9800GTX whoops an 8800Ultra

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: ZeroTM
It's $299 - 349, and it outperforms Ultras considerably, wtf is everyone bitching about.

We've been value carded to death by ATI and NVIDIA... You can already buy a card from NVIDIA that performs almost as well as the Ultra for $200, why do we need one that does just a tad bit better for an additional $150? The fact that you can buy a card for half the price of the last year's flagship that performs just as well is nothing new. The fact that a year later the new flagship card barely outperforms that last one is... That is what everyone is bitching about.

 

[CreasianDevaili]

Um...

Pfff.. That was so well written, with so much sarcasm, that I am unsure how to respond.

 

[dasracht]

Originally posted by: ZeroTM
It's $299 - 349, and it outperforms Ultras considerably, wtf is everyone bitching about.

I agree. If it really is $299, with performance that significantly beats all the $299 cards out now, why isn't everyone happy? It's not a giant leap in performance, but at that price point, it seems like a good leap in value, especially if you have sli board. Of course I'm probably biased since I'm looking to step up, but the card as bad as I expected (as long as it's really 299)

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: dasracht

Originally posted by: ZeroTM
It's $299 - 349, and it outperforms Ultras considerably, wtf is everyone bitching about.

I agree. If it really is $299, with performance that significantly beats all the $299 cards out now, why isn't everyone happy? It's not a giant leap in performance, but at that price point, it seems like a good leap in value, especially if you have sli board. Of course I'm probably biased since I'm looking to step up, but the card as bad as I expected (as long as it's really 299)

What makes you think the price point will be $300? Seriously - given historical pricing, it will be more than likely $400 base + $50-$75 "launch premium". I would expect it more in line of $450-$500, given that the GX2 is already pricing at $600 base. That gives you room for a 9800GT and 9800GTS card in the middle somewhere, at $300 and $350 respectively. The 9800 GT will likely be the mainstream enthusiast card at that point, and performance will essentially be trash. the 9-series high end is shaping up to be simply another G80 refresh.

 

[dasracht]

I agree the 300 seems too low, especially with the gx2. Those leaked slides with the 300-350 price point are convincing though...

 

[Obsoleet]

Nice business strategy.
Slow the cards down / stop them from getting faster, increase margins through die shrinks, develop more SLI technology, hook more people in the proprietary SLI tech, force the sale of more cards to get any real performance increases each generation.
NV is still capable of putting out a monster high end card if they need to compete against someone again, and in subsequent product generations they will profit greatly from selling your 13year old leetzorz gamerz friendz 3 GPUs instead of 1.

In summary for the masses: Nvidia is no longer your friend. They are now straight up milking you and it will increase in it's ferocity.


Most people are ok with SLI but I won't use it. I bought it when it first game out in the GF6 era and had no problems with it, but I'm a single card gamer for simplicity of driver/app support and would rather use 1 card.

 

[scottb75]

I'd like to see if the 9800GTX still whoops the 8800Ultra with AA/AF settings on, if it does then I'll be impressed, since that is where the G92 cards still showed weakness compared to the 8800GTX/Ultra.

 

[dasracht]

Will the drivers they release with the gx2 cover the gtx as well? I hope we can get some reviews later this week with AA and proper drivers.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: Obsoleet
stop them from getting faster, increase margins through die shrinks, develop more SLI technology, hook more people in the proprietary SLI tech, force the sale of more cards to get any real performance increases each generation.
NV is still capable of putting out a monster high end card if they need to compete against someone again, and in subsequent product generations they will profit greatly from selling your 13year old leetzorz gamerz friendz 3 GPUs instead of 1.

In summary for the masses: Nvidia is no longer your friend. They are now straight up milking you and it will increase in it's ferocity.

:thumbsup:

 

[BlizzardOne]

Originally posted by: scottb75
I'd like to see if the 9800GTX still whoops the 8800Ultra with AA/AF settings on, if it does then I'll be impressed, since that is where the G92 cards still showed weakness compared to the 8800GTX/Ultra.

well, using the Crysis results from http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=247591 ...

1280x1024 no AA = 55.865 fps
1680x1050 8QxAA = 4.125 fps

I ran the test on my rig (X6800 @ 2.93ghz & EVGA 8800 Ultra superclocked) at the same two settings and got:

49.885 fps (10.7% slower - maybe partially due to the 19% clockspeed difference of the CPU they used and slight GPU/shader clockspeed advantage)

and

12.000 fps (190% faster - presumably memory bandwidth coming into play)

 

[zephyrprime]

Unimpressive. How many transistors does that thing have again?

 

[BlizzardOne]

754m (73m more than G80)

 

[Belles Toaster]

It's always been about the money. Its about marketing: how you just can not be complete without a SLI setup or scoring over 15k in 3dmark 06. Lets not be naive why did Nvidia ignore the middle class gamer last year. Yes, life does not begin at 40 rather at the 8800 series. It's not about love , why a better analogy would be the sheep dog and the coyote. They both pleasantly greet each other in the morning and then proceed to go at each other after they punch in the time clock. I am sure that in reality, it may be more a gentlemens after hours sport club where give and take is arranged over herbal tea.

 

[AzN]

This was expected. These G92 cards are so close to one another that it is really pointless.

 

[Belles Toaster]

Yes they are one in the same. Just like going to the butcher and carving the meat one way,its $5.99 a pound leave some fat on it, its $2.99 a pound. Nvidia does not have much up its sleave and we may be getting to a point of diminshing returns to R&D. We may get another die shrink to 45nm but to get further are heavy obstacles. Nvidia may be trying to milk the proverbial cow before it really shakes things up. Personally , I think DX10 was more a humiliation to the graphic card companies who knew it was coming and unleashed drival on the marketplace.

 

[Donts00tmesanta]

has to be fake considering the pwnage of the 9600gt

 

[CurseTheSky]

And I thought it would only be six months before I regretted the money I spend on my 8800GTX.

It's not a paperweight yet!

 

[mwmorph]

Just from the page you linked, loks like the 8800Ultra is quicker in most DX10 games.

Th 9800GTS is quicker in NFSro Street(11 i pro street right?) and 0.2FSP quicker in HL2 at the highest resolution while most DX10 bnchmarks make the 8800U slightly quicker.

 

[zephyrprime]

Man, they should have named the g92 the 8900 series instead of jumping to the 9xxx numbering regime because the performance doesn't justify a whole new number series name. It seems like the REAL next generation card is the 9600gt oddly enough. Will there be a 128 shader version of the g94 someday? Only something like that would yield big performance improvements.

 

[Cookie Monster]

G94 has a maximum of 64 shaders and some other things being cut down from the bigger G92. Thats why its more economical to produce.

The thing is that due to the unexpected early arrival of the RV670, nVIDIA had no choice but to release G92 based cards to combat the threat posed at the mid-high range markets. Thats why the 9 series look very lack luster because of nVIDIA's counter to the HD38x0 series. I gues they were willing to sacrifice the hype of the 9 series for market share. The initial 8700GT(G92) was going to be a 64SP card. But they had to release something full fledged (8800GT/GTS) and i.e revealing their refreshes performance because of this.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
Man, they should have named the g92 the 8900 series instead of jumping to the 9xxx numbering regime because the performance doesn't justify a whole new number series name. It seems like the REAL next generation card is the 9600gt oddly enough. Will there be a 128 shader version of the g94 someday? Only something like that would yield big performance improvements.

The G94 is derived from the G92, the G92 is the 128 shader version of the G94 - or rather the G94 is the 64 shader version of the G92...the only reason the 9600GT performs anywhere near the 8800GT is because the core clocks are so much higher. Overclock the 8800GT/GTS and the 9600GT is clearly an inferior part.

 

[unholy414]

I wouldn't call this "whooping". More like "9800GTX is mildly better than the 8800Ultra".

 

[Sable]

8900GTX imo.

 

[Sheninat0r]

I think it can be summed up pretty quickly: THIS SUCKS.

 

[bryanW1995]

we've known this was coming for weeks. 9800gtx is an OC 8800gts 512 that can run tri-sli. it's still better than being stuck with a 9800gx2 imho. Just ask rollo which parts HE requested...