9800GTX reviews

Before people take that quote out of context. I was talking about the G92s Texture Address capabilities verses the G80s. And how the G92's Texture addressing was bottlenecked by bandwith with standard multitexturing.

Oh I did one too. Which carried on from my 9800GX2/9800GX2 Quad review benches.

http://www.rage3d.com/previews/video/nv9800gtx/

 

*Smacks forehead*

Can't believe I forgot to take that into account.

 

Nope. It comforts me to know that my GTX was not a bad purchase at all. I'm not sure I'll blow that kind of dough again though, whoa!

 

I also like that my 640MB gts is still pretty decent after over a year.


edit- nice review Chris, could you go on a bit more about the fps tanking in crysis with shadows on high?

 

They should've just called it the 8850GTX. And had a desktop 8700 for G94.

 

no, 8900 sounds better imo.

 

At least they didn't add any more X's to the name.

 

Or the 8750GTX. Still seems as though G92 is step backwards in some regards. Please roll on the single GPU, 512bit, 1Gb, 32ROP, 256SP behemoth that truely moves GPU power forward.

Now that's what should've been released this week.

 

My favourite was - and I kid you not - the "XFX GeForce 8800 GTX XXX". Everyone knows that more X's <=> more awesome.

[Edit] Aha, it still lives

 

The FPS falls to 5-8 FPS range because the textures/memory is being swapped into the bus. The only setup capable of delivering post 20 framerates was the Tri 8800GTX SLI setup. But the base performance of a single 8800GTX at those settings was like 9-10 FPS. Mouse lag was unbearable.

 

Also in stock at newegg, brand new 8800 GTS 512 cards with higher performance(well by 5 mhz at least) for $100+ less! Scary....


Aaron Spink
speaking for myself

 

24" (1920x1200) is getting as popular as 22" (1650x1080?). It's certainly high end. But then 30" (2560x1600) is increasing in popularity and it certainly deserves to be test.

However, as it's still the bleeding edge of tech, I don't fault sites that don't test. However, I probably won't bother reading their reviews either. As even if I didn't use that high res, it does illustrates areas that might be a problem if more demanding games entered the market.

Still a 9800 GTX for 300 USD is certainly a great deal even if its high resolution performance is a dog.

Thanks but I'll keep waiting for a more compelling solution before upgrading.

Regards,
SB

 

1680x1050 actually

It's "okay", but my father just picked up an 8800GT 512 for $150CAN a few weeks ago, and my sister got an 8800GTS 512 for $200CAN earlier this year.

Big yawn from me TBH, although I still don't mind that the card that I purchased a year and a half ago is still near the top. No other computer part that I've had has maintained that kind of value! It's just too bad that it's because the pace of innovation seems to have slowed

 

I have no problem with testing 2560x1600. I just don't think many people will be on LCDs with that cabability for quite a while. I'm really only interested in the resolutions that my display can handle. Looking at that Steam survey, only 3.6% of users have displays that can do 1920x1200 or higher. That's compared to 13% of users that have 8800 or 9600 series cards. New AMD cards don't even seem to be on the radar.


Edit: This survey is 5 months old, so the numbers have probably changed a reasonable amount, but 1080p capable displays are still pretty expensive.

 

I have a 5 yr old CRT that does 2048x1536, maybe they could test on that.

 

I like CRTs, but I find they make my eyes sore, even with a refresh of 100Hz. I've spent too much time in front of bad monitors I think. Need to get my eyes checked again. LCDs don't bother my eyes at all.

LCD is the standard desktop now, and it's going to affect the way people think about their graphics card purchases because they're locked into a fixed resolution. I don't think people will change their monitors as frequently as they change video cards.

 

I thought the 6 month refreshes were kinda crummy but really now, we're going 18 months and still nothing. I always looked forward to the new stuff coming out every year, even if i couldnt afford anything, just to know where the industry is headed. Ever since ATI slipped into the black abyss that is AMD its been pretty boring. And theres always improvements to be had. An 8800GTX/Ultra is going to struggle with 8x SSAA in most of last years games, i want that fixed without having to resort to a multi-gpu platform. Lower power draw higher performance per watt and IQ improvements are always welcomed as well.

I like where both Nvidia and ATI have headed as far as more affordable better perfoming parts, but i do miss the brand new/reworked tech flagship cards.

 

Heh, I actually play in that resolution when a game doesn't support widescreen.

Regards,
SB