No I dont think it will, you see from the benchmarks we see the 9600GT on par with the 8800GT with AA, so if the 9800GT is on par with the 9600GT with AA then something is not right..
-
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.
9800 GT is rebadged 8800 GT, just has extra SLi conector for Tri.
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
No I dont think it will, you see from the benchmarks we see the 9600GT on par with the 8800GT with AA, so if the 9800GT is on par with the 9600GT with AA then something is not right..
No offence meant mate, but that's my point. The new intel chips aren't new architecture, they're basically the same as the current gen, just shrunk and with some more cache. That is essentially what Nvidia are doing, refreshing the older tech. Intels next gen native quad core won't be out til the end of the year. Nvidia are basically following the same plan, refresh current hardware and make it, hopefully, a bit quicker and more efficient.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 20,344
- Location
- Stanley Hotel, Colorado
Thats not what a new series is about usually but then the jump from 6 to 7 series also seemed a bit crap to me
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Well judging by the 9600 GT prices (the lower range card), id say the 8800 GT (sorry 9800 GT 
) price is going to increase to £200+ for that extra SLi connector. 
) price is going to increase to £200+ for that extra SLi connector. Well judging by the 9600 GT prices (the lower range card), id say the 8800 GT (sorry 9800 GT
IT IS going to be faster than an 8800GT because if it was not they might aswell rebadge an 8800Ultra as the 9800GT since the 9600GT is as fast as the 8800GT....
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Think your confused, the 9600 GT is a cut down 8800 GT, the 9800 GT is the rebadged 8800 GT with the extra SLi connector for Tri.
So there is no speed gain at all?
Last edited:
Is it possible that the amount of ROPs is now what's limiting these cards? I mean, we've seen how graphics cards fare in Crysis with antialiasing (okay, it's hardly 'faring' so much as 'being forced to take it up the backside', but still), with the G92 cores they increased the amount of texturing power, but they also cut back the raster operational power quite dramatically. Now, when they cut the shaders on G94 (the 9600 GT to you and me), the performance didn't seem to take a hit in the slightest. Therefore, that leads us to one of four conclusions:
The ROPs are holding the cards back.
The memory bandwidth is holding the cards back.
The cards are becoming CPU limited.
nVidia is bollocksing us and re-releasing the same cards.
Your guess is as good as mine.
The ROPs are holding the cards back.
The memory bandwidth is holding the cards back.
The cards are becoming CPU limited.
nVidia is bollocksing us and re-releasing the same cards.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
Wolfdale on the left, Conroe on the right.
So, Wolfdale core is not just a smaller Conroe core resulting from the transition to finer production technology. Intel engineers made a number of innovations in the new processors
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intel-wolfdale_2.html
You missed the SS4 instructions set of the 45nm intel parts that see big
gains in certain multimedia apps.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Wolfdale on the left, Conroe on the right.
So, Wolfdale core is not just a smaller Conroe core resulting from the transition to finer production technology. Intel engineers made a number of innovations in the new processors
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intel-wolfdale_2.html
LOL, its has more cache, think the two biggest blocks, rescale image on the right and extend the end "cache" parts and change the colours and its next to identical
the left picture is a longer core design, squished up a bit in photo so everything looks a little thinner. they really are almost completely identical except the scale of the picture. i'm too lazy and never use photo manipulation proggies. but if someone squishes one/streches the other it will look even closer. slight differences are simply down to how some units of transistors fit together better/differently as they are smaller but thats purely a result of the smaller process, no idea where the sse4 units are, if someone messes with the colours so they are similar, better to highlight the darker bits, you can probably find sse4 units based on the slightly bigger differences.
lol, "looksie, they've used different colours, the cores must be different" , ingenius.
Maybe nvidia can do the same, show pics of the new core but reverse the polarisation in the colour and call it a new architechture
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
did you read the article at all?
I didn't say it was just a smaller Conroe core, i said it was "basically the same". Of course there would be a few advancements and few new features, but its not a new chip! that will be Nephelihm (or however its spelt) and even then im sure there will be more than a few features in common.
My point remains valid though, there's no competition to push NV into making the Next Gen chip, they may as well shrink and refine the current gen and get what they can from it. I'm not saying i like it, i've had my GTX for ages now and would love to splash on a brand new shiny spanky card but as i said earlier, people seem to be bashing NV when they're doing the same thing as ATI, and when ATI do it everyone praises them! I'm no NV fanboy (although all my graphics cards for the last umpteen years have been NV) but i feel they come in for more stick than is really warranted sometimes!
My point remains valid though, there's no competition to push NV into making the Next Gen chip, they may as well shrink and refine the current gen and get what they can from it. I'm not saying i like it, i've had my GTX for ages now and would love to splash on a brand new shiny spanky card but as i said earlier, people seem to be bashing NV when they're doing the same thing as ATI, and when ATI do it everyone praises them! I'm no NV fanboy (although all my graphics cards for the last umpteen years have been NV) but i feel they come in for more stick than is really warranted sometimes!
They were saying the same thing on Bit-tech when the review of the 9600GT went up because a lot of the results were close to the 8800GT.
Looking at ATI's 2900XT and 3870 might confirm this. Someone on the guru3d boards was saying that the 2900XT only really has 64 shaders which emulate 320 through ATI's superscalar architecture. But since games don't take advantage of this kind of architecture it's more of a marketing tool. More evidence that suggests this is true is that the new 9600GT with 64 shaders is on par with the 3850.
Possibly the 8800GT might see some impressive performance gains with more ROP's and some monstrous 512 bit memory. Maybe this is what they've done with the 9800GT.