Print 103 comment(s) - last by Dasickninja.. on Jun 27 at 3:58 PM

NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX+   (Source: PC Perspective)
So where are the stickers with Calvin peeing on ATI cards?

NVIDIA rolled out a new GPU-- rather quietly-- called the GeForce 9800 GTX+ that it intends to do battle with the Radeon HD 4850 from rival ATI. NVIDIA says that the 9800 GTX+ is based on the G92 9800 GTX GPU that has been on the market for a while now.

The 9800 GTX+ reference cards have a shader clock of 1836 MHz and a graphics clock of 738 MHz. The new GTX+ GPU supports PhysX on the GPU and supports CUDA-based applications as well. CUDA-based applications include Folding@Home and Badaboom video transcoding.

The GPU supports both 2-way and 3-way SLI -- just as the original 9800 GTX does. NVIDIA claims that when pitted against the Radeon HD 4850, the GTX+ is on average 22% faster than the 4850. NVIDIA’s reviewers guide for the 9800 GTX+ shows that the card can deliver 30 fps on Crysis at 1920 x 1280 resolution verses about 27 fps for the HD 4850. PhysX on the 9800 GTX+ is supported with driver version 177.39. NVIDIA also claims that the PhysX capability of the 9800 GTX+ gives a noticeable performance boost on 3DMark Vantage CPU test 2 to the tune of a 7.5 times gain.

Perhaps the best news for gamers looking for a video card that performs well, but doesn’t cost a fortune is that the 9800 GTX+ card will retail for $229. The old 9800 GTX drops to a price of only $199, making for a great performance for price bargain considering the card was over $300 a few weeks ago.

One more important note on the 9800 GTX+ GPU is that it is built using a 55nm refresh of the original G92 core in the 9800 GTX, which was built using 65nm process. Unconfirmed rumors point to a July 16 launch for the 9800 GTX+.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Same old ...
By MAIA on 6/20/2008 12:17:32 PM , Rating: 5
9800 GTX+ = 8800 revision number 3

RE: Same old ...
By chaos386 on 6/20/2008 3:01:38 PM , Rating: 5
It kinda makes you wonder what the point of the GTX 2x0 series is when the only Nvidia cards worth buying are all still G92-based.

RE: Same old ...
By ImSpartacus on 6/20/2008 9:40:33 PM , Rating: 3
I agree. It's funny that the same core that came in the 8800GT nearly a year ago is still challenging next gen stuff.

g92 was a knockout.

RE: Same old ...
By Lakku on 6/23/2008 11:50:04 PM , Rating: 2
Simple. The GTX 200 series of cards are a flexing of nVidia's engineering muscle. It is on the market as a purely symbolic statement of what nVidia can do. nVidia knows this, thus the fantastic cards, for GAMING, that come from the G92 based products. ATi is competing in this market, and it's great they are competative once again. However, the GTX 200 series is a shot at Intel and the upcoming GPGPU 'wars' I think are coming, not for runnig your games, but for runnig render farms, compute intensive applications, and other professionally designated applications. Eventually, some of that power will come down to gaming levels, but I believe nVidia is positioning themselves to be more than a gaming card company now a days, as they don't have a CPU business like Intel and AMD have.

RE: Same old ...
By Emryse on 6/26/2008 5:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry - but ATI is not competing. They're just existing in the same marketplace - barely.

Competition occurs when a company can match a rival company's product with same or similar speeds, at the same time, with the same generation of tech, and at the same or similar costs.

ATI is certainly not doing these things. They are making products that cost more, perform less, are late-in-coming, and generationally behind.

NVIDIA is putting refits of their old G92 base because they are proving that they can compete with "current-gen ATI" using their "past-gen NVIDIA". Anyone working for ATI should be ashamed.

NVIDIA could release a next-gen product at any time, just as Intel is absolutely spanking AMD in the CPU market and therefore had to artificially slow their product release time table.

It's called leveraging competitive advantage for max profit margin - and NVIDIA is playing this hand smartly.

RE: Same old ...
By gochichi on 6/27/2008 12:59:11 AM , Rating: 2
You're kidding right? You think Nvidia is sitting on some "next gen" part and just getting pummeled by ATI right now for no particular reason?

FYI, the smaller the nanometer the process, the cheaper it is to produce and the higher the profit margin. So ATI has been milking their 55nm process for some time now, while NVIDIA is still 65nm (barely moving to 55nm now). So a Radeon HD 3870 was CHEAPER to make than a 8800GT... same goes for the 4850 and 4870 but even more so because NVIDIA's latest stuff is exceedingly expensive to make (and to buy for that matter).

You are very poorly informed, NVIDIA just released their "Next-gen". It is quite costly and performs only slightly better than ATI's very releasonably priced stuff.

When NVIDIA was winning on performance, many (not I) overlooked the absolute lack of features on NVIDIA's cards... DirectX 10.1 is the only ETHICAL thing to manufacture right now, yet NVIDIA is still pushing outdated DX10 hardware out of their factories... effectively stalling software development as much as they can. HDMI audio... yes, some of us have current monitors and HDTVs... and yes, it's hell of a lot more convenient to get audio from HDMI.

Thank God for this non competitive company, because were it not for ATI, there wouldnt' even be video acceleration in NVIDIA's lineup.

I'd like to think I am not a fanboy. Nvidia WAS outperforming ATI, but right now, ATI is absolutely troucing NVIDIA. I wouldn't touch an NVIDIA card with a stick right now. (In great part because they are so archaic in their features, not a performance issue so much).

I am really proud of myself for not using bad language. It was difficult, but I made it through.

RE: Same old ...
By MonkeyPaw on 6/20/2008 10:45:28 PM , Rating: 5
9800 GTX+ = 8800 revision number 3

...and STILL no DX10.1.

RE: Same old ...
By ImSpartacus on 6/22/2008 10:38:55 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree. g92 was basically another generation. When you have a midrange card competing with a high end card (8800GT -> 8800GTX), it isn't a revision, it's just bad naming.

RE: Same old ...
By Dasickninja on 6/27/2008 3:58:25 PM , Rating: 2
A few new features, a generation does not make. The 9800GTX+ is little more than a feature heavy G80.

RE: Same old ...
By xRyanCat on 6/23/2008 2:15:13 PM , Rating: 2
The games that take advantage of DirectX 10.1--Assassin's Creed is the only one I know--don't offer anything revolutionary. Incremental improvements in Anti-Aliasing and other things are present but since it's backwards compatible with DX 10.0 it's far from a deal breaker and should be pretty low on the list of things to consider.

RE: Same old ...
By Lakku on 6/23/2008 11:57:27 PM , Rating: 2
Show me the benefits of DX10.1, and any games using them. I'm not even sure DX10 has really taken off other than to add some extra effects that are more difficult, but not impossible to do in DX9. DX10.1 also caused other problems in Assassins Creed, though I would think these are fixed by now. If many devs aren't taking full advantage of DX10, why worry about DX10.1? Seems most PC games now a days are extentions of console games anyway, to which you can get away with, mostly, DX9. The biggest reason I use DX10 is more subtle, namely better shadowing and better, more realistic light source behaviour/water behaviour, and for a handful of games, namely Bioshock, Crysis, the upcoming STALKER Clear Sky (at least they talk a good game), and a couple others.

RE: Same old ...
By BruceLeet on 6/24/2008 11:10:45 AM , Rating: 3
Nvidia with no DX10.1 its obvious, they are not including 10.1 so the headless noobs that pay attention only to their marketing schemes will buy a 10.1 card when it comes out.

Any video game company will soon say "We are taking advantage of 10.1 in this title ...etc" and Nvidia will go "Time to include 10.1 to make those sales". AMD already has it, so last gen hardware owners will take advantage of next-gen games. Nvidia doesnt want to include it so they will make money when it is implemented mainstream, its a business practice/marketing scheme, that like I said...headless noobs fall for.

RE: Same old ...
By gochichi on 6/27/2008 1:05:54 AM , Rating: 2
They are headless noobs... but you are brilliant.

10.1 is simply the current spec, not making the current spec is backwards and unethical. If we didn't care about features on our video cards, we'd just run Intel graphics.

But since we do, and 10.1 is the current spec, NVIDIA's refusal to meet the spec means NVIDIA doesn't get my business. This was less of a problem when NVIDIA was outperforming ATI, but now that ATI is beating NVIDIA on both features AND performance, it is silly to argue that DX 10 is better that 10.1.

That's just silly, you're silly. Whenever there's a shift in leadership, you see the fanboys come out of the dark, and you sir, are a fact-ignoring-fanboy.

If there was a 10.2 spec, I would expect the hardware companies to follow it, simple as that.

RE: Same old ...
By BruceLeet on 6/27/2008 2:05:24 PM , Rating: 2
Swing and a miss

By therealnickdanger on 6/20/2008 12:09:16 PM , Rating: 5
The competition is just becoming outrageous. The amount of graphics power you can buy for under $250 is just ridiculous, and it's not like these are mid-level cards even, these are incredibly powerful performers.

For the games I play, I'm not sure I'll need to go beyond my HD3850 for a long time, but it's good to know that the replacement card will be CHEAP yet not suck.

RE: Wow
By tallcool1 on 6/20/2008 12:29:21 PM , Rating: 5
You can thank AMD/ATI for this one. Without the 4850 coming to market at a fantastic price/performance ratio, the 9800GTX price wouldn't have dropped like a rock. Obviously nVidia is doing it to save face and try to not lose market share. Makes me wonder with a 1/3rd price reduction, is nVidia still making a profit on the 9800GTX?

RE: Wow
By nosfe on 6/20/2008 12:34:57 PM , Rating: 3
from what i've read(rumors) the 4850 die is smaller than that of a 9800gtx+ so lets have a price war!

RE: Wow
By Slappi on 6/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Wow
By Wirmish on 6/21/2008 12:25:33 AM , Rating: 5
Originally Posted by Slappi, 09-Jun-2008, 22:26
You guys didn't learn your lesson from the 2900 fiasco.
Same pre launch hype all based on rumors.
Everyone looked stupid launch day.
Guess we are all in for a repeat.

Are you the same Slappi ?

Look at this ->
G92 = ~324mm²
G92b = ~270mm²
RV770 = ~256mm²

ATi is clearly the winner here !

RE: Wow
By Wirmish on 6/21/2008 12:14:21 AM , Rating: 4
Look at my GPU dies comparison:

RE: Wow
By nosfe on 6/21/2008 2:57:24 AM , Rating: 2
actually, a 10% decrease from 324 is 292 so the difference between rv770 and g92b could be even bigger than in your chart

RE: Wow
By Lakku on 6/23/2008 11:44:07 PM , Rating: 2
I disagree. nVidia created competition for themselves with the release of the G92 based 8800GT. nVidia has no need to save face, they still have the most complete top to bottom line-up, including a graphics card at every price point, including outrageous price points. The 4850 is a great card as it creates more CHOICE, but it does not really compete any level of compeition that wasn't there before, as the 8800GT is still a great value. It's nice the 9800GTX price dropped, and that was indeed because of ATi, but nVidia was well ahead of the game and in a place to make that decision regardless of what ATi did. I don't see nVidia losing much market share, as they have anything you could want from your GPU, including working, on-board physics acceleration and arguably better SLI implimentation. Kudos to ATi for the choices they bring, but it in no way radically changes the GPU playing field.

RE: Wow
By Lakku on 6/23/2008 11:46:20 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, that should read ".. it doesn't really create any radically new level of competition that wasn't there before..."

Not as much raining on the parade.....
By nismotigerwvu on 6/20/2008 12:50:25 PM , Rating: 2
I would say this is more gearing up for war than raining on AMD/ATI's parade. The cards are super close (slight edge to the 4850 with today's games but that could change). If anything this is bringing another float to the consumer's parade.

RE: Not as much raining on the parade.....
By StevoLincolnite on 6/20/2008 1:13:46 PM , Rating: 5
There is one difference, The Radeon 4850 is using immature drivers as of right now, unlike the G92 which has mature drivers in comparison, what says that AMD/ATI won't release drivers which may provide boosts of 10-20% in some games? (Which works vice versa)

The Hardware is only half the story, you could have a solid Graphics card, but if you are using the default windows drivers/really crappy drivers, your not going to be going anywhere performance/quality wise are you?

RE: Not as much raining on the parade.....
By BruceLeet on 6/20/2008 2:25:55 PM , Rating: 3
Mhm. We just got new drivers 2 days ago. 4850s aren't supported yet, just factory drivers. Next driver update should be around the 20th of next month, and even after the driver support for 4850 comes out, those drivers wont be fully optimized (it takes AMD about 2-3 tries before they get it right)

The vanilla 4850 can mildly outperform 8800 GT, 9800 GTX and come up short of a 9800 GX2, lets see how a 4870X2 with GDDR5 can do (with mature drivers of course) =p

RE: Not as much raining on the parade.....
By Spuke on 6/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: Not as much raining on the parade.....
By nosfe on 6/20/2008 4:14:50 PM , Rating: 3
its not that the drivers are unstable/bad right now, its just that there will be improvements over the months to come in the performance department for the 4850; right now i'd wager the 4850 is a better buy than a 9800gtx(better performance with AA) and the gap will only widen in the coming months

By StevoLincolnite on 6/20/2008 4:24:43 PM , Rating: 2
I Just ordered 2 of these from Auspcmarket to replace my Crossfire 3850's - I was actually surprised when I bought them how the continued driver improvements kept rolling out, for instance with the cat 8.1's to the 8.5 I managed an increase of 50% performance in Supreme Commander with AA enabled, which wasn't bad, I was not expecting that considering that the Radeon 3850 was based on the 2xxx series.

Currently these things are sitting on around $250 mark in Australia, which is rather good, considering that the 9800GTX ranges from $350 to $480, It's actually sitting on the 8800GT in terms of price here at the moment, which is great, more performance for my dollar with driver performance improvements to come in the next following months which increases performance!

RE: Not as much raining on the parade.....
By Spuke on 6/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: Not as much raining on the parade.....
By overzealot on 6/21/2008 1:36:55 AM , Rating: 2
I haven't read anything that says the 4850 drivers are bad... and it's not like the days when the driver was completely different for each product.
It's your money buddy, don't cry about what others think. I'm sure you'll be just as happy with either 8800gt or 4850.

By Darkskypoet on 6/21/2008 2:11:34 AM , Rating: 3
Really! I mean its quite like saying the gt280 drivers are bad right now. Will nvidia unleash more performance with future drivers? They'd better, and they will. But do you then call those immature drivers / bad drivers? You could. But make sure you're calling a spade a spade green or red.

Most heavily programmable hardware such as these types of cards require driver tweaking, and time to improve. Neither the gt280 nor HD4850 drivers are bad... Not relative to the horrid stuff we've seen come out of BOTH firms in recent history. So if in code, by mature you mean old, stable, and proven... Sure buddy its your money, spend it how you see fit.

By StevoLincolnite on 6/21/2008 4:12:51 AM , Rating: 2
It really doesn't matter which card you go with, you will still get great performance, just to me the 4850 is the better pick, especially since I will be throwing them in Crossfire, I've had an ATI card since the Radeon 9xxx and Geforce FX days, Before that ATI had a bad reputation for buggy, annoying drivers and software. (Radeon 8500DV anyone?)

But if my current 3850 is anything to go by, the future is looking nice for me on the ATI camp.

Now all we need is more PC Exclusives to take advantage of all this extra Graphics Rendering Power other than Crysis, or Release Spore/StarCaft 2 already. :)

Boycott NVidia
By phatboye on 6/20/2008 12:36:06 PM , Rating: 3
RE: Boycott NVidia
By phatboye on 6/20/2008 12:39:37 PM , Rating: 1
... and no I'm not a ATI fanboy, I'm currently running a 7600GGT. I havn't touched an ATI card since my ATI RAGE PRO card back sometime in 1998. Been a loyal NVidia card user since my Ti4400 but if they keep this up my next card will be an ATI.

RE: Boycott NVidia
By Icelight on 6/20/2008 2:16:49 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't used an ATI card since the 8500LE, not as long as your gap, but still a lengthy period of time. I'm getting real tempted to go ATI this time around though! (even though I swore I wasn't going to upgrade until next year...)

RE: Boycott NVidia
By Pirks on 6/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: Boycott NVidia
By Darkskypoet on 6/21/2008 2:06:43 AM , Rating: 3
Well.. I bought the HIS HD3870 pretty much on launch day, and just now sold it to a friend to fund my HD4850 purchase... Not a single problem with it stability wise.

In fact bout a month ago bought a Sapphire 3870 and ran them in crossfire until this morning. Both HD3870s are moving to different homes now, and aside from a single glitch (my bad when I didn't install driver correctly for crossfire) they were rock solid.

HIS was dual slot cooler, newer sapphire was single slot cooler.

Both in vista 64 and XP 64. (crossfire only XP 64). So maybe you got a bad card? or maybe some other issue?

RE: Boycott NVidia
By just4U on 6/22/2008 12:56:29 AM , Rating: 2

It's possible your card wasn't ramping up under load fan wise. There was reports of that happening with some 3850s, 70s and Even some 8800GT's. Bios updates fixed what ever was going on with them. .. It happens.

I like "HIS" they are a good company that tries to make some quality parts. They are to ATI what XFX is to Nvidia or atleast that's what they "appear" to be positioning themselves for. Time will tell.

RE: Boycott NVidia
By Pirks on 6/22/08, Rating: -1
RE: Boycott NVidia
By formulav8 on 6/23/2008 6:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I wouldn't blame it on the actual video chipsets. Myself, and i'm sure many others would agree that ATI has good drivers for Vista overall. They are Not perfect but they are definitely NOT the cause of your problem and neither is the video chipset in general.

I have a cheapo 3870 and have absolutely NO problems running Vista. I've played newer DX10 games like Lost Planet and older DX9 games as well with no problems. Just my humble opinion on the matter. :)


RE: Boycott NVidia
By jtesoro on 6/20/2008 11:37:54 PM , Rating: 2
Is it just me or are H-Enthusiast's pages with white text on black background very hard to read? I had to cut and paste the text to Notepad so I could comfortably read it!

RE: Boycott NVidia
By Clauzii on 6/21/2008 1:30:56 AM , Rating: 1
Reads fine on my Samsung 957DF..

RE: Boycott NVidia
By Clauzii on 6/24/2008 3:40:43 PM , Rating: 2
Well, it does...

RE: Boycott NVidia
By EricMartello on 6/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: Boycott NVidia
By Darkskypoet on 6/21/2008 2:27:24 AM , Rating: 2
Yep! 'Cause collusion is great for the market place, right? Wait... no.. its not. Or like those poor suckers that get caught with massive inventories in stock when nVidia slashes 'official' prices to compete with upstarts like 38xx, and 48xx?

So the vendors with said inventories would have to stick with Official pricing until nVidia cuts their balls off with an official price drop? Thus in a stroke of a pen slashing all profit from said cards? Is it not better for said vendors to slide the price down as required to turn over cards before such an event?

(why my 3870's both sold today and not two weeks from now)(And why one of my fav small vendors is gonna hurt with his current stock of nVidia cards)

Low margins are a sign your #1 supplier (nVidia) is either charging too much, has costs that are too high, or indicative of the market place. Please give me an example of a big firm consistently selling these cards at a loss, and surviving to 'walmartize' the industry. Further, explain to me why nVidia would punish such a firm if they are increasing market share, visibility, and best of all moving large 'walmart quantities' of nVidia chips, or more likely reference cards.

I doubt nVidia would be interested in refunding channel partners for holding on to stock too long by following the commissar's price schedule, and then being forced to take a bath when the price drops are allowed.

These cards, aside from those that differentiate themselves in some way, are perfect substitutions, and now commodities. Price distortions don't help this matter, and may end up hurting vendors more then helping. Further, the incentive to cheat, if vendor is large enough, is huge, with little to no threat of repercussion. In fact the threat of repercussion increases the smaller the firm is. (less likely you matter to nVidia's bottom line)

It can play Crysis!
By Icelight on 6/20/2008 12:17:49 PM , Rating: 5

Quick everyone, race to get this to -1!

RE: It can play Crysis!
By MAIA on 6/20/2008 12:28:24 PM , Rating: 3
hmmmm it appears to be a crysis at the "not worth reading" link ...

RE: It can play Crysis!
By mattclary on 6/20/2008 12:30:17 PM , Rating: 2
Always happy to help a brother out! :thumbsup:

RE: It can play Crysis!
By Mitch101 on 6/20/2008 2:58:53 PM , Rating: 2
Just in time is the game on the bargain shelf now for being released so far ahead of the technology to play it at a decent rate.

RE: It can play Crysis!
By majorpain on 6/21/2008 4:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
my saphire 3870 runs crysis with all sets at "High" smoothly... have a phenom 9550 tho... :D

Somewhat related question
By FITCamaro on 6/20/2008 12:07:21 PM , Rating: 2
Is Physx processing enabled on 8800 series cards yet?

RE: Somewhat related question
By homerdog on 6/20/2008 12:11:53 PM , Rating: 2
Not yet, but it should be soon.

RE: Somewhat related question
By FITCamaro on 6/20/2008 12:13:28 PM , Rating: 1
Well it says the 177.39 driver enables it for the 9800GTX. Looking up the driver it says it supports the 9800GTX and 2x0 series. But nothing about the 8x00 series.

RE: Somewhat related question
By homerdog on 6/20/2008 12:49:43 PM , Rating: 2
Well I surely hope the PhysX driver for the rest of the CUDA enabled GPUs won't be far behind. Although I still have my doubts about spending precious GPU resources on physics when we've got CPU cores sitting idle...

RE: Somewhat related question
By FITCamaro on 6/20/2008 2:23:37 PM , Rating: 3
They should make it an option in games so people can see which performs better on their system.

RE: Somewhat related question
By Silver2k7 on 6/22/2008 5:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
qoute "Although I still have my doubts about spending precious GPU resources on physics when we've got CPU cores sitting idle... "

You have to realize that a single or even 4 CPU cores is not that good compared to say 200+ shaders working their mojo..

July 16th Launch?
By awer26 on 6/20/2008 12:11:22 PM , Rating: 1
While the idea of a quality product AND a low price is a new one for nVidia, its too bad this isn't coming out for another month. You can get the Asus 4850 from Newegg now for $169AR.

RE: July 16th Launch?
By homerdog on 6/20/08, Rating: 0
RE: July 16th Launch?
By Alexstarfire on 6/20/2008 12:23:15 PM , Rating: 2
I think he meant great performing product with a low price. The 8800GT may have fit the bill at one time, but not anymore. The rest never were that great performing.

RE: July 16th Launch?
By Rookierookie on 6/20/2008 1:51:58 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about you, but I think the 7900GS was a pretty darn good performer at its debut for its price level. The 6600GT also dominated its price range for quite a few months.
ATI was the one that never had a competitive mid-range offering since Radeon 9 (X800GT? Too late to market, to beat a rival product that's six months old isn't going to do...), until now.

RE: July 16th Launch?
By FITCamaro on 6/20/2008 2:27:05 PM , Rating: 1
The 8800GT is still a pretty damn good card. And with how cheap they are, you can easily get two in SLI. And looking at the reviews of both the 4850 and 260/280 in CF/SLI, two 8800GTs in SLI keeps up pretty damn well.

RE: July 16th Launch?
By Darkskypoet on 6/21/2008 2:34:51 AM , Rating: 2
Pls don't forget the price of 8800 line pre 3870... Please also remember that the 8800gt is only that cheap, and also quite a large thorn in nVidia's craw because of the release of the 3870 for cheap.

The 8800 series were far more money, and the 8800gt cannibalized the sale of a whack of nVidia cards. Those posting above about the 'price controls' being a good thing should examine this time as well. As how many 8800 series cards languished on the shelves at ridiculous prices (and costs to vendor) once 8800gt was dropped on the market at a price to compete with 3870? Lots.

Some of the other cards mentioned sure! 8800gt, completely forced by 38xx, and it wrecked inventory values for a lot of stores. Perhaps we should be thankful HD2900xt kinda sucked like it did.

RE: July 16th Launch?
By homerdog on 6/20/2008 3:50:07 PM , Rating: 3
To me a quality product offers great performance for its price range. The cards I listed all fell under this category when they were released, and I would argue that the 8800GT and 9600GT are still great cards for the price.

It seems we have ATI to thank for the recent trend of ~$200 GPUs with 80-90% the performance of ~$500 GPUs, and I for one am loving it. I just hope it stays this way... once you've had a taste of the high end there's no going back :)

Hmm, different reality
By psychobriggsy on 6/20/2008 12:47:53 PM , Rating: 5
Pretty much every review had the ATI card thrashing the 9800GTX in everything apart from Crysis and maybe another game. A few reviews merely had it slightly ahead somehow. Sure the GTX+ is faster, but not by enough to make up for the losses.

Anyway, $170 4850 or $230 9800GTX+ isn't a hard choice given the superiority of the former.

RE: Hmm, different reality
By Adonlude on 6/20/2008 1:23:04 PM , Rating: 1
Yes the AMD card does in fact serve a purpose: Knocking $100 off the Nvidia card so we can get it cheaper.

RE: Hmm, different reality
By Wirmish on 6/21/2008 12:43:49 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, so you prefer to encourage nVidia who sold his cards at big price just before the release of the HD 4850 ?

Beautiful way of encouraging ATi, without whom nVidia would continue to line their pockets with your hard earned money.

RE: Hmm, different reality
By BruceLeet on 6/24/2008 11:13:09 AM , Rating: 1
Beautiful way of encouraging ATi, without whom nVidia would continue to line their pockets with your parents hard earned money.


Shader Clock
By jsv35 on 6/20/2008 12:09:00 PM , Rating: 3
I believe that the 1836MHz clock speed is of the shaders, the memory clock speed should be something like 1000MHz - 1200MHz.

RE: Shader Clock
By MAIA on 6/20/2008 12:23:54 PM , Rating: 2
I believe that the 1836MHz clock speed is of the shaders, the memory clock speed should be something like 1000MHz - 1200MHz.

Could be ...

But it could also be 918MHz DDR which translates into 1836MHz effective.

Anyway, most probably is shader clock.

Review of 9800 GTX+
By nafhan on 6/20/2008 1:17:27 PM , Rating: 2
Review on PC perspective shows the cards to be pretty close in performance with the ATI card winning on power consumption.

RE: Review of 9800 GTX+
By psychobriggsy on 6/20/2008 2:31:37 PM , Rating: 3
That was the first review out, very rushed.

The Guru3D and Tech Report reviews are far more solid.

By DXRick on 6/20/2008 3:29:06 PM , Rating: 2
A $170 (after MIR) card with excellent performance that only requires 110 watts. It was worth waiting for.

I just added it to my NewEgg wish list, and will be buying one shortly.

RE: Impressive!
By SiliconAddict on 6/21/2008 11:33:03 PM , Rating: 1
Where are you getting 110?

the review says more in the 310 watt range under load. That is stupid.

RE: Impressive!
By formulav8 on 6/23/2008 6:40:03 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize that the numbers in the link you pointed to is in relation to the ENTIRE system and NOT the video by itself??


Power Plug
By Slaimus on 6/20/2008 4:52:35 PM , Rating: 2
The plus version seems to still need two PCIe power plugs, which a lot of mainstream power supplies (like my Earthwatts 430) do not have. Why couldn't the die shrink save enough power to cut down on a plug?

RE: Power Plug
By Alexvrb on 6/20/2008 6:36:53 PM , Rating: 2
Because they used the die shrink to bump clock speeds, not to save power. If you want less power consumption, perhaps you should consider the 4850.

When does HD4870 come out?
By V3ctorPT on 6/20/2008 4:08:56 PM , Rating: 2
I had a 2900XT 'till yesterday... it ate 391w in my Q6600 playing GRID at full throttle... switched to my old 7800GTX and the quality of image is awfull... the game doesn't seem to be the same. So... when does HD4870 come out, so I can have some fuuuun?

By Goty on 6/20/2008 5:12:21 PM , Rating: 2
The 9800GTX+ is a nice card just as the 9800GTX is, and that's the problem. There's so little performance gain to be had by one over the other that I think the 4850 is still the better buy.

By SiliconAddict on 6/21/2008 11:26:16 PM , Rating: 2
Based on super inefficient cards that generate a crap load of heat and put a spike on one's electricity bill. I mean seriously look at Intel and their Performance per watt. Hell even AMD is getting better on this...then do a comparison with Nvidia and ATI. Its obvious where their priorities are.

22% faster than the ATI 4850?
By Belard on 6/22/2008 3:46:49 PM , Rating: 2
Do we have ENOUGH codes after the model number yet? How about 9900GTX?

If the new 9800GTX+ is 22% faster than the ATI 4850, then wouldn't that make it about as fast as the GTX 280?! With some games, the difference between 4850 / GTX280 is 10~25%!

BTW: $200 for a 65+ fps card vs $650 for a 80+fps card in 1600x1200, which is the better deal? What if the $300 4870 ends up being a 75~80+fps.

We'll know in a week or so.

Competition is good. Without it, there would be no $150 3870 or 8800GT cards today. And why WE NEED AMD to go head to head with Intel.

My current PC AMD CPU with Nvidia Graphics. Next PC: Quad core Intel with AMD GPU. Sorry AMD, the current Phenom X4s are too hot and too slow for the money.

By Ozlaw on 6/23/2008 10:29:32 PM , Rating: 2
See, The Tech Report, A first look at the Radeon HD 4850, Stone-cold GeForce killer?
by Geoff Gasior — 2:57 PM on June 19, 2008. He points out that the 4850 is the bottom of the line of the new AMD's coming out and then after running a full battery of tests against a pre-release 9800GTX, concludes: " It's been a long time since a Radeon was the graphics card of choice at the all-important $199 price point, but the HD 4850 looks like it might have the title locked up. The current GeForce 9800 GTX is simply no match for AMD's latest mid-range offering, and Nvidia's surprise, the GeForce 9800 GTX+, has quite a bit of ground to make up if it hopes to be competitive. We'll have a full work-up of the GTX+ soon, of course, but the cards only just arrived this morning. "

ATI Benchmarks?
By FaceMaster on 6/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By RamarC on 6/20/2008 12:10:05 PM , Rating: 2
anandtech has benchies for the 4850. it really is a $200 9800gtx.

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By JoshuaBuss on 6/20/2008 2:51:23 PM , Rating: 2
or $170 if you can stomach some MIRs ;)

I've never been let down by a rebate and I've sent in dozens..

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By bighairycamel on 6/20/2008 12:11:50 PM , Rating: 5
quote: I the only person who hasn't seen these benchmarks yet?

Yes, yes you are.

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By FaceMaster on 6/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By FaceMaster on 6/22/2008 5:08:49 PM , Rating: 1
HMMMM on this site I get voted down more for admitting that I don't know something than I do for talking about sexually exploiting peoples Mums. Perhaps it's suggesting something?

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By bangmal on 6/24/2008 2:19:24 AM , Rating: 3
yes, maybe they have been sexually exploiting yours long enough to tolerate your comment?

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By vapore0n on 6/20/2008 12:12:05 PM , Rating: 3
Anandtech has the review of the new ATI and shows that the radeon scores 29.8fps in crysis.

Based on that, the new gforce doesnt do that much of an improvement.

Now, feature for feature, you have phycs(nvidia) vs true lcpm hdmi audio(ati).
Both marketed at different sectors with about the same performance in games.

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By Mitch101 on 6/20/2008 2:57:08 PM , Rating: 3
Some Free FSAA possibly with DX10.1 too.

RE: ATI Benchmarks?
By MAIA on 6/20/2008 12:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote: I the only person who hasn't seen these benchmarks yet? Or has AMD gone 'hey Nvidia lets compare cards, yes, that should a great experience' before giving them to the rest of us?

Yes, you're probably the only person who hasn't seen these benchmarks yet. Reviews listed here:

By othercents on 6/20/08, Rating: -1
RE: Unimpressed
By JoshuaBuss on 6/20/2008 1:39:09 PM , Rating: 5
are you nuts?

the 9800 GTX was considered a 'high performance' card ever since it was released (at well over $300, mind you), and the $200 (read - $169 after rebate) 4850 BEATS it.

the ONLY game these cards aren't getting incredibly frame rates in is Crysis, and that's because the game is just coded horribly.

what planet are you living on? how in the world can you say "the video card manufacturers need to look at price/performance"!?!? that's what the 4850 is all about.. if you want absolutely sick performance for a reasonable price, your best bet is 2 4850s.. end of story.

RE: Unimpressed
By NullSubroutine on 6/20/2008 2:07:09 PM , Rating: 2
there was a good performance increase in crysis and other games when the press used the official 8.6 drivers and not the beta press ones or the 8.5 many sites used. used the official 8.6 drivers and their speeds a bit higher. which was the same for the GTX 280 benchmarks as well.

RE: Unimpressed
By someguy123 on 6/20/2008 2:49:14 PM , Rating: 1
the game is not coded horribly, it just uses very high poly models and high quality shaders. the fact that the game even runs on current technology shows that it's coded very well.

the only reason other games perform better is because they are not drawing at the scale/not rendering as high quality of shaders and poly amount. just because crysis isn't cutting tons of corners to get high framerates doesn't mean it's coded poorly.

RE: Unimpressed
By System48 on 6/20/2008 1:47:37 PM , Rating: 2
The best buy will end up being a base model GTX260, while initial prices were suppose to be $399 some site are either making mistakes or putting a price drop in early. Right now you can get this one
for $302 plus shipping, price will proably be changed very soon a quick Google shopping search will show you that other sites had also listed the card for about $300 at first but now their prices are more like $425+.

RE: Unimpressed
By JoshuaBuss on 6/20/2008 2:23:04 PM , Rating: 5
how do you figure that when a single 4850 beats the 260 in a number of tests and can cost almost half as much? (~$170 vs. ~$320) ?

RE: Unimpressed
By FITCamaro on 6/20/2008 2:25:24 PM , Rating: 2
If you look at the availability on the site, they don't have it in stock. So they can price it at whatever they want.

RE: Unimpressed
By DeepBlue1975 on 6/20/2008 4:15:28 PM , Rating: 2
Look at the benchmarks. The gtx260 is a $400 trap right now, and you can't buy it almost anywhere yet.
The only high end alternatives are the gtx280, which is a real power hog for a single card, or the gx2 from nvidia which performs even better most of the time, at less price and drawing less power.
You also can get an 8800gt SLI at the same price as the gtx260 and usually better performance, though it'll require you to have an SLI supporting mobo which could be an inconvenience for many (it would be for me, but I don't care for it as I'm no gamer), but many gamers out there have sli compatible motherboards with an empty x16 slot they could put to good use :)

RE: Unimpressed
By Darkskypoet on 6/21/2008 2:47:55 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed! Why buy a broken gt280? I mean, its not uncommon to do it, and its very similar to the tri-core phenoms. Dies that large on a 65nm process have crappy yields. Also consider waste based on wafer size. Thus voila 8 core chips. I am surprised there isn't a 240 at 6 cores, etc. Maybe because it would be a laughing stock vs current nvidia cards? And could only serve to compete badly with existing skus? Regardless, IMHO; AMD served up my expectations and more w/HD4850... GT280... kinda like expecting a Top End Ferrari for xmas, and getting a Porsche Boxter. Not bad. But not what I expected from 1.4 billion nVidian transistors.

GT260 is a hope to recover wasted dollars by not waiting for a redesign / going with current TSMC 55nm libraries. It goes to show that this card was probably being worked on for quite a while if they didn't plan to go 55nm from the outset, and is more important to nVidia in TESLA configs, then in gaming machines. Much the same as R600 was more a firestream product then a top end gaming card. But think of the money GPGPU cards go for these days :) $700 ? BAH try again! Much higher ASPs and no annoying vid connectors to solder :)

RE: Unimpressed
By darkpaw on 6/20/2008 3:19:51 PM , Rating: 2
Really, are you serious? The ultra high end $500+ video card market is a tiny, tiny fraction of sales (albiet with a very high markup). Only idiots with tons of extra money spend 2x as much for 10% more performance (which is useless on pretty much anything besides a 30" monitor to boot).

For most people this is the most interesting time in video card releases in years! There hasn't been this much value to be found at this price range since the Ti4200 then Radeon 9500/9600. For years the mid range has been a desolate wasteland of underperforming, overpriced crap like the 8600, 1600, and 2600.

Three years ago I paid $450 for a 7800GT (the most I've ever paid for a video card ever), because pretty much anything in the mid range was crap for PCI-e. Now it is possible to get 2 8800gt's for under $300 and come damn near the performance of those $650 cards or buy two of these new 4850s and do even better for $350 or so (and say goodbye to nVidia crappy ass chipsets to boot, damn 780i is most unstable board I've ever owned).

Really, there has never been a time when so much performance can be bought for so little value. It doesn't really matter that the high end has been stagnating a bit because most people don't have 30" displays and $650 to spend on cards.

"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein
Related Articles

Most Popular ArticlesTop 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM
Free Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki