9800gtx pic

Gerard · 4 Mar 2008 at 19:45

8800 ultra on top

Darkwave · 4 Mar 2008 at 19:55

So it looks like it's going to be a die-shrunk GTX with 512MB RAM if the benchmarks we've seen are true.

Skeeter · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:02

Ulfhedjinn said:
So it looks like it's going to be a die-shrunk GTX with 512MB RAM if the benchmarks we've seen are true.

And this surprises you because......?

Darkwave · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:03

Skeeter said:
And this surprises you because......?

Doesn't. I was simply making an observation that makes me glad I didn't wait for it any longer.

Jokester · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:05

Least it looks like it still uses the standard cooler mount.

Gerard · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:06

Its strange that they would downgrade the amount of memory onboard. talk about a backwards step 768 down to 512. :confused:

sunlitsix · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:11

well its based on a 256-bit interface so the memory amount had to be decreased
the only reason 768mb was used was due to the 384-bit interface

Skeeter · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:11

Its not all about capacity, its about speed and bitrate and all the other components....

easyrider · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:12

This has to be one of the least interesting releases for a GFX card for some time.

And to call it a 9800 GTX is just a joke imo.

Gerard · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:13

Yeah but for their flagship "new" product thats what im wondering why the downscaling. If performance on this is what its rumoured to be (marginally better than 512 gts performance ) would 768mb and a 384 bit interface not have made a difference?

Duke · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:14

Just to clarify; the 9 series are just die shrinked and minor changes to clock speed (up and down)? Oh and tri sli ready?

Gerard · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:16

Duke said:
Just to clarify; the 9 series are just die shrinked and minor changes to clock speed (up and down)? Oh and tri sli ready?

Yup, looks that way. Very underwhelming this time around.

Safe to say nvidia blew their load with the 8800 series, they either are having a hard time topping that performance or have no reason to top it because of the 2900 series.

Jokester · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:16

And the addition of DX10.1 but nothing really in terms of performance.

easyrider · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:16

Duke said:
Just to clarify; the 9 series are just die shrinked and minor changes to clock speed (up and down)? Oh and tri sli ready?

Yes.

About as exciting as a hangover.

easyrider · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:17

Jokester said:
And the addition of DX10.1 but nothing really in terms of performance.

X2 has that is faster and will come in cheaper.

RavenXXX2 · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:19

Why stick two six PCI-E connectors on the card if its merely an OC GTS, unless the second one is just for show, there must be reasonable performance gains over a GTS. The clocks would be massive if it is just an OC GTS.

Gerard · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:20

Im wondering what kind of price theyre gonna be sticking on this, but knowing their pricing strategies they'll have the gall to have it over the £400 mark.

I really can't believe thats their next card, its pathetic and thats the plain truth of it, unless all the rumours are currently wrong and its a ton faster than the current 8800's.

jigger · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:21

RavenXXX2 said:
Why stick two six PCI-E connectors on the card if its merely an OC GTS, unless the second one is just for show, there must be reasonable performance gains over a GTS. The clocks would be massive if it is just an OC GTS.

I seen that...lol massive

HeX · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:39

Jokester said:
And the addition of DX10.1 but nothing really in terms of performance.

Didn't think the 9 series were getting 10.1...

Devious · 4 Mar 2008 at 20:45

The extra power connector is a curious addition...