backtop


Print 70 comment(s) - last by rainyday.. on Apr 14 at 11:10 PM

NVIDIA's next-generation mid-range offerings are just 10 days away

Earlier this week review publications received their test kits for the GeForce 8300 through 8600. The bulk of these cards, the GeForce 8500 GT, GeForce 8600 GT and GeForce 8600 GTS will launch on April 17, with the GeForce 8300 GS and GeForce 8400 GS following soon after.

DailyTech published technical details of these cards last month. In a nutshell:
  • GeForce 8600 GTS -- 256 MB GDDR3, 675 MHz core clock, 1000 MHz memory clock
  • GeForce 8600 GT -- 256 MB GDDR3, 540 MHz core clock, 700 MHz memory clock
  • GeForce 8500 GT -- 128 to 256 MB DDR2 or GDDR3, 450 MHz core clock, 700 MHz memory clock
NVIDIA claims these three cards will be available at launch.  The 8600 GTS will fill the $199 to $229 price point, followed by the 8600 GT ($149 to $159) and the GeForce 8500 GT ($89 to $129).

The GeForce 8400 GS and 8300 GS will bring up the rear with 450 MHz core clocks and 400 MHz memory clocks. However, these two GPUs will only show up in OEM systems and will not likely make an appearance in your local hardware store.



Comments     Threshold


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

What about performance?
By 4745454b on 4/7/2007 3:32:01 PM , Rating: 2
According to this site, http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=... the performance of these cards is very lacking. A very overclocked 8600GTS with AA/AF enabled is slower then an x1950pro. If this is the best that an overclocked 8600GTS can do, then Nvidia looks like it has a problem.




RE: What about performance?
By therealnickdanger on 4/7/2007 3:43:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...then Nvidia looks like it has a problem.

Yeah, there aren't any perfected drivers for it yet... Be patient. The card isn't even out yet.


RE: What about performance?
By Chillin1248 on 4/7/2007 5:33:51 PM , Rating: 2
According to a (in my opinion) more reliable site, the 8600 GTS performs slightly better than a 7900 GT:

http://vr-zone.com/?i=4883

However they did manage to get a rediculous overclock on it:

http://vr-zone.com/?i=4875

-------
Chillin


RE: What about performance?
By tuteja1986 on 4/8/2007 4:18:21 AM , Rating: 2
Some people in Australia already have bought the 7600GT since one shop broke the early date sale terms.


RE: What about performance?
By PrinceGaz on 4/9/2007 9:22:52 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, I would imagine lots of people in Australia (and elsewhere) have already bought the 7 600GT, as it has now been available for over a year ;p


RE: What about performance?
By Ajax9000 on 4/10/2007 3:19:27 AM , Rating: 2
RE: What about performance?
By Alpha4 on 4/7/2007 5:56:35 PM , Rating: 2
Are there any cases you can recall where mid-life drivers significantly improved performance? I don't mean with specific games like Black & White 2 or Doom III, just overall.


RE: What about performance?
By Lakku on 4/7/2007 10:39:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, nVidia did it to ATi back when the original Radeon released. I believe it was for the Geforce 2 GTS or Geforce 3, but on ATi's launch day, nVidia released new drivers that made their cards quite a bit better. It seemed like it was planned that way all along. Perhaps nVidia will do it again to R600 (or just release a refreshed card), but that may just be wishful thinking. Anyway, I believe the 8 series/R600 and beyond will benefit from drivers more then cards in the past, due to the increased need for software to work with hardware to dictate, on the fly, how much processing should go to pixel, vertex, and/or geometry shading. Make drivers, over time, to do this job more efficiently, and I think you will see some noticeable performance gains.


RE: What about performance?
By SquidianLoveGod on 4/8/2007 12:50:32 AM , Rating: 2
Nvidia bought out the company that did Wicked 3D, Which actually released drivers for they're products which would give a 25% boost in performance.
These New mid ranged cards are still new, the drivers are still young, Performance will increase, I remember awhile ago during the days of the FX series, Nvidia released drivers which increased performance on my TNT2 M64 card, I was astonished at the feat.

I personally would go for a 7900GS price/performance.


RE: What about performance?
By Marlowe on 4/8/2007 8:43:48 AM , Rating: 2
Ooh! I've also had a TNT2 M64! :D

I exchanged my S3 Savage4 with one :) Great card! Remember playing good old Unreal(1) on it :D


RE: What about performance?
By AstroCreep on 4/8/2007 3:03:30 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously! Hell, we haven't even seen the ATI/AMD offerings yet, which would surely prompt nVidia to force a quick price drop when they are released.
Take a deep breathe a wait for a little while. You really think that 7800gt is gonna go by the way side in another two months? :/


RE: What about performance?
By KCjoker on 4/7/2007 4:26:39 PM , Rating: 3
You're wrong, the performance isn't lacking at all. These are low/mid range cards and yet they're performing as well as last gen high range cards. That's what happens every time with new low/mid range cards. Look at the 7600GT how it was comparable with the previous high range card the 6800 Ultra. You get what you pay for, $200 bucks buys you good framerates at low resolutions. If you want better than that be willing to pay for it.


RE: What about performance?
By razor2025 on 4/7/2007 5:01:58 PM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately, that's not right either. $200-220 is mid-high range, and ~$150 is the mid range "sweet spot". In current state, 8600 GTS loses to parts that cost ~$140-150 (or lower with rebates and sale). Even with coming DX10 games and driver improvement, I don't see 30-40% increase in performance( that makes these cards "bang for buck" )possible. If I'm blowing $200 on a card, I'd expect to be able to run latest game at reasonable resolution around 1280x1024 and 1680x1050 w/o AA or AF, not 1024x768.


RE: What about performance?
By KCjoker on 4/7/2007 5:26:13 PM , Rating: 2
Performs pretty much like a 7950GT(with DX10 capability when drivers get sorted) and for $200 I think it's a good deal but to each his/her own. I see your point that it's in a sticky spot which is why I paid the extra $60 and got a 8800GTS 320mb. I was waiting on the 8600GTS and wanted to see benchmarks. However I was worried that the 8800GTS 320mb might get discontinued once the 8600GTS was launched. Not sure if it will or not but I'm happy with my purchase.


RE: What about performance?
By Lakku on 4/7/2007 10:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
1680x1050 may be asking too much from a mid-range card. The latest games, i.e. Oblivion, STALKER, SupCom etc. can take noticeable dips in certain areas on a quad core, single 8800GTX system. This is at max settings, but the fact remains the latest games can take their toll.


RE: What about performance?
By drebo on 4/8/2007 3:21:16 AM , Rating: 1
You're an idiot.

So, preliminary benchmarks for this generation's MID range cards put them at last generations HIGH end card. That sounds pretty good to me.

How about DX10 support? Where's the X1950pro sit on that? Oh, right. It doesn't.

The only threat to these cards right now is the 8800GTS 320mb.

For the record, a 7900GS($140 card from eVGA) plays games at 1280x1024 and 1680x1050 without a hitch. Hell, I can play Oblivion on a 7600GS medium settings at 1280x1024 with no problem. My 7900GT gets me stutter-free gameplay on Ultra High settings at 1680x1050 in every game I've ever tried to play on it.

These 8000-series cards will perform just fine for their pricepoint (low-mid to upper-mid range buyers) in their target markets (people who are smart enough to realize that the worth of a card when compared to a completely different card is more than the number of FPS it gets in Quake 4).


RE: What about performance?
By Targon on 4/8/2007 9:06:47 AM , Rating: 2
That's pretty much the whole point here, that you need to compare these new cards to the other cards in their generation and the generation before it.

X1950 is really from the Geforce 7900 generation, no matter when the X1950 was released. Now, the R600 based cards are due to be released "soon", which should re-initiate the true performance battle between NVIDIA and ATI video processors.

In addition to this, with the lack of DirectX 10 titles, the only real performance measurement at this point is the performance in DirectX 9 games. It doesn't matter at this point if a video card is DirectX 9 or 10 right now, it's all about how the performance is compared to the other DirectX 9 cards on the market. That means we can properly compare everything from Geforce FX 5200 to 8800 cards and Radeon 9500 to X1950 cards to see how they compare.


RE: What about performance?
By crimson117 on 4/9/2007 10:33:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's pretty much the whole point here, that you need to compare these new cards to the other cards in their generation and the generation before it.

Well the real comparison is, considering these new cards, what's the best performance I can get for my money?

If your budget is $150... should you get one of these cards, or should you opt for a x1950Pro?


RE: What about performance?
By razor2025 on 4/8/2007 5:27:38 PM , Rating: 3
Typical ad hominem attack. DX10 is still up in the air as far as "efficiency" goes. No one knows how much performance penalty will kick in to render DX10 specific graphic enhancement. You buy hardware to software specification, not buying hardware guessing the software spec.

This is the facts. 8600GTS will cost $200-230. You can get a 8800GTS for ~$250. 8600GTS LOSES to 1950GT/PRO in some benchmark, and the Radeon is a ~$120 card. Make no mistake, 8600GTS is priced as $200 and above card, that has same/lower performance of a $120-130 cards with speculative performance on DX10. People smart enough will pony up the extra $20 to get a much better performing card, or save up the $60-70 savings for future upgrade later when DX10 ACTUALLY MATTERS!


RE: What about performance?
By drebo on 4/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: What about performance?
By defter on 4/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: What about performance?
By otispunkmeyer on 4/10/2007 4:07:00 AM , Rating: 2
although your comparing a properly mid range card with one that was slightly higher end, i think the big mistake NV made here was keeping the crummy 128bit memory bus alive.

i was hoping, in light of this, Ati might capitalize and go with at least 192bit bus, but apparently their mid range is using 128bit as well

512bit on the top end for Ati, mid range gets left in the stone age on 128bit


Very informative article
By Spartan Niner on 4/7/2007 2:33:16 PM , Rating: 5
This is a very clear, concise article that has exactly the info we all wanted - specs, price, and a release window. Good job!




RE: Very informative article
By therealnickdanger on 4/7/2007 3:47:07 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. It was a pleasure to read!


RE: Very informative article
By Alpha4 on 4/7/2007 5:45:52 PM , Rating: 2
And not a single typo or grammatical error too! Kudos Sven.


RE: Very informative article
By BladeVenom on 4/7/2007 3:57:32 PM , Rating: 2
Now all we need is some reliable information about ATI's dates, prices, and specs.


RE: Very informative article
By TechLuster on 4/7/2007 5:07:43 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, but the specs given are incomplete-- what about number of shaders and shader clocks? All rumors suggest the 8600GTS has 64 shaders (though there's been no info on shader clocks), but sources conflict about whether the 8600GT has 48 or 64 (I would guess NVIDIA went with 48, since this card will be memory bandwidth limited anyway). Finally, I think we can assume these cards all have 8 ROP's, since with G80 the number of ROP's is the memory bus width divided by 16.

Also, I think the other bit of info a few of us are interested in is obviously performance, but I guess we can't expect DT to release any numbers until the NDA's up.


RE: Very informative article
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 4/7/2007 5:14:52 PM , Rating: 2
We don't have an embargo. I have conflicting info though, so I'm not publishing anything just yet.


RE: Very informative article
By crystal clear on 4/8/2007 5:10:23 AM , Rating: 1
Just for reference purposes-

NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS Performance Preview

Published by Vijay Anand on Saturday, 7th April, 2007

http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?id=2...


RE: Very informative article
By cubdukat on 4/8/2007 7:37:34 PM , Rating: 2
I'm building an HTPC rig that can also do light to moderate gaming, and what I can't find is if the 8600's will have HDCP on board.

I'd like to be able to play Crysis in the best way I can, but I'd also like to be able to play HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movies.

Even if it doesn't, I may buy it anyways. Right now all I have is my MB's GeForce 6100, which I have heard is virtually useless for gaming. It also doesn't seem to work so well with HTPC tasks, either. If this thing can give me both good framerates in stuff like FEAR and it has HDCP, then it's a done deal.


RE: Very informative article
By TechLuster on 4/8/2007 2:50:54 AM , Rating: 5
Why on earth did this post get modded down? I was making an important technical point, namely that the number of shaders and shader clocks are a major *currently unknown* factor which will affect the performance of these cards, especially on future titles (which are going to be much more shader intensive than current games).

To those people who modded me down: you need to understand that there's much more to performance than core clocks and memory bandwidth (which is even more true now that the shaders on GeForce 8 cards are in a separate clock domain). Thus while the "Very informative article" post above was correct that useful information was succinctly presented, it was NOT correct to say that the article contains "exactly the info we all wanted."

If I had said something like "omg this DT article sux! lol!" then you should mod me down, but that's not what I did. I simply pointed out that while the article was good, relevant information was missing. I then attempted to fill in the holes with the best information available for the benefit of my fellow DT readers.

Please don't mod down posts of people who are genuinely trying to add something useful to the discussion.


It is about damn time
By Staples on 4/7/2007 6:08:34 PM , Rating: 2
I have been waiting for the C2D prices to drop and the midrange 8000 cards to come out. With out AMD offering anything to compete with the Core 2, the processors have not dropped a cent since they came out. This is totally ridiculous and makes me not want to buy an Intel CPU. As far as NVIDIA, at least the prices have been dropping but they have been milking the high end for so long it makes me sick.

Where are you AMD (CPUs and video cards?).




RE: It is about damn time
By Staples on 4/7/2007 6:12:16 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah, I really hope someone comes out with a 512Mb version of the 8600GTS because if not, I may not be getting a new video card. The only way to get 512mb+ is to get an 8800 high end for $600+? I don't think I am that interested in upgrading if this is how it will be working out.


RE: It is about damn time
By GaryJohnson on 4/7/2007 6:49:25 PM , Rating: 2
A 640MB 8800GTS can be had for ~$370.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...


RE: It is about damn time
By sdsdv10 on 4/8/2007 11:24:36 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, it is ~$335 with mail in rebate (yeah I know, MIR suck but what are you going to do) and has free shipping. Sounds like a pretty nice deal.


RE: It is about damn time
By Rickler on 4/7/2007 7:04:32 PM , Rating: 2
I was waiting too; I bought a 65nm 3600x2 instead. It's not as fast as the e6300, but at half the price it's a better bang for the buck.


RE: It is about damn time
By TechLuster on 4/8/2007 8:01:41 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
With out AMD offering anything to compete with the Core 2, the processors have not dropped a cent since they came out.

First off, Intel's first round of Core 2 price cuts are expected to happen within a few days, so you won't be waiting much longer.

But do note that AMD's still pretty competitive in the lower-end market. For example, you can currently pick up a 4600+ EE for $124.


Performance Leap
By Alpha4 on 4/7/2007 6:08:27 PM , Rating: 2
It seems to me that generational leaps in graphics-cards yield less performance increase than seasonal refreshes of current-gen cards.

If I recall correctly the 7900gtx brought anywhere from 25% (HL2, Prey) to 60% (3Dmark06) performance improvement over its predecessor, the 7800gtx, which stopped short at around 20-30% faster than the 6800 Ultra.

I think the optimal time to upgrade for 7600gt users would be during this refresh with the likely release of an 8900gs. Similarly 7900gtx users would enjoy more bang for their buck by waiting for the 8900gtx assuming Nvidia adheres to this trend.




RE: Performance Leap
By RussianSensation on 4/8/2007 12:55:04 AM , Rating: 3
You need to review your benchmarks. Look at Tom's VGA Charts.

7800GTX 430/1200 256mb is:

58% faster than 6800Ultra in HL2:E1 @ 1600x1200 AA/AF
58% faster in Hard Truck @ 1600x1200 AA/AF
64% faster in Oblivion @ 1600x1200 no AA/AF
50% faster in Prey @ 1280x1024 AA/AF
50% faster in Rise of Nations @ 1024x768 AA/AF
147% faster in Titan Quest @ 1024x768 noAA/noAF

However, 7900GTX (650/1600) - refresh of 7800GTX 512mb (550/1700) is roughly 20% faster.

Refreshes, in fact, are almost never as fast as a full generation upgrade (9700Pro -> 9800xt (+30%) < X800XT (2x!) -> X850XT PE (+20%) < X1800XT 512 (2x!) -> X1950XT (+20-30%)


RE: Performance Leap
By crystal clear on 4/8/2007 2:37:06 AM , Rating: 1
Quote-

UPDATE We received an email from Omid Rahmat, CEO of Tom's Publishing LLC confirming a sale. Omid said: "The rumors flying around are less than accurate. I can only comment on one point, and I do so reluctantly, hoping to avoid more ridiculous rumors.
"TG Publishing, the publisher of Tom's Hardware Guide, has been sold. We expect the deal to close this month, and will make an official announcement at the appropriate time. We believe that there are some very exciting times ahead for the company, and that our readers have a lot to look forward to. I hope that I can share our expectations with you shortly."

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38...


RE: Performance Leap
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 4/8/2007 2:38:56 AM , Rating: 2
No surprise there. They sold TG Daily earlier this year already.


RE: Performance Leap
By crystal clear on 4/8/07, Rating: 0
RE: Performance Leap
By TechLuster on 4/8/2007 7:52:20 AM , Rating: 2
AnandTech already explored ReadyBoost performance in depth on pages 5-7 of their Windows Vista Performance Guide:

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=29...


RE: Performance Leap
By crystal clear on 4/8/2007 8:11:19 AM , Rating: 1
Thanks will look into this-seems interesting !


By crystal clear on 4/8/2007 11:45:57 AM , Rating: 1
Add to the list-

"GeForce 8900GTX and 8950GX2 "

"the most expensive GeForce 8950GX2 that will be sold for $599 USD. It is rumored to be a dual GPU solution much like the 7950GX2 and will come with a total of 512MB GDDR-4 memory per GPU."

(read the table)
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/7055/geforce_8900gtx...


By Staples on 4/8/2007 12:52:22 PM , Rating: 2
All these variations are ridiculous. In the end they all cost like $25 apart from each other. If I was a retailer, I'd only carry a few of them.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 4/8/2007 2:21:14 PM , Rating: 2
That document is fake CC.


By crystal clear on 4/10/2007 6:25:37 AM , Rating: 1
On a Conf Call with Nvidia now, release of 8800Ultra is confirmed, Specs, later.

Confirmed a single chip card.

Expect Reviews on May 1st and aavailablity May 15th

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=142641


By yacoub on 4/8/2007 5:03:24 PM , Rating: 1
Yet considering the best of those - the 8600GTS can barely keep up with the cards of last year, the only ones that really matter to gamers are the 8800 and 8900 series cards, and generally with those price is the key determinant. Most people would find it unreasonable to spend more than ~$300 for a GPU (some say $250 max). Right now that's the 8800GTS. It will be interesting to see what ATi releases in that price&performance range and if it offers more performance for a similar price or similar performance for a lower price (though the latter seems unlikely since the 8800GTS performs rather well for a pretty sweet price point).

It will also be interesting to see benchmarks of the mobile Go versions and if they perform more closely with the 8600 or the 8800 desktop GPUs.


Direct X 10
By Pryde on 4/8/2007 8:30:57 AM , Rating: 2
These cards may not be better than last gens Direct X 9 cards, but we haven't seen what Direct X 10 capable of. If Microsoft claims are correct that DX10 is 6-8 times more "efficient" at rendering the images then these could possibly be powerhouses.

At GDC a Alienware PC with a Intel Quad Core CPU (unknown speed)and a single 8800GTX on a Dell 30" monitor could run Crysis at 2560x1600 with full detail on runs very smooth. (also like to point out it was done with Beta DX10, Beta Drivers and un-optimized crysis code)

Now if we drop the res down to what the majority play on 1280x1024 then we are probably going to be CPU limited.(unless you have a quad core)

These cards will easily play any DX9 game at where 90% of people play at 1280x1024 or under with Full Detail, AA etc and 1600x1200 with full detail but with like 2-4x AA.

And if you want to play at Higher res and every turned on full then theres the 8800GTS/GTX and SLi.




RE: Direct X 10
By ttnuagadam on 4/8/2007 9:23:03 AM , Rating: 2
that seems very unlikely considering everyone is complaining about how much crysis chugs even on the best pc's available.


RE: Direct X 10
By Cascaderanger on 4/9/2007 9:21:45 AM , Rating: 2
Guess I'll have to ask, since I dont know. You say the Crysis code (in the test you mention) was unoptimized. Would that be for the GPU, or for the quad-core CPU? Both? I'm not going to assume either way. If you mean CPU, I dont see how unoptimized code could make use of quad-core vs. dual-core unless it's set up to utilize the extra cores? Does the OS automatically load share between four cores?


what about mobility parts?
By ATC on 4/7/2007 3:18:06 PM , Rating: 2
There was a rumour that NVIDIA’s mid-range 8 series cards' launch will coincide with their first DX10 mobility parts. I guess not.




RE: what about mobility parts?
By Kougar on 4/7/2007 4:26:43 PM , Rating: 2
There were G8x GO series cards in working laptops for CeBIT, so no reason I know of to think they wouldn't launch them with these or shortly afterwards.


Price Drop
By ryancat on 4/7/2007 3:32:58 PM , Rating: 2
Could we expect a price drop on the sub 8xxx cards with the release of these?




RE: Price Drop
By Nightmare225 on 4/7/2007 3:58:20 PM , Rating: 2
I'd guess so, considering that Nvidia will start discontinuing the G70 series ASAP after these cards are released. They'll want to get rid of them as fast as they can.


Too much nerfing
By razor2025 on 4/7/2007 4:57:22 PM , Rating: 4
Looks like the 128-bit bus decision is hurting these cards. The performance from the review posted above looks VERY disappointing. X1950 series bests it in current games by around 10-15%+ in FPS, and it's $50-60 cheaper than 8600 GTS. Even if driver optimization gives it 20% increase (pretty high expectation in real world), it's price/performance is still in doubt. Add the fact that for $20-30 more, you can get a 8800GTS 320MB, and there's no way 8600 GTS can catch that. So, either 8600 series position itself lower in price range, or it has to compete with its older brethren at the top, and older generation at the bottom (where the DX10 capability is quite marginalized).




I have no reason to replace ...
By Iroh on 4/9/2007 8:46:49 AM , Rating: 2
I have no reason to replace my 5700 ultra yet.

Others who keep up with the latest and greatest games may. I don't know. Can anyone speak from experience on that.

Which card is required to "enjoy" the latest and greatest games presuming you also have 2GB of Ram and a 3GHZ P4?




By robber98 on 4/9/2007 12:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
Depends on what kind of game you play and screen resolution/eyes candies you play with...


Good info to know
By bamacre on 4/7/2007 2:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
It is nice that they give the release date and price ranges. The 8600 GTS looks like it will be a very popular card.




benchmarks wanted
By Jayceon Carter on 4/7/2007 4:19:35 PM , Rating: 2
Great info! Considering the prices I'll be choosing between the 8600 GT and GTS. Just wait and see the final benchmarks first.




New cards
By restrada on 4/7/2007 6:28:07 PM , Rating: 2
I will most definitely pick me up the GT card courtesy of Newegg.com.




By rexian96 on 4/7/2007 9:29:16 PM , Rating: 2
Great news. I have been eying this bad boy, 8600GT :) Can this in a combo with Brisbane 3600+ decode 1080p BD/HDDVD ?

That 3600+ Brisbane at $65 is very tempting. Anybody think if overclocked @2.5GHz can decode 1080p BD/HDDVD with help from 8600GT? If yes, I could save some money & go with AMD ;)

If I have to go for E4300, probably I can get away with nvidia 7050 and won't need 8600GT. Any thoughts?




Any mobile parts?
By jeffbui on 4/8/2007 8:21:26 AM , Rating: 2
Any mobile parts?




BD/HDDVD decoding with X2
By rexian96 on 4/8/2007 12:25:30 PM , Rating: 2
I have been eying this bad boy, 8600GT, which is going to be available in 10 days. Can this, in a combo with an overclocked Brisbane 3600+, decode 1080p BD/HDDVD?

That 3600+ Brisbane at $65 is very tempting and I see it can be overclocked to 2.5GHz fairly easily. Anybody think it's possible? Thanks.




Am I missing something?
By Neoprimal on 4/9/2007 2:02:36 AM , Rating: 2
Noone has mentioned the fact that these are DX10 cards. I think it's sort of premature and even a moot argument to compare it to kickass DX9 cards. A crappy DX9 card still kicks the snot out of a DX8/7 card right? I could be wrong, I guess. The market for these cards, low/mid end or not are Vista users ie: people who are on Vista right now who are 100% ready to play THE FIRST DX10 games on the market and experience Vista in all it's um, glory?, otherwise it'd probably be worth it to stick with a mid-high end DX9 card like the X1950pro. As I said, I could be wrong about all of this but it's my 2c. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Personally speaking, I wouldn't even consider buying a $250+ DX9 card right now, much more 2 of them for SLI/Crossfire. As shakey as Vista is right now, the future (near or maybe even a little far) is that OS and DX10 and as great as the DX9 cards are, they CANNOT play DX10 games; while as slow as these low/mid end DX10 cards are, it's sure they'll play DX10 and all Direct X generations under it fine....if but a little slow (compared to the pros and ultras) :p.

Cheers.




Model Mayhem
By thartist on 4/9/2007 7:29:09 PM , Rating: 2
... So now, havin heard of the mayhem they had done with latest gen vcards names, and to make things easier for the user, they are releasing (not all of them just yet) 8100, 8200, 8300, 8400, 8500, 8600, 8700, 8800, 8900 with their corresponding sufixes.

Thank you nvidia.




By DingieM on 4/12/2007 5:37:30 AM , Rating: 2
Just look at what AMD is going to deliver very soon:

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=38...

Seems they have the advantage in the combined form of: low power 65nm, considerable lower pricing than previous generations and competition, very fast, built-in dedicated video hardware, HDMI.
So this would be my choice if going for PC graphics cards and it sure looks worth to wait for.




IT DOSENT MATTER
By rainyday on 4/14/2007 11:10:25 PM , Rating: 2
guys from what i see its a pretty bad time for pc gaming. developers a not releasing pc games. they are favoring 360 for some reason. all good games r released for 360 (except strategy). i wouldn't want a pc upgrade now.
i thought console games are less profitable than pc due to licensing and royalties.




"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki