Official Reviews here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=142904
Syn
Printable View
Official Reviews here: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=142904
Syn
Aren't various overclocked editions of the GTX faster than the Ultra by default?
So it's just an overclocked 8800GTX? Not all that impressive. Should be good for a few more FPS. Why not save money and just overclock an 8800GTX yourself, unless the Ultra has something special to give it alot more overclocking headroom.
Just higher bin probably.
That, and perhaps the addition of the HD video processing silicon... Since the mid-range cards now have the capability, I was wondering if that was going to be added to the top of the line at some point, and this might be where they introduce it.
If they indeed end up selling it at $999 with a simple overclock, it better cook me dinner and wash my dishes as give me great frames, because that is just a ludicrous amount of cash for something that lame.
wtf, if this is true it's totally unimpressive.
but i don't get rid of the feeling that dell just refers an overclocked 8800gtx as ultra.
i can't believe this, because, as azraeldarkangel already said, there are factory-overclocked gtx's out there which are faster than this so called "ultra".
there must be more behind it. i doubt that this is the "real" "ultra".
As I said yesterday, I'm not sure this is for real... factory overclocked cards are within a tick of this already! :slap:
what happened to 160 stream processors? if it still uses the same amount it is not a great upgrade. Maybe it will be faster due to drivers or little internal tweaks
Looks like another 7800GTX 512meg.
Off topic a bit... when nVidia came out with the 7800GTX 512MB interim step last gen, how long after that was it before the 7900 series was launched?
LOL didn't they do that with the infamous 7800
Now thats pretty dissapointing if it is true .
Play the waiting game again.
like 2-4 months at most i think. it was a very short amount of time, but the 512's were still fastger, but much more expensive, nvidia couldn't meet demand with such a high bin.Quote:
Originally Posted by virtualrain
the gtx 512was a bit different too, the bin was MUCH higher and it had double the ram.
if these specs are true then that rumor of a 999 pricetag must be false. private gpu makers can bin at these speeds...perhaps the thinking is overclockers will get more out of them.
higher clocks good enough for me, anyways, better hd processing on the 8800ultra is why ive skipped the 8800gtx
i have yet to see any problems with my 8800gtx and hd vids
Well yes and no. The 7800 512mb was just higher clocked, but it had massive clock increases, so the peformance was there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
The $999 is either wrong, not US dollars, or is for a GX2.
pic looks a bit funny.
Here is where the image clip in the OP was likely grabed from...
http://www1.ca.dell.com/content/lear...n&~tab=details
Here's who started this... http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...d=623&Itemid=1
noticed how nearly all 8800GTX ceiling were below 700mhz on GPU, maybe 8800GTX Ultra sports all those GPUs that binned way higher than 700mhz on GPU ? :)
7800GTX512 was sold 117999yen ($1000) in Japan
ELSA GLADIAC 970 GTX Silent 512 GeForce 7800 GTX 512MB
http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/pcupdate/...4/news002.html
OC 8800GTX for that price ? no joking
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4727
NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0191.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX"
NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0193.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS"
NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0194.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra"
NVIDIA_G80.DEV_019E.1 = "NVIDIA Quadro FX 4600"
NVIDIA_G84.DEV_0400.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS"
NVIDIA_G84.DEV_0402.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT"
NVIDIA_G86.DEV_0421.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8500 GT"
NVIDIA_G86.DEV_0422.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS"
NVIDIA_G86.DEV_0423.1 = "NVIDIA GeForce 8300 GS"
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra 384bit 768MB GDDR3 @ 650/2160 ???
http://www.fudzilla.com/images/stori...phics/g80u.jpg
and the RAM is only 768MB
7800GTX512 doubled the RAM from the 7800GTX
"8800 Ultra" is not the 2nd "7800 GTX 512"
everyone can OC the 8800GTX to 650/1000 on air without any Vmod
no need pay for extra money
FUDZilla==the_INQ==BS
So, stop using it as news source.
IF it will be a "speed binding" Core of it and as this site claim, it will NOT be good for start.......Maybe THAT'S the reason why NVIDIA have provided these new drivers (158)!......Maybe they "gain" from the drivers or so!.....We will see.......IF it's true, ATI will crush it...... ;)
weak sauce....this is pathetic.
It doesn't deserve the label "ULTRA"... infact this should be like a "GTX KO" edition provided by EVGA at best!
I guess this is how Nvidia reacts after enjoying a brief time of monopoly,
playing it's customer's as if we were fools. It'll take some serious competition
and a reaction from the audience to force Nvidia to whoop itself back in line
and press out a good lineup that we enjoyed in the 6xxx and 7xxx series.
no.Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
So maybe Nvidia bumps the clocks a tad in anticipation of R600 so they can maintain the crown? Meanwhile its just a specification and price point that I imagine will be received coolly by their retail partners and consumers? Things will continue to be boring until R600 - which we needed 6 months ago. I like my 8800GTX but I want to play with something new. :D
This is one of the main reasons we need 3 players in the market. If there were 3 players we'd have cheaper & more varied products to choose from.Quote:
Originally Posted by turbox997
On the flip side, I speculated at 650/2200 for the Ultra so if those are the specs then I was pretty darn close (except I said GDDR4, bleh).
A real Ultra would be 750+/2400+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
Hopefully we will be able to get those ati cards going on your AW9D-Max, i noticed you have that board on the bench table again. :toast:
I think u are bs, cause u didnt read the source.Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
This card is just to make ATi show their XTX in the first place. That's it's sole purpose. They still have one big launch left this year, likely during the summer. :toast:Quote:
Originally Posted by hipro5
Of course, ATi still have 1 launch for this year as well, unless it turns out the R650 is the XTX, which really wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. It'd definitely explain why ATi aren't launching it with the XT. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revv23
;) :D
truthfully,i can't believe those are the specs for the ultra. Like people have said,they're only a hair above factory overclocked GTXs,a fact that nVidia of all people will know. The only people that wouldn't understand that are the kind of people that don't spend hundreds on video cards. these cards are meant for the enthusiasts, and we know our stuff.
i can't presume to know what nVidia is going to do as far as the Ultra is concerned, but i doubt that a tiny speed bump is all they're gonna have. maybe GDDR4? much larger speed boost? who knows, but a couple MHz isn't enough for a company to justify 1000 dollars, regardless of DX10 market share
it's not going to be $1000. If something will be a thousand dollars, it would be a dual g80 setup. No single card is going to cost 1000, especially on a 6 month old arch.
Ryan
This is old news... but perkam deleted the thread before people saw it :stick:
Anyway it's pretty sad that nvidia had to pull this.
Who's to say that the ultra isn't just to clear stocks of g80 in anticipation of g81?
If g90 is out at the end of the year, theres not a great ammount of time for a die shrink g8x part.
If nvidia is already producing g81 components ready for a launch a month or two down the line, slapping an 8900 cards cooler on a 8800gtx and calling it an ultra may just be to help clear out the last g80 cores.
My personal belief is the ultra will be at the same price the gtx is currently, and the gtx will fall in price to give it a better price:performane compared to ati's offering.
Well atleast the 8800GTX scales really nicely breaking the 600mhz barrier but going from 620 to 650 has shown to be mostly pointless. The Ultra would have been alot better served with 1200mhz GDDR4.
it won't be added ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Latest report on the Ultra (again, from a less than reputable source although this sounds more likely than the supposed "Dell leak")...
http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=146517Quote:
These are final specs for the 8800 Ultra.
GPU: 675MHz
Mem: 2.35GHz
Shader: 1.60GHz
8800 Ultra still has 128 Stream processors based on 90nm process and has 384-bit bus connected to a 768MB memory GDDR3 type (1.0ns).
For more details about 8800 Ultra,
http://www.fx57.net/?p=613
Is that the same memory as existing cards (1.0ns)? If so, I suppose it may be possible with water cooling to flash this BIOS into your existing GTX.
650Mhz core
and 2080Mhz Mem
I can allready buy that, but it is named Asus 8800Gtx Aquatank
thats sexy
this is a factory overclocked card, given the term ultra for marketing purposes.
BTW, according to this Asian site which is the source of the pic that is circulating around, the specs are a bit higher than those leaked by Dell (or Fud)...
Core: 675MHz
Shader: 1.6GHz
Memory: 2.35GHz
Will it be much faster than a superclocked EVGA 8800 GTX? I just like to know.
According to the stINQ it's a big waste of a name.
Source (Inquirer)Quote:
Final 8800 Ultra specs disappoint
NVIDIA WILL UNLEASH the 8800 Ultra to the world on May 2nd at 6AM PST - 15:00 CET, but atypically for Nvidia, this will be a paper launch.
Yes, you've read it correctly, this will not be a hard one, but rather launch results of benchmarks and announce availability for the third week of May.
This time, Graphzilla decided not to trust any of its partners and just decided that the partners will receive the board after the NDA expiry date, to stop renegade websites from filing reviews of leaked hardware. The partners we have talked with are sincerely disappointed at Nvidia and consider this a breach of trust.
Also, what makes things very worrying in the Nvidia-partner relationship is the fact that some companies are more preferred than others, and there is a certain memory company that is raising quite a few eyebrows.
You see, in order to be able to buy 8800GTX, a lot of partners have to buy up to 8-9-10-11 GPUs of a lower grade - that is the 7300, 7600 and now 8300, 8400, 8500, 8600 - while some partners are allowed to get just the highest end cards.
We are not sure how the situation will resolve with 8800 Ultra, but the final specs we have learned and are present on the boards given to reviewers, only and exclusively by Nvidia, are rather disappointing.
The GPU is not clocked to 675MHz, as some official documents from the past were stating, but rather a very conservative 612MHz, a 37MHz clock boost. The clock of 128 scalar units has been raised from 1.35GHz to 1.50 and memory is set at 2.16GHz instead of 1.80GHz, raising the memory bandwidth from 86.4GB/s to 103.68GB/s, still a couple of gigabytes short of upcoming Radeon HD 2900XT, with its 105.60GB/s.
Everything else remains the same as it was on the 8800GTX, and some partners suggest schematics how to create an 8800Ultra from a single 8800GTX board - an interesting turn of events indeed. Can you say... voltmod?
Yes, you have read this correctly - in order to create an 8800Ultra, you would have to search the search engines of today for schematics of 8800GTX and raise the voltage of the memory by two 0.05V notches, and the clock of 2.13GHz should be achieveable by almost every 8800GTX board out there. µ
they're serious?
marketing for suckers.
Ryan
If the article DeathReborn linked is true. Well really the only up side to the card is that it had a v-mod done to the memory to go further and a better heatsink from what we've been hearing.
Not horrible not the best, I would of expected more. Then again its not like they need to push themselves far to increase there lead further from ATI/AMD.
This is the sad truth of the ATI DX10 debacle... nVidia is under no pressure to either lower prices or increase performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by deathman20
WHy? The 6800ultra was just a higher clocked 6800gt.Quote:
Originally Posted by turbox997
Notice that they are announcing it the same day that ATI is announcing their lineup. Couldn't be that they are trying to steal ATI's thunder or anything ;)
it should do something like 700+/2300+ on stock cooler ... but the price doesnt justify its performance gain over 8800GTX ... also u can get 2 x 8800GTS 640 for 2 x 350ish thats only 700 bux ...
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=39231
this and the Buffalo CL7 PC3 8500 for 1000 bux ... what happen to the head of these companis?? i thought PC componenet suppose to be cheaper... as demand downQuote:
The GPU is not clocked to 675MHz, as some official documents from the past were stating, but rather a very conservative 612MHz, a 37MHz clock boost. The clock of 128 scalar units has been raised from 1.35GHz to 1.50 and memory is set at 2.16GHz instead of 1.80GHz, raising the memory bandwidth from 86.4GB/s to 103.68GB/s, still a couple of gigabytes short of upcoming Radeon HD 2900XT, with its 105.60GB/s
They did that six months ago when they launched the gtxQuote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Still on 90NM, are they?
Even IF the clocks are 675/1600/2200, that's not worth a 900+ price. Well it may be worth it to some I suppose.
Still thinking I'll wait it out for the 65nm G90/8900. It'll do noticeably better, run on less power, generate tons less heat and likely will cost half of this supposed "ultra".
Update #1 : The final core clock on 8800 Ultra is apparently lowered to 612MHz but memory clock remains at 2.16GHz. The shader clock is at 1.5GHz. The memories used on the card are Samsung -1A GDDR3 chips at 1.0ns. NVIDIA has also lowered the price of the 8800 Ultra to around US$850.
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4930
Still too much money for what you get.
You know if it was a 675 clock or higher sure I could see it worth it for some. This 612Mhz is a joke if manufactures are selling OC'ed GTX models with a 630Mhz clock.
Only good thing out of it is better cooler and higher memory speed, but thats it and still even then a $300-400 price increase is horrible. Getting 2 GTX's becomes a WAY smarter choice than this, heck buying a separate water cooling system for the GPU it self would be cheaper and probably could clock higher.
am i the only one that thinks that the new heatsink is insanely big ;)
:banana::banana::banana::banana: me.... that's well good!Quote:
Originally Posted by black_edition
Some 8800U pics (and other comparing with R600XT)
http://fabu.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/20...C_8649-01a.jpg
http://fabu.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/20...C_8686-01a.jpg
http://fabu.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/20...0070502011.htm
The memory is helping out nicely to get the scores up or that card is not running reference clocks.
That thing is huge.
That is a sexy looking HSF.
The price is sexy too.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
That 8800 ultra is a strutter :D :toast: :toast:
I wonder if it performs as mean as it looks?
Link translated.Quote:
Let R600 to death! The most powerful in the world 8800ULTRA first test
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/1...4901py0.th.jpg
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/1...8201et6.th.jpg
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9...8501lx9.th.jpg
Quote:
Graphics Geforce 8800Ultra the final specifications have been determined, Core frequency relatively more conservative, the public version of the default 612MHz core frequency. 8800GTX only than the 575MHz upgrade the 37MHz.The default public version of its 128 Stream Processor speed 1.35GHz to 1.50GHz upgrade. instead of the 1.65GHz legend.
Quote:
Due to improved transistor 8800ULTRA single card consumes 175W. Less than the 8800GTX 177W.
Quote:
the 8800 Ultra has a large number of tantalum capacitors, resistor and capacitor placement, Another Sanyo SVP solid polymer aluminum capacitor and inductor-shielding to ensure the supply of pure graphics Electricity without impurities
Let R600 to death! The most powerful in the world 8800ULTRA first test
http://translate.google.com/translat...language_tools
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r...8800Ultra3.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r...8800Ultra2.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r...8800Ultra1.jpg
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r.../8800U3D05.jpg
There is a thread for this up top.
those charts don't really show the actual performance ratio, if they both started from zero it would provide a better comparison
couldn't they have stretched those bars any further? :p:
And does that really matter? It shows numbers thats all thats important if you can believe them.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] MarioMaster
Ahh yes so there is.Quote:
Originally Posted by fornowagain
Nice timing there aswell fornowagain. :)
Agreed LOL, could they have made the bars longer? The performance increase does not justify the rumored $1000 price tag. I'll stick with the 8800GTS or HD X2900XT, thanks.
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r.../8800U3D05.jpg
There is what, not quite 600 points difference on 3dmark05 and less than 500 points in 3dmark06, yet the bar is 10x long? ROFL
Just remind that R600XT (same as XTX since they're just the same only differ the 1GB GDDR4) is gonna match only with 8600 model, so, I think is worthless compare these cards.
When do theses come out i need one!
its a simple psychological trick some review websites use.Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyJJO
they know, big bars, and big numbers easily fool those not more knowlegable of what they are reading.
so when making the graphs, all they did was make the base line 12,900...
so the scores look ridiculous.
the truth of the 8800 Ultra, is it's just a slightly overclocked 8800 GTX, which can easily be beaten, with a small volt mod, and some better cooling.
8600? not that bad, I heard R600 = 8800GTS or so, not the 8600.Quote:
Originally Posted by end3rkid
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/2719/true1ny8.jpg
http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/2153/true2vj8.jpg
Graph man to the rescue!
Lol, 600 points looks like 130,000 points on the 05
Another fixed graphic.
http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/4792/sshot64eb5.png
I fixed it for them... much better now! OMG Ultra!!!!! That's so worth $1,000.:rolleyes:
LOL
thats pathetic..
B-b-b-but you don't get the cooler looking cooler! :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lane-k
dang that sounded redundant lol
"WolStame, May 2, 2007" :confused:
And the best by far is this graph, which accurately represents a 156 point difference (a 1.27% increase)
http://fabu.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/20.../011/SLI05.swf
lol yea it's just the illusion that makes the scaling looks a lot higher. Good marketing strategy tho, because you can't say it's false data, just easily false interpretation.
death to R600? those bars clearly show death to gtx :rolleyes:
believe it or not, it is top reason why i havent read a review in yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Kunaak
Well, I was trying to say the entire 8600 line.Quote:
Originally Posted by CandymanCan
yeah, theres alot of very misleading review sites out there, but there are some ones that will not mislead you, with crazy stuff like this 8800 Ultra review is trying to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
sites I watch regularly...
anandtech, techpowerup, and Xbitlabs.
I would include Hard OCP in the mix, but honestly, thier choice of the squiggle graphs make the data so unreadable, that I cant bother doing any more then skimming over the data... then looking for a site with graphs and such, that are actually useful to me.
theres a few others, but these are the main ones I like.
reviews like this one here are purposefully misleading so they sell the hardware...
I ask me how many minutes and the numbers of developper have work on the conception of this GPU... i think 5 minutes for flash the bios, 1 hours for get all prices for find the most cheap but accurate cooler.. ( i will joke my boss a long time with this..) how many, 700$ the GPu?
i stop the joke ..Anyway if they have use better quality for component, select the best chips... can be the best for OC..
I have read paper launch is fixed on 2th May.. one thing is sure Nvidia know what they do for marketing and publicity.. right the same day when NDA of AMD/ATI end...
I think one actual notable difference between the Ultra and GTX might be memory used.
this review states that the Ultra uses .8 NS ram, to get that 2.2 ghz mem speed, while the GTX uses 1.0 NS (if I recall right)... so theoretically, the Ultra should be alot more clockable on the memory, then the GTX is...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron
Great minds and all that.
This Card is the best GPU in the World till the end of 2007 kills the R600 with ease.
It overclocks very well 720mhz Core@ air. No normal 8800GTX will go that high ATI has a big problem.
http://directupload.com/files/0yyzmogh2dzxmemymdku.jpg
http://we.pcinlife.com/thread-758018-1-1.html
http://fabu.beareyes.com.cn/2/lib/20...C_8649-01a.jpg
Only +4% ? :rofl:
Can the first person to buy one please post a pic of themselves so I can :rofl: at you.
TIA
It also says it has a lower TDP at higher frequencies then the GTX, using improved transistor design. If its true, a core revision may also help the OC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kunaak
Its possible. TDP went from 177W to 175W from that statement though.Quote:
Originally Posted by fornowagain
All I have been able think about since seeing the specs and price of this card is the 6800 Ultra Extreme. The only company that sold these in any amount was eVGA and it was at least 5 months after launch that they sold them freely. Prior to having them posted for sale to all, you had to register to win a chance to purchase one, they had one drawing per month...
Ooooo a whole 2W :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by deathman20
2W less at a higher frequency with core voltage bump (power at v squared). So maybe its not just binned cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyJJO
WOW. Did they label that graph correctly?Quote:
Originally Posted by HiJon89
Could there be only a 156 point difference between SLI and single??