NVIDIA GT200 Rumours & Speculation Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pretty expected performance, right? Or maybe slightly disappointing? ;) I thought it would have a liiiittle more UMPH!! and ROAR!! :LOL:
 
Yeah I was expecting it to be a little faster relative to G80/G92 than those scores suggest. Not bad but it's definitely vulnerable to RV770.

We're sorely lacking the games to justify this hardware though. If RV770 can provide 100fps at $200 instead of GT200's 150fps at $600 then we all know who comes out the winner there....
 
trinibwoy said:
First GTX280 review (stolen from techpowerup?) - http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=191150

It's up there with the 9800GX2 and beats it in several of the (arguably aged) titles tested. But we're getting into ridiculous 200+ fps territory here even at very high resolutions so I don't see the point.

One highlight is the idle power consumption which is around 9600GT and 8800GT levels.
Click to expand...

I expected the GTX280 to be faster than that, the stock GTX280 was slightly faster than the GX2. But I am not going to draw any final conclusions yet - the drivers might improve ("old" drivers was used in the review). Maybe I was just a bit too optimistic about the GTX280 performance, when I expected more than the 2xG92 that the specs indicated.

The load powerconsumption was in the also same range as the GX2 - I expected some effiency improvements under load too, . Idle consumption is good.
 
nagus said:
Anyone else who finds the Crysis results a little odd?

Radeons looks like they were benched with higher settings then the nvidia cards.

I find it VERY hard do believe that a 9800GTX get 29fps while the X2 only gets about 14.

something is wrong... look at this:

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...dia_geforce_9800_gtx_sli/18/#abschnitt_crysis
Click to expand...
Maybe due to CrossfireX not scaling equally good on all Crysis-scenes?

edit:
Did some digging - in those two links - and it turns out, that 9800GTX is in both cases 58-59% percent faster than a single 3870, so it seems quite obvious that they used different scenes and crossfire-scaling is the determining factor.
As already shown here:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,6...772775&article_id=631520&page=1&show=original
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,6...772782&article_id=631520&page=1&show=original
 
Last edited by a moderator:
just fyi but w1z runs Crysis tests on his own custom timedemo iirc so the #'s arent going to be with what you see elsewhere
 
Yeah and later W1zzard had this to say:

w1zzard said:
confirmed .. all crysis results are at 1280x1024. for some reason the loading screen loads in the right resolution and then crysis switches back to 1280x1024 for the benchmark :(
Click to expand...

Anybody who has an 8800GT/8800GTX knew their was no way to get the listed fps at those resolutions in the benchmark.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
trinibwoy said:
Yeah I was expecting it to be a little faster relative to G80/G92 than those scores suggest. Not bad but it's definitely vulnerable to RV770.

We're sorely lacking the games to justify this hardware though. If RV770 can provide 100fps at $200 instead of GT200's 150fps at $600 then we all know who comes out the winner there....
Click to expand...
Try running Age of Conan at 1920x1200 on max settings with HDR and AA then.
 
Tim said:
I expected the GTX280 to be faster than that, the stock GTX280 was slightly faster than the GX2. But I am not going to draw any final conclusions yet - the drivers might improve ("old" drivers was used in the review).
Click to expand...

But just how much additional tweaking to the drivers would need to be done? Nearly all of the ratios are about the same and there aren't any real hardware changes. The drivers for the most part should be almost the same as the old ones.

There are only so many ways you can run data through a scalar processor.
 
neliz said:
You wonder how many people with R600's have joined that team.. or heck.. judging by people doing less than 1 WU per day.. how many Celerons are in there...
Click to expand...
Maybe it's just people checking to see that it runs with a certain configuration? Surely you remember how big of a hassle it was to get the first GPU client to run on X1900s.
 
Rufus said:
http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teampage&teamnum=131015

As of right now they're in the top 1% of all teams (1259 of 125990) with only 200-odd CPUs (erm, surely GPUs).
Click to expand...


They must have aot of slow machiens in that team, here are my stats: http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_summary.php?s=&u=146079

And the team I'm in: http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/user_list.php?s=&t=11108

And how we rank overall: http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/team_list.php?s=
 
spajdr said:
Weird that techpowerup uses older forcewares and not ones with WHQL (177.26), at least Asus got them on CD with card.
Click to expand...

didn't FW 75.80 give some good performance boosts anyway; even to Oblivion?

i just [now] got an email from a friend that says Crysis runs much better for him [even somewhat "playable" at 19x12 with his SLI'd 8800GTXes he could not get before].

i absolutely cannot confirm as i am back on powered by AMD. i am depending on his report.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
The R7xx Architecture Rumours & Speculation Thread
5 6 7
Replies
124
Views
31K
AlexV
AlexV
A
  • Locked
The G92 Architecture Rumours & Speculation Thread
53 54 55
Replies
1K
Views
241K
Geo
G
A
The Official IGP Rumours & Speculation Thread
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
12K
Ailuros
Ailuros
A
  • Locked
The Official RV630/RV610 Rumours & Speculation Thread
38 39 40
Replies
780
Views
139K
Geo
G
Back
Top