Slashdot Mirror
GeForce 8800GTX Benchmarked
An anonymous reader writes "The card does not launch for another week, but DailyTech already has benchmarks of the new GeForce 8800GTX on its website. The new card is the flagship GPU to replace GeForce 7900, and according to the benchmarks has no problem embarrassing the Radeon X1950 XTX either. According to the article, 'The GeForce 8800GTX used for testing is equipped with 768MB of GDDR3 video memory on a 384-bit memory bus as previously reported. Core and memory clocks are set at 575 MHz and 900 MHz respectively.'"
Looks like the card is the bomb.
It also looks like the card sucks more juice than my complete computer I have right now.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Wow... this thing could run like... two Vistas... maybe
Oh your god! 92% more FPS than ATI's current flagship! Both in HL2 and in Quake 4! "Only" 54% better 3Dmark06 score though. This card is crazy ;P I wish I could afford a truck full of these. Or maybe just one. Hmm and a new CPU... And more RAM... And some huge disks in RAID-5... Damn.
Any technology distinguishable from magic, is insufficiently advanced.
But will the 8600 GT be in a good price range? The 8200? This will matter to a lot more people.
More power is never, worse, though...unless you are trying to reduce power consumption...
Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
The final piece of my plan for world domi...
I mean...
At last, the long awaited G80 series! Only two things prevent my upgrade: Vista's final release reqs and the G80 series. Is it Direct x10 ready as expected? I can't tell from the article. Bah! Even if it isn't I'm holding off Vista until well past its release; I could wait for the GeForce 8850GTX, or 8900GTX or whatever their naming convention is, as well. Impressive stats to say the least.
Demented But Determined.
When will we see the 8950GTX?
-jX
Don't you just love politics? It's like a comedy of errors.
I just bought a new system with current gen components, and its already outdated now.
Is that both the launch cards will be expensive. nVidia's usual form is to launch high end only with a new major numerical generation (this being the GeForce 8 series). The high end one will be $600 or more, the next one down probably $300-400. You'll have to wait a few months on a more midrange card to come out.
Makes sense too, new chip and such yields are likely to be a bit low at first so you need to drop it in the expensive stuff. After you've done some work, you release some lower cards.
If you want a midrange card, we'll I'd probably be eying the 7600GT. They are good performers and not bad as it is, once this launch is underway I'd expect their price to drop even further.
hope it's worth the cash...
That looks... expensive.
Does it do DirectX 10? If so, how well? I mean the target market here is the high end gamer thus the interest is going to be on having something that supports the latest, greatest. The game development community seems to be going bonkers over DX10 so it's something to consider before you get a card.
I'm planning on getting a high-end graphics card here soon but I'm going to hold off until Vista is out and running for a bit to evaluate and make sure I get one with good DX10 support. No sense in spending money on a new generation of hardware if it doesn't support the new generation of software fully.
I'm no hardware techie, but I do so enjoy playing a good game --- "when I have time" (yeah...).
Everytime Microsoft releases a new version of DirectX it has some new sweet feature that everyone wants but none of the current cards on the market support it.
Microsoft has also said DirectX 10 and Vista will not be backward compatible with previous versions of DirectX. (Or has this changed, as I recall Vista wouldn't support applications built for previous OS's too - seems they changed their tune on that one. Then again they've really yanked everything from the OS that was originally going to set it aside as a truly new OS, but I digress...)
So, basically, what I'm getting at is why? Why would I want this (obviously hawt) card, when chances are in 4-6 months (If they don't kick back the release data again, har) DirectX 10 will be out and have some new fancy feature this card won't support?
Of course, I could be missing something and maybe the card does support DX10 - feel free to tell me I'm a toad for even asking.
I, for one, welcome our new Nvidia overlords.
The article doesn't say it, but it appears from a quick web search that this is the 1st of the cards that will support DirectX 10.
Now to get things straight, I'm not bashing Nvidia here or criticizing AMD ATI as I own products from both and am very impressed.
Ok, on to the meat of the topic. I read about this card on Tom's Hardware about a month ago and was very impressed. The specs Nvidia gave Tom's for the 8800GTX was 768mb of GDDR4 memory, 128 pixle pipelines, dual 384 bit memory busses (768 bit total), 4 RAMDAC cores at 450mhz and 2 G80 cores at 550 mhz with the memory at 1000mhz (2000mhz for DDR). The card probably won't have a aftermarket cooling solution for sometime as the user can only apply one HSF to one G80 core. Also I understand the G80 is a 75nm chip instead of a 90nm chip. This provides reduced power consumption.
Now what I'd like to see happen is AMD get on-board with ATI and do there magic on the operations per clock view of a VGA and help ATI churn out some killer VGA's that are smaller and cheaper yet rival monsters like the 8800 GTX.
Overall, both companies are kings in there own rights, for now anyway. AMD holds ground in the CPU market like none other and Nvidia churns out next gen products at better prices and performances. Who knows what these guys have in store for us, but one thing is certain only user demands and time will tell us what the next gen VGA will be.
...until they reach the 5 digit numbers. My guess is BFG is already drooling over what's just over the horizon.
BFG 10K, anyone?
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
I agree that people should respect laws and contracts better than that, and I see how not doing so hurts all the honest ones, but what are those embargoes good for, anyway?
Is it just nVidia's PR department trying to coordinate press coverage for maximum effect? What's in it for the reporters? What does it accomplish?
They conclude that the nVidia card draws 4% more power than the ATI card because the difference between the power consumption under load of an entire system differs by 4%. When this issue is raised in the comments, they defend their math:
How do you figure that the difference btw the two cards themselves is more than 4%? We have two identical systems here. The only thing that changes is the video card. The only way what you say could be valid is if the 8800 isn't pumping out as much juice as possible. Other than that, because the difference btw these two systems is 4%, we know that the difference btw the only variable in those systems (the two cards) is also 4%.
Words fail me.
By the way, there's a 45 watt difference between the idle power of the ATI system and the nVidia system. That should be a huge deal, but these gamers don't seem to care.
Want a tissue?
That's no moon... Seriously, it looks like a (bad) replica of a star destroyer or something.
All your base are belong to Wii.
and that would be (drumroll).........cost! Okay, so this is a what percent improvement over the previous generation? Who (besides high end gamers and developers) will be able to even notice a difference? Finally, what possible motivation would they have for purchasing a card that is likely going to be more expensive than their entire current computer (monitor inclusive if you have a CRT)...?
[/rant]
Just another nameless binary in a crowd of 1's and 0's
If you compare these results with the 8800GTX/1900XTX benchmarks from other reviewers. Seems the 8800GTX is a bit higher than average as well as 1900XTX lower, but still this card is a beaset
I'll pass, thanks but hey, I was just posing a question. I couldn't give a rats ass if they leak this stuff early. If they don't some puke from across the world will. I'm just pointing out the fact that seemingly professional sites like AT and DT are walking the line and risking getting their asses handed to them by a blood thirsty lawyer.
Pass the popcorn, I'd love to watch that in action...
So then the question is: How does this compare to AMD/ATI's R600 which is due out in some sort of final form somewhere between later this month and early january.
Comparing the 8800 to a x1950 is like comparing a 7800 to an x850 (granted this demonstrates it will at least for a brief period be the fastest card on the market, both in DX9.0c and being the only DX10 card out there that as well). But ATI have had their next gen card in the pipe for a while so presumably we'll see it fairly soon, and it's likely significantly faster than the x1950 series (I've heard estimates from 2-4 times as fast, including an estimate in that range from a former ATI employee, but I have no idea how likely that is to be accurate). How that would compare to the 8800 I'm not sure, but I bet they'll be fairly stiff competition.
Fortunately this can kickstart some life back into the high end computer business, which at the moment has been from what I've seen largely dead waiting on the release of SM4.0 hardware. Sure CPU's are nice and all, but why would anyone have gone out and bought the fastest card on the market for the last 3 or 4 months knowing full well that there is a whole new *featureset* in the immediate future (as opposed to the constant faster version of the same thing, which is unavoidable, radically new features, such as the geometry shader, and the whole new driver model with vista etc... and that sort of thing only comes around every couple of years).
Now isn't THAT overkill?
;)
Hint: Look at the markup, and no, this isn't a nVidia bash
It's never just a game when you're winning. - George Carlin
Looks like a gorgeous card with blazing speeds for all you gamers out there. But for those like me who run Maya, I'll be content sticking with my ATI FireGL v7350. Now yes, I like you all have seen those reviews out there that say the GeForces can run Maya faster than ATI, but that's bullshit. I've done rendering with both setups on identical systems and pound for pound the ATI annhilates the Nvidia.
This sig will self destruct in 5 seconds.
Where are the remaining 27 pages of the article?
And where are the adds?
Did I time travel 4 years in the past? What year is it!
I guess this means ATI is sunk. Time to open source those video drivers! I'd go ATI/AMD all the way if they open sourced the fglrx drivers even though they kind of suck. Yep, that's the kind of desperate counter measure that's called for here.
At the very least start supplying specifications again so we can write a nice, clean open source driver ourselves. Seriously, I'd like my next computer to use something better than a Radeon 9250.
But it should push down the prices for the 7000 line, which is nice since I don't pay more than $100 for a video card (7600GS is the best at the moment).
LOAD "SIG",8,1
Does that thing have TWO PCI-E power jacks?
It's a power hungry for my psu - but I think with some jumper cables I can hook it up to the service panel in the basement. It will add some clutter down there, but at least when winter comes I can put my wet shoes next to the computer instead of the furnace.
Thinking about upgrading my DX2-100.
Man, if I can just find some talking points, I'm about ready to start writing my own letters. I really do hate to think that the abilities one of the most decent cards in recent history might be imprisoned within closed code. That would suck so hard it'd catch tachyons.
I wish the review site had some charts to help show the difference in FPS for those games. I made a quick chart in case you want to see.
"It's never the things that happen to us that upset us, it's our view of them." -Epictetus
This is just the trailer for the actual article. Coming soon to a website near you!
My computer is 2 months old with a 7900GT. I was going to get a second one for SLI, now I wonder if I should put that money towards a 8800GTS when they come out.
Or be sane and wait until there is a game I want to play that actually stresses out my computer.... but that... would be... exercising... so much restraint...
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Why do I get the feeling we're going to one day need to use those plastic support 'hooks' (I can't remember what they're called) to secure our cards again?
Reminds me of my first vesa local bus card.
too bad the cooler looks like may aunt's hair dryer.
This card is a poster child of Gluttony, Greed, Envy & Lust. That pretty much constitutes a majority of deadly sins, there. I'd think twice about what exactly it is that you're doing in trying to find out more information about this card.
You definitely don't want to be anywhere near one of these things if the apoclypse starts.
On a personal note, this card outperforms my development server in clock speed, memory and power consumption.
Now I'm not saying I'm humble or meek or anything but seriously... G80 IS THE NUMBER OF THE BEAST!!!!11!!1
Even if you underclocked this thing you'd have enough performance to load two copies of Half Life 2 at once and still have enough memory left over to play Solitaire!
I'll subscribe to Slashdot when I see a month without a dupe, a typo, or an article the "editors" didn't read.
But will it run Neverwinter Nights 2 above 20 FPS? ;)
Shouldn't they implement something like SpeedStep, but for the GPU? It would be killer to have one of these if they only drew minimal power when not using them for anything other than XGL or AeroGlass.
Dvorak on Doomtech
Video cards are getting absurd, but this really ties it up. At over 300watts and this size, I've officially built a desktop gaming PC that's smaller and uses less power than this card alone.. and that was only 3 years ago! There's so many parallel, custom instruction set processors on this it's truly a rendering farm stuffed onto one piece of silicon. I can't decide whether that's irresponsible or appropriate, but I do know no system I've built would even fit this card, let alone power it, let alone be tolerable sitting next to me (vacuum cleaner anyone?). I'll wait for the single slot edition, thanks... .
I think i just creamed my little white panties.
My computer has only 512mb ram(with 32mb shared for video).
I know it's unfashionable to pile on Sony anymore, but for the PS2 and XBox there was a 3-6 month window before PC graphics caught up. I do believe that is what drove some of the early adapters, that something so powerful wasn't available in any other form.
The Nvidia card that is said to be equivalent to the one in the PS3 is the 7900, which was launched in March.
The PS3 has been delayed so much that they are now launching AFTER the graphics card that they are equivalent to has been superseded. That's not a good thing when you're selling your console at a premium.
I'm a great nvidia fan, I think they do great things. I can only hope that a heatpipe version comes along aswell as the hairdrier version.
800 Pixels, Manchester creative web design
I think a good question to ask is why there's an open source Radeon 9800 driver that can run Doom 3 despite ATi not providing any specs, yet the open nv driver can barely run xcompmgr on a 7800GTX.
Radeon X1950 XTX
Idle: 184
Load: 308
GeForce 8800GTX
Idle: 229
Load: 321
Damn. 300 watts just for a single video card. And now read this part:
Having two SLI bridge connectors onboard may possibly allow users to equip systems with three G80 GeForce 8800 series graphics cards. With two SLI bridge connectors, three cards can be connected without any troubles.
One full megawatt just for running your video cards. It requires two slots and two power connectors.
My 6600gt already uses a power connector, which i found scary when i bought.
I want a video card that:
-Powers up from its slot instead from the power supply
-Plays current generation games fine at 1024x768.
Is this too much to ask?
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Now I can play Deus Ex: Invisible War at ~50 FPS...
Said the anonymous coward who thinks that he knows my hardware setup without my even telling him. I like how you just psychically KNOW that I must not know what I'm talking about based on your meager, barely interesting little experience with your own crappy card.
I have a GeForce4 Ti 4200 overclocked almost to 4600 speeds. I've had it for a long time. I've been able to run most games at 1024 x 768 resolution with medium graphics settings for years and years now. So what's the problem? The version of hardware pixel shaders that it supports. If you think I'm somehow mistaken (which I doubt, since you're just the type to blurt out things that make no damn sense without any care as to facts), then why don't you waste time researching the card yourself? Or better yet, just trust me when I tell you that I installed the latest Vista beta and the card would not work with Aero. And yes, I spent lot of time on google determining why and if there is a workaround. I even looked into ways of flashing the rom on the card to trick it into supporting a higher version of shaders. I'm so far ahead of you on this, and on probably every other single aspect of life, that it's not even funny. Moe-ron.
You're quite right about the 30 to 60 FPS jump.
However, those numbers are for maxed-out graphics - in reality you'd be playing with the textures and either the resolution or the anti-aliasing turned down a notch. Going from 4xAA to 2xAA might put the game near 60 FPS by itself - and this isn't a noticable effect when playing a game unless you're looking for it very carefully.
Will Quake 4 gamers notice that? I'd imagine that most won't. I certainly wouldn't, my monitor only does 1152*864.
This card is for people with big monitors that they insist on running at high resolution when playing the latest games on maximum graphics settings, and upgrade-phobics who want it to be useful for as long as possible. If I had a Cinema Display I'd get one...
So who cares then? Oh, yeah -- you do:
Moderate this up if you have the moral fiber and intestinal fortitude to show something worth-while about this pathetic breach of confidentiality.
Pathetic indeed.
everything in moderation
What games actually need this kind of power to run? And at what point does realism start detracting from the enjoyment of the gameplay? What I mean is, two games that I have played before (World of Warcraft, UT2004) are fun precisely because they are so cartoonish. And finally, what kind of power supply could even hope to run two of these doing SLI?
Point well taken, but let me expand on that. Above 60 FPS and you MAY start to notice, but not like you think. In a close fire fight (lots of moving around and lots of bullets flying) high frame rates will actually cause the action to slow down or become choppy. Limiting the FPS to 120 enables a much smoother game. Gamers who say they are getting 300+ FPS are noobs in my book. Having that high a frame rate does not really buy you anything. Now, I'm sure someone is going to come along and dispute this and that's okay. That's part of what /. is all about. From my experience over the past 4 years of playing high end graphics games, between 60 and 120 FPS is optimal.