8800 GT INFO / Updates in bold / MUST READ OP AND SEE LINKS FOR BENCHMARK PICS

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,207
593
126
Looks like NV will push SLI 2.0 real hard. I bet that they could release a dual-slot card that performs vastly superior to G80 if they needed to, along with the 8800 GT. It's probably a wise business decision for them (not the mid-range thing, but the platformization w/ upcoming 780i SLI) but it still leaves me bitter. And I am not too sure whether it'll be the best decision for them, business-wise. Considering Intel preparing discrete GPUs in 2008~2009, going further up front and setting industry standards could be better for the long-term? Could be either way, I guess.

Same thing is happening in the low-end, too. Unless Intel hurries up and release G35 and its drivers that are actually capable of pushing 1080p, NV will not let the on-board GPU run 1080p (be it via hardware or drivers). It really bothers me because today the point of mATX is, other than the size reasons, HD playback. If not for HD playback, I can get by with 915G/945G which is like $50. I was hoping NV to step up and give 1080p capability for mATX folks, but oh well.. they gotta sell 8600 GT/S, eh? G35 can't come soon enough.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
Originally posted by: coldpower27
Pretty impressive preliminary benchmarks for the 8800 GT if true.
Shouldn't be true if those Everest-pics are correct:
It has those 112SP's but they won't do that much good because there are only 16 TMU and 16 ROP units. It should be clearly slower thatn 8800 GTS, little bit slower than HD2900 PRO.

http://www.lavalys.com/products/whatsnew/g92_en.png

Those fillrate numbers :(

 

superbooga

Senior member
Jun 16, 2001
333
0
0
Originally posted by: Rusin
Shouldn't be true if those Everest-pics are correct:
It has those 112SP's but they won't do that much good because there are only 16 TMU and 16 ROP units. It should be clearly slower thatn 8800 GTS, little bit slower than HD2900 PRO.

http://www.lavalys.com/products/whatsnew/g92_en.png

Those fillrate numbers :(

Fillrate hasn't been an issue for a long time, and it won't be. NVIDIA actually overestimated the fillrate and bandwidth requirements for the new games with the original G80, and that's why they've cut down on them for the new chips.

If you look at the benchmarks for the newest games, performance is heavily dependent on shader power (gigaflops is actually a much better term) rating of each card.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
Well it would be suprising if 8800GT would be faster than 8800 GTS with smaller amount of TMU and ROP units, that clock difference (85MHz) don't do enough difference. If you compare just numbers HD2900 PRO and 8800 GT 512 should have almost equal performance.
 

superbooga

Senior member
Jun 16, 2001
333
0
0
Originally posted by: Rusin
Well it would be suprising if 8800GT would be faster than 8800 GTS with smaller amount of TMU and ROP units, that clock difference (85MHz) don't do enough difference. If you compare just numbers HD2900 PRO and 8800 GT 512 should have almost equal performance.

It's 345 vs >500 GFlops, that's a big difference.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Originally posted by: Rusin
Well it would be suprising if 8800GT would be faster than 8800 GTS with smaller amount of TMU and ROP units, that clock difference (85MHz) don't do enough difference. If you compare just numbers HD2900 PRO and 8800 GT 512 should have almost equal performance.
makes sense that they would since 2900 pro seems to fit in between 8800gts 320/640 and 8800gt is supposed to be taking the place of the 320.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
Superbooga:
Well HD2900XT had impressive GFlops number compared to 8800 GTS, but still HD2900XT loses in DX10. That GFlops number doesn't tell much

Bryan:
8800 GT will just be much slower than 8800 GTS 320MB that's the problem.
 

superbooga

Senior member
Jun 16, 2001
333
0
0
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Originally posted by: Rusin
Well it would be suprising if 8800GT would be faster than 8800 GTS with smaller amount of TMU and ROP units, that clock difference (85MHz) don't do enough difference. If you compare just numbers HD2900 PRO and 8800 GT 512 should have almost equal performance.
makes sense that they would since 2900 pro seems to fit in between 8800gts 320/640 and 8800gt is supposed to be taking the place of the 320.

Actually, the 8800GT is supposed to be priced the same as the the XT, not the Pro.
 

superbooga

Senior member
Jun 16, 2001
333
0
0
Originally posted by: Rusin
Superbooga:
Well HD2900XT had impressive GFlops number compared to 8800 GTS, but still HD2900XT loses in DX10. That GFlops number doesn't tell much

Bryan:
8800 GT will just be much slower than 8800 GTS 320MB that's the problem.

2900XT does beat 8800GTS (and pretty badly) in some games, so GFLOPS is representative of performance assuming no other major bottlenecks.

We can make a bet on this, but that really wouldn't be fair to you. This is about GTS vs GT, which is pretty much (architecture-wise) the same. This makes the GFLOPS comparision even more valid.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
When AA turned on, not in so many...and in DX10 HD2900XT pretty much "dies" (8800 GTS 320MB performs better in DX10 mode than in DX9 mode..in few games). So atleast in DX10 GFlops doesn't seem to have inpact (in same game HD2900XT wins in DX9-mode but loses to GF8800 GTS 320MB in DX10)

If 8800 GT and HD2950XT are both with $250 it's pretty much game over for 8800 GT.. HD2950XT > HD2900XT and 8800GTS > 8800 GT. Still don't know why they are replacing 8800 GTS 320MB with slower card.
 

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,271
323
126
In some cases the 512mb 8800GT will win vs the 320mb 8800GTS simply due to frame buffer size. The DX10 games like Lost Planet, plus World in Conflict and the benchmark Call of Juarez all are very frame buffer intensive (in as low as 1280x1024 with no AA/AF).

Now I don't know if this means future games will move toward this direction of needing much more VRAM, or if these are just isolated isolated cases.

I do believe the 8800 GT will beat the 8800 GTS 320mb stock, but as for the OCed versions (which a large portion of the cards are) then I'm not sure which will perform better. SM3.0 especially seems to be a more bandwidth intensive test than SM2.0, and despite the differences in SPs, I think the OCed 320mb GTS will at least be able to compete (within 95%) of the 8800GT.
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
There is very tiny difference between 320MB and 640MB GTS-cards. Virtually that difference that bigger frame buffer offers comes with that kind of settings that neither cards performs playably.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Originally posted by: superbooga
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Originally posted by: Rusin
Well it would be suprising if 8800GT would be faster than 8800 GTS with smaller amount of TMU and ROP units, that clock difference (85MHz) don't do enough difference. If you compare just numbers HD2900 PRO and 8800 GT 512 should have almost equal performance.
makes sense that they would since 2900 pro seems to fit in between 8800gts 320/640 and 8800gt is supposed to be taking the place of the 320.

Actually, the 8800GT is supposed to be priced the same as the the XT, not the Pro.
8800 gt is supposed to be priced the same as the 2900xt, or 2950 xt? I wasn't comparing anything to future DAAMIT cards, I was comparing it to the 2900 pro. There's no way that nvidia is going to price the 8800gt up against the 2900xt. now, if the 512mb version kicks some serious A$$ then it might get priced up against 2950xt/3000xt/3800xt or whatever they're going to call it, but that doesn't appear likely ATM.
 

bryanW1995

Lifer
May 22, 2007
11,144
32
91
Originally posted by: Rusin
Superbooga:
Well HD2900XT had impressive GFlops number compared to 8800 GTS, but still HD2900XT loses in DX10. That GFlops number doesn't tell much

Bryan:
8800 GT will just be much slower than 8800 GTS 320MB that's the problem.
based upon what info? I believe that the GT will be similar if not better than than 8800gts 320. It was not originally intended for that kind of performance, but thankfully ati has pushed nividia a little bit so they ramped up the clocks on it :)

 

superbooga

Senior member
Jun 16, 2001
333
0
0
Originally posted by: Rusin
If 8800 GT and HD2950XT are both with $250 it's pretty much game over for 8800 GT.. HD2950XT > HD2900XT and 8800GTS > 8800 GT. Still don't know why they are replacing 8800 GTS 320MB with slower card.

Rusin, if you're so confident about this... Change your settings so you can receive PMs.

 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
Originally posted by: bryanW1995
Originally posted by: Rusin
Superbooga:
Well HD2900XT had impressive GFlops number compared to 8800 GTS, but still HD2900XT loses in DX10. That GFlops number doesn't tell much

Bryan:
8800 GT will just be much slower than 8800 GTS 320MB that's the problem.
based upon what info? I believe that the GT will be similar if not better than than 8800gts 320. It was not originally intended for that kind of performance, but thankfully ati has pushed nividia a little bit so they ramped up the clocks on it :)
GT has 16xTMU and 16xROP vs. GTS 24xTMU and 20xROP. 85MHz on core doesn't make up that difference

http://www.lavalys.com/products/whatsnew/g92_en.png

 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
Originally posted by: superbooga
Originally posted by: Rusin
If 8800 GT and HD2950XT are both with $250 it's pretty much game over for 8800 GT.. HD2950XT > HD2900XT and 8800GTS > 8800 GT. Still don't know why they are replacing 8800 GTS 320MB with slower card.

Rusin, if you're so confident about this... Change your settings so you can receive PMs.
There's nothing to change. It says I can receive PM messages

 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
The 8800GT is going to be faster in newer gamers because it will have more superior shader performance compared to the GTS.

112SPs @ 1.5GHz is quite abit faster than 96SPs @ 1.2GHz. (Without the MUL, and assuming the SPs on G92 is identical, 8800GT = 336GFlops compared to 230GFlops of the 8800GTS).

In terms of texel/pixel fillrate its pretty close. I tend to think the 8800GTS will perform slightly better in older games because of the higher TMU count. But for current games, the 8800GT looks to be a more stronger performer.

Not to mention that the 8800GT will have VP2, PCI-e gen2, low power draw/heat and cheap (MSRP of ~$249)
 

Rusin

Senior member
Jun 25, 2007
573
0
0
What about ROP-amount? One key reason why HD2900XT suffered when AA-turned on was amount of ROP-units (ROP-bottleneck).
------


About prices.. $250 in States means that it will cost like 270? in Finland..about same price or little bit higher than 8800 GTS 320MB. It could be cheap there.

There is 33W difference in TDP value (110W vs. 143W). Now that 8800 GTS 320MB consumes (on load) typically 105W..how much will 8800 GT consume typically? Can it be cooled silently with that cooler? Single slot cooler.. doesn't push hot air out of the case.