GeForce 9900 GTX & GTS Slated For July Launch

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

05-02-2008, 11:43 AM
Natalia

Quote:

Originally Posted by NH|Delph1

Well, I would say that the reason they have 1.5 million 8600GT's is because they suck and no one in the right mind buys them ;)

//Andreas

Heh... I bought one to run my second monitor :p:
05-02-2008, 03:08 PM
shiznit93

Quote:

Originally Posted by Natalia

Heh... I bought one to run my second monitor :p:

SLI can't run 2 monitors? My 8800GT runs my dual monitors just fine.
05-02-2008, 03:56 PM
w0mbat

I think Nvidia would be stupide if they really name G100 the GF9900 series.
05-02-2008, 08:52 PM
MAS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barys

Some promising rumours from Asia :) Some guy from PCInlife Forum has said that GT200 is GF9900 series and it is singlecore GPU. It has 512-bit memory bus and 32 ROPs but unknown number of SPs yet. 550-600W PSU recommended to run this monster :( It probably won`t have DX10.1 support but only DX10.
But the most important thing is about it`s performance which is supposed to be muuuuuch greater than GF8800GTX/GF9800GTX and even GF9800GX2. He has said that GF9900GTX in SLI mode runs Crysis smoothly in 2560x1600 4xAA and Very High details!!
Single card should allow to play Crysis in 1920x1200,Very high details and 4xAA!!!!

Only i can say is if it`s true it is a so much powerful GPU and maybe even more powerful than G80 when was released 1,5 years ago.

PS. I hope these info is true. :)

PS2. These info is from "Phk" who is reliable source. (at least he was right about G80 and G9x specs)

if so, 4870 ought to be significiently more powerful than the third radeon generation, and the results are not incredible
05-03-2008, 12:08 AM
NH|Delph1

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAS

if so, 4870 ought to be significiently more powerful than the third radeon generation, and the results are not incredible

Don't trust those charts.

//Andreas
05-03-2008, 12:24 AM
Macadamia

And I don't trust PHK either.
He's blatantly known for twisting G80 vs R600 results, sucking up to mods, and more BS.

Aka don't trust fanboys. ;)
05-03-2008, 12:34 AM
fcry64

what is the 4870 anyway? no changes in arch apart from the bridge that would share mem?
05-03-2008, 12:50 AM
Macadamia

Quote:

Originally Posted by fcry64

what is the 4870 anyway? no changes in arch apart from the bridge that would share mem?

I wouldn't count on shared ram; it seems quite probable though that RV770 has an internal PCIe "bridge" that bifurbicates lanes, and has the connector onboard.

I'm counting on a lot more SPs since that's the way the original Radeon R600 architecture should have gone. The shaders are extremely small and you can pack quite a number without increasing much size.

Still, this is the GT200 thread so I wouldn't really talk too much. :cool:
05-03-2008, 03:39 AM
Barys

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macadamia

And I don't trust PHK either.
He's blatantly known for twisting G80 vs R600 results, sucking up to mods, and more BS.

Aka don't trust fanboys. ;)

What are you talking about? Did you read his posts about 1,5 year ago and about month before G80 was released? He gave some 3D Mark results of G80 which were unbelievable for many at first but they were true.

The same is when there were rumours about G92. He first said that G92 WON`T be a high-end part GPU but "only" performance-mainstream and it was true too.
He said a few months ago GF9800GTX will be based on G92 and he was right. The same is about G94 aka GF9600GT.

So i`dont understand why do you think what he is taling is BS.
I don`t say he is most reliable person in the world and what he says is always 100% true but i based on what he said in the past and it was true so i don`t have any reason to not believe him at all. Maybe some details will be different in GT200 when released i don`t know but there is possibility that what he has said it`s true.

PS. Once again about GT200 performance. When i have written GF9900GTX SLI runs Crysis at 2560x1600 VH det. and 4xAA smoothly i have thought there will be about 40-50 fps at least but it seems PHK was talking about 25-30fps which means it will only playable at this resolution with those cards. Too bad but it still seems to be very powerful.
05-03-2008, 05:59 AM
Macadamia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barys

What are you talking about? Did you read his posts about 1,5 year ago and about month before G80 was released? He gave some 3D Mark results of G80 which were unbelievable for many at first but they were true.

The same is when there were rumours about G92. He first said that G92 WON`T be a high-end part GPU but "only" performance-mainstream and it was true too.
He said a few months ago GF9800GTX will be based on G92 and he was right. The same is about G94 aka GF9600GT.

So i`dont understand why do you think what he is taling is BS.
I don`t say he is most reliable person in the world and what he says is always 100% true but i based on what he said in the past and it was true so i don`t have any reason to not believe him at all. Maybe some details will be different in GT200 when released i don`t know but there is possibility that what he has said it`s true.

PS. Once again about GT200 performance. When i have written GF9900GTX SLI runs Crysis at 2560x1600 VH det. and 4xAA smoothly i have thought there will be about 40-50 fps at least but it seems PHK was talking about 25-30fps which means it will only playable at this resolution with those cards. Too bad but it still seems to be very powerful.

Everyone can repeat truths. G92 and G94 were squarely predictable (the duh kind). G80 was available for developers before so it's fairly easy to get an approximation.

When everyone is aiming at that ballpark in performance, everyone's basically gotta be right. :ROTF: If we go by classic nVidia, GT200 should not be 9900. 9900 should be G92b (55nm) "refreshes" to bump up clocks and all. G92b is a very expandable asset, if RV770 comes too fast then they'll release GT200 and probably steer away the hype. :)

It does kinda pester me that Crysis 2560 4x needs 2 cards for just 30fps, given that I was personally giving 1 GT200 the expectation of 1920 4x. (It's one GT200 or 2 RV770, no hotter than that for me)
05-03-2008, 06:18 AM
Barys

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macadamia

Everyone can repeat truths. G92 and G94 were squarely predictable (the duh kind). G80 was available for developers before so it's fairly easy to get an approximation.

When everyone is aiming at that ballpark in performance, everyone's basically gotta be right. :ROTF: If we go by classic nVidia, GT200 should not be 9900. 9900 should be G92b (55nm) "refreshes" to bump up clocks and all. G92b is a very expandable asset, if RV770 comes too fast then they'll release GT200 and probably steer away the hype. :)

It does kinda pester me that Crysis 2560 4x needs 2 cards for just 30fps, given that I was personally giving 1 GT200 the expectation of 1920 4x. (It's one GT200 or 2 RV770, no hotter than that for me)

Well any proof on that?

You are saying everyone can repeat the truth. So maybe he is doing this at present with GT200?
You are saying G80 was available fo developers. OK but GT200 could be available too. It`s about 2 months when it will be launched so don`t you think most of developers have had them already?:)
05-03-2008, 06:24 AM
BenchZowner

Barys... you're taking this too seriously man.
Relax, knowing or not means nothing, until you can lay your hands on the product yourself.
05-03-2008, 06:35 AM
Barys

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

Barys... you're taking this too seriously man.
Relax, knowing or not means nothing, until you can lay your hands on the product yourself.

OK i know what you are talking about but i just want to say you can`t say if this or that info is 100% true or not. :) I don`t say PHKs info is 100% but he is reliable source (as i say G80&G92 threads on his forum). You have said some intresting info too and some parts of them are the same with PHKs info.
It is still only rumour mill even, as you`ve said, we won`t see any official benchmarks.:)
05-03-2008, 08:41 AM
Leeghoofd

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macadamia

It does kinda pester me that Crysis 2560 4x needs 2 cards for just 30fps, given that I was personally giving 1 GT200 the expectation of 1920 4x. (It's one GT200 or 2 RV770, no hotter than that for me)

Don't blame the cards , blame crappy coders at work...but I'm looking forward to ATI's release and see how the green team will respond... maybe it's finally getting time to upgrade that 8800GTX...
05-05-2008, 12:05 PM
whocaresbg

GeForce 9900 GTX (GT200) specs leaked :

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=271801
05-05-2008, 12:35 PM
Barys

Quote:

Originally Posted by whocaresbg

GeForce 9900 GTX (GT200) specs leaked :

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=271801

Well, if we take a look at the specs we see the aren`t impressive at all:( Moreover they are much different than BenchZowners specs.

If these are true i wonder how this card in SLI could run Crysis smoothly in 2560x1600 with VH details and AA4x enbaled? About 50% better specs give 100% or more pefrormance increase? It`s not possible imho if GT200 is nothing more but G80/G92 with 512-bit MC, 32ROPs and more SPs. To get such a big performance hit GT200 has to have some major architectural changes over it`s predecessors.
05-05-2008, 12:53 PM
Beefy22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barys

Well, if we take a look at the specs we see the aren`t impressive at all:( Moreover they are much different than BenchZowners specs.

If these are true i wonder how this card in SLI could run Crysis smoothly in 2560x1600 with VH details and AA4x enbaled? About 50% better specs give 100% or more pefrormance increase? It`s not possible imho if GT200 is nothing more but G80/G92 with 512-bit MC, 32ROPs and more SPs. To get such a big performance hit GT200 has to have some major architectural changes over it`s predecessors.

How are the specs only 50% better?

Double the ROPs, double the memory bus width, and +50% SP... Also, considering the negligible performance delta between the 112SP and 128SP G92s it safe to assume SPs weren't the source of the G92's bottleneck. So perhaps a near doubling of performance isn't too far fetched?
05-05-2008, 01:18 PM
Barys

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beefy22

How are the specs only 50% better?

Double the ROPs, double the memory bus width, and +50% SP... Also, considering the negligible performance delta between the 112SP and 128SP G92s it safe to assume SPs weren't the source of the G92's bottleneck. So perhaps a near doubling of performance isn't too far fetched?

OK but you compare G92 to GT200 but if you take G80 specs against these rumoured GT200 specs then there is no big difference but another thing is that NVIDIA could do some major architectural improvements (shader performance increase like NV40-->G7x etc.) and it could bring such a big performance improvements.:)
05-05-2008, 01:40 PM
Psykocyber

240W !??!?!
Think I will just buy a ATI card (if they perform) or wait for the die shrink.

And wouldn't GDDR3 be kind of surprising?

I dont really thrust this...
05-05-2008, 01:43 PM
Frank M

Quote:

Originally Posted by whocaresbg

GeForce 9900 GTX (GT200) specs leaked :

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=271801

This ain't GT200, it's GG184bb o.0 :D
2×G92b in MCM? I'd rather call this speculation than specification...
05-05-2008, 05:20 PM
ToTTenTranz

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiznit93

SLI can't run 2 monitors? My 8800GT runs my dual monitors just fine.

Your #single# 8800GT supports dual monitors, the problem is when SLI is enabled.

SLI doesn't support multi-monitor in gaming mode.
Even a single 9800GX2 will automatically disable the secondary monitor when playing games.
05-05-2008, 09:13 PM
grimREEFER

the card is literally faster than we can imagine if that crysis bench is correct.
im guessing its fake though unfortunately.
05-06-2008, 09:24 AM
shiznit93

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz

Your #single# 8800GT supports dual monitors, the problem is when SLI is enabled.

SLI doesn't support multi-monitor in gaming mode.
Even a single 9800GX2 will automatically disable the secondary monitor when playing games.

:eek:
05-08-2008, 06:58 AM
largon

Quote:

Originally Posted on VR-Zone http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...s/viewpost.gif
330-350mm2 die size

So it would be the same size as G92? Doesn't seem likely when we look at the figures for ROPs and SPs.

Frank M,
VR-Zone doesn't claim it's MCM, infact they say the exact opposite.
05-08-2008, 07:28 AM
mascaras

Quote:

Updated specs

65nm process
MC 512
1GB GDDR3
240 SP
32 ROP
6+8Pin

Seems like GT200 got two versions. One is 65nm and the other is 55nm.

Probably 65nm is for first wave of GT200 cards and 55nm is for later batches.

http://we.pcinlife.com/thread-929091-1-1.html

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showpost.p...3&postcount=33

regards

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page