# Ho...ly...Sh - G92



## ADF (Aug 3, 2007)

Link


> "G92" GeForce 9800 GTX specs.
> 
> - 65nm process technology at TSMC.
> - Over one billion transistors.
> ...



If true... I'm glad I decided to skip this generation. What a monster!

*take it with a pinch of salt people, unconfirmed*


----------



## yak (Aug 3, 2007)

A gigabyte? On a video card?
Humanity lost a few trillion transistors out of it's own head somewhere along the way.


----------



## ADF (Aug 3, 2007)

8800GTX has 768mb and this is the generation after that *shrug* there was 7 series cards with 1GB.

There are some details I can see as being iffy though, built in audio chip? I am sure that is the same way the 8 series has built in physics chips, it is most probably referring to the XAudio2 support added in DX10.1 for better 360 porting.

As for the massive performance leap, if true, I have my theory. GPU computing is the next big thing, with GPGPU and Havok FX being particular area's of interest. You will need quite allot of power to utilise such features without taking away from gaming performance, otherwise everyone would require a high end SLI rig.

No one can use this much power in just gaming, Crysis at 2560x1600? XHD2 Monitors? This could very well be fud, this would be a monstrous leap in GPU power, but an interesting subject none the less. If true, hell, no need to upgrade for a VERY long time. Nothing would push this beast in the first year or two of release.


----------



## Rhainor (Aug 3, 2007)

Holy hell...imagine a pair of _these_ in SLi...You could run WoW and Portal _at the same time_ at max settings...

...okay, that may be an exaggeration...


----------



## webkilla (Aug 3, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> Holy hell...imagine a pair of _these_ in SLi...You could run WoW and Portal _at the same time_ at max settings...
> 
> ...okay, that may be an exaggeration...



more likely you could run Portal and Supreme Commander at max settings... at the same time


----------



## Janglur (Aug 3, 2007)

1 GB on a video card?  Old news.

Look up the WildCat VP990.  The series hit 1 GB nearly 5 years ago.


----------



## Rhainor (Aug 3, 2007)

Janglur said:
			
		

> 1 GB on a video card?  Old news.
> 
> Look up the WildCat VP990.  The series hit 1 GB nearly 5 years ago.



For our purposes here, video cards designed primarily for professional 3D modeling don't count.  The GeForce cards are aimed at home users and gaming applications.


----------



## Janglur (Aug 3, 2007)

And i'm sure modelling cards are into the 4 GB range now.
Technology's improving.


What's so 'bad' and surprising?


----------



## Rhainor (Aug 3, 2007)

Janglur said:
			
		

> And i'm sure modelling cards are into the 4 GB range now.
> Technology's improving.



As always.



			
				Janglur said:
			
		

> What's so 'bad' and surprising?



Bad?  I don't see anything bad here.  I see info on a new consumer video card with stupid-good stats that's almost making me drool...


----------



## sgolem (Aug 4, 2007)

*boing*

Money's holding me back here, but I can dream.


----------



## ADF (Aug 4, 2007)

The 7900 GX2 was a 1GB cosumer GPU, it was a one off but it shows we have had 1GB VRam cards before. Being a card designed for SLI on the GPU or quad makes the memory amount not very suprising.


----------



## Zero_Point (Aug 5, 2007)

The 7900 GX2 was also pretty much just 2 7900 cards slapped together.
Also, if you thought the 8800 was huge and power-hungry, wait until this bad mutha gets released...
._.


----------



## ADF (Aug 5, 2007)

I just hope the size of the cards have been kept in check, what is a point in all that power if it doesn't fit in your case?


----------



## Rhainor (Aug 5, 2007)

The 7900 GX2 was oversized, and required an E-ATX case and/or motherboard to fit.

However, it was just a proof-of-concept to make sure they could actually pull off what they perfected for the 7950 GX2, which had the standard form-factor dimensions for length and width, albeit double the thickness.


----------



## Kougar (Aug 8, 2007)

ADF said:
			
		

> 8800GTX has 768mb and this is the generation after that *shrug* there was 7 series cards with 1GB.
> 
> There are some details I can see as being iffy though, built in audio chip? I am sure that is the same way the 8 series has built in physics chips, it is most probably referring to the XAudio2 support added in DX10.1 for better 360 porting.
> 
> ...



The HD 2900 offers 1gb of onboard Vram, but tests with 512mb versions show it's pretty much useless to have at present. 

The HD 2900 also features a built in audio codec chip. Due to DRM it was needed to offer HDCP compliant audio output over the video card's HDMI port. The system's own sound wouldn't have worked for HDCP protected content as it doesn't fit within the DRM protection umbrella.

I can believe the performance claims, a 6800 Ultra offers the same performance of a 7600GS for example. What I find hard to swallow is the 2x 8800Ultra performance @ "half the power consumption of a single 8800GTX" part. It should be interesting... now if Nvidia would just fix their DX drivers for Folding@home, we could see what the card can really do.


----------



## Janglur (Aug 8, 2007)

Kougar, I KNEW you were a fur too!  Now that i've seen you post here with that sig, I have proof!

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!



Overclocker furries UNITE!


----------



## HaTcH (Aug 8, 2007)

Hehe.. I could go for even 1/10th of these... I'm getting 18 fps with WoW XD


----------



## ADF (Aug 8, 2007)

Will you look at that; Crysis has been officially announced for November the 16th, around the same time these cards are expected. Convenient, or annoying, wouldn't you say? Everyone purchased 8 series cards for this game, but it comes out in time for the 9 series.


----------



## Kougar (Aug 8, 2007)

Hey, maybe they will bundle Crysis with the 9800GTX models... you never know 

Janglur, do I know ya from somewhere? You remind me of a few people I could mention...


----------

