GeForce 9800 GTX specs - hopefully this is not true

[ripken204]

Are you calling the 9800Gx2 card the high range? Even if it is so, the performance increase is 30% over an ultra...not bad but when you conisder it is having 2 GPUs in it...its kinda sad.

it'a very sad

anyone get the $300 EVGA 8800GTX at newegg yesterday? definitely worth it if these new benchmarks are true.

[Thunderbolt 2864]

Yeah, I hope the 9800 series will live up to my expectations, and I pray that these specs currently being posted are not true. Its kinda unbelievable that NVIDIA would release a higher generation card that has lower specs than its predecessors.

As some of you said, the 9800 GX2 should have more of a performance increase since it has 2 GPU's. But we'll wait and see when the benchmarks are published.

[jcarle]

But we'll wait and see when the benchmarks are published.

And for nVidia to make an official announcement.

[ripken204]

i could care less about the GX2, cooling it will be a pain. for ppl with air, you cant cool both gpus, and for ppl with water like me, it you also can only cool one.. i hate dual gpus solutions for that reason.

[weEvil]

Chill out guys. There's no way they will release something that is slower. People would buy the 8xxx series if they did.

[puntoMX]

And I was told that the 9800 was going to be a 512 bit interface. This is a whole bunch of BS, I'm telling you. All this wait for nothing and I'm going to be disappointed? Not happy.

Nothing to worry about, logic tells that more then 128 shader units would need more bandwidth, thus a 512bit bus to the memory would be more likely. Speculations about the 9800GTX are 384 shader units with 1GB RAM (GDDR3 or most likely GDDR4).

Well, it seems they come out with the 9800GTX in a few weeks, and specs are clear now:

+ G92 based, 675MHz

+ 128 Shader units, 1.688GHz

+ 512MB and 256bit, working at 2.200GHz DDR

+ 3 way SLI

+ 300-350 USD range

- 156W max. power usage

So, I guess people will stay with there G92 based 8800GT/GTS cards .

[ripken204]

for that price my step-up is free

[Thunderbolt 2864]

Ok, I'm already quite convinced that these specs are true. Stupid NVIDIA.

I really hope that GT200/100 (Whatever its called) will be better. I guess NVIDIA decided to release the 9800 GTX with these lousy specs because ATI couldn't catch up to them or whatever. And if you asked me, these specs don't even deserve the "GTX" name at all.

[nmX.Memnoch]

I've read that the 9800GTX is nothing more than a re-release of the 65nm G92 core with more stream processors enabled and a speed bump. I don't know why they gave it a 9x00 name either, other than they're running out of how many times they can re-release the chips as 8x00 versions. I don't know that it's so much a mistake as they used to do it all the time in the early days, but I do think calling it a "next generation" part is a mistake.

I've also read rumor that ATI's RV770 will have 800 SPs. Although that's an extremely high number I don't think it's going to give them that much of a performance gap over NVIDIA's GT200 as it might seem. Their SP count is much higher than NVIDIA's now (more than double) and it hasn't given them any real edge in performance.

[ripken204]

I've read that the 9800GTX is nothing more than a re-release of the 65nm G92 core with more stream processors enabled and a speed bump. I don't know why they gave it a 9x00 name either, other than they're running out of how many times they can re-release the chips as 8x00 versions. I don't know that it's so much a mistake as they used to do it all the time in the early days, but I do think calling it a "next generation" part is a mistake.

I've also read rumor that ATI's RV770 will have 800 SPs. Although that's an extremely high number I don't think it's going to give them that much of a performance gap over NVIDIA's GT200 as it might seem. Their SP count is much higher than NVIDIA's now (more than double) and it hasn't given them any real edge in performance.

you've read? it's a fact

stupid nvidia is waiting for ati to release their next monster.

the whole 9x00 thing is just marketing, hoping to get more money out of us.

personally i think they should have made all G92's the 9x00 and then their next beast should be some new name.

i personally want to see how 9800GTX SLI is.

[Thunderbolt 2864]

I wonder if this product is going to be a success like the 8800 series. Doubt it, and I for one isn't going to buy it. Just only a 10% increase over the 8800 GTX? Pass. Not even worth my money or time. Stupid NVIDIA, who cares about ATI. Just release a good card already and be done with it.

Why did they even bother releasing this crap. They could have just waited for ATI to release their new generation, and given the 9800 GTX the GT200 core, which makes more sense to me. But no. Its all about the money. Pfft.

Edited March 17, 2008 by Thunderbolt 2864

[nmX.Memnoch]

you've read? it's a fact

Yes, I've read. I'm not going to quote it as fact because until the press release comes directly from NVIDIA and we have reviews on actual released hardware it's not fact.

personally i think they should have made all G92's the 9x00

I disagree. It's the same architecture with a few tweaks. They should've done exactly what they did with the GF4's (from 4600 -> 4800), the GF FX's (from 5800 -> 5900) and the GF 7's (from 7800 -> 7900). What I'm saying is that these should've been called 8900's, not 9800's.

They could have just waited for ATI to release their new generation, and given the 9800 GTX the GT200 core, which makes more sense to me.

See comments above. There are at least a couple of reasons they're going with the 9x00 name(s):

1. They could only come up with so many suffixes before it starts to get rediculous. I'm sure they sat around and the conversation went something like:

"We could call them 8800 GTX Ultra Max In Your Face AMD/ATI"

"No, No, remember 'KISS'? Let's just waste a whole generation of names and call these the GeForce 9 series...and forget that we could've used 8900 GS, 8900 GT, 8900 GTX, 8900 Ultra".

"YEAH, I like that! Let's roll with it..."

And there you have your "Marketing 101" lesson for the day.

2. The 8x00 line has been on the market for over a year and I'm sure they're worried about public perception. The "true" enthusiast knows what's going on...but the "wannabe" or "n00b" (for lack of better terms) enthusiast goes "yeah, time to upgrade!". And believe me, the "wannabe/n00b" enthusiasts outnumber us...

KISS = Keep It Simple, Stupid

Edited March 18, 2008 by nmX.Memnoch

[puntoMX]

KISS = Keep It Simple, Stupid

Learned something today .

By the way, the first 9800 cards will have the "normal" G92 core, the ones after June will have the new 55nm based cores, so less power or higher speeds...

[weEvil]

Don't the new 9xxx series have improved hardware support for Hybrid SLi?

[nmX.Memnoch]

KISS = Keep It Simple, Stupid

Learned something today .

By the way, the first 9800 cards will have the "normal" G92 core, the ones after June will have the new 55nm based cores, so less power or higher speeds...

That still doesn't change the fact that I don't think they should be 9800's.

In fact, I think the original die shrink to 65nm should've been called 8900's (i.e. instead of reusing the 8800 GT moniker, we would've had 8900 GT's) and these new ones (the 9800's) should be 8950's.

Edited March 19, 2008 by nmX.Memnoch