9800 GTX revealed photos/specs and it looks garbage

i see it as the 9600GT *64 pipelines* is "close" to a 8800GT *112 pipelines* now the 9800GTX is "suppose" to have *128 pipelines* so this thing i going to be pretty much "in theory" 2 8800GT's in SLI or GTS's even

 

assuming this acurate i see absolutly no reason for me to....upgrade? :3eyes:

 

XeonX2: uuh.... there are more widescreen resolutions than just 1680x1050 (which i play at, and quite well), 1920x1200, and 2560x1600. think you're forgetting about ones that go lower.... such as maybe 1440x900. And how do you expect that they'd be able to release a card in a 1-year span that offers what.... a 5x higher average framerate than what we have now? did ANY video card released EVER offer that huge of a performance increase? i don't remember any. and if they did, it probably sure as hell wasn't for a game focused on looking better with age, not worse like most games that have been released in the past couple years.

 

so hmph 9800gtx looks slower then the 8800 gts yeah that must be right!

 

wait.... not exactly sure about this.... but wouldn't the 9800GTX support DirectX 10.1?

 

well 1st i din't mention any res i only said ws and in a 1 year timeline they already release a dozen 8 series cards unless you my friend are blind enough to not notice that. Other then adding more shader units they are increasing the clocks instead. and yes there were releases with huge performance increase. like the 7 series to the 8 series... im sure those who READ will know that.

 

tbh i think 9800gtx will have more shaders higher clocks all around and done in 55nm when compared to current best :| else its gonna suck. and really it looks like 8800 gt in some screenshots yes even worse then 8800gts tho it is a good card but 9800gtx shouldn't be slower or at same speed it should be faster else its a no go really.

 

hmm, something isnt right here, how can it be slower than a mid/high card from the previous generation.

either something isnt right with those specs or nvidia is planning something with the drivers.

if it really is the same spec as displayed, there is NO way it can be faster than a GTS unless they do something with the drivers to make it faster.

not impressed with the new generation at all.

8800gs-----> 9600gt, i cannot see the point in the 9600gt existing, its almost the same price and performance as the 8800gs, only the GS overclocks much higher and also has a larger ram option.

-EDIT-

on a side note there is only so much you can do with this chipset, they have shrunk it, added and taken away bandwith,shaders and ram and ran it at different speeds.
and lets be honest there is never a huge performance difference between all of them.

i guess nvidia cant do any better any more, maybe they will end up like 3dfx?

 

It's not slower than a gts, the gtx is rumoured to run at 675/1688/2200 and the gts 512 runs 650/1625/1600 at stock. On top of that the gtx will apparently use 0.8ns memory, should be good up to around 2400mhz.

 

I want to be the first one to say , the card's going to kick butt...
While we've got most of every one suggesting it's going to be as slow as the GTS...lol

Quite posting photoshopped fakes....eRRRrr

It's simple , just scale performance in accordance to the 9600GT's increase..
Which is quite impressive , if u'd ask me..

Plus I dont believe the " GX2 being 30% faster then an Ultra" story....

 

But the 9600gt uses the g94, 9800gtx is still on g92. A g92 with higher clocks is still limited by its architecture, I don't know what nvidia did to make the g94 so impressive but if the g92 in the gtx is unchanged then I'm not holding my hopes up.

And the extra mhz on the memory is surely negated by the memory bus

 

If this is true I'll be blaming AMD/ATi almost as much as Nvidia. But I don't think it's true. It can't be. It can't...

 

why blame ATI. Nvidia is the one that decided the 9 series will be just a few die shrinks with some higher clocks and maybe a few optimizations. where as ATI is RV770 which is suppose to have a 50% increase in performance. from my view it just looks like Nvidia want to ween the 8 series abit more by giving it a die shrink and rebadging it as a new series.

 

Because if ATi had a real high end card out that could hold its own against the 8800ultra then Nvidia would have had no choice but to make a significant improvement over the current series. As it stands Nvidia know that ATi can't compete so they don't need to do anything innovative. The stench of monopoly in the air.

 

:stewpid::banana:

 

ATI cant hold its own against an ultra hey ever heard of a 3870x2.

 

9800 GTX 3dmark 06 score

 

Anyone who believes any of this fabricated horse **** is delusional.

Any bets that the official specs of the new card dont mirror these in the slightest?

 

as i had said before... don't remember if it was in this thread or another one..... wouldn't the 9800GTX support DX10.1, whereas those screens of GPU-Z show that DX10.0 is supported?

easy2007: the 3870 X2 barely holds it's own against the 8800 Ultra. even the GTX has comparable performance to the 3870 X2.

 

elementaldragon: sorry but i have to say did we even read the same review. because from what i can see from the review on Guru3D the 3870x2 is faster than a 8800GTX in every test and most of time as fast as a 8800ultra except for in a few cases where it loses by 2/3 fps.