Quote Originally Posted by saaya View Post
actually those 40nm chips clock worse than the 55nm chips dont they?


dx11 is enough to make it a different part in my books... its pretty irrelevant, at least now, but its a real change... 10.0 to 10.1 isnt really... if you look at the changes they had to make to go from .0 to .1 its really more of a revision, not a new part... if even that... i mean the 260 v2 with more sps was a more notable improvement and bigger change...

5770 is a 4870 with lower temps, it clocks better, and costs less, and has dx11

nvidia has lower temps too, but worse clocks, same or HIGHER costs and no dx11

i think calling it a g92 rebrand is the nice thing to do here... cause g92 was a kick4ss product, if you call this 10.1 chip a new chip, you would have to call it a square silicon piece of F A I L... calling it a rebrand sounds much more favorable
okay, so my sarcasm was lost on everyone.

here's the deal, the gt240 is gt200 based.



the 9800gt's g92 and the gt240's gt215 probably have more differences than the 4870 -> 5770. yeah, the 5770 has dx11 and all of that jazz, but it's still basicly a modified and shrunk 4870. the gt215 is meant to fill the market UNDER g92 products... ironic isn't it? i'm not trying to defend the gt240, it's only remarkable feature is a 9w idle draw, but calling it an 8800 or 9800gt rebrand is just silly.