250 on the Egg right now.
Click to expand...

I got a 8800GT (Gigabyte) for around $258. Though the other problem with the 8800GT's is with ram (bad batch of cheap Qimonda ram :() that cannot run at OC'ed speeds.
 
Wow, boy am I glad I got an 8800GTS 512 :eek: Maybe the 9800GTX will be something, who knows.
 
Personally,Im pretty damn pleased that my 8800GTX has just spent 1 year in my rig and is still king of the hill.I mean really.do we need to have a next gen part?/For what..Crysis??Every other game right now is pretty much no sweat to my 8800GTX..I wish for better drivers and for NV to get DX10 up to snuff..My .02...
 
I am planning on building a completely new rig later this year... so hopefully that will give me time to see if a new architecture is going to hit the shelves and be a success. If not, I would probably still be satisfied because I think some of you are underestimating the power of the current architecture.

Take everything these current refreshes (8800GT, etc) can do and scale the speed higher and add more stream processors, etc etc... I don't see why a new architecture would even be necessary if there is a lot of growing room with this one. That and I don't really see how I can go wrong upgrading from a Socket 754 system with an an overclocked 6800GT AGP card :)
 
This is terrible, was hoping to get the 9800GTX and fly around DX10 games, gaaaah I have NV, and ATI too :mad:.
 
DaNotoriousDOM said:
Nvidia will not spend money on R&D unless ATI trumps it. It was made plain and simple in 07 and continues in 08. If ATI went under right now they would probably not release anything in 08. I wonder what their engineering department is doing or has been doing the last year.
Click to expand...

there probably working on a dx11 card. maybe their finished working on the true next gen card and therefore are working on the next installment of cards. who knows but ATI have a big opportunity to compete now
 
I think the most annoying part is the 8 series is getting long in the tooth, and there are quite a few of us ready to upgrade. It used to be there were new architectures coming faster than I could afford it. Now, I have been waiting for a long time now, and will continue to sit and wait. I don't even know what I am waiting for now. The new architecture seems a long way off, and I sure hope it is worth the wait. It's a reall bummer. I don't game that much in the summer.....
 
*sigh*

Oh, how I miss the days when the video card market was much simpler. When I bought my Geforce Ti 4200, there were only three models to choose from (4200, 4400, and 4600). Higher numbers meant faster cards, and we didn't have any of this GT/GS/GTS/GTX/GX2/XT/Pro/XTX confusion.

Why do these companies feel the need to make this so confusing? Instead of 8800GS/GTS/GT/GTX, why not call them, say...8800,8820,8850, and 8880?
 
Does anyone think the 9800gtx could be a slightly overclocked gts with 1gb of very fast ram and a good cooler?
 
I think calling current 8 series die shrinks 9x cards is down right dispicable of nvidia. A way of duping people into buying current gen technology under the guise of next gen technology.

Nvidia guy 1: Hey amd/ati didnt produce squat and cant compete with our current line of cards, how can we alienate our fan base and make more money?

Nvidia guy 2: shrink the die and call them 9x cards?

Nvidia guy 1: BRILLIANT!
 
Until ATI comes up with something interesting, there is no reason for Nvidia to fight for the title they already dominate. The R3850/70 are the right direction, but ATI are not likely to threaten Nvidia on the high end anytime soon. Nvidia is collecting spoils of the last 3 years R&D now, while using it to fund more R&D.

Next revolution will not come until 2009-10 range.
 
Well, most of you will prolly laugh at this, but its soo true, amd doesnt GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ULTRA PERFORMANCE.!

the 3870 and 3850 is superiour to nvidia's current lineup, in several areas. but, they cannot match nvidia if single card solution is the only possibility.

3870 and 3850 is very scaleable. 1-4 videocards. and ive tested 2x 2900 XT @950//1200, and MAN thats some fast stuff, im not kidding, its really incredible fast.

Ive bought a 3870 yesterday, waiting for some money from the old parts of mine, sold like 5 1gb ddr333mhz memory modules for laptops, means i got enough money for 2x 3870 more, i will buy one for now though.
and if i ever face a game my cards cannot run, i buy another videocard, thats actually money i got laying around, sorry if this sound bad for you guys, i live in a rich country and blablabla, doesnt make me more happy though.

well back to the point, you dont use much time saving up for a 3870, or 3850, its better than selling your 8800 GT, then buy a new videocard, and go on like that forever.

thats point nr1 ati>nvidia on this one.

powerconsumtion, idle, idle idle, ati got the upperhand there, but when on load, it doesnt give the performance per watt.
but people idle alot aswell, or do windows stuff, non 3d.

ATi >< nvidia, even.

Singlecard solutions, low effect, mixed there, for a small HTPC, both have something good, nvidia has low powerconsumtion and some great features, ati got sound card on the videocard through HDMI which works good.

Linux.
Ati will win the linux user. when all the docs are released, but for now, nvidia is the winner there.
1-1 and 2 even.

SM 4.1. is clearly something nice for ati cards, though.

overall, the ati cards give lotsa bang for the bucks when considering, the upgrade scaleablity, some extra features and low price for all this.
Nvidia have pushed the limits of the current arcitecture, and should now start thinking, we should invent something again.

like amd does with stuff like Hybrid cf, a really good IGP, amd got the best one there aswell.
like better SLI, mutligpu is getting used more and more, and is probally something most gamers have in the comming years. just as dualcores.
 
Dual GPU single card? Pfft. If they actually support it (unlike the 7950GX2) it might be worth it, but other than that if I want SLI I'm going to stick to "normal" SLI.

+1 on calling the new card "9800GTX" out for being dishonest. Historically a new number has meant new technology. Now they're trying to get people to buy clocked-up current-gen tech under the guise of next-gen.
 
I remember when the 7900 series came out ~6months after the 7800 series. No one bitch and whined, they just enjoyed the performance increase. Now they change the first number instead and everyone without a clue is calling sheninigans. Just enjoy the performance and stop whining about being forced to *gasp* save your money.
 
Silus said:
For those waiting for a new architecture, why would do think a new would come ?
Seems that you are either new to this or never really bothered to read the evaluations of new cards. New architectures appear, when:

1) The previous one was a failure and thus new cards need to based on something better. This means shorter time frame between new architectures.

2) The process goes as usual, where the current architecture is successful and can be used to base, at most, the next couple generations, while R&D efforts are being done in the background, for something new, that should debut in 2-3 years.

So just over a year as passed, since NVIDIA revolutionazed the graphics industry with G80 and it was and still is, quite successful. I'm sure NVIDIA is already focusing resources on a new architecture, but the next couple of generations, including the 9 series, will still be based on G80 and its derivatives i.e. G92.

Anyway, on to the article, this is a roadmap that doesn't surprise me. The lack of competition from AMD, doesn't really forces NVIDIA to do anything. Obviously, we, as consumers, don't like it. I sure am one. But from a money making company perspective, this is the perfect time to make huge profits, while not investing a whole lot of money. I also believe that, if NVIDIA had the chance to crush AMD/ATI, they would, but why would they, if this exact situation, let's them keep making profits, without much costs ?
As Kyle suggested, and if R700 is indeed scheduled for early this year, NVIDIA is surely holding back some cards. Given their advantage in the GPU market, they can afford to play the waiting game and surprise the competition with something much better.
Click to expand...

Quoted for being a scarce quality post. Also, QFFT
 
All I know is that another product cycle is coming around and it appears I still don't have a reason to upgrade from a card I bought in 2006.
 
Kyle, for a followup, is it possible to assemble a meaningful chart or graphic outlining the product lineup? To be totally honest, I haven't been paying close attention for the past year or so to the model names and letter extensions. Now it's really getting mucked up with Nvidia moving from 8xxx to 9xxx without a meaningful architecture change. Then they throw in GT, GTS, GTX, GX2...

My point being that for the average consumer, or someone like myself who is brain dead from the holidays and can't keep up, this is extremely confusing trying to tell them all apart and what is going to give me the best value for my dollar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top