9800 GTX benchmark

[Blitzen]

Well i have just seen a benchmark for a 9800GTX and it only hits 16K in 3D Mark 06.....

Thats poor.......especially for a flagship card.

I can hit 15K+ now.

[SiM]

But won't it get much better once drivers are final?

[Blitzen]

But won't it get much better once drivers are final?

I wouldnt have thought the drivers would make alot of difference as its going to be a VERY similar build to the already G92 cards.

[this_is_gav]

Doubt there'll be any improvement that won't help the previous 8800s regarding driver updates (unless nV pull a fast one and only apply future driver optimisations to the 9800s). As Blitzen said, to all intents and purposes it's just a an overclocked 8800GTS. A product to fit into their upgrade cycle with little justification, let alone the bump to 9800. They should have done what they did with the 7800/7900s and used 8900.

That said, it's not really much different than the HD3800s and X1900s were to the 2900XT and X1800s.

[TooNice]

I am still holding for proper reviews, but it would be quite disappointing if improvements on the high end were so negligible after 15 months, especially when looking at the power boost in the mid-range. Still, if the 9600 SLi scales as well as it did, then I'd exdpect the GX2 to do as well. And as long as they are not trying to price the 9800 GTX in the same position as the 8800 GTX (but closer to say £250-275) then I suppose that they can still remain competitive against the 3870 X2.

Edit: Looks like we now have official word that it's pretty much an overclocked GTS. Maybe the relative lack of bang compared to some of the really nice mid-range card they've been doing is the very reason they can keeping this for last. Considering the price of the 3870 X2, nVidia really can't be expect to sell this at £300 IMO.

Edit 2: I do think that AMD were a little quick to move from the HD2### to the HD3### and that may be one reason nVidia sees the need to ramp up the numbers. But whoever is numbering those cards is not doing the best of job IMO.

[shaffaaf27]

for people upgrading from X100/X1000/6/7 series, this would be the card to get if its around £250. if not, then an 8800GTX wont go wrong.

[baius]

There's not a huge amount of competition in the market place, at present. As such, current technology is going to be pushed (by the "leader") as much as possible.

Assuming the above, (i.e. using current tech,) I think the market place would prefer a 65nm (i.e. G92) 8800 Ultra, rather than an OC 8800 gts-2.

Whilst most of the features of this card are "at least" as good as the Ultra, some features aren't, i.e. this new card is 256bit - whereas the 8800 GTX/Ultra was 384bit.

As a result, some benchmarks favour the 9800 gtx, some favour the "older" 8800 ultra.

As one reviewer said, it all comes down to price. If this card can squeeze in just above the 8800 gts-2 and a current gtx/ultra, fine. If it's more expensive than the high-end 8800's, the price isn't justified.

[No.72]

Simple, Nvidia is milking the architecture for as much as they can until ATI bring out something better.

[baius]

Simple, Nvidia is milking the architecture for as much as they can until ATI bring out something better.

Well done. You've said everything I just said, without developing RSI.

[aidanjt]

Simple, Nvidia is milking the architecture for as much as they can until ATI bring out something better.

The AMD 3870 X2 is cheaper, faster, and uses less power than the 9800 GTX, it easily has the price/performance crown. And all this with AMD being in the worst position they've ever been in, I think they need to quit milking.

[vhero]

i think 8800gt is gonna be the top card for a while for your average gamer as everything which performs noticably better has a mass price increase