Any word on when nVidia's next card is coming out?

[Mithan]

Curious if there is any information of when we can expect to see a follow up to the 8800 GTX?

I am planning on building a new system later in the year, but I wanted to skip the 8800 GTX and go for the next generation of cards.

Thanks

 

[fire400]

2002/03 = make/Geforce FX

2004 = 6800GT

2005 = 7800GT

2007 = 8800GT

2009 = 9800GT

2011 = Geforce 10,800GT

put the math together

lol

 

[johnnq1]

http://www.mikeshardware.co.uk/RoadmapQ307.htm

8900 will be out soon.

 

[Mithan]

Originally posted by: johnnq1
http://www.mikeshardware.co.uk/RoadmapQ307.htm

8900 will be out soon.

Thanks John, that is what I was looking for.

 

[chewietobbacca]

That's terribly outdated I think. It says the Ex50 CPUs were released in June but they're not released until this week/next week. Also, X38 supposed to be released in July but no sign of them anywhere yet...

From what it sounds like, Nvidia is skipping the 8900's and going straight to the 9800's at end of year.

 

[SickBeast]

Wasn't the 8800GT released in 2006?

 

[MooMooCow]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Wasn't the 8800GT released in 2006?

November I believe.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Im thinking that the G92s (or G9x)will be released around novemeber time frame. Would make the G80 exactly a year old and it fits with their current approach of releasing a new highend GPU at fall and mid/low range during spring.

There will be no 8900 series since nVIDIA has most likely avoided the 80nm process all together due to reasons such as severe leakages etc
So the next GPU from nVIDIA i think will be something along the lines of nv40 --> G70 (nv47). (6800ultra to 7800GTX)

Its quite ironic how the next series from nVIDIA will be along the lines of the 9x00 series. Will history repeat itself? who knows.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Im thinking that the G92s (or G9x)will be released around novemeber time frame. Would make the G80 exactly a year old and it fits with their current approach of releasing a new highend GPU at fall and mid/low range during spring.

There will be no 8900 series since nVIDIA has most likely avoided the 80nm process all together due to reasons such as severe leakages etc
So the next GPU from nVIDIA i think will be something along the lines of nv40 --> G70 (nv47). (6800ultra to 7800GTX)

Its quite ironic how the next series from nVIDIA will be along the lines of the 9x00 series. Will history repeat itself? who knows.

what so, the 9800GTX will be the best card to buy (as the ATI 9800Pro/XT was at the time) the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX and then all of a sudden ATi will produce a beast (like the 6800's were) leaving Nvidia trailing, but not to far behind?

i would pay money to see that happen lol, but i bet it wont.

 

[BFG10K]

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

 

[fire400]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

yah, look at the radeon 2900, it's terrible compared to a geforce 8800

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: fire400

Originally posted by: BFG10K

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

yah, look at the radeon 2900, it's terrible compared to a geforce 8800

No it's not.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

And youre not comparing flagship to flagship like the FX was back in the day.

8800GTX vs 2900XTX is pretty damn ugly, hence AMDs price current price structure.

 

[dreddfunk]

Cookie - why do you think that the 8900 series will be a no show--just because you think nvidia will skip 80nm?

I was honestly hoping for a 7900-style refresh to the 8800 series at some point before the end of the year.

[Best Oliver Twist impersonation]
May I have a 512MB/96 shader/single-slot card, please?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: fire400

Originally posted by: BFG10K

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

yah, look at the radeon 2900, it's terrible compared to a geforce 8800

The 2900XT offers comparable performance with an 8800GTS. Is the GTS a terrible card?

 

[dreddfunk]

Keys - I agree. I know I'd certainly love to have one. Does anyone want to throw a terrible GTS my way?

That said, I think Acanthus has a point, which is that the 2900xt isn't such a great 'flagship' card, when compared to the competition's best card.

I didn't keep track of the GPU market back when the FX came out (I was still happily chugging away with my 9700pro), so I don't know if that's a valid comparison or not...I suspect not, but I don't know.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: fire400

Originally posted by: BFG10K

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

yah, look at the radeon 2900, it's terrible compared to a geforce 8800

The 2900XT offers comparable performance with an 8800GTS. Is the GTS a terrible card?

So if ATi launched an X3900XTX for $45 that had comparable performance to a Geforce 7200... Is that what we compare it to?

The fact remains their flagship that was very late failed to take the performance crown. They knocked down the price to compensate for that so their card could compete with slower offerings.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: dreddfunk
Cookie - why do you think that the 8900 series will be a no show--just because you think nvidia will skip 80nm?

I was honestly hoping for a 7900-style refresh to the 8800 series at some point before the end of the year.

[Best Oliver Twist impersonation]
May I have a 512MB/96 shader/single-slot card, please?

Why do they want to release 8900? especially this LATE? when e.g x800 series goes into x900 series, the refresh is often very simple. Simple as in optical shrink, core clock increase, memory clock increase with high vram for example.

However when i say by skipping 80nm which nVIDIA could have optically shrunk the G80 die (without re designing the layout which obviously is going to be a pain given the short period of time), they can rather go straight to 65nm where they can redesign some of the weaknesses of the G80 for example GS performance, cache, add more ALUs, etc.

Also given the fact that the competition is very weak at the moment (looking at the overall picture low to high end) i think nVIDIA made the right choice.

edit - unless they planned it a long time ago.

 

[fire400]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: dreddfunk
Cookie - why do you think that the 8900 series will be a no show--just because you think nvidia will skip 80nm?

I was honestly hoping for a 7900-style refresh to the 8800 series at some point before the end of the year.

[Best Oliver Twist impersonation]
May I have a 512MB/96 shader/single-slot card, please?

Why do they want to release 8900? especially this LATE? when e.g x800 series goes into x900 series, the refresh is often very simple. Simple as in optical shrink, core clock increase, memory clock increase with high vram for example.

However when i say by skipping 80nm which nVIDIA could have optically shrunk the G80 die (without re designing the layout which obviously is going to be a pain given the short period of time), they can rather go straight to 65nm where they can redesign some of the weaknesses of the G80 for example GS performance, cache, add more ALUs, etc.

Also given the fact that the competition is very weak at the moment (looking at the overall picture low to high end) i think nVIDIA made the right choice.

edit - unless they planned it a long time ago.

prolly FX series gave them motivation.

I mean, articles pointed out that after the release of the 7800GT, ATI was in the hole. Negative.

Vice versa with the Geforce FX series, the 9800XT pretty much topped things out with the 9000 class reign. 9700pro, same thing.

ATI's gonna have to release like a 3700pro ZX Platinum Extreme
..lol
or something like that.

 

[lopri]

X2900 HD performance seems bad indeed (compared to 8800 GTX). I have a 8800 GTX that I'm fixing/rebuilding my friend's rig with, so out of curiosity (OK, that's just a bragging in disguise. I wanted to test out my 30" monitor!) I ran a F.E.A.R. benchmark and compared it to the score that another AT'er posted in his own thread. And the equation was like;

8800 GTX @2560x1600 / 4AA / 16AF = X2900 HD @1920x1200 / 4AA / 16AF

That's a pretty big gap there and I still don't understand why X2900 takes such a big toll by AA. (Is there any 'official' explanation?)

From the interview carried on @B3D and its Q&A thread, it looks obvious that ATI designed this part with more forward-looking mind. Unfortunately with the kind of dev support that ATI provides, the card will not likely shine in its shelf-life time.

On Topic: At this point I gave up on the 'refresh' of G80. We're already heading towards end of July, and NV stated that G92 will debut around November time-frame. (In a share holders' meeting) Since there hasn't been any 'leak' regarding G81 around the web, that leaves about 3 months of window for NV to introduce/sell new SKUs. I don't think NV will mess up the price hierarchy, when 8800 GTX/GTS are selling well. It's possible, however, that they could make 7900 GS/GTO type of SKUs (of which the main purpose would be to get rid of G80 inventory) just before or after the launch of G92. It looks like the 8800 GTX will be the first card in a long, long time that will maintain its market value from its debut till its replacement arrives.

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
So if ATi launched an X3900XTX for $45 that had comparable performance to a Geforce 7200... Is that what we compare it to?

I would. But it depends on your viewpoint.

If you're looking solely at performance figures and totally ignoring pricing then yes, you would most likely compare the 8800 Ultra to the HD2900XT and find the ATI card to be outclassed. However, most people use price/performance as the deciding factor when purchasing a new card. As in "How much performance can I get for X dollars?". This pits the HD2900XT against the 8800GTS which makes it much more attractive than in the performance-only scenario.

 

[fire400]

yeah you look at intel vs amd, intel is packing a good punch

same thing can be said about ati and nvidia, you see nvidia on the gain

amd and ati are merged? you can defend them all you want fanboys, but there is absolutely no substitute for the fortune 500.

either you're at the top or your not. both amd 'n ati are saving face obviously by making their chips cheaper, but whether they can keep up with it, let's hope so.

I mean, it's the 21st century, they can figure it out themselves without us trying to determine for ourselves what's best for either nvidia or ati, except faster is obviously going to help them get further with reasonable pricing.

So if ATI wanted to create a super computer graphics card, sure it'll give out crazy number, and this example is totally obsurd, but their target market would not be typical customers anymore, say enthusiasts and folks who're lookn' at an ATI chip to buy with the level of income and applications for the card.

I still wanna see a:

Radeon x3700pro ZX Platinum EXTREME card...

-2GB of DDR5
-2GHz core clock
-3GHz memory clock

loaded with architecture that can run anything to date, flawlessly.

 

[BernardP]

There is a wide performance gap between 8600GTS and 8800GTS 320. I have seen somewhere (?) that some king od 8800GS or 8900GS can be expected: A cut-down from the current 8800GTS on a smaller die process, with somewhat higher clocks.

 

[Arkaign]

The 2900XT would get more respect if it wasn't

(1)- Huge
(2)- Noisy
(3)- Power Hungry
(4)- Late

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: Aflac

Originally posted by: fire400

Originally posted by: BFG10K

the R600 will be a akin to the woeful geforce FX

I would disagree that the R600 is a GeForce FX. Barring driver issues it's generally pretty close to a 8800 GTS, sometimes being faster. Also it doesn't seem to do too badly in DX10 compare to the competition and its price is very attractive.

It's late but it doesn't have atrocious performance in modern games like the FX series did.

yah, look at the radeon 2900, it's terrible compared to a geforce 8800

No it's not.

i think the 2900 is bad compared to the 8800 i agree with the dude who says its terrible