Either way it looks to be a complete piece of crap. CAN BE 30-50% faster, that just isnt acceptable in my book. Either they call this the 8800GX2 or they can get screwed because its not next gen so doesnt deserve the 9 series name
Printable View
Either way it looks to be a complete piece of crap. CAN BE 30-50% faster, that just isnt acceptable in my book. Either they call this the 8800GX2 or they can get screwed because its not next gen so doesnt deserve the 9 series name
HD3870X2 4tw!
I am aware that a GPU core is made up of many cores.
I would like to see 2 of the cores that are made up many cores on one card.
How hard could it be to take 1GB of memory, and 2 of the already existing compilation of cores side by side?
:P
It would be a flagship card for sure.
But, how much of the market is Xtreme users like us?
So that thingy is supposed to outperform the ultra and still costs 450 bucks ,,, will we see a 400$ Ultra before the 9800 release
fake, i doubt nvidia would bother with a POS like this.
with the pcie conclusion, this has got to be fake...
how can the asian sites not get pics before [H]?
I don't get it... even 2 gts g92 cards should defeat an ultra.
How about 2 ultras in sli vs this card?
2 people beating up one person is not a fair fight ;)
You can guarantee 2 Ultras in SLI will destory this card. You can also pretty much guarantee that the Quad SLI drivers for this card will be absolute crap so these SLI'd wont beat the Ultras in SLI
So the performance of this in SLI will still be limited in XP? The DX9 limitations of the old GX2 series couldn't be overcome in XP. You will need to switch to Vista's DX9 to get some benefit out of 2 of these.
Where is this product supposed to shine if you already have an SLI capable board? Why would you get this over 2 faster discrete cards?
On a side note, is the renewed interest in Quad and Tri setups and driver optimizations going to make the 7950GX2 a sought-after card again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightCrawler™
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
You folk better measure it up...Quote:
Originally Posted by bluep3ace
The dimensions of the bracket and card PCB match perfectly and are comparable to any a PCIe VGA.
Attachment 70090
yeah that'd be an amazingly elaborate fake. these are real people.
Does anyone in the Uk know how much the old 7950GX2 blocks cost when they were released ?
I want to watercool my next highend card and as crap as this one is going to be it looks like i have no option because my GTO is not going to last much longer.
People Please Note they do not have 2 SLi Connectors, So they can't be In tri-SLi (Octa-Sli)
Octa? 3 * 2 = 6 right? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboy
surely octa is for 8.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
He was referring to Warboy's comment
Quote:
People Please Note they do not have 2 SLi Connectors, So they can't be In tri-SLi (Octa-Sli)
....Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
There is No Post....You see nothing....Move along....
hexa :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboy
I agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by DamienKC
This is really crap.Why is Nvidia using the name ''9800GX2'' instead of 8900GX2 or something like that?
This card will be using the G92-400-A2 core.Same modified core of 8800GT/S.
And the 9800GTX will replace the 8800GTX and is just a 65nm die shrink.
The only new thing is that it has HDMI,no more...
Why do they announce it like next generation?
i thought hex was 5?Quote:
Originally Posted by Empty_Quarter
Penta is 5 as in penta-gon
Fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Hexa-SLi.... Ouch....
"YOUR RUNNING HEX?"
"Yea I run Hexs."
Tri SLIQuote:
Originally Posted by Scubar
3x 9800GX2 = 6x 8800GTS 512MB = Holy Crap.... CRYSIS = :owned:
:slobber: :slobber: :slobber:
I already covered these, It can't support Tri-Sli / Hexa-SliQuote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22
Since it only has one connector.
Then write nvidia letters.... :mad: :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboy
Dude, its already going to be Quad-Sli if you have it in Normal SLi physical setup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22
Why are you complaining.
y eye... You need to stop trolling.
Your post is pointless and has no bearing on the thread other than to start up crap.
This is your only warning.
IFMU
Man have you ever been at school? Have you ever seen your Pentagon? :rofl: :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboy
If he has, he'd know it has 5 sides. Not 6.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
He was probably thinking of "tetra-" when he said "petra". Tetra- is a prefix for 4 (from Greek).
Seriously, here there are some young guys, but that's a bit... mmm too much for me :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
12 is Dodexa.... ? LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Cant wait for Dodeca-SLi.... :D
I know, but I was just taking wild guesses.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
>.> I don't know anything past Quad...Reason, Below.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I didn't play with the blocks all day and never took the time to act the teacher what is it called past Quad. or Square :rofl: I was to busy playing with the Old school IBMs. Or the Lisa IIs.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Anyways, On a Serious note, Not cool to sig me for not knowing anything of the # for things. such as Octa, Pentra, tetra and such.
Yeah, seriously.... dont sig him for that, been a long time since geometry.... :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboy
im thinking of step up to 2 x GTS G92 SLI, then wait for G100 GeForce 10800 GTX lol or w/e it will be called
R680 is just like this anyway .... quad SLI, quad fire performance will vary, and hopefully they can get good drivers out .... but after seeing how well the 7950GX2 SLI performs compare to just a single GX2... im not counting on it ...
really debating on whether i should just get two of R680/9800GX2, or 2 of G100 (if i can wait that long ..) ... since R700 is not comin this year?? or is it??
I'm debating too, I got the money easy if its only under 500 bucks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
Thread cleaned....not sure what that was, but those weren't the first posts of that type from "y eye". Shouldn't be a problem any more.
You can get two 512mb gt's here in Can for $239cad each so may as well just get two of those. We are assuming this will be slower then two gt's of course tho correct? I guess for a single 16xpcie slot board though this is the solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warboy
I am a little disappointed they called it the 9800gx2 however, meaning the whole 9x00 series will just more revamped 8x00s?:confused: :shakes:
Thanks Vapor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Its not a performance problem, Remember 2.0 has alot more bandwidth then 1.1, So I don't think we have to worry about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sneil
Also, I think its a different core, if you look the cores on the 8800GT, and the 8800 GTS 512mb.
They are G92, but have a Different Sub-Number.
Well can you blame them (as a business). . Why do they need to release anything new whilst their cards are still on top?Quote:
Originally Posted by ..::ABSOLUT::..
This sucks we need ATI to get into its game or we need to devise an evil scheme to get one of the forumers as the new Nvidia CEO.
As with everyone i'm not too excited about this card. Sure it's good, and *hopefully* SLi will get some meaningful work driver wise. For me though i'm a single card user, hence not that excited about this.
That sounds like a good plan :D, I'm in......:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by takamishanoku
i dun't know if anyone's seen this but tom's hardware got an exclusive with the card:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/...force_9800gx2/
Not that pretty lookin...
but its going to be pretty cheap, $450.
Probably a MSRP of $450, so street prices will be +$500.Quote:
Originally Posted by twin_savage
HD3870x2 is suppose to have a MSRP of under $400, so hopefully that will have a street price of ~$400.
I think 6 = hexa?
hmm
Any tests yet..? Must have one of those for benching...
it doesn't actually look that bad to be fair.
and for those still debating sides;
Quote:
A geometrical figure with three or more sides is called a polygon or a polyhedron. Here are the names for some polygons.
3 triangle, trigon
4 quadrilateral, tetragon
5 pentagon
6 hexagon
7 heptagon
8 octagon
9 nonagon, enneagon
10 decagon
11 hendecagon
12 dodecagon, duodecagon
13 triskaidecagon, tridecagon
14 tetrakaidecagon, tetradecagon
15 pentadecagon
16 hexadecagon
17 heptadecagon
18 octadecagon
19 enneadecagon
20 icosagon
I want to see one of these without the shroud, are there any pictures like this?
There sure is a certain desire for nude and naked here :D :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewbenator
Single bigger dice can be more complex than making multiple smaller die. Also, yields of many smaller die tend to be higher than complex large die. Occam's razor really.Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekFSE
thats wot i think; but i know who will disagree >:0Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
or else they just making more use for what they already have in production :p:
Oh so this will be theyr quad-sli -.-
Well its just 2 x G92 GTS in 1 card, they should release G100 instead of this crap.
I hope it's more than just "2 x G92's" -- my problem with all the AA at super high resolutions, is that it's sometimes just a texture fillrate benchmark. Take a look at some of the benchmarks here (the Sapphire active cooling method is a good read, too):
http://www.elitebastards.com/cms/ind...1&limitstart=4
/rambling begin/
Nvidia is a fill-rate monster, but not necessarily the best at shader/ALU ops. While I'm digging some of the newer games out there (BioShock, CoD4, and Crysis), they seem to be more focused on AA+hires than more realistic physics, AI, gameplay, and visual effects -- although CoD4 is one of the best shooters I've played in a long time. I'm pretty content playing at 1680x1050 =)
We're in the 1st generation of DX10 games; game makers are still trying to figure out how to "do it fast" -- the game makers can't keep up with the evolving hardware =) we've had multi-core machines for years, and developers are still trying to "do it right" cpu side.
/rambling end/
Why only 30% performance increase? Possibly due to Ahmdal's law (google it), but I'm still not sure what benchmark they are using -- 30% faster in fill-rate, shader, or ALU ops?
What I want from the graphics cards is more performance with similar/lower power consumption, heat, and footprint -- is that too much to ask? =P
XFX offering I think.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/...force_9800gx2/