Jawed
Legend
When I read the Fudzilla article I have to admit the X did make me think the rumour was rubbish.
Jawed
HardOCP refuses to review GTS 250
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
Jawed
i dont mind re branding, as long as they rebrand while lowering the price that is all i care about.
While GTS250 may be a 9800 GT and itself is a 8800GT which is again a slightly scale down of 8800 GTX.
What matters is pricing..... Could anyone provides Info on the pricing history.
Edit: So from a little Research, Geforce 8800 GTX was launched on Nov 2006 Pricing at $559,
GTS 250 is launching ( March 09 ) 1GB version at $149. The faster clock speed and memory more then made up for the lost of 128Bit memory performance.
So today $149 will get you the top performing Graphics Card 27 months ago worth of $559.
( I dont know if the 512Mb $129 version will be a match for 8800GTX )
Compare to CPU performance this isn't such a bad deal at all.
While GTS250 may be a 9800 GT and itself is a 8800GT which is again a slightly scale down of 8800 GTX.
What matters is pricing..... Could anyone provides Info on the pricing history.
Edit: So from a little Research, Geforce 8800 GTX was launched on Nov 2006 Pricing at $559,
GTS 250 is launching ( March 09 ) 1GB version at $149. The faster clock speed and memory more then made up for the lost of 128Bit memory performance.
So today $149 will get you the top performing Graphics Card 27 months ago worth of $559.
( I dont know if the 512Mb $129 version will be a match for 8800GTX )
Compare to CPU performance this isn't such a bad deal at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
The GTS 250 is a rebranded 900GTX+, not a 9800GT/8800GT. So its quite a lot faster than a regular 8800GTX.
So the real comparison should be between the 250 at its current price and the 9800GTX+ at both its launch price, and its most recent price.
In both cases the 250 looks like a decent deal to me. Of course thats only in comparison to NV's own line up. If it wasn't for AMD, we wouldn't be seeing these price cuts at all.
Kanyamagufa
Regular
This whole renaming scene feels like something out of a Monty Python sketch...
Captain Jack Sparrow may have put it best, though; "That's just maddeningly unhelpful."
Captain Jack Sparrow may have put it best, though; "That's just maddeningly unhelpful."
Blazkowicz
Legend
I like the renaming! it properly markets the G92b with a bit of a refresh on price and frequencies.
consumers don't know about GPUs and stuff, so they don't care, informed people know about GPUs, frequency, ram, architecture etc. so they don't necessarily have to care either.
consumers don't know about GPUs and stuff, so they don't care, informed people know about GPUs, frequency, ram, architecture etc. so they don't necessarily have to care either.
Jawed
Legend
No, frequencies have not been refreshed. Guess that makes you a consumer not an informed person.
Jawed
Blazkowicz
Legend
ouch, I'm pwned! 
though, while googling about the GTS 240, it's said to be faster than the 9800GT. not that I care much about 5 or 10%, but whatever. for someone with a NV bias a G92b is reasonable.
from this end of the market, note that the 9800GTX+ was a no-go anyway (too expensive)
though, while googling about the GTS 240, it's said to be faster than the 9800GT. not that I care much about 5 or 10%, but whatever. for someone with a NV bias a G92b is reasonable.
from this end of the market, note that the 9800GTX+ was a no-go anyway (too expensive)
Isn't the word on GTS 240 that it's a 9800GT at 9800GTX+ frequencies?
Jawed
Legend
You got me there - I can't even find GTS240:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_family.html
Do you think this'll do?:
http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?modelmenu=2&model=2425&l1=2&l2=6&l3=656&l4=0
Jawed
Cookie Monster
Newcomer
Think its at 9800GTX frequencies.
Jawed
Legend
NVIDIA Backs Away From GTS 240 Rebrand of 9800 GT
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=14551
Jawed
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=14551
Jawed
Thats a bad move IMO. the 240 re-name made a lot of sense in light of its increased clocks and the existance of the 250. No we are stuck with understanding 2 different naming schemes for what is essentially the same architecture.
Well maybe the arrival of the "not for individual purchase" GeForce GTS 150 card explains it a bit. nVidia already screwed up with the new namingscheme eventhough you can't buy this in the shops...
Check the GeForce GTS150 specs which basically is GeForce GTX250 'slow'.... it's the 'old' GF9800GTX+ using the original PCB and original GTX+ cooler and 1GB memory.
And since GTS150 would probably be faster than GTS240, while also having better specs... well you can see where this is going.... very confusing already
Check the GeForce GTS150 specs which basically is GeForce GTX250 'slow'.... it's the 'old' GF9800GTX+ using the original PCB and original GTX+ cooler and 1GB memory.
And since GTS150 would probably be faster than GTS240, while also having better specs... well you can see where this is going.... very confusing already
And since GTS150 would probably be faster than GTS240, while also having better specs... well you can see where this is going.... very confusing already
This can't be! renaming the card was supposed to make it better for consumers, are nvidia really only after the money of unknowing customers?
Wtf? I thought the GTS150 was going to be G94 based. So the only difference between GTS150 and GTS250 is 100Mhz memory clock? There's no way people can be this incompetent so I've gotta agree now with all the people who say Nvidia is just intentionally f*cking with their customers and partners in order to dump old inventory.
How is the 150 priced compared to the 250? I'm just not seeing the logic behind using different names. Clearly it makes no sense from a product positioning point of view but it doesn't seem to help the things sell either.
I mean, why name a part GTS 150 when you could justifiably call it a GTS 250? Surely thats going to hurt their sales?
In effect we now have:
'old PCB' 9800GTX+ 512MB @ 1100Mhz = GTS 250 512MB 'fast'
'old PCB' 9800GTX+ 1024MB @ 1000Mhz = GTS 150
'new PCB' 9800GTX+ 1024MB @ 1000Mhz = GTS 250 1024MB 'slow'
'new PCB' 9800GTX+ 1024MB @ 1100Mhz = GTS 250 1024MB 'fast'
Have I got that right? If so, its a complete mess.
I mean, why name a part GTS 150 when you could justifiably call it a GTS 250? Surely thats going to hurt their sales?
In effect we now have:
'old PCB' 9800GTX+ 512MB @ 1100Mhz = GTS 250 512MB 'fast'
'old PCB' 9800GTX+ 1024MB @ 1000Mhz = GTS 150
'new PCB' 9800GTX+ 1024MB @ 1000Mhz = GTS 250 1024MB 'slow'
'new PCB' 9800GTX+ 1024MB @ 1100Mhz = GTS 250 1024MB 'fast'
Have I got that right? If so, its a complete mess.
Similar threads
