But Wait, There's More NVIDIA G92 for 2007 (8800GTS 128SP)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DerekFSE

I wonder if they are having yeild issues, and that is why we arent seeing a GTS or GTX.

---

Could be, or it may be that they don't feel a need to release something more powerful than the GTX. AMD has nothing to offer that will beat the GTX. With no pressure from AMD, Nvidia can sit happy with its high-priced offerings.

I think its yield issues

While retailers sold out on 8800GT's quite quick, its unknown how many were sold exactly (some stores had < 30 or so apparently) and on a new process, the first batches are always hard to have (not to mention that pushing up a release 2 weeks isn't a good way to ensure good batches). But it goes in line with the thinking that new die processes start off w/ a mid-range priced card - that way if :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: hits the fan, it won't be on the flaghship

If they called it 8850 no one would buy their stock of 8800 cards. Confuse the buyer = more profit. Hence Intel, Asus, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vapor

Actually, G92 doesn't have DX10.1 support. It's basically a die shrink with the better video decoder from the 8600 series, a few architectural changes, and a 'weaker' memory controller. Basically, a small, low cost, low power, tweaked G80 with the best video decoder nV has.

Still clocks well enough to mostly outperform G80 though :)

Very nice post zerazax.

---

I think the PV3 in the 8800GT is the next step up from the 8600's version as it now does full VC-1 acceleration.

The new 8800GTS would outperform the old GTX if it was 128SP 575+/1650+/2000+. I however am expecting it to have slightly higher vGPU and clocks of 650-700 as stock (725-800 Vendor OC cards). nVidia would probably price it at $300-399, if closer to $300 there might be a slight drop in the 8800GT 512MB prices.

Of course the big question would be if it keeps to 16 ROP's as the 256bit suggests.


Some retailers in the UK had upwards of 150+ (50 of several models).

What I'm really wondering is what's going on right now in the mind of nv's ceo. Either he must have some crazy product up his sleeve, or a crazy scheme, because creating midrange cards that demolish your performance cards for less $$$ just doesn't seem to be the best business tactic.

just a thought

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zerazax

Here's what I think might happen:

We all know that G92 usually has 128SP's, but that 1 of the 8 are de-activated / laser-etched out. Thus, we know that G92 can support 128SP's. It makes little sense for Nvidia to sit around disabling cores that could be at their full potential. Hence, we might see a GTS version with 128SP's (what they really need to do is rename 8800GT to 8900GT, and name the 128SP GTS to 8900GTS). Then we have GTS > GT again.

Afterwards, Nvidia can combine two GT's together and make a new GX2 as they did before. Then marketing can have a field day with the 1GB (2 x 512MB), 224 SP's, etc. Lets just hope its drivers don't suck like the GX2's ended up being.

Or, IIRC, the G80 was touted as having the capability of reaching 160SP's but thermals, cost, and power could not work on the 90nm process. With 65nm, they might see if they can expand the G92 to 160 SP's with new revisions and increase shader clocks as well, and make a new GTX/Ultra. Then we'd be back at GTX>GTS>GT. If you use how Nvidia calculates flops, a GTX with 160 SP's at 2000 Shader Clock is ~1TFp (3 x 160 x 2000 as they calculate it) and voila, you have that magic 1TFp card of ancient lore everyone talks about.

And that way you can release those new high ends at early next year once work is done with them and sway the crowd over until the real new generation architecture (9-series) gets released sometime halfway next year.

A big reason why the 8-series architecture has lived so long with minimal changes is simple: the G80 is one of the most advanced and best designed cores ever made in video card history. Why abandon something so quickly that has been a winner? 9-series work is undoutedly already well under way, but if there is no rush to get that one out, keep working with what you have.

---

I don't know if there'll be another GX2, I believe the GX2 was more of a desperation move since they were losing against ATi at the time and had to release something for marketing superiority. IE: "we have the fastest single slot solution!"

As for the names, yes it's confusing, but remember how so many of us complained when they were coming out with "GS, GT, GTS, GTX" segment lines, I thought it was insane that they gave us that many choices and segments/niches. But now, said and done, I kind of like it, and I kind of understand their reasoning.

Usually...but not always... they seem to release two top contenders(say.. GTS/GTX), then they release a respin say the GT, then one more last respin that adds value to the product line: GS.

So starts to make some sense now, as chaotic as it is, it's all released in time revisions, but it's extremely confusing to people who try to buy a GPU after all lines have been released and they're out of the loop, one might say, "where do I begin?? Which is better than the other?!?!"

if they already making much dough then there is no incentive to create new products in the high end bracket
just think how much $$ they'll make from 8800gt ....lots.

how much is made in the 100-230usd price bracket?
vs this niche bracket of 230-300 [8800gt]
then 300+ high end cards. supposed g92 8800gts, etal.

nvidia have jumped the gun on ati's new niche offering.
just like intel has filled lower cost/budget cpu levels(+high end)
competition only serves to strengthen the monopoloy of intel and nvidia :doh:
and yet amd/ati does provide an alternative in the gcard world when priced in the right bracket.
there's more money in the sub-high end than in the high end....so what incentive is there to produce a new high end:shrug:

the upgrade market in the sub high end price bracket should be huge...if the performance features are there.

so bulk of market is 100-300usd...what products can they squeeze into that bracket?

300-400 /400-500 /500+?

im just curious about sales figures in all the brackets and where the no of units/and total value of sales distribution is spread:yawn:
is it a bell curve?

this new g92 gts could easily wipe out even more ati sales...particularly as the 2900xt hovers around the 400+usd mark.

if sales are satisfactory without upgrade market then there is no need for high end advances....just fill in sub-high-end niches to capitalise on what tech they got already.

and when will new monster be? 3months or a year away or in between or never?

I really don't understand why there's so much confusion. It's as simple as:

8800GTS 320/640 = old GPU (G80)

8800GTS 512/1GB = refreshed GPU (G92)

Though, I do agree, naming the refreshed GPU "8900GTS" might have prevented Joe-6-pack from getting confused, but with us XS'ers there's no need. :up:

This is starting to make a little sense to me now. Nvidia wants to phase out the more expensive to make 90nm cards, which is why they didn't call it 8900GT, no one would buy the remaining g80s. A little sly but as a shareholder I can't object. 8800GT is obviously the g92 with 112sp and the new GTS will be the full g92 with 128sp, the g80 GTS and GTX will be discontinued while the great 8800 brand is retained as the midrange, cheaper to produce at 65nm with 256bit memory bus. This is where the real money is made.

Then I think Nvidia will release a NEW substantially more powerful GPU core with more shader units and hopefully dx 10.1. The lower yield version will be the 8900GTX with some units disabled around $450-500, and the full yield version will be the 8900Ultra around $550-600 . Ultra is good brand and deserves to be more than just overclocked GTX. The whole range from mid to top high end will be covered, there will be a clear distinction between the 8800 mid level and 8900 high end. They will be able to spread yields for both G92 and the G9X, and their partners will be able to offer superclocked versions of each model. It just better happen during my step up period :), my 8800gt should ship this week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shiznit93

This is starting to make a little sense to me now. Nvidia wants to phase out the more expensive to make 90nm cards, which is why they didn't call it 8900GT, no one would buy the remaining g80s. A little sly but as a shareholder I can't object. 8800GT is obviously the g92 with 112sp and the new GTS will be the full g92 with 128sp, the g80 GTS and GTX will be discontinued while the great 8800 brand is retained as the midrange, cheaper to produce at 65nm with 256bit memory bus. This is where the real money is made.

---

ya, makes good sense - just wondered why they didnt announce the two G92-"upgrades" simultaneously..

yeilds makes sense...they released the card they knew the gpu's could hit with decent yeilds, all the time binning for the higher-performance cards...once stock of the gpu's has built up enough, they'll have a release.

Anyone else feel a G92, 8800GS, coming with 96SPs?

BTW- Adam, yes it is a pretty much a bell curve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xenolith

I really don't understand why there's so much confusion. It's as simple as:

8800GTS 320/640 = old GPU (G80)

8800GTS 512/1GB = refreshed GPU (G92)

Though, I do agree, naming the refreshed GPU "8900GTS" might have prevented Joe-6-pack from getting confused, but with us XS'ers there's no need. :up:

---

My thoughts exactly. It really isn't that hard at all to differentiate the new cards when looking at the vram. Every man and his dog should be able to see 320 and 512 are different. Five minutes of reading will tell you which card is superior. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zerazax

Here's what I think might happen:

Or, IIRC, the G80 was touted as having the capability of reaching 160SP's but thermals, cost, and power could not work on the 90nm process. With 65nm, they might see if they can expand the G92 to 160 SP's with new revisions and increase shader clocks as well, and make a new GTX/Ultra. Then we'd be back at GTX>GTS>GT. If you use how Nvidia calculates flops, a GTX with 160 SP's at 2000 Shader Clock is ~1TFp (3 x 160 x 2000 as they calculate it) and voila, you have that magic 1TFp card of ancient lore everyone talks about.

---

Mmm, it's quite possible the next generation will have 192 SP and 2400Mhz Shader clocks. :up:

G92 8800GTS 512 / 3 December
128 SP
Core Clock 650MHz
SHader P. Clock 1625MHz
256bit
Memory Clock GDDR3 970MHz（1940MHz）
TDP 140W
Price ~ 299-349$

Maybe we are waiting for a new ULTRA @ G92 at January

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoriLLakoS

G92 8800GTS 512 / 3 December
128 SP
Core Clock 650MHz
SHader P. Clock 1625MHz
256bit
Memory Clock GDDR3 970MHz（1940MHz）
TDP 140W
Price ~ 299-349$

Maybe we are waiting for a new ULTRA @ G92 at January

---

new gts will have also with 24 rops and 32 TMU;)

Are anywhere some test new 8800GTS 128SP or compare with another GPU ?
Can`t find