Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Video Cards and Graphics

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-10-2012, 02:00 AM   #1
Shephard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 766
Default does nvidia still rebrand cards?

My card is 9800 GT which is just the same as a 8800 GT as I remember.

Then there is 8800 ultra which was there best at the time. Then they rebrand as 9800gtx+ for next series. Then after that GTS 250...

Did nvidia stop doing this? I thought it was really annoying that they did that to customers.

How come they did this? I guess some people think they are upgrading to new card because it's new series, but all it has is a new name.
Shephard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 02:51 AM   #2
aaksheytalwar
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,136
Default

With low end stuff. Yes
__________________
3770k @ 4.3 with H100i, Asus Z77 Deluxe, Samsung 30nm 4x4gb ddr3 @ 1866 9-9-9-28 1T, MSI R9 290 Gaming 4G, Coolermaster Silent Pro Hybrid 1300 watts, Crucial M4 512gb, 3x Seagate 7200.14 3TB each
aaksheytalwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 02:51 AM   #3
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shephard View Post
My card is 9800 GT which is just the same as a 8800 GT as I remember.

Then there is 8800 ultra which was there best at the time. Then they rebrand as 9800gtx+ for next series. Then after that GTS 250...

Did nvidia stop doing this? I thought it was really annoying that they did that to customers.

How come they did this? I guess some people think they are upgrading to new card because it's new series, but all it has is a new name.

it's far more common for mobile and OEM GPUs to be renamed... but both AMD and NV basically are still renaming cards.... but mostly for low end cards....

GT 630 = GT 440/GT430, GT 620/610 = GT 520...
now there are 3 different "cards" named GT 640m for mobile, one uses GK107, and I think the others use GF116...
as for AMD they renamed mobile 6600/6700 to 7600...

also some OEM cards go even further, I think the 5450 was called also 6350 and 7350,
the 6700 series was basically exactly the 5700...

but anything higher than the GT 640 is using a new GPU at the moment, the same for the Radeons 7700 and higher....

some people just make their decision based on the name, so a "geforce 600" should be good and newer...

but to be fair, it can also help in some cases... if it still makes sense to sell an old card, if the 8800GT kept its original name, it could be confusing with the slower 9600GT and 9500GT released a few months later... or the 5700 which was clearly faster than the 6600 series, and with mostly equivalent features...
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 06:26 AM   #4
T_Yamamoto
Lifer
 
T_Yamamoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: North Carolina State University
Posts: 13,765
Default

Just don't get a cheapo card and you'll.be fine.
__________________
Intel i5 4430, MSI B85M-P33, Gigabyte Windforce R9 270x, 6GB ram, Intel 530 128gb SSD, WD 150gb HDD, Toshiba Canvio 1tb External HDD, Windows 7, NZXT Vulcan, Dell E2414H, ROCCAT Kova+ Max, TG3 BL82

Mid 2014 13" Macbook Pro, Intel Core i5-4278U 2.6Ghz, Intel Iris 5100 GPU, 8GB ram, 128gb SSD
Heatware | Steam
T_Yamamoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 09:58 AM   #5
amenx
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shephard View Post
My card is 9800 GT which is just the same as a 8800 GT as I remember.

Then there is 8800 ultra which was there best at the time. Then they rebrand as 9800gtx+ for next series. Then after that GTS 250...
The 8800(gtx) Ultra is a totally different card to the 9800gtx+. Different gen, process, mem bus, transistor count, ROPs, tex units, altogether different card that was not renamed/rebranded. It was also still more powerful than the 9800gtx+ when the latter was released.

The 8800gts 512mb was rebranded to 9800gtx+ then to 250gts. Ironically the 8800gts 512 superseded the 8800gts 320/640mb cards yet basically retained the same model name. It should have been called 9800gts from the start as it was a good 30% better performer than the 8800gts 640mb.
amenx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 09:59 AM   #6
Zap
Super Moderator
Off Topic
Elite Member
 
Zap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Somewhere Gillbot can't find me
Posts: 22,378
Default

Yes they still rebrand cards in the low end, and sometimes mid range. They've got to keep up with all the AMD rebranding, after all. Srsly though, they BOTH do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shephard View Post
My card is 9800 GT which is just the same as a 8800 GT as I remember.

Then there is 8800 ultra which was there best at the time. Then they rebrand as 9800gtx+ for next series. Then after that GTS 250...
The 8800 Ultra was never rebranded as anything. The 8800 GT, 9800 GT,l 9800 GTX, 9800 GTX+ and GTS 250 were all the same GPU. The GT cards had parts disabled, resulting in 112 cores while the others had the full 128 cores. There were also some die shrinks along the way, with corresponding clock increases. So, the two GT cards are the same (though I think the 9800 was updated with a die shrink sans rebrand) and the GTX+ and GTS are the same. The GTX is different. Also, RAM capacities and clock speeds varied, to differentiate the products. So really, the only straight up rebrands were the 512MB versions of those I mentioned earlier.

That is, unless anyone feels that a GTX 660 Ti, 670 and 680 are "rebrands" of each other.
__________________
The best way to future-proof is to save money and spend it on future products. (Ken g6)

SSD turns duds into studs. (JBT)
Zap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 12:42 PM   #7
iMacmatician
Member
 
iMacmatician's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: United States of America
Posts: 88
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zap View Post
So, the two GT cards are the same (though I think the 9800 was updated with a die shrink sans rebrand)
Yep, the 9800 GTX to 9800 GTX+ transition included a die shrink from 65 nm to 55 nm plus slightly higher clocks.
iMacmatician is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 02:29 PM   #8
aaksheytalwar
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,136
Default

Isn't the perf diff like 5% btw them.
__________________
3770k @ 4.3 with H100i, Asus Z77 Deluxe, Samsung 30nm 4x4gb ddr3 @ 1866 9-9-9-28 1T, MSI R9 290 Gaming 4G, Coolermaster Silent Pro Hybrid 1300 watts, Crucial M4 512gb, 3x Seagate 7200.14 3TB each
aaksheytalwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 02:59 PM   #9
toyota
Lifer
 
toyota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: my chair
Posts: 12,190
Default

AMD does the same thing...
__________________
Win 8.1 64 bit | 4770k@4.4 | Asus Z87 Pro | MSI GTX780 Gaming | G.SKILL Ares 16GB DDR3 2133 | Seagate SSHD 2TB | Corsair 500R | Corsair TX650 V2 | Sound Blaster Zx | Gateway 23inch 1920x1080 IPS
toyota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 05:52 PM   #10
Zap
Super Moderator
Off Topic
Elite Member
 
Zap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Somewhere Gillbot can't find me
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaksheytalwar View Post
Isn't the perf diff like 5% btw them.
I think the difference can be higher depending on which ones you compare. Take the slowest 256MB 8800GT and the fastest 1GB GTS 250 and I think you'll find quite a performance difference.

But yes, GTX to GTX+ was very small difference as the only performance difference was due to higher core, shader and memory clocks. While that didn't sound very good, note that the higher clocks were possible due to the die shrink. It also allowed the GTX+ to need only one 6-pin PCIe power plug (not always implemented) while the GTX needed two. Additionally, the cards could be smaller (not always implemented).

So, to call something like this (GTX to GTX+) a rebrand is both somewhat true, as well as very unfair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toyota View Post
AMD does the same thing...
Yup.
__________________
The best way to future-proof is to save money and spend it on future products. (Ken g6)

SSD turns duds into studs. (JBT)
Zap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 06:27 PM   #11
Shmee
Moderator
Memory and Storage
Video Cards and Graphics
 
Shmee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cali
Posts: 2,188
Default

Keep in mind the card parts besides the GPU also changed between these. For instance, the 9800 GTX needed 2 6 pin power connectors, the 55 nm versions didn't. Also, the GTS 250 did not support 3 way SLI (only one SLI connector up top)

They also came in different lengths. My original 9800 GTX is huge.
__________________
Anandtech Moderator
3770k @ 4.4 GHz under corsair H100i
R9 290 crossfire Powercolor + Sapphire Tri X
16GB Corsair Vengeance on MSI Z77A-GD65
HP ZR30W | Haf X | Logitech G110 + G500
Seagate 600 + Crucial M4 + WD black 1TB
Shmee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 06:59 PM   #12
FalseChristian
Diamond Member
 
FalseChristian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oshawa, ON, CA
Posts: 3,305
Default

The 9800GT was exactly the same as a 8800GT. The same clocks and everything. Now, maybe, the 9800GT might have been a better overclocker than the 8800GT but that's it.

I should know. I had 2 8800GT 512 MB is SLI.
__________________
Core i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz (45x100) 1.350v-Asus P8Z68-V/Gen3 (BIOS 3402)-16GB Kingston VR DDR3-1333Mhz @ 1600MHz 1.65v-2 EVGA GTX 760 2GB (1212/7600) ACX-750w Cooler Master GXII-RealTek on-board sound-Intel Onboard 1Gb Ethernet-Rogers Cable Internet 6.6MB/second-2TB Seagate 7200 SATA 6 HD-3TB SeaGate USB 3.0 EHD-22" Samsung SyncMaster 2253BW 1680x1050 67Htz-Windows 7 HP 64-bit SP1
FalseChristian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 09:28 PM   #13
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FalseChristian View Post
The 9800GT was exactly the same as a 8800GT. The same clocks and everything. Now, maybe, the 9800GT might have been a better overclocker than the 8800GT but that's it.

I should know. I had 2 8800GT 512 MB is SLI.

some 9800GT were exactly 8800GT with a new bios, others obviously had different PCBs and others the 55nm G92B, while I think all the 8800GT and the early 9800GT used the 65nm G92, but apart from OC/power G92 and G92B performed equally

but as I said, I don't see rebrand always as a bad thing, I remember buying a Radeon 9100, which was exactly a 8500LE, and faster than the newer 9000 PRO

in a way GTX 560 is a rebranded GTX 460 "OC"...
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 09:51 PM   #14
Shmee
Moderator
Memory and Storage
Video Cards and Graphics
 
Shmee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cali
Posts: 2,188
Default

I thought the 9800 GT was mostly 55nm?
__________________
Anandtech Moderator
3770k @ 4.4 GHz under corsair H100i
R9 290 crossfire Powercolor + Sapphire Tri X
16GB Corsair Vengeance on MSI Z77A-GD65
HP ZR30W | Haf X | Logitech G110 + G500
Seagate 600 + Crucial M4 + WD black 1TB
Shmee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 10:00 PM   #15
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shmee View Post
I thought the 9800 GT was mostly 55nm?
most cards probably are, but many early 9800GT use the 65nm chip...
also, the specs, clocks and all are 100% the same, so 9800GT performs exactly like any 8800GT.

I think the 9600GT also had originally a 65nm G94 and later a 55nm version,

another rebranded card was the 8800GS, later called 9600GSO,

9800GT was also called GTS 240 (OEM only).

Last edited by SPBHM; 11-10-2012 at 10:06 PM.
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 10:03 PM   #16
toyota
Lifer
 
toyota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: my chair
Posts: 12,190
Default

never mind
__________________
Win 8.1 64 bit | 4770k@4.4 | Asus Z87 Pro | MSI GTX780 Gaming | G.SKILL Ares 16GB DDR3 2133 | Seagate SSHD 2TB | Corsair 500R | Corsair TX650 V2 | Sound Blaster Zx | Gateway 23inch 1920x1080 IPS
toyota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 10:20 PM   #17
Fallengod
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: so-cal
Posts: 5,582
Default

I was about to say, AMD does the same exact thing. If you are going to "out" nvidia for it, lets be fair here....

Also, there were 9800GT's that were different from an 8800GT..... Its not like they were the same exact card with a different name, which is obviously what you were implying. 9800GT's were known for being quite a bit better actually(I would know anyways as I owned both). In fact, for the most part, they dont just rebrand cards. Usually there are differences, even if they might be negligible. Get your facts straight. Much of that stuff is just related to business strategy and marketing.
__________________
heatware

Last edited by Fallengod; 11-10-2012 at 10:24 PM.
Fallengod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 10:47 PM   #18
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallengod View Post
I was about to say, AMD does the same exact thing. If you are going to "out" nvidia for it, lets be fair here....

Also, there were 9800GT's that were different from an 8800GT..... Its not like they were the same exact card with a different name, which is obviously what you were implying. 9800GT's were known for being quite a bit better actually(I would know anyways as I owned both). In fact, for the most part, they dont just rebrand cards. Usually there are differences, even if they might be negligible. Get your facts straight. Much of that stuff is just related to business strategy and marketing.
quite a bit better!?
both used the G92 with 112 "cuda cores", at the exact same clock,

and as I said, there is even the 9800GT 65nm... so you have the same chip and performance...

http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-51...m-vs-55nm.html
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 11:39 PM   #19
Fallengod
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: so-cal
Posts: 5,582
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPBHM View Post
quite a bit better!?
both used the G92 with 112 "cuda cores", at the exact same clock,

and as I said, there is even the 9800GT 65nm... so you have the same chip and performance...

http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-51...m-vs-55nm.html
They performed basically the same, but the 9800GT was known for running quite a bit cooler and overclocking better. Just sayin...
__________________
heatware
Fallengod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 12:10 AM   #20
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,409
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallengod View Post
They performed basically the same, but the 9800GT was known for running quite a bit cooler and overclocking better. Just sayin...
some 8800GT also ran cooler and overclocked better than others...
the 9800GT was just a continuation of the 8800GT, obviously the "8800GT" name was abandoned earlier, and 9800GT had a die-shrink and possibly the process maturing, newer PCB designs, and all of that, but that's doesn't mean one of the earlier models using the 65nm GPU will necessarily overclock better than one sold as 8800GT just because of the new name...

also, my 55nm 9600GT overclocked less than most 65nm 9600GT.
SPBHM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 02:42 AM   #21
Arkaign
Lifer
 
Arkaign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19,238
Default

Low end has been stagnant for years. I recently replaced a buddy's dead 6600 vanilla with a GT620 ($10 AR), and if anything it was slower for the games he plays (original CS and UT mostly, hah)
__________________
Death is the answer.
Arkaign is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 07:34 AM   #22
frozentundra123456
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,279
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fallengod View Post
They performed basically the same, but the 9800GT was known for running quite a bit cooler and overclocking better. Just sayin...
There was also a low power 9800GT after the die shrink that was slightly undervolted and underclocked. I used one of these for a couple of years with an OEM 300 watt power supply and was very happy with it. As a matter of fact I just retired it a couple of months ago.
frozentundra123456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 08:25 AM   #23
Eureka
Diamond Member
 
Eureka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,826
Default

It doesn't make sense to develop new cards for old-end, and even midrange. It's easier to just shrink the die of an older model and call it development.
__________________
San Francisco: ASRock Z87E-ITX | Intel i7-4770k | 16 GB DDR3 1600 | Gigabyte WF3 7950
Honolulu: Gigabyte MA790X-UD4P | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 8GB DDR2 800 | Sapphire HD4890
London: ASRock 4CoreDual-VSTA | Intel Dual Core E7400 @ 3.1ghz | 2GB DDR2 667 | ATi X850 XT @ 540/590
Eureka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 08:57 AM   #24
VirtualLarry
Lifer
 
VirtualLarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,601
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPBHM View Post
in a way GTX 560 is a rebranded GTX 460 "OC"...
I thought GTX460 1GB (original) was GF104, and GTX560 was GF114.
__________________
Rig(s) not listed, because I change computers, like some people change their socks.
ATX is for poor people. And 'gamers.' - phucheneh
haswell is bulldozer... - aigomorla
"DON'T BUY INTEL, they will send secret signals down the internet, which
will considerably slow down your computer". - SOFTengCOMPelec
VirtualLarry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 09:04 AM   #25
Zap
Super Moderator
Off Topic
Elite Member
 
Zap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Somewhere Gillbot can't find me
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkaign View Post
Low end has been stagnant for years. I recently replaced a buddy's dead 6600 vanilla with a GT620 ($10 AR), and if anything it was slower for the games he plays (original CS and UT mostly, hah)
Don't know about CS, but I think the problem with UT has to do with drivers. I remember BITD with a 3dfx card and then GeForce cards of the time, the game played nice and smooth. However, sometime along the way Nvidia stopped caring about older games, so they don't play right anymore.

At least that's my theory.

I remember going back to play Crimson Skies around 5 years ago, and it was completely unplayable with GPU acceleration turned on with Nvidia cards. Radeons worked fine, and software rendering worked fine.
__________________
The best way to future-proof is to save money and spend it on future products. (Ken g6)

SSD turns duds into studs. (JBT)
Zap is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.