9800GTX pic and specs

VR-Zone has gotten some details and photos of the GeForce 9800 GTX (G92-P392) card. It comes with 12-layer PCB at 4.376" by 10.5". This card is clocked at 673MHz for core and 1683MHz for the shader while memory clock is yet to be determined. The memory interface is 256-bit with 512MB of 136-pin BGA GDDR3 memory onboard. It comes with two DVI-I and one HDTV-out. There are two SLI connectors and two 6-pin PCIe power connector. The card employs the CoolerMaster TM67 cooler where the fan is rated at 0.34A, 4.08W, 2900rpm, 34dBA. The total board power is 168W.


source, http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/GeFo...iled/5599.html

FInaly

Im sort of disappointed.

Is this just an overclocked 8800GTS?

Quote:

---

The memory interface is 256-bit with 512MB of 136-pin BGA GDDR3 memory onboard.

---

Sooooo.....it's an 8800GTS 512MB with a slight overclock and boasts Tri-SLI compatibility. :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Sooooo.....it's an 8800GTS 512MB with a slight overclock. :shrug:

---

why not call it a 8900GTX heh


ATi is going to have a nice year.

ble, so its official 9800gtx is worse then a factory oced 8800ultra...

I would also like to point something else out:

Quote:

---

There are two SLI connectors

---

The card in the picture above does NOT have two SLI connectors.

it also doesn't have 2 dvi + 1 Hdmi

hrm

so, chip is the same, this is 673 mhz and g92 gts is 650 mhz, memory should be in the 2100-2200 range I guess...
so the only point in this card is replacing the 8800GTX/Ultra all in once with a more price effective card (with less ram also)
it does make sense since a faster card would have been too close to the GX2

After 5 years, Nvidia is finally now capable of releasing the same model number as ATI.

*yawn*... People, this is a tide over from nvidia to get off of more expensive 90nm, and to just step things up a bit more while waiting to see ATi's next move. NVidia's been in a very comfortable position, as such they can hold back the big gun until they absolutely have to launch it(think R700).

Calling it the 9 series is a marketing decision so customers don't think "Well, ATi have gone up to the 38** series, so that must be better than the older 8*** series".

Also, that picture isn't a 9800GTX...

HEY, dont kill the messenger. but diltech is right for the most ppart, its just a more energy efficient card thats cheaper to make. and about the pic, i say its real because its vr-zone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

Also, that picture isn't a 9800GTX...

---

Well, I didn't want to come out and say it but........QFT.

So an 8800GTS 512 with Tri-SLI = 9800GTX...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

*yawn*... People, this is a tide over from nvidia to get off of more expensive 90nm, and to just step things up a bit more while waiting to see ATi's next move. NVidia's been in a very comfortable position, as such they can hold back the big gun until they absolutely have to launch it(think R700).

Calling it the 9 series is a marketing decision so customers don't think "Well, ATi have gone up to the 38** series, so that must be better than the older 8*** series".

Also, that picture isn't a 9800GTX...

---

It isn't the 9800GX2. Well it doesn't look like a GX2.

GX2

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...2&d=1203954879

http://img.club.pchome.net/upload/cl...1203302683.JPG

http://img.club.pchome.net/upload/cl...1203303739.jpg

GTX(?)

http://resources.vr-zone.com//newspi.../9800GTX-1.jpg

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1203965459

Wow! i'm impressed, must get one:rolleyes:

If this is true i'm really disappointed.
I just got a 3870 X2 for testing and reselling in 2 months or so, i already found someone who wants it. I wanted to have a real monster card to finally play Crysis at very high in multiplayer without any framerate drops down to 20/30.
But it seems like the new nvidia cards wont be able to do this.
Very pitty..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

*yawn*... People, this is a tide over from nvidia to get off of more expensive 90nm, and to just step things up a bit more while waiting to see ATi's next move. NVidia's been in a very comfortable position, as such they can hold back the big gun until they absolutely have to launch it(think R700).

Calling it the 9 series is a marketing decision so customers don't think "Well, ATi have gone up to the 38** series, so that must be better than the older 8*** series".

Also, that picture isn't a 9800GTX...

---

Why would they release 9800GTX2 with such a crappy dual PCB design and the bad reputation that had their previous attempt if they were in such a comfortable position :confused: :shrug:

So if the normal leading product is called flagship, do we just call this flagsh1t?
Good god. Where's fast forward button already. I sorely hope that AMD's next graphics flagship product puts a gargantuan fire under Nvidia's ass. Until the truly new tech gets here, my money and I will be sleeping under a rock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LowRun

Why would they release 9800GTX2 with such a crappy dual PCB design and the bad reputation that had their previous attempt if they were in such a comfortable position :confused: :shrug:

---

We can't call it crap until we see how it performs...

Anyway, they're merely doing it to combat ATi's efforts. If they weren't comfortable, they'd just push forward and drop a real new lineup instead of playing sit and wait, all the while giving them time to set up to drop on a smaller process size.

I guess I wont be upgrading for a while now...

This really looks disappointing. Hopefully the card gives the performance the Nvidia guys say it has!

Well... nothing known about shader units and stuff so far, but with only 512MB Vram, this card WILL suck in high res gaming. Maybe if they put out a 1GB version like they already did with the 8800GT...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

*yawn*... People, this is a tide over from nvidia to get off of more expensive 90nm, and to just step things up a bit more while waiting to see ATi's next move. NVidia's been in a very comfortable position, as such they can hold back the big gun until they absolutely have to launch it(think R700).

Calling it the 9 series is a marketing decision so customers don't think "Well, ATi have gone up to the 38** series, so that must be better than the older 8*** series".

Also, that picture isn't a 9800GTX...

---

True, but you have to understand that people were expecting more.....
Lets now wait for RV770 :)

That's probably 9800GT,it will be interesting to see if it has the same SP's 9600 has since they are better than the old ones anyway it sucks that Nvidia hasn't solved the HDMI sound problem yet.
As for the 512mb GDDR,they are enough for now...

Ummm, who is to say that Nvidia CAN launch the 9800GTX that they leaked months ago? Maybe they just don't have G100 (or whatever was supposed to be on this Card) in working order yet. So, 3870x2 is kicking their butt, so they release a revamped GTS with TriSLI to fill the gap till they can make the next Chip work. Everyone is saying that they don't have to release a much better card, what if they CANT! :shrug:

Weak.

Is it really that surprising? the 8800 GT and (new) GTS really should have been 9xxx line cards, except nVidia didn't want to kill of sales of it's old G8x parts by releasing it. Notice how the 8800 GTX & Ultra have been disappearing over the last few months?

G9x is very much just a slightly improved G8x on the newer process.

Anyone know if the next step is a G1x0 or if it's going for multiplicity with the G9x? Smaller die + less power seems to suggest GPU might be going in the same direction of the CPU, that there are limits to what a single die can do and to progress the answer is multi-core designs

256 bit?

what in the hell is up with that?

are they trying to de-evolve cards or something?
I thought newer, was suppose to get better... not worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Sooooo.....it's an 8800GTS 512MB with a slight overclock and boasts Tri-SLI compatibility. :shrug:

---

Thats the entire 9 series so far :(



So far it looks like both companys were trying to saturate the market with DX10 cards. Focusing on the midrange like they did and closing the huge gap that used to be there was a good idea for both camps. We win :D

No way! It'll have at least 192 shaders and 24 rops! :D

:rofl:

maybe they got it mixed up with the 9600GT.

I mean 256 bit, and 512 ram?

come on.... damn....
what happend?

I too think that nvidia is just waiting to see what ATI comes out with. After launching the 8800GTX, 8800 ULTRA, 800 GTS 320, 640, 512, 8800GT 256 AND 512, I doubt that the 9800 gtx and gx2 are the only cards nvidia has up their sleeves.

But I hope I am wrong and ATI can rally! Too much green as of late, I need some red to believe in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kunaak

maybe they got it mixed up with the 9600GT.

I mean 256 bit, and 512 ram?

come on.... damn....
what happend?

---

ATI is from everything we heard going to use the 256-bit bus as well on the newer R700 cards. Faster memory = less need to up the bus bandwidth to get same results which = less money spent on the card for manufacturing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HKPolice

No way! It'll have at least 192 shaders and 24 rops! :D

:rofl:

---

omg, that's what it should have

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

We can't call it crap until we see how it performs...

Anyway, they're merely doing it to combat ATi's efforts. If they weren't comfortable, they'd just push forward and drop a real new lineup instead of playing sit and wait, all the while giving them time to set up to drop on a smaller process size.

---

That doesn't make sense at all from a business prospective. If they were that comfortable they would just introduce their true next gen video card knowing they would beat whatever the R700 offered through sheer performance, price or both. This would mirror the G80 release. Beside, they already own Ageia and are planning on implementing the PhysX SDK using CUDA (assuming) through it's TWIMTB program. By dropping the true next gen ASAP with Physx (through CUDA) would show confidence in their arch design, captured market share and overall price/performance ratio of their next gen video card including PhysX. But we are not seeing this at all. IMO, it looks more of a reactionary move then proactive one.

Either:
A. They aren't ready
B. Truly concerned of what the R700 offers so they can counter it
C. Bluffing
D. worried about Intel and AMD/ATI as a whole

I guess we have to wait and see...

A,B and D.Le'ts hope those are not the specs.

I think i'll pick C....

I think that ATI has a pretty bright future if Nv continues on like this. I really expected them to keep dominating, seeing that they had 2 years to work on a new card. 192 Shaders and 24 ROP's would kickass.

As has been mentioned on chiphell, the memory clock is going to be 2200mhz for the stock config, and by assumption that means it will use .8ns 2400mhz GDDR3 from Hynix...So I imagine we'll see overclocked parts from AIBs with the mem clock closer to 2400mhz effective.

The current G92/G94 chips use 1.0ns 2000mhz GDDR3 iirc.

While I don't like it any more than ya'll, this should be at least some good news for a architecture starved for bandwidth. A 20% increase on paper will make the part look good in reviews, that much can be assumed.

That all being said, it's a pretty weak way to go about things...I imagine anyone that has a 9600gt/3800 and on up will wait for RV770 and the upcoming 512-bit gen from nvidia.

Quote:

---

ble, so its official 9800gtx is worse then a factory oced 8800ultra...

---

:yawn2:
this is so boring

Have to say was expecting this, but still very dissapointed (from an xtreme sense). However i still think with the new SP meaning that 128 will roughly be 150SP (old), this thing will fly with the faster mem.

Selfishly i'm glad i bought a 8800GTX 2 months ago :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle

That doesn't make sense at all from a business prospective. If they were that comfortable they would just introduce their true next gen video card knowing they would beat whatever the R700 offered through sheer performance, price or both. This would mirror the G80 release. Beside, they already own Ageia and are planning on implementing the PhysX SDK using CUDA (assuming) through it's TWIMTB program. By dropping the true next gen ASAP with Physx (through CUDA) would show confidence in their arch design, captured market share and overall price/performance ratio of their next gen video card including PhysX. But we are not seeing this at all. IMO, it looks more of a reactionary move then proactive one.

Either:
A. They aren't ready
B. Truly concerned of what the R700 offers so they can counter it
C. Bluffing
D. worried about Intel and AMD/ATI as a whole

I guess we have to wait and see...

---

In semiconductor manufacturing, you use the old process as long as you can, thanks to the bathtub curve fail rates that come with new processes. This is purely due to lack of competition, nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle

That doesn't make sense at all from a business prospective. If they were that comfortable they would just introduce their true next gen video card knowing they would beat whatever the R700 offered through sheer performance, price or both. This would mirror the G80 release. Beside, they already own Ageia and are planning on implementing the PhysX SDK using CUDA (assuming) through it's TWIMTB program. By dropping the true next gen ASAP with Physx (through CUDA) would show confidence in their arch design, captured market share and overall price/performance ratio of their next gen video card including PhysX. But we are not seeing this at all. IMO, it looks more of a reactionary move then proactive one.

Either:
A. They aren't ready
B. Truly concerned of what the R700 offers so they can counter it
C. Bluffing
D. worried about Intel and AMD/ATI as a whole

I guess we have to wait and see...

---

From a business perspective - nobody should ever hold back a superior product in hopes of *future* sales. The only possible motivation for doing so would be if the cost was substantially less for making the current products than the superior ones, or to clear out inventory.

I recall a story from about a year ago that the 8800GTX silicon actually had 160 shaders but they were only using 128 to improve yields. An engineer from nVidia actually confirmed this and indicated that the full 160 shaders might be utilized after a die shrink.

So my guess is that the card will have at least 160 shaders, and I'm also guessing there is no reason to go back to 512MB of memory and they will stick with 768MB (also supported by the pics of the card and how long it is).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle

That doesn't make sense at all from a business prospective. If they were that comfortable they would just introduce their true next gen video card knowing they would beat whatever the R700 offered through sheer performance, price or both. This would mirror the G80 release. Beside, they already own Ageia and are planning on implementing the PhysX SDK using CUDA (assuming) through it's TWIMTB program. By dropping the true next gen ASAP with Physx (through CUDA) would show confidence in their arch design, captured market share and overall price/performance ratio of their next gen video card including PhysX. But we are not seeing this at all. IMO, it looks more of a reactionary move then proactive one.

Either:
A. They aren't ready
B. Truly concerned of what the R700 offers so they can counter it
C. Bluffing
D. worried about Intel and AMD/ATI as a whole

I guess we have to wait and see...

---

QFT!

GeForce 9 series is definitely a *yawn*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kunaak

maybe they got it mixed up with the 9600GT.

I mean 256 bit, and 512 ram?

come on.... damn....
what happend?

---

Ditto...

bah dissapointing

The pic doesn't fit the description.

Quote:

---

So my guess is that the card will have at least 160 shaders, and I'm also guessing there is no reason to go back to 512MB of memory and they will stick with 768MB (also supported by the pics of the card and how long it is).

---

:hehe: that's morelike it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gr8golf

From a business perspective - nobody should ever hold back a superior product in hopes of *future* sales. The only possible motivation for doing so would be if the cost was substantially less for making the current products than the superior ones, or to clear out inventory.

---

I think this will end up superior. Would it have less total bandwidth with the rumored specs even with the 2400mhz effective memory? Yes, yes it would. But G92's architectural enhancements (textures etc) over G80 and sheer clock speed should allow it to usurp the former high-end. Yes I understand people have already done this through overclocking current G92 products, but what matters in the market is the stock clocks, and on these products they are relatively higher than what we currently see.

That again all being said, it has been mentioned that this generation was supposed to be launch Q407, a normal ~1 year between high-end products, but was held back when there was a surplus of the G80 products in the channel, even at the reduced price.

My assumption has been that the 8800gt/s were only released because of nvidia needing products to compete with the 3800 series and now that excess G80's are out of the channel, they can go ahead with the launch of the products clocked higher and with more bandwidth at stock to actually call it the generation after the 8800 series.

I would just think of it this way...If you grabbed a 8800gt/gts512MB, you got to jump on the next-gen train early. If you overclock, you have defeated nvidia's intention, with the exception of the new highest-end part using faster memory than what is currently available.

loooooooooove these threads

ppl are killing each other debating about vapourware :D

let's see the real deal and real benchmarks and OCs :D

I hate to say it since I've participated, but you have a great point there!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irev210

why not call it a 8900GTX heh


ATi is going to have a nice year.

---

Nope, more like why not call it a 9800GTS or 8950GTS. Considering how big this thing looks, I'd be angry at Nvidia for no shoehorning a 512bit bus on there and 2GB of ram.

Quote:

---

"G92" GeForce 9800 GTX specs.

- 65nm process technology at TSMC.
- Over one billion transistors.
- Second Generation Unified Shader Architecture.
- Double precsion support (FP64).
- GPGPU native.
- Over one TeraFLOPS of shader processing power.
- MADD+ADD configuration for the shader untis (2+1 FLOPS=3 FLOPS per ALU)
- Fully Scalar design.
- 512-bit memory interface.
- 1024MB GDDR4 graphics memory.
- DirectX 10.1 support.
- OpenGL 3.0 Support.
- eDRAM die for "FREE 4xAA".
- built in Audio Chip.
- built in tesselation unit (in the graphics core"
- Improved AA and AF quality levels

---

...since it has turned to vapour...

:ROTF:

and yet more rumours:

Quote:

---

- Codenamed G100
- 65nm process
- 256 shader processors
- 780MHz core clock
- 3200MHz memory clock
- 512-bit memory width
- 2048MB (256X8) GDDR5 chips
- GDDR5 @ 0.25-0.5ns
- Dual DVI-out
- Supports DX 10.1, VP3
- 15-25% lower TDP than 8800GTS

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adamsleath

...since it has turned to vapour...

:ROTF:

and yet more rumours:

---

EXACTLY all rumours :p:

I guess this is what happens when you don't have competition for so long.

its the same frequency as the 8800gts but eats up more power?
hope?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by virtualrain

I recall a story from about a year ago that the 8800GTX silicon actually had 160 shaders but they were only using 128 to improve yields. An engineer from nVidia actually confirmed this and indicated that the full 160 shaders might be utilized after a die shrink.

So my guess is that the card will have at least 160 shaders, and I'm also guessing there is no reason to go back to 512MB of memory and they will stick with 768MB (also supported by the pics of the card and how long it is).

---

It was never confirmed nor was it real.
That was completely fanboy hope for the Ultra which has now moved over to the G92.

i think i will just pick up a second gtx on ebay for cheap after these come out...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEC911

It was never confirmed nor was it real.
That was completely fanboy hope for the Ultra which has now moved over to the G92.

---

The Ultra was not a die-shrink though... so whoever combined the rumor of 160 shaders with the Ultra was not following the "rumors" very well... we shall see soon enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger_D25

Posted by accident, sorry to waste the space guys (not sure what the heck I was thinking)?

---

You can delete posts, you know. Well I guess you don't... You know now! :)

...I think ill stay with my 8800GTX. Or maybe go back to ATI :D

EDIT: wait ill just pick up another 8800GTX once these hit the market, that will do nicely :p:

i think i might try a 3870x2

so basically its just my current card with a few more shaders :yawn2:

ill just flash my 8800gts to gtx, cool, i have dual 9800gtx's already woohoooo

Quote:

---

the fan is rated at 0.34A, 4.08W, 2900rpm, 34dBA

---

That seems Load :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

We can't call it crap until we see how it performs...

Anyway, they're merely doing it to combat ATi's efforts. If they weren't comfortable, they'd just push forward and drop a real new lineup instead of playing sit and wait, all the while giving them time to set up to drop on a smaller process size.

---

I said the design is crappy and performance even if good won't change that, can't reuse that after market cooler or waterblock you have already nor fit that phase change evap or LN2 pot so it will mainly be stock cooling :down:

One question though, If it's just an oc'ed GTS, why it needs two 6pin connectors...? :para:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by virtualrain

The Ultra was not a die-shrink though... so whoever combined the rumor of 160 shaders with the Ultra was not following the "rumors" very well... we shall see soon enough.

---

Or you weren't following the rumors...
The rumors leading up to the Ultra was that IF there was an extra SP block, that it would be unlocked.
What does a die shrink have to do with unlocking a SP block?

hmm guess i'll be waiting for the 10800 GTX :D

If the card has 192 or 256 SP it still might be worth looking into when the card is released....even if the rest of the supposed specs are true.

who cares about this worthless card.. next,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DerekFSE

Very good observation, and question.

---

Seconded that. Also it's 65 so it should require less power. Hmmm

It looks like AMD and Nvidia are just waiting for Larrabee to wipe them out.