9500GT Detail Information - D9M
- Thread starter Cheex
- Start date
Still 128-bit, eh? I guess you can't hope for much on the low-end.
Seems like a rehash of the 8600 series, to be honest.
Seems like a rehash of the 8600 series, to be honest.
It'd better not cost $150.
And I'd better not see it at Best Buy for $200-ish (like their 8600 GTSs are at!)
If this card were around $75-100, it wouldn't be too bad, not a terrible card for cheap thrills, to be honest.
And I'd better not see it at Best Buy for $200-ish (like their 8600 GTSs are at!)
If this card were around $75-100, it wouldn't be too bad, not a terrible card for cheap thrills, to be honest.
That is about where I think it will be. Pretty much just a little more than the 8500GT that it is replacing.
well it doesnt say how many shaders it has, but lets say 32...
if it has 32, at the clock rates specified, its probably 8600GTS level performance. which isnt bad at all considering it will probably replace the 8500gt (and i'm assumign the ddr2 variant would be the 8400GS replacement)
if it has 32, at the clock rates specified, its probably 8600GTS level performance. which isnt bad at all considering it will probably replace the 8500gt (and i'm assumign the ddr2 variant would be the 8400GS replacement)
If the 9500GT can provide 8600GTS performance then I would go out on a limb and say that that is great news for budget gamers, provided the price is still below $100.
GDDR3-variant has membanwith of 28.8GB/s (Compared to 86GTS's 32GB/s and 86GT's 22.4GB/s). GDDR2-version has only 14.4GB/s. 9500 GT GDDR3 doesn't need that kind of membandwith unless it has that 32SP, 16TMU, 8ROP structure.
honestly seeing as the entire 9 series for nvidia seems to just be a respin of the 8 series..
i wouldnt be surprised if the 9500gt is really just a g84 @ 65nm with pci-e 2.0 support. i bet it will overclock fairly well then since the g84 8600gts could already run 675mhz with its 32 shaders.
i wouldnt be surprised if the 9500gt is really just a g84 @ 65nm with pci-e 2.0 support. i bet it will overclock fairly well then since the g84 8600gts could already run 675mhz with its 32 shaders.
GTaudiophile
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
hans:
Most likely you are right. Naming these cards as GF9000-series is purely because that 9-number will sell better..and perhaps there is that small thing that these cards would be difficult to name if they would use Geforce 8000-system.
It's just less confusing this way. I mean for example GF 9500 GT.. what would be good name for it in 8000-series (fits between 8600 GT and GTS). 9600 GT would also be hard to name. It works at G80-8800 GTS level.
Then there are these 9800 GT, GTS, GTX and GX2 cards coming.
Most likely you are right. Naming these cards as GF9000-series is purely because that 9-number will sell better..and perhaps there is that small thing that these cards would be difficult to name if they would use Geforce 8000-system.
It's just less confusing this way. I mean for example GF 9500 GT.. what would be good name for it in 8000-series (fits between 8600 GT and GTS). 9600 GT would also be hard to name. It works at G80-8800 GTS level.
Then there are these 9800 GT, GTS, GTX and GX2 cards coming.
Well.. 9500 GT is to replace 8500 GT. According to specs this would be huge improvement in that price segment; double the processing units and raise core clock by 45,5% and shaders by 83,3%.
------
There is one difference: Core/shader-clock ratio. With 8600 GT and GTS that ratio is like Corex2.15=shader. With 9500 GT it will be Corex2.5=shader.
Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
I really don't see anything to complain about. @ Spec, we're likely to see this :
9600GT = 8800GS
9500GT = or > 8600GTS
and so on. Has it ever not been this way? I mean look at the 2600XT compared to X1950, or X1650 compared to X850. What you want (and what we're getting) is where a new midrange part equals a fairly high-end last-gen part, and where a new low-end part equals a previous midrange part.
They should have just stuck with the 7 series naming imo. Therefore the G92 GT and GTS could be a 8900GT/GTS and the upcomming GX2 bringing nothing brilliant to the table could be a 8900GX2. Why they screwed the naming up so badly is beyond me. Imo, I think nV's marketing dep. became nervous when ATI's marketing dep. released the 3xxx series just after the 2xxx series. Just shows their aim.
yes i agree.
but the refresh was late since ati didnt do anything all of last year so nvidia just stretched out their product launches by 6 months.
its sortof like how intel doesnt care to launch stuff in 2008 since amd is sucking there too.
basically 9800gx2 is dual 8800gt, i would not be surprised at all if the 9800gt is say... 8800gt or 8800gts g92 with a new name (nvidia has done this before with lower end cards, 7100gs and 6200tc are the same card..)
perhaps they come out with a 9800gtx which could be say a higher clocked version with gddr4 or something. who knows.
the dide for the 9600gt is actually the only legitimately "new" chip here as it has 64 shaders and they dont have any chips that have that yet. but the 9 series seems to just be really updated 8 series @ 65nm.
oddly the 9600gt die is still bigger than the 3870 die. so amd might still be competitive there, and in the lower range with their 3650 to compete with the new 9500gt. but amd has nothing for the high end.
9800 GX2 = 8800 GTS 512MB SLI.
You are right about that GPU size thing:
RV635: 120mm^2
G84: 169mm^2
RV670: 192mm^2
D9M: 240 mm^2
D8P: 324 mm^2
R600: 420 mm^2
G80: 484 mm^2
So 9500GT's D9M is double in size compared to HD3670's RV635. D9M is 42% larger than G84..GPU that which is replaced
-----
AMD should be able to push their prices down..I hope. RV630 were smaller than G84 etc. but still AMD has lost ground on GPU markets while Nvidia is closing in on Intel.
You are right about that GPU size thing:
RV635: 120mm^2
G84: 169mm^2
RV670: 192mm^2
D9M: 240 mm^2
D8P: 324 mm^2
R600: 420 mm^2
G80: 484 mm^2
So 9500GT's D9M is double in size compared to HD3670's RV635. D9M is 42% larger than G84..GPU that which is replaced
-----
AMD should be able to push their prices down..I hope. RV630 were smaller than G84 etc. but still AMD has lost ground on GPU markets while Nvidia is closing in on Intel.
Yes, it's certainly a simple refresh of the 8600.
Comparison with faster/pricier cards is not what this is about. The 9500GT DDR3 should retail for $100, since the 9600GT is supposed to be $169. The DDR2 version will fight the HD3650 Pro, while the DDR3 version will probably beat the HD3650XT.
This $100 low-power card will provide near-8600GTS performance and be faster that those 6800GT and 7800GT that many still have in their systems from 2 or 3 years ago.
For $100, you get up-to-date video acceleration and the ability to play most current games at middle resolutions and settings.
Comparison with faster/pricier cards is not what this is about. The 9500GT DDR3 should retail for $100, since the 9600GT is supposed to be $169. The DDR2 version will fight the HD3650 Pro, while the DDR3 version will probably beat the HD3650XT.
This $100 low-power card will provide near-8600GTS performance and be faster that those 6800GT and 7800GT that many still have in their systems from 2 or 3 years ago.
For $100, you get up-to-date video acceleration and the ability to play most current games at middle resolutions and settings.
No. Not big flaw there..There won't be any DX10.1 games any time soon and these cards alredy have hard time with DX10...
If we are going to be getting performance equal or better than the 8600GTS from this 9500GT, then I think budget gamers will be relishing this 9-series (8-series refresh) more than the mainstream and high-end gamers.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 18K
-
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter