some 9800GTX news..........

Status
Not open for further replies.
Um... that doesn't really make sense. How would it be any faster than the 8800 GTS with those specifications? There must be something else missing from this.
 
The amount of memory is still 512MB and since this is just a new flavor or the G92 chip, it sports a 256-bit bus, which in no way will limit performance.
Click to expand...
Why do think the 256-bit bus won't limit performance?

Is it like a British double-decker bus? :D
 
Uh...

So they are renaming the 8800 GTS 512 to 9800 GTX?

Good job, Nvidia. :/
 
That's the idea...the new high-end part is the GX2, and all the new 9 series cards are just G92 or derivatives as far as I know. Who knows when the true next-gen will be out that can play crysis :rolleyes:
 
-=Antimatter=- said:
That's the idea...the new high-end part is the GX2, and all the new 9 series cards are just G92 or derivatives as far as I know. Who knows when the true next-gen will be out that can play crysis :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yeah.. but..meh.. it's stupid. Why release some a G92 part as an 8800 if you're gonna release the same damn thing 2 months later as a 9800.
Bleh.
 
NKDietrich said:
Yeah.. but..meh.. it's stupid. Why release some a G92 part as an 8800 if you're gonna release the same damn thing 2 months later as a 9800.
Bleh.
Click to expand...
I find this hard to believe... NVIDIA hasn't released a new GPU for over a year. Now their new series is nothing but a die shrunk 8800 GTX? That's unbelievable. I'm guessing that this Expreview site may just be wrong. Hopefully anyway.
 
I for one and not surprised, but if we could see SLI on an Intel chipset for normal socket 775 boards... that will be like another Christmas for everyone. Nvidia would loose big on its chipset market but gain so much in their main bread and butter arena and thats the graphics market.
 
NKDietrich said:
Uh...

So they are renaming the 8800 GTS 512 to 9800 GTX?

Good job, Nvidia. :/
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that... I mean, look at the 9600GT vs. 8800GT. The 9600GT has roughly half the SPs, which should (all else being equal) mean roughly half the performance, but it isn't. So what has changed? If the rest of the 9xxx series follows suit, it could still be a large step up in performance (doubtful, I know, but its always fun to speculate :) )
 
This is pretty disappointing. Nvidia is just stringing everyone along with these crap refresh vid cards, almost forcing people that want a upgrade from the 8800GTX to get their 9800GX2 card.

I'll wait to see how the reviews are for the GX2, but if its less than amazing for the price, I'll just get a 3870 X2. Sure I would rather have a killer Nvida card, but I'm not going to give them my money until a real next gen flagship card comes out.
 
Zinn said:
I find this hard to believe... NVIDIA hasn't released a new GPU for over a year. Now their new series is nothing but a die shrunk 8800 GTX? That's unbelievable. I'm guessing that this Expreview site may just be wrong. Hopefully anyway.
Click to expand...

It's not unbelievable at all. The 8800GTX is still the fastest single GPU card in the world, barring an 8800 Ultra, which we all know is just a slightly revised (better power management) GTX with a factory OC. They haven't been given incentive to move forward substantially -- they're doing the financially responsible thing and milking the architecture for all it's worth.

Until ATI can produce a reliable (single GPU) competitor to the G92 based 8800/9xxx series they'll keep right on die shrinking and clocking higher, making the cards more affordable in the process. At the current rate of things I don't expect ATI to be doing any better next year. Of course, if their new architecture is a substantial step up from the 2900/3870 series, that may change, and fast.
 
its times like this when you just wanna kick nvidia in the balls and tell them to make a mans card.
 
Well with me still being on a 7900GTX, the 9800GT is looking mighty sexy. As long as its faster than the 8800GT ill be sold on the card.

But yeah for you 8x00 series owners, there really isnt much of a upgrade you can do that will give you a good performance boost or less you go SLI.
 
Why is everyone thinking that this 9800GTX will not scream? Look at the 9600GT. The specs don't look good on paper but the thing is a monster for the price. The 9800GTX is basically more than twice the power of the 9600GT. It should rock, especially at a price of $400 or less.

I'll be getting one of these or a 9800GX2, but I'm not a huge fan of SLI, so I'll probably go with the GTX.
 
kllrnohj said:
I'm not sure about that... I mean, look at the 9600GT vs. 8800GT. The 9600GT has roughly half the SPs, which should (all else being equal) mean roughly half the performance, but it isn't. So what has changed? If the rest of the 9xxx series follows suit, it could still be a large step up in performance (doubtful, I know, but its always fun to speculate :) )
Click to expand...

QFT. The 9xxx series or at least the G92 has slight software and, I think, hardware modifications that makes it perform really well even though it looks vastly inferior to the 8800GT on paper.
 
heatlesssun said:
Why is everyone thinking that this 9800GTX will not scream? Look at the 9600GT. The specs don't look good on paper but the thing is a monster for the price. The 9800GTX is basically more than twice the power of the 9600GT. It should rock, especially at a price of $400 or less.

I'll be getting one of these or a 9800GX2, but I'm not a huge fan of SLI, so I'll probably go with the GTX.
Click to expand...
Both cards are bandwith + ROP limited. Basically this is reason why 112SP vs. 64SP doesn't make that much difference (why between 8800 GTS 512 and 8800 GT main performance difference comes from clock frequencies, not SP amounts). This 64SP is basically the most optimal amount of SP's for this card.. if you go up..there's not much performance difference, but if you go down from this your performance will tank.

There's major difference in texture filtering performance which is the main thing that causes 8800 GT to win 9600 GT. This advantage is little bit limited because 9600 GT has more effective mem bandwith even when both have same max transfer rate
 
I have no objection to a G92 based GTX card, but for heavens sake give it some decent clocks so it can actually outperform the new GTS by a decent margin.

A core clock of 720MHz
A memory clock of 2400MHz
1GB of memory

That is what i expect from the next GTX, don't disappoint.
 
If Nvidia can keep making gains like this with each revision of there GPU architecture, you won't see a true next gen GPU for a long time. Nvidia is in the drivers seat right now & they know how dominate there line of GPU's are atm. Users that took the Steam survery saw that 65% of those users are using Nvidia GPU solutions while it's down to 35% for ATI. Nvidia may get to confident & AMD may catch them napping. That's the worst that can happen for Nvidia atm. Like having to relive the FX Series.

AMD's 3870X2 was a nice try. As you can see here at the [H] reviews card however, it's not as good as it is being hyped up to be. It trades blows with an 8800GTX. Not good for a multi GPU solution. A look in the ATI forums & multiple other forums show the card having a ton of issues with a wide range of games. Surely to be fixed by driver updates.

With that said, if AMD continues to deliver subpar parts, Nvidia is just going to kick back & keep refinning there GPU's to keep getting beneficial gains. AMD is in dieing need of an 9800XT era again to change the road Nvidia is heading down.

-DarkLegacy
 
I've said this many times now, but I don't believe the 9800 GTX is just an overclocked 8800 GTS 512.
I'm betting on similar specs to the existing 8800 GTX, but with a possible increase of Stream Processors, to 160 or 192.

That would make the 9800 GTX something like this:

- 65 nm with close to a billion transistors.
- 384 bit memory interface
- At least 768 MB of VRAM, probably GDDR4
- 160/192 Stream Processors. I'm leaning towards 160, rather than 192.
- Clock frequencies seem about right in the rumors. 675 Mhz for the GPU, 2 Ghz for the memory and 1.8 Ghz for the Stream Processors
- Dual slot cooler
- Same length as a 8800 GTX/Ultra
- MSRP of $600-650

With these specs and considering 160 Stream Processors, the GTX would be 30-40% faster than the existing 8800 GTX, especially at higher resolutions. The GX2 would still be faster, since it is rumored to be "at least" (worst case scenario) 30% faster than the Ultra, which would mean, it will be about 20-30% faster than the 9800 GTX in most situations. If driver support is up to par, Quad-SLI would be the fastest solution and Tri-SLI with 9800 GTX would be a close second.
 
you haven't provided any reason to believe that this kind of card would exist at the moment..
 
It would be spectaculary stupid for nvidia to release a 9800GTX that wasn't much faster than the 8800GTX. If we're looking at double the performance of the 9600GT then I would say that's acceptable.
 
meatfestival said:
It would be spectaculary stupid for nvidia to release a 9800GTX that wasn't much faster than the 8800GTX. If we're looking at double the performance of the 9600GT then I would say that's acceptable.
Click to expand...
Why exactly it would be stupid?
 
Niceone said:
Both cards are bandwith + ROP limited. Basically this is reason why 112SP vs. 64SP doesn't make that much difference (why between 8800 GTS 512 and 8800 GT main performance difference comes from clock frequencies, not SP amounts). This 64SP is basically the most optimal amount of SP's for this card.. if you go up..there's not much performance difference, but if you go down from this your performance will tank.

There's major difference in texture filtering performance which is the main thing that causes 8800 GT to win 9600 GT. This advantage is little bit limited because 9600 GT has more effective mem bandwith even when both have same max transfer rate
Click to expand...

Well we can hope they might have added more Rops in 9800 too.

Anyway even if we cry about lack of innovations it's still best GPU times ever since 9500/9700 series. I mean high performance cards are available for amazingly low prices.

Do we really need to return to times of $500 monsters giving good performance and low end giving crap performance?
 
Niceone said:
Why exactly it would be stupid?
Click to expand...

because in pretty much every new generation of Geforce cards, the ones with GTX/Ultra designation have been almost twice as fast as the previous generation's best.

If the rumoured specs are true it would have been far more appropriate to call it an 8900.
 
I seem to remember when the 8800 power specs were released Nvidia said something about how after the 8800 series they were going to be making a big push to cut power consumption and I got this feeling at the time this was going to be at the cost of raw performance gains in later generations. Could this be what we are seeing here?
 
meatfestival said:
because in pretty much every new generation of Geforce cards, the ones with GTX/Ultra designation have been almost twice as fast as the previous generation's best.

If the rumoured specs are true it would have been far more appropriate to call it an 8900.
Click to expand...
And why this is stupid move for Nvidia? They are just trying to make as much money as possible like any other commercial company. Usually it happens by creating better and better cards, but when there's no real competition this happens; they don't have to improve much..their main goal is trying to make manufacturing of the card as cheap as possible, but still keep prices where they were.

There's clear pattern here:
ATi releases Radeon 9000-series which ruled..and there was 22 months between Radeon 9700 pro and X800.
Nvidia released Geforce FX-series which sucked.. and there was only one year between first GF FX cards on sale and Geforce6 series.
Radeon X800 was launched around same time as Geforce 6.

Now Nvidia released Geforce8 which have been dominating now 16 months later Nvidia's next gen is few months a way and Nvidia is rushing their next gen; most likely there won't be long time period between Nvidia's and AMD's next gen
 
Michaelius said:
Well we can hope they might have added more Rops in 9800 too.

Anyway even if we cry about lack of innovations it's still best GPU times ever since 9500/9700 series. I mean high performance cards are available for amazingly low prices.

Do we really need to return to times of $500 monsters giving good performance and low end giving crap performance?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately G92-GPU only has 16 ROP units.
 
meatfestival said:
It would be spectaculary stupid for nvidia to release a 9800GTX that wasn't much faster than the 8800GTX. If we're looking at double the performance of the 9600GT then I would say that's acceptable.
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be stupid at all. Look at the 9600GT. They released a card that falls right smack dab in the middle of their 8000 series in terms of performance, but instead of calling it "8700GT" or whatever, they called it 9600GT. Look how much hype and excitement it got! You honestly think you would see this much hype if they called it 8700GT instead?

Nvidia knows they will sell more cards as "9800GTX" than say "8900GTS", so it doesn't surprise me at all that this is the name they chose.
 
smartpatrol said:
I don't think it would be stupid at all. Look at the 9600GT. They released a card that falls right smack dab in the middle of their 8000 series in terms of performance, but instead of calling it "8700GT" or whatever, they called it 9600GT. Look how much hype and excitement it got! You honestly think you would see this much hype if they called it 8700GT instead?

Nvidia knows they will sell more cards as "9800GTX" than say "8900GTS", so it doesn't surprise me at all that this is the name they chose.
Click to expand...

Yuppers.. If the 8800GT and 8800GTS were Launched as 9800GT and 9800GTS, everything would be far less confusing.. I mean.. Hey.. the 9800GT performs almost as fast as the 8800GTX!

It would have been a marketing boon!
 
TheBluePill said:
Yuppers.. If the 8800GT and 8800GTS were Launched as 9800GT and 9800GTS, everything would be far less confusing.. I mean.. Hey.. the 9800GT performs almost as fast as the 8800GTX!

It would have been a marketing boon!
Click to expand...

They should have just gone with the 8900 nomenclature for the G92 cards. People would have been far less confused, and it would have been on par with the 7800 -> 7900 transition of yesteryear.
 
This article points to another article which names it's proof as "sorces" and links to an eastern langauge GPU-Z screen shot. It only shows a 10DE Device ID as "proof". This could easially be a bios mod. Or really it's an easy photoshop. If they can run a GPU-Z on this, why can't they give us a picture of the card it's self in someone's hand. I'll wait for NVidia to release something or for someone to show us real life pictures of the card and GPU-Z shots before I believe yet another internet blog with "proof".
 
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/GeForce_9800_GTX_Card_Photos_&_Specs_Unveiled/5599.html

i believe the longer 12 layer PCB, but i don't believe the mooted specs of 23MHz on the clock and ~150MHz on the memory.

There is simply no need to got to the expense of creating another board design, especially one that is bigger and more costly, if only to boost the clocks by such a paltry amount. After all, there is a 1GB G92 GTS with memory at 2050MHz and core at ~700MHz.

If that picture truly is of the new G92 GTX then I at least am sure that the clocks will be significantly faster than the default GTS, and it will probably come with a 1GB option from day one.
 
Here it is.. They made 8800 GTS 512:
-1.5" longer
-Running with 25MHz higher clocks
-Now with 25W higher TDP
-Prices will be 50-80 USD higher
-They added second SLI-connector <---!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
R3MF said:
http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/GeForce_9800_GTX_Card_Photos_&_Specs_Unveiled/5599.html

i believe the longer 12 layer PCB, but i don't believe the mooted specs of 23MHz on the clock and ~150MHz on the memory.

There is simply no need to got to the expense of creating another board design, especially one that is bigger and more costly, if only to boost the clocks by such a paltry amount. After all, there is a 1GB G92 GTS with memory at 2050MHz and core at ~700MHz.

If that picture truly is of the new G92 GTX then I at least am sure that the clocks will be significantly faster than the default GTS, and it will probably come with a 1GB option from day one.
Click to expand...

Which GTS is that? (I havent seen it, would be interested in it)
 
TheBluePill said:
Which GTS is that? (I havent seen it, would be interested in it)
Click to expand...
http://www.google.com/search?q=8800...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
and 10 seconds later........

Gainward's new G92 8800 GTS card with 1024MB of GDDR3 memory has been listed on Alternate.de. According to their spec sheet this card comes with a high factory overclock, the core runs at 730MHz and 1GB of GDDR3 memory runs at 1050MHz (2100MHz effectively).http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5640&Itemid=34
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top