**Offical 8800Ultra owners thread** post pics and clocks.

[fornowagain]

Not even trying?

He was using LN2 for goodness sake

If that's not trying I don't know what is

He said it was a first run, just to see what the card is like. He wasn't "trying" for any records, even though it smashed a few. A lot of these guys stick on pots and volt mod before even pushing the card on air, that's the easy bit. Trying really is a relative term when overclocking.

 

[IceShock]

i installed one in my mothers pc, didnt quite fit in the case tho so i had to make a few... modifications.

my mum made use of the extra few feet of 8800 PCB

ROFL. not used MS paint in years

 

[fornowagain]

ROFL. not used MS paint in years

You'd never know it!

 

[Sime]

LOL! That sir, Is class.

 

[IceShock]

glad you liked it it tickled me for a while

 

[raja]

stock gpu clocks are only 612??

That points to a bit of a mixed bag up high, I had expected 675 out of the box, as standard...

The thread itself is not a waste for those considering a purchase, as long as results from users are posted back here to see where the OC ballpark generally lies..

 

[straxusii]

You can buy 2 x gts for the price of an ultra and Im guessing the SLI GTS destroys the ultra

 

[IceShock]

You can buy 2 x gts for the price of an ultra and Im guessing the SLI GTS destroys the ultra

not really, theres about 3% difference between 2 gts's and one GTX so one ultra would beat them, but if you got 1 ultra then you allways got the room for another if you want to so then youd have double again

 

[straxusii]

not really, theres about 3% difference between 2 gts's and one GTX so one ultra would beat them, but if you got 1 ultra then you allways got the room for another if you want to so then youd have double again

Ive just checked on THG VGA charts and this is what I see @1920x1200 comparing 640MB GTS SLI vs GTX (there's no ulra option sadly) non SLI all at stock frequencies:

Oblivion - 38.5 vs 28.7
MS Flight X - 22.4 vs 22.6
Doom 3 (16x12) - 142.2 vs 113.5
BF 2142 - 67 vs 57.2
Warhammer MOC - 43.1 vs 42.6
Prey (16x12) - 98.2 vs 76
3d mark 06 - 2836 vs 2477

I think if you replaced the above scores with the ultra then it would be a fairly even contest with the GTS probably just edging it, so it isnt destroying the ultra as I said above

 

[IceShock]

and plus if you got two gts's some games might not support multi core so then you'v had it lol.

+ if you got one ultra then you got space for another if needs be

 

[Duff-Man]

Ive just checked on THG VGA charts and this is what I see @1920x1200 comparing 640MB GTS SLI vs GTX (there's no ulra option sadly) non SLI all at stock frequencies:

Oblivion - 38.5 vs 28.7
MS Flight X - 22.4 vs 22.6
Doom 3 (16x12) - 142.2 vs 113.5
BF 2142 - 67 vs 57.2
Warhammer MOC - 43.1 vs 42.6
Prey (16x12) - 98.2 vs 76
3d mark 06 - 2836 vs 2477

I think if you replaced the above scores with the ultra then it would be a fairly even contest with the GTS probably just edging it, so it isnt destroying the ultra as I said above

Given the numbers above I'd take the single GTX any day.

I used SLI with 6800s and 7800s, and I can assure you there are more issues than is apparent from straight benchmarks. For one thing, irregular output of frames in AFR mode leads to the framerate appearing to be less than it is (ie 50fps with SLI in AFR mode doesn't 'feel' as smooth as 50fps with a single card, since the maximum time between frames is always greater or equal with the SLI).

I'd like to try ATIs crossfire at some point, but they need to release another cracking card *before* nvidia first. As it stands I'm not going back to SLI.

 

[fornowagain]

Link

Finally word of EVGA's crown 8800 Ultra's
Written by Slobodan Simic
Friday, 11 May 2007 13:18

Why stop at just one, let's make two


EVGA just announced two 8800 Ultra's that don't work on reference clocks, first one will carry the proud brand of Superclocked while the other one will represent KO (Knock-out) series.

First one, the EVGA e-Geforce 8800 Ultra Superclocked will surely claim the throne of the worlds fastest card. The core of this card will work at 655 MHz, 43 MHz faster then reference card, which isn't that much but should be enough for this card to take the throne. The card is packed with 768 MB on Nvidia's weird 384-bit memory, and it will end up clocked at 2.25 GHz. The reference works at 2.16 GHz. That should be enough to get about 108GB/s of memory bandwidth. Shader clocks are claimed higher, but we don't know how much higher but certanly more than 1.5 GHz.

Of course as all EVGA's Superclocked cards this one is also "carefully tuned and thoroughly tested to Superclocked performance". The EVGA's recommended price for this card is USD $899.99 for USA, and €899 for the European market. Ouch that is dirty cheap for any Shaik in the town.

The second one is EVGA e-Geforce 8800 Ultra KO version, clocked at modest 636 MHz for the core and 768 MB of memory clocked at 2.25 MHz. Looks like EVGA got its hands on some nice memory chips. Recommended price for this one ended a little lower then Superclocked at $859.99 for USA, and €859 for Europe.

As for the other features they are the same as any other 8800 Ultra on the market, but at least it's higher then those boring reference clocks. Products will be available starting May 15th, 2007 through EVGA's network of leading E-tailers, retailers, systems integrators, OEM system manufacturers and distributors. We haven't been able to get hold of the pictures of these two cards, but we hope that EVGA went a little further then reference cooling.

£614 hohoho, not funny.

 

[Down1oader]

what games will people be using these for? (mainly testing my sig )

 

[straxusii]

and plus if you got two gts's some games might not support multi core so then you'v had it lol.

+ if you got one ultra then you got space for another if needs be

I dont think the "youve got room for another ultra" argument holds any water at all, no one will buy 2 ultras because they need to due to game perofmrance limitations. 2 ultras is strictly for the willy waving crowd only.

In a good % of games the GTS SLI is better than the ultra, and better by some way. In some others it is even or the ultra is a little better,and some games dont support SLI so the ultra is miles better.

 

[The Halk]

I dont think the "youve got room for another ultra" argument holds any water at all, no one will buy 2 ultras because they need to due to game perofmrance limitations. 2 ultras is strictly for the willy waving crowd only.

In a good % of games the GTS SLI is better than the ultra, and better by some way. In some others it is even or the ultra is a little better,and some games dont support SLI so the ultra is miles better.

Just now an Ultra is 530 quid.

For the same price you can get 2 8800 640MB GTS.

So assume you have 530 quid to spend.

You buy two cards, SLi them, and in a years later things aren't as fast as you'd like. You decide to go and buy a card and it costs you another 500 quid.

Or, you buy the Ultra, and in a years time you add a second Ultra for 300 quid.

 

[Curanir]

Well, i bought one, bought a QX6800 as well, plus 4GB of memory to go with it, and the mobo.......oh yes and a PSU to run it all....oh yes the cooler too.

Err, did it really have to cost that much ?

Vista x64 installed. No driver problems, all games working well. Alcohol running nicely....

Now why couldnt my old AMD X2 have worked as well? I am soooo glad to see the end of NF4.

Only problems i did have was getting 3dMark06 to run properly but an hour or so browsing netted me a newer patched version which seems to run just fine.

People are gonna say i spent too much on this system, but given the legacy of AMD and Nvidias nForce4 chipset and that damn RAID, i'm happy to have spent what i did, because it worked FIRST TIME. For a change.

 

[Richdog]

People are gonna say i spent too much on this system, but given the legacy of AMD and Nvidias nForce4 chipset and that damn RAID, i'm happy to have spent what i did, because it worked FIRST TIME. For a change.

Yes, you spent too much on that system. You could have probably spent around half or a little more and had equal or greater performance with overclocking.

 

[Curanir]

And because everybody predicted this response i shall justify my purchase by saying that yes you can reach these speeds by overclocking with a lesser rig but can you reach the speeds ill get when I overclock?

In all seriousness i earn a fair whack, ive got disposable income so its no big deal for me. I can afford to do it so why shouldnt i... Plus I was seriously getting upset with my AMD rig, constant crashing and unreliable. I needed an upgrade so i future proofed my rig for a few years by spending a little extra. I wont need to upgrade (hoping....) for a long time with this rig. And with Valve saying they are going to multi core their source engine, the writing is on the wall for multicore systems.

Anyway, if you'll excuse me im off to shamelessly play with my e-penis.

 

[lay-z-boy]

*snip*

Funny that, my x2 system worked flawlessly from day one and i had a lanparty mainboard. In fact, the thing still works fine to this day.

I'm sure many other users are in the same boat too.

 

[Gerard]

The only people i can see getting an ultra are evga owners who can (i assume) step up to it with a minimal (compared to the cards retail price) cost.