9600GSO ?upgrade? to 55nm G94 core

[AzN]

http://en.expreview.com/2008/1...-coming.html#more-1003

Some changes will be make in NVIDIA?s product line. This time NVIDIA keeps the name but change the core inside. Our sources mentioned the original G92 9600GSO will be discontinued, and NVIDIA is rolling out a new 9600GSO with G94 chip and keeping the name unchanged. The new 9600GSO will have 512MB memory,we are not sure the memory interface will shrink to 128bit or keeps 256bit.

There are several revisions of the ?new? core: G94-210-A1 is 65nm, G94-210-B1 and G94-219-B1 is 55nm G94 core.

Just like early limitation on the 8800GS, only a few company got the rights to launch the ?new? 9600GSO. Words in the industry saids they may be Asus, Leadtek, XFX, PC Partner and MSI.

Wouldn't this be a downgrade?

 

[happy medium]

Mabe it's gonna be like a 9600gt with the gso's extra shaders?

Sounds like sound competition for the 4670 and the 55nm process should make it even cheaper.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Azn
Just like early limitation on the 8800GS, only a few company got the rights to launch the ?new? 9600GSO. Words in the industry saids they may be Asus, Leadtek, XFX, PC Partner and MSI.[/i]

Wouldn't this be a downgrade?

No EVGA? Hmm.

As far as being a downgrade, it depends on how wide the core is and how wide the memory interface is. If it switches to a 256-bit memory interface it may be an upgrade.

 

[Spike]

Interesting, wonder if this is why newegg has been selling off the 9600GSO's for so freaking cheap lately, making room for the new versions.

 

[angry hampster]

I'm very curios how many shaders it will have.. This seems like it will be direct competition for the 9600GT.

 

[AzN]

If it's G94 it's based on 64SP and 32TMU. This is worse than current GSO with 96SP and 48TMU.

Personally think GSO is more powerful card than 9600gt. I guess it depends how you look at it. Sure the GSO is clocked lower and has lower rop and 192bit bus but 2 things it has over 9600gt is Shader and TMU. GSO tends to be the faster card when memory bandwidth isn't the issue usually without AA. Not to mention it can easily overclock to 8800gt stock levels.

The way I look at it. If this card has 12ROP and 32TMU and 64SP it will slower even if it has 256 bit memory bus.

I don't know what Nvidia is thinking. Perhaps to cut cost but no way it will battle a 4670 with these cuts. Nvidia really needs to go back to drawing board. All they are doing is rehashing old technology and downgrading them just to cut cost and lower performance.

 

[nyker96]

why don;t they keep it simple just make 9600GT as the low end, charge 70 bucks for it.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
No EVGA? Hmm.

Yeah, no BFG either.

Originally posted by: Azn
If it's G94 it's based on 64SP and 32TMU. This is worse than current GSO with 96SP and 48TMU.

That's what I was thinking.

Originally posted by: nyker96
why don;t they keep it simple just make 9600GT as the low end, charge 70 bucks for it.

Because it will never be that cheap. Reason is the more costly core and more complex/costly PCB compared to, say, the 9500 GT. Now, if the "new" GSO became a G94-like 55nm core with 128 bit memory, then the price will likely go down a decent bit - but where does that leave the 9500 GT?

Dunno, NVIDIA's stack is too compressed with the 9600 GSO, 9600 GT and 9800 GT all vying in a $40 or less spread (not counting the recent $50 GSOs).

 

[s44]

More naming confusion. Argh!

 

[taltamir]

While i find it highly objectionable, at the end of the day the best deals can be had on specific nvidia cards exactly BECAUSE of this incessant naming confusion. So it is a highly ironic situation.
But for the first time I can actually recommend a company (AMD) to someone as having honest and non misleading representation of their card's power level with its names.

Benchmarks will tell if the new GSO is weaker or not.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: taltamir
But for the first time I can actually recommend a company (AMD) to someone as having honest and non misleading representation of their card's power level with its names.

So, you aren't bothered that ATI basically rebadged their lower end chips? Oh, I forgot, low end products don't exist for enthusiasts.

Both companies (ATI/NV) to some extent rebadges/renames products to create "new" ones, and neither company smells of roses.

 

[AzN]

http://en.expreview.com/2008/10/08/1049.html


AMD announced Radeon HD4600 series, and one single 9500GT can not secure the entry market for itself. NVIDIA hurried rolling out it?s ?New? 9600GSO makes sense.

New version of GeForce9600GSO is base on G94 core, and amount of shader reduce to 48 (9600GT have 64SP), but memory interface keeps at 256bit, memory size will be 256MB or 512MB. So we can take it as a shrinked 9600GT. It is sure that the new 9600GSO will have performance lower than G92-9600GSO and 9600GT, but hopefully it can bring its price down.

The card will hit the market at the end of October, but HD 4650 have already lower its price to 70USD. Even NVIDIA?s magic shrink brings down the price but the new 9600GSO maybe still late for the show.

This new GSO will have 48SP and 256bit memory bus with 512mb of ram.

What about ROP count? If they have 256bit bus this means it will have 16ROP instead of 12. 25% raised from the original GSO.

48SP means it will have 24 TMU from 48. 25% cut from 9600gt and 50% cut from the original GSO.

This would be good at AA benches but not so on raw performance. Would be better match for 4670 that is good with AA. Will have lower power consumption obviously. Cards like this don't have the staying power in PC gaming industry that is always on constant flux of raising shader.

 

[CU]

Glad I got the old GSO for $36 from newegg.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: taltamir
But for the first time I can actually recommend a company (AMD) to someone as having honest and non misleading representation of their card's power level with its names.

So, you aren't bothered that ATI basically rebadged their lower end chips? Oh, I forgot, low end products don't exist for enthusiasts.

Both companies (ATI/NV) to some extent rebadges/renames products to create "new" ones, and neither company smells of roses.

I don't think for a second that AMD is being altruistic (or smells of roses), they have quite a history, and as soon as they get a break they will start milking and tricking again. But nVidia has been reaching new lows (minimum advertised price, completely different cards with the same name, lower sounding names for faster cards, etc). While AMD has been putting a tremendous effort in this regard.
I Would be glad if you could give me an example of what you said about AMD. Anyways. At the end of the day I KNOW what the cards are worth, so such confusion can allow me to get a better deal (because a good card is shunned for a more impressive sounding one).

I feel like I gotta give AMD credit where it is due, they have done an excellent job with their product names.

 

[Denithor]

This reeks of nVidia finding a way to dump 9600GT cores that didn't quite make the cut.

 

[taltamir]

well, they SHOULD sell them, just under their own, new name.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: taltamir
I Would be glad if you could give me an example of what you said about AMD.

Radeon R600

The Radeon HD 3400 and 3600 are just die shrinks (with the addition of display port) of the 2400/2600 series.

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: taltamir
I Would be glad if you could give me an example of what you said about AMD.

Radeon R600

The Radeon HD 3400 and 3600 are just die shrinks (with the addition of display port) of the 2400/2600 series.

Yeah, they are both guilty of it. At the very least ATI actually did a die shrink and added a feature however tiny it was. As far as I know the 8800GS -> 9600GSO is a complete clone, just a new name. Not that I'm complaining since all this silly confusion and good competition from ATI allowed me to get one of the $36 9600GSO's.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Spike

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: taltamir
I Would be glad if you could give me an example of what you said about AMD.

Radeon R600

The Radeon HD 3400 and 3600 are just die shrinks (with the addition of display port) of the 2400/2600 series.

Yeah, they are both guilty of it. At the very least ATI actually did a die shrink and added a feature however tiny it was. As far as I know the 8800GS -> 9600GSO is a complete clone, just a new name. Not that I'm complaining since all this silly confusion and good competition from ATI allowed me to get one of the $36 9600GSO's.

Shouldn't they have called it 9800gso instead? this new 9600gso fit the name considering it's based on G94.

 

[taltamir]

A die shrink does not bother me, die shrinks are WONDERFUL, using the SAME NAME is the problem.

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Spike

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: taltamir
I Would be glad if you could give me an example of what you said about AMD.

Radeon R600

The Radeon HD 3400 and 3600 are just die shrinks (with the addition of display port) of the 2400/2600 series.

Yeah, they are both guilty of it. At the very least ATI actually did a die shrink and added a feature however tiny it was. As far as I know the 8800GS -> 9600GSO is a complete clone, just a new name. Not that I'm complaining since all this silly confusion and good competition from ATI allowed me to get one of the $36 9600GSO's.

Shouldn't they have called it 9800gso instead? this new 9600gso fit the name considering it's based on G94.

Yeah, 9800GSO probably would have been better but then people would think it's better than the current 9600GT which it's not, at least not without overclocking. The whole naming things gets completely out of hand.

I remember when it used to be all about the ram numbers. They would put tons of memory on a budget card and people would buy those over the faster cards because the memory number was higher. I remember getting my Radeon 8500 64mb and having this dude next to me say I was wasting my money on getting that low of memory. He had a something MX card in hand with 128mb and was convinced it was better.

At least these naming issues today are leading to some good deals along with the confusion instead of just confusion.

 

[taltamir]

the ram thing didn't go away spike , people STILL buy low end cards with tons of ram and think they are getting a better deal.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Sounds like "9500 GTS" would have been a more fitting name, since performance looks to be right between a 9500GT and a 9600GSO. At the very least, it would makea as much sense to me to name it that way as opposed to keeping the same 9600GSO brand, unless they already have plans for a 9500GTS.

Originally posted by: Azn
Personally think GSO is more powerful card than 9600gt. I guess it depends how you look at it. Sure the GSO is clocked lower and has lower rop and 192bit bus but 2 things it has over 9600gt is Shader and TMU. GSO tends to be the faster card when memory bandwidth isn't the issue usually without AA. Not to mention it can easily overclock to 8800gt stock levels.

There is no personally about it. Benchmarks show the 9600GT is faster than the 9600GSO. Hell, the 9600GSO is neck and neck with an HD3850 512MB.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

Originally posted by: Azn
Personally think GSO is more powerful card than 9600gt. I guess it depends how you look at it. Sure the GSO is clocked lower and has lower rop and 192bit bus but 2 things it has over 9600gt is Shader and TMU. GSO tends to be the faster card when memory bandwidth isn't the issue usually without AA. Not to mention it can easily overclock to 8800gt stock levels.

There is no personally about it. Benchmarks show the 9600GT is faster than the 9600GSO. Hell, the 9600GSO is neck and neck with an HD3850 512MB.

You obviously haven't seen enough benchmarks and just part of the mass who think 9600gt is more powerful card by looking at 4xAA benches without even knowing what you are looking at. Cards have strengths and weaknesses. GSO can be more powerful depending on the settings. Not to mention the overclock ability of these cards that goes toe to toe with 8800gt.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...radeon-hd-4670-512mb/6

 

[SunnyD]

Glad I got my GSO a couple weeks ago. Hahaha.