• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

G92 scores 10k in 3DMark06

Greebo said:
I know it is wait and see but according to Nvidia:

"G92 is the successor of the current G80 GPU and according to Michael Hara, vice president of the "green" company, the chip will be ready by Christmas 2007. This means that NVIDIA will try to update their high-end graphics card sector every fourth semester in the years to come. This release cycle was adopted with the G80 GPU last year, leaving the mid-range and low-end products for a spring release"

and:

"NVIDIA also claims that the upcoming G92 is set to break the 1 Teraflops barrier. The 8800 is capable of about 330 Gflops, which means the green team is suggesting that the 9800 could be three times more powerful."

I would imagine Nvidia will release the top end version first to cash in on all those with the money who want the latest and fastest and the lower and mid end to come out in Spring 2008. That way they will make the most money.

IMO I can't see the company releasing the mid range card which would stop them selling any 8800 GTS and GTX cards as that is commercial suicide.
Click to expand...


yeah thats my point.

say they release the mid range first. people like me, who want to buy the 9800gtx, may be tempted and not want to wait, so would end up spending maybe £150 less on the mid range.

then whenever it is they release the 9800gtx, less people will buy it, as many have just got the mid range, and if that copes well with games, theres now no longer a need to sell the mid range and shell out more for the 9800gtx.

i just cannot see them doing that tbh.
 
That point is a little flawed erg mid range cards usually ain't as fast as the
last gens top cards. So unless ya want to sell a faster card to buy a new
gen card that is slower it won't work that way. Ie 7900gtx to 8600gts. I
know the 9800gts will prob be faster or as fast as 8800gtx or ultra but
as stated above the 9800gts and 8800gts can hardly be called mid range.
 
Last edited:
It's only with the last releases of gfx cards where we have had the situation that the mid range card (and I mean a 8800 GTS 320Mb) is almost not as fast as the old top end card.

IF (and that is a big if) the 9800 GTX is 3 times more powerful than the 8800 GTX, that has got to make the 9800 GTS stomp all over the 8800 GTX and even a 9800 low entry card may give the 8800 GTS a run for its money.

So I can't see Nvidia launching a 9800 GTS and 9600 low level card first as that would stop anybody buying 8800 cards. However, if they launch the high end card for say £400 -£600 there will always be people prepared to buy it and there still will be people buying the 8800 GTX and GTS cause they haven't got that kind of money.

However, I will agree that the 8800 GTS 320Mb is hardly a mid range card on price but it is on performance. IMO there is currently no mid ranged cards out there as Nvidia crippled the 8600 and ATI did as well with the 2600.

The 8600 and 2600 are hardly faster than my 4 year old x800xt.
 
Greebo said:
However, I will agree that the 8800 GTS 320Mb is hardly a mid range card on price but it is on performance.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call the 320 MB version mid range at 16x10 resolutions.

I should know I downgraded from a GTX and used one and didn't really feel undone by.
 
they say though that the mid range release will be faster than the ultra (slightly though) or whether thats the 'on paper its faster' thing i duno.

but still, if this new mid range jobby copes very well in new games like crysis, or UT, or anything really, then i wont see the need AT ALL to get the gtx version. which is their loss i guess

either way, im gettin a new card november, and its bound to be better than my 640 gts atm lol
 
easyrider said:
I wouldn't call the 320 MB version mid range at 16x10 resolutions.

I should know I downgraded from a GTX and used one and didn't really feel undone by.
Click to expand...

Very true. I was just meaning, and not putting it across very well, that there ought to have been a card between the 8600 and the 8800 GTS 320mb in performance. The gap between the two cards are just huge.

Therefore with the 8600 being too low in performance to be a mid ranged card, I have no choice but to call the 8800 GTS 320Mb the "mid range" card although it is both too expensive and too powerful to be one really.
 
ergonomics said:
but still, if this new mid range jobby copes very well in new games like crysis, or UT, or anything really, then i wont see the need AT ALL to get the gtx version. which is their loss i guess
Click to expand...

Depends on your resolution and wanted eye candy. The 8800 GTX can't do the current games at high res/full eye candy so although crysis scales well (apparently), even with the new mid range card turning out to be as fast as an 8800 GTX, some people will want the faster card just to play games to the max.

Don't forget an awful lot of people seem to have bought 24" monitors recently.;)
 
So this new G92 coming out in November, faster, slower or the same as an 8800GTX? Also, the high-end card based on the G92 will come out later? Speculation of course, I just wanted to know what I'm hearing is right.
 
10k aint much cop, i get over 9.1k in 06, and im all stock, unless its gaming performance is a big leap over the GTS, if not then its gona be a pointless upgrade from one, not like its Dx10.1 is going to be used for years is it.
 
Last edited:
G90 = most powerful (gtx)
G92 = next one down i guess (gts)
G94-96 = more mainstream?
G98 = dirty cheap low end (think 8400gs)

this is going by the codenames nvidia gave their 8 series, where the higher the G8*, the lower down the spectrum the card was.
 
helmutcheese said:
The original story goes that G90 is High End and G92 is Mid Range.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the story that Nvidia planned to skip G90 this time, so we're possibly either not getting a high-end part from Nvidia at all this time around or G92 is the high-end part. But the fact is we still have absolutely zero idea what's going on so this discussion is pointless.
 
Greebo said:
Also found this:

""G92" GeForce 9800 GTX specs.

- 65nm process technology at TSMC.
- Over one billion transistors.
- Second Generation Unified Shader Architecture.
- Double precsion support (FP64).
- GPGPU native.
- Over one TeraFLOPS of shader processing power.
- MADD+ADD configuration for the shader untis (2+1 FLOPS=3 FLOPS per ALU)
- Fully Scalar design.
- 512-bit memory interface.
- 1024MB GDDR4 graphics memory.
- DirectX 10.1 support.
- OpenGL 3.0 Support.
- eDRAM die for "FREE 4xAA".
- built in Audio Chip.
- built in tesselation unit (in the graphics core"
- Improved AA and AF quality levels
Click to expand...
Well that came from a single forum post so frankly that's probably 99% false.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom