# 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently [Update - FACT!]



## ADF (Oct 15, 2007)

Linky







A $250 card beat the 8800 Ultra... anyone see a problem with this picture?


----------



## net-cat (Oct 15, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

(Assuming it's not a glitch...)

No problems. It just means that nVidia will gimp the next round of 8800GTs in some way.

Mendocino core, anyone?


----------



## Eevee (Oct 15, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

Crap, I have the GTS.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Oct 15, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

meh... I wouldn't go by the benchmarking software. All the best tests are done with benchmark mods for games like Doom3, Half-life 2: the Lost Coast, FEAR, etc. A card can get great benchmarks in benchmarking software, but end up running like crap in your favorite games which I've actually experienced. I tried a tweaked driver on my old 6600GT AGP. Normally scores around 8000pts overclocked in 3dmark2k3. Installed a 3rd party tweaked driver, overclocked, and ran 3dmark2k3 to score 9000pts but my games ran like crap. Installed the old tweaked drivers that scored a bit lower and better improvement in the games.


----------



## ADF (Oct 15, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

It has been pointed out elsewhere that the ultra scoring less than the GTX shows the chart is unreliable.


----------



## latiass (Oct 16, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

I saw this earlier. I really hope it delivers on what is advertised, because if just a die shrink (and I think clock speed increase and MOAR MAGIC STREAM PROCESSORS) can perform this well, I have high hopes for whatever they happen to be cooking up in their labs. Then again, ATI's next addition to their current lineup is supposedly even better (RV670? idk), so I guess it will be interesting.


			
				netcat said:
			
		

> No problems. It just means that nVidia will gimp the next round of 8800GTs in some way.


They seem to be pretty damn good at doing that. Kind of like the G84 and G86. I was hoping G9x was totally going to be the GEFORCE 9800 XT or something, just for the irony, but it's possible they might just don the 8x00 moniker until they can think of something ridiculous, like ATI did.


----------



## net-cat (Oct 16, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

GeForce 8800, 8900, 8950, 8975, 8987.5, 8993.75, 8996.875, 8998.4375, etc.


----------



## ADF (Oct 22, 2007)

*RE: 8800GT is a mid range monster, apparently*

UPDATE

This source claims the 8800GT is actually more in the performance range between the GTS and GTX. Not as good as the equel to ULTRA claim, but better than the one about it being in between the 8600GT and 8800GTS.

Before making purchase plans remember, we have yet to see the revised 8800GTS benched which has a 65nm die shrink and shader pipline boost up to 128.


----------



## ADF (Oct 28, 2007)

We got ourselves some NDA breakers! 8800GT performance and price range is confirmed with official reviews.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1210/1

http://www.bootdaily.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=849&Itemid=51

So yes, it's confirmed, a mid range priced part performing near GTX level.

This is just hilarious, the other cards are going to have to either get revisions or significant price drops to make way for this one. Either way, Crysis level gaming just became accessible by the mainstream.

[edit]

Crysis SP demo benchmark.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1211/2


----------



## Delphinidae (Oct 28, 2007)

Children, that benchmark is about as fake as my girlfriend-having claims.
I see multiple problems with the picture.

First off, the GT is faster than the GTS, but they will also release a boosted GTS series soon after the GT to keep things good. If you recently bought a GTS, you don't watch enough news. It is also true that the GT is stronger than any offering ATI has.

Secondly, the GTX got a higher score than the Ultra (wtf?) and the 2900 XT got an erroneously high score compared to GeForces. It can't happen, that card couldn't normally take the 640 MiB GTS in most games.

The Ultra remains the ultimate. NVidia just addressed some minor shortcomings in the GT, such as incorporating newer version shader processors on the new GTs (and probably the new GTSes too).

It also remains true, though, that the 8800 GT offers the most performance for your money. It's that good, absolutely no debate about it. It beats everything ATI could come up with and it's still cheaper. That's a bargain on one side, and humiliation on the other. And don't believe the original poster's benchmark image, but do believe the Tech Report (and me). You may want to add http://techreport.com to your favourites.

Remember, there is gossip, and there is the Tech Report. 
Have a nice day

Edit: as far as I'm aware, the GT has 96 shader processors (it's what the GTS had before) and the new generation GTS cards will get 112. As a tip, you shouldn't buy the 256 MiB version of this, because the card is very powerful and it's best to outfit it with more headroom (512 MiB).


----------



## Delphinidae (Oct 29, 2007)

It's Monday, day of the truth.
Elite Bastards revealed the final specs on the 8800 GT. Here are they:

Memory bandwidth (has a little effect on almost everything)
GTS: 320 bit
GTX/Ultra: 384 bit
*GT: 256 bit*

Texture addressing (I can't tell myself, it's probably texture store/fetch/render capabilities)
GTS/GTX/Ultra: 4 per clock
*GT: 8 per clock*

Shader processors (responsible for all the number crunching about everything)
GTS: 96
GTX/Ultra: 128
*GT: 112* (16 disabled during manufacturing)

ROP units (responsible for all work related to screen draw)
GTS: 5
GTX/Ultra: 6
*GT: 4* (some disabled?)


The GT is clearly superior to the GTS, but lags just a little behind high-end products - it did introduce more advanced technology though, and has higher clock speeds, so it did get closer to top-end cards. The difference isn't major though, so *your money is better spent on two GTs in SLI than buying one Ultra*. It was about time nVidia did this for us - GTX cards have hardly gotten a price drop in one whole year, the mass needed an affordable videocard that *can actually do some shit* for the money.

If you were still postponing a real upgrade, you don't have to, any more.


----------



## Zero_Point (Oct 29, 2007)

Actually, according to an article I read on that site, nVidia is going to _retire_ the 8800GTS.


----------



## Delphinidae (Oct 29, 2007)

I think they should make this all sensible instead.
Like, naming the new GT (G92) the 8800 GTS, and downscaling and demoting the GTS to GT with a very attractive price, so that order is back in the universe, and the 8800 GT < 8800 GTS statement would be true again, just like with all previous chip types.

But other cards don't matter anyway. This year's best bargain is already the GT, I'm planning one myself.

Edit: you misunderstood, they retire the 320 MiB version, because the low memory amount was a problem for the chip since launch. They're keeping (and probably boosting) the 640 MiB version.


----------



## ADF (Oct 29, 2007)

> Children, that benchmark is about as fake as my girlfriend-having claims.



I don't know why you would say the benchmarks are fake, pretty much every website are giving the same 'just below GTX/higher than GTS' scores. That is allot of different people spreading fud if you think they are fake.

Whatever the case the card comes out today, so we will be seeing allot of benches for confirmation. Hopefully it will live up to its claims and I can get a good upgrade from my 256mb 7900GT


----------



## Delphinidae (Oct 29, 2007)

It's a good upgrade no matter what, because it supports the latest effects with unparalleled performance for such money.

Edit:  http://techreport.com/articles.x/13479   - reliable review


----------



## ADF (Oct 30, 2007)

Rip off Britain strikes again >.=.<

The launch price was a lie, at least here. 8800GT's are going for allot more than was advertised before release, it is Â£130-Â£145 risen to Â£170-Â£200 for a 512mb 8800GT.

That is around $350-$410 to Americans.

Don't get me wrong, it is still allot of power for 320mb 8800GTS price range, but it kills any possibility of getting a pair for the price of a single 640mb 8800GTS. They shouldn't advertise pre release what they won't offer in the shops.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Oct 30, 2007)

16 pipes disabled? Could probably soft mod using Riva Tuner to unlock them. If not a little hard mod with an exacto and lead pencil will fix that.


----------



## Zero_Point (Oct 31, 2007)

ADF said:
			
		

> Rip off Britain strikes again >.=.<
> 
> The launch price was a lie, at least here. 8800GT's are going for allot more than was advertised before release, it is Â£130-Â£145 risen to Â£170-Â£200 for a 512mb 8800GT.
> 
> ...



Odd, Newegg's selling them for anywhere between $269.99-$309.99 (dependent on a clock-speed you could easily achieve yourself, of course).


----------



## ADF (Oct 31, 2007)

Zero_Point said:
			
		

> Odd, Newegg's selling them for anywhere between $269.99-$309.99 (dependent on a clock-speed you could easily achieve yourself, of course).


Hence why I said "Rip off Britain", think of  European countries, that is were the retailers are selling way above recommended pricing.


----------



## Zero_Point (Nov 1, 2007)

ADF said:
			
		

> Hence why I said "Rip off Britain", think of  European countries, that is were the retailers are selling way above recommended pricing.



Not to mention the laws of supply-and-demand are taking effect very quickly, they're all but sold-out on Newegg.


----------



## fastturtle (Nov 7, 2007)

Delphinidae said:
			
		

> The GT is clearly superior to the GTS, but lags just a little behind high-end products - it did introduce more advanced technology though, and has higher clock speeds, so it did get closer to top-end cards. The difference isn't major though, so *your money is better spent on two GTs in SLI than buying one Ultra*. It was about time nVidia did this for us - GTX cards have hardly gotten a price drop in one whole year, the mass needed an affordable videocard that *can actually do some shit* for the money.
> 
> If you were still postponing a real upgrade, you don't have to, any more.



A better option:
Pair of 7300GT in SLI mode - Far cheaper and doesn't need a new PSU to run them unlike a pair of 8x00 cards in SLI mode. 

Pair of 7300GT's cost about the same as one 8800GT while giving decent boost to almost everygame you'd play right now. 

Sure you don't get the latest/greatest but with the right choice you can get a screaming SLI rig that doesn't have fans Screaming so loud you can't hear the game while your neighbors think you're torturing prisoners for Guantanomo.


----------



## JinxCA (Nov 7, 2007)

fastturtle said:
			
		

> A better option:
> Pair of 7300GT in SLI mode - Far cheaper and doesn't need a new PSU to run them unlike a pair of 8x00 cards in SLI mode.
> 
> Pair of 7300GT's cost about the same as one 8800GT while giving decent boost to almost everygame you'd play right now.
> ...



A single 8800GT requires at least a 500W, and two in SLI requires around 600W. If your rig doesn't have a power supply near either of those two wattages, it's safe to say you're also not the type to play any game above 1280x1024 with any AA on, in which case, even buying one 7300GT is a ridiculous recommendation given the age of the card. 

7600 or a 7900 is a more sound recommendation, although it does have a hefty requirement of at least 400 watts for the power supply. XD

Also, it's worthy to note the 8800GT is a single slot cooler, which makes it significantly quieter compared to the GTS/GTX series.


----------



## Zero_Point (Nov 8, 2007)

fastturtle said:
			
		

> A better option:
> Pair of 7300GT in SLI mode - Far cheaper and doesn't need a new PSU to run them unlike a pair of 8x00 cards in SLI mode.
> 
> Pair of 7300GT's cost about the same as one 8800GT while giving decent boost to almost everygame you'd play right now.
> ...



I fail to see the logic in this. If a pair of 7300 GTs cost the same as one 8800 GT and the 8800 GT offers you FAR superior performance, then why bother with the 7300 GTs? If pretty much every 8-series card from the 8600 and above can run circles around my 7950 GT SLi setup (which cost me $600 for the 2 cards), then what does that tell you?


----------



## TehSean (Nov 8, 2007)

Also, the 7300GT isn't DX10-capable. So. Why buy something that's More Obsolete??


----------



## JinxCA (Nov 8, 2007)

Zero_Point said:
			
		

> If pretty much every 8-series card from the 8600 and above can run circles around my 7950 GT SLi setup (which cost me $600 for the 2 cards), then what does that tell you?



More like the 8800 GT and above, the 8600 is underwhelming when it comes to performance. A single 7950 GT beats an 8600 in every bench, while a 7900 GT outperforms the card by a few frames. Both cards have more pixel pipelines, shaders and memory bandwidth. 

It's unfortunate because the previous [x]600 series were solid cards. If anything the 8800 GT IS pretty much the 600 series card for the new generation.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 8, 2007)

I wouldn't rely on benchmarks to make or break your decision when it comes to getting a gaming card for gaming. A lot of the results can be fudged, etcetc, some games are optimized for a brand of card.

Stunningly, ATi's cards are extremely-optimal for Source (half life) games, able to compete with many technically-superior nvidia cards.


----------



## JinxCA (Nov 8, 2007)

TehSean said:
			
		

> I wouldn't rely on benchmarks to make or break your decision when it comes to getting a gaming card for gaming. A lot of the results can be fudged, etcetc, some games are optimized for a brand of card.
> 
> Stunningly, ATi's cards are extremely-optimal for Source (half life) games, able to compete with many technically-superior nvidia cards.



Generally it's price for me, but if you're not going to use benchmarks and time demos to make your decision what do you use? Brand loyalty? 

Sure, results can be "fudged", but it's still a relatively close facsimile of the card's actual power. You make a good point if you're ONLY looking for a card to play games based on the Source engine, but I would say that keeping up with an 8800 in Half-Life isn't a win overall if you get spanked in every other game. (And really, the difference between an 8800 GTS and 1950XTX in Half-Life 2 is like 15 frames in favor of the GTS, but you're looking at above 100 FPS anyways, so it doesn't matter.)


----------



## TehSean (Nov 9, 2007)

In the case of Source games, you really could feasibly use brand loyalty to your advantage since, even though it's harder on the Source Engine than the HL1 Engine, mods are still coming out.. So by buying a Source game, you've in essence bought potentially dozens of them.. But mostly shooters.

And yes, the 8800 series, the GTX/Ultras in particular, regularly outperform current ATi flagship cards. The GTS and now GT are very likely to do the same.

If you absolutely feel you must upgrade cost-effectively, I would suggest purchasing the GT model with the most video memory on it since a great number of games end up benefiting from increased vid mem!

I'm slowly upgrading myself and got a 8800 GTX and am needing to get a new motherboard, CPU, and new memory due to the motherboard/CPU swap planned. It was an attempt at not having to upgrade for a long long time.


----------



## JinxCA (Nov 9, 2007)

TehSean said:
			
		

> If you absolutely feel you must upgrade cost-effectively, I would suggest purchasing the GT model with the most video memory on it since a great number of games end up benefiting from increased vid mem!
> 
> I'm slowly upgrading myself and got a 8800 GTX and am needing to get a new motherboard, CPU, and new memory due to the motherboard/CPU swap planned. It was an attempt at not having to upgrade for a long long time.



Well, in theory I try to be cost-effective, but unfortunately it doesn't work so well in the real world. Had I known about the GT last November I would not have ditched my X1900 in favor of a GTS. ;_;


----------



## fastturtle (Nov 23, 2007)

Guess what. You can't get DX10 unless you're running the Vista abomination so what difference does DX10 support make in a vid card:?:

Now SLI mode with a pair of 7300GT's can offer one hell of a boost for a damn reasonable cost as I said. You only need a 400 watt PSU to handle a pair of 7300GT's in SLI mode that cost about $110 acording to newegg today which is less then half the cost of a single 8800GT that's flat out of stock until when ever.

I'm as biased as everyone else but mine is more towards absolute best bang for the buck and in this case, a pair of 7300GT's cost less then an unavailable card, while offering acceptable performance in almost every game on the market right now.  As to Crylis and other Hot games coming out for Xmas, I don't have a damn idea but unless they games are DX10 only (stupid to limit market with poor vista adoption) and you are using Vista, I don't see any reason they'd not offer a cheap enough solution until the new cards hit in the spring, when your vaunted 8800GT should finally be available and lots cheaper to boot.

But as I'm not a Windows Gamer. Prefering to edit Video, Music, Images, what do I know? Basically, what I see is  a discussion similar to gearheads of all types. Ford blows Mopar & Chevy off the track yet the answer is the same. It depends on bang for buck and you're needs. Mine don't include gaming or Windows so the 7300GT makes sense as the OpenSource drivers offer good performance without infecting my system with anymore unneeded proprietary software. I find it bad enough that I have to install closed source codecs just to play most vids.


----------



## Zero_Point (Nov 24, 2007)

fastturtle said:
			
		

> Guess what. You can't get DX10 unless you're running the Vista abomination so what difference does DX10 support make in a vid card:?:
> 
> Now SLI mode with a pair of 7300GT's can offer one hell of a boost for a damn reasonable cost as I said. You only need a 400 watt PSU to handle a pair of 7300GT's in SLI mode that cost about $110 acording to newegg today which is less then half the cost of a single 8800GT that's flat out of stock until when ever.
> 
> I'm as biased as everyone else but mine is more towards absolute best bang for the buck and in this case, a pair of 7300GT's cost less then an unavailable card, while offering acceptable performance in almost every game on the market right now.  As to Crylis and other Hot games coming out for Xmas, I don't have a damn idea but unless they games are DX10 only (stupid to limit market with poor vista adoption) and you are using Vista, I don't see any reason they'd not offer a cheap enough solution until the new cards hit in the spring, when your vaunted 8800GT should finally be available and lots cheaper to boot.



So, you expect us to believe that 2 last generation low-end cards can come close to a current generation card that's supposed to be mid-range but has high-end performance? I call shenanigans.


----------



## Ron Overdrive (Nov 25, 2007)

As for the DX10/Vista abomination comment: http://www.technospot.net/blogs/download-directx-10-for-windows-xp-from-alky-project/

And fastturtle, its obvious you're not a pc gamer never the less a windows gamer. Even in OpenGL support and performance a single 8800GT would wipe the floor with a dual 7300 setup. And yes, the 8800GT is available NOW. Just check newegg. And damn, for a *nix user you're worse then some Mac guys I know.


----------



## JinxCA (Nov 25, 2007)

Ron Overdrive said:
			
		

> And fastturtle, its obvious you're not a pc gamer never the less a windows gamer. Even in OpenGL support and performance a single 8800GT would wipe the floor with a dual 7300 setup. And yes, the 8800GT is available NOW. Just check newegg. And damn, for a *nix user you're worse then some Mac guys I know.



No need to even go for the 8800GT, the 7900GT is still a solid card and can be had for either as much or cheaper than a dual 7300 set up depending on the card you select. (It should be mentioned that SLI can also be a PITA at times and shouldn't really be considered an option unless used at high resolutions with plenty of AA and the flagship cards, otherwise a single card solution will always trounce it.)


----------



## GreenReaper (Nov 26, 2007)

For what it's worth, I bought one - needed an upgrade from my passively-cooled 7300 LE. 

I got it from Dell Home via Slickdeals, $220 including tax. Unfortunately this offer is no longer available, but I suspect you'll find others out there soon enough (and they may deliver faster).

Like many people, I only have one slot, and I don't have any particular intention to switch motherboards. I need a good card and cheap, and this appears to be it. I'm tired of waiting for ATI to shape up, and I don't think 10.1 support is a particularly relevant change.

*Bonus suggestion:* Goes nicely with this 22" Samsung 2ms 1680x1050 widescreen monitor and you can get $50 cashback (eventually) if you pay with PayPal - if you're among the first 17,000 customers globally (read: move fast). Make sure it shows up at PayPal's end, grab the rebate, and calibrate the monitor after you get it.

*Super Bonus Update Edit*: If you are reading this, you were too slow. It's probably still a reasonable deal, but not super-great.


----------



## Sylia (Nov 27, 2007)

I need to upgrade sometime soon.  I'm running on a 6 year old motherboard with a newer vid card.  It's AGP - DDR1 - Socket7 - ATA tech, so not even anything salvageable.

The 9800GT looks nice, but is what doesn't look good is that AMD and ATI are both in a bad situation raising concerns that prices for the worthwhile stuff might jump.  And DDR3 is the next shiny thing that's not yet widely supported.  Sockets and video cards have been changing quite a bit, so it doesn't look like there's any "good" time to upgrade.  Not yet.


----------



## GreenReaper (Nov 27, 2007)

I don't think PCI-Express is going away for a while now. The 8800GT is PCI-E 2.0, rather than 1.0, and runs at 16x. As for AMD and ATI . . . well, they're the same company now. Perhaps you meant AMD and NVIDIA?

There's never a perfect time to upgrade, but now's not too bad, especially with memory prices in one of their "down" periods (which affects both cards and main memory).


----------



## Delphinidae (Nov 28, 2007)

Now let's do some simple math, assuming that the 7300 GT is worth "1".
Please note that the following numbers are rough approximations.

7300 GT  -  1
7300 GT SLI  -  1.8 (maximum)
8600 GT  -  2
8800 GT  -  8


It's surely worth spending 110 bucks on two 7300 GTs, when you can have more performance and more effects for similar money, just buy one 8600.
As for the 8800, nVidia promised in a conference that they will *fix supply issues*. Prices will go _down_. First 1-2 weeks of december.


----------

