Dell leaks 8800 Ultra specs

[ShadowOfMyself]

Its still a Dell leak nonetheless, so it should be accurate

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=623&Itemid=34

We don't need to wait until the end of May to find out more about the upcoming Geforce 8800 Ultra card. Dell has actually leaked the 8800 Ultra specifications, but later removed the link. However, we were fast enough to capture the moment.

So, Dell confirmed the existence of the card and the specification clearly indicates that Nvidia is planning a 650 MHz card with 2160 MHz of GDDR3 memory on its odd 384 bit memory controller.

This is really a modest speed upgrade, as for example, EVGA already ships a 8800 GTX overclocked at 621 MHz core and 2000 MHz memory. With water cooling you can easily match 650 MHz core and 2160 MHz memory, or at least you should be able to.

The card still has 128 stream processors and it will be available with Dell's XPS 710 machines at later date.

If its true I must say Im disappointed, but then again that might be all they need to gain an edge on R600

 

[Pugnate]

And this is 'supposedly' going for a grand? Another ghost card?

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Pugnate
And this is 'supposedly' going for a grand? Another ghost card?

going to likely only be available to performance system vendors... likely only be available on the XPS as far as Dell is concerned, Alienware will get some for their top-end systems, Voodoo, Falcon, etc etc.

 

[chrismr]

And I was beginning to think my GTX was going to be put to shame... every time I hear about the new cards coming (R600,8600) out I always feel better about my GTX.

If the only difference between the Ultra and the GTX is clock speed, then I really don't understand why they bothered.

 

[PingSpike]

I hope that this doesn't actually go for the rumors $1000 MSRP because two times the price for a preoverclocked card is a total ripoff. Article points it out...a good watercooling setup should match that and cost a lot less.

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: chrismr
And I was beginning to think my GTX was going to be put to shame... every time I hear about the new cards coming (R600,8600) out I always feel better about my GTX.

If the only difference between the Ultra and the GTX is clock speed, then I really don't understand why they bothered.

Dude, you have no reason to feel bad about having a GTX. There's no games out there that can really tax that card so I highly recommend ignoring GPU news for at least another 6-12 months or until a game comes out that finally lowers your fps enough to consider upgrading.

 

[BFG10K]

There's no games out there that can really tax that card

Stalker and Call of Juarez can.

 

[chrismr]

Originally posted by: yacoub

Originally posted by: chrismr
And I was beginning to think my GTX was going to be put to shame... every time I hear about the new cards coming (R600,8600) out I always feel better about my GTX.

If the only difference between the Ultra and the GTX is clock speed, then I really don't understand why they bothered.

Dude, you have no reason to feel bad about having a GTX. There's no games out there that can really tax that card so I highly recommend ignoring GPU news for at least another 6-12 months or until a game comes out that finally lowers your fps enough to consider upgrading.

I know, it's just not often I have the top of the line GPU (in fact this is first time ever).

But I will continue to keep up to date on the latest and greatest in the graphics field, as I simply find it interesting to read about.

BDG10K, I would not say that Stalker really taxes the card that badly. Sure, the FPs can hover in low 40's, but that is really with everything maxed. I find 40 more than playable. Pity the game is such a turd though.

Cant speak for call of juarez though as never tried it.

 

[chizow]

Stalker performance issues stem from a rushed and unpolished game more than anything. Its nothing special visually.

Will be interesting to see if the 8800 Ultra has some OC'ing headroom past the 650MHz leaked specs. The original GTXs didn't OC all that well and unlike the 8600 GTS the 8800s do scale extremely well with clock speed. Still a bit disappointing NV didn't beef up the architecture a bit, but then again we're probably less than 6 months away from an 8900 or 9800 release.

 

[Hidden Hippo]

I tohught that Nvidia were bringing out a GDDR4 version of the card? Is this still going on or are they just releasing inredibly overclocked GDDR3 versions.

 

[Genx87]

This sounds realistic for a speed bump card.

 

[jim1976]

Yeah I've heard that too, last night.. If all they need is a minor clockspeed bump to match the x2900xtx then you know what this pricing is.. Or they may have unlocked the missing MUL which will give an extra boost..
Anyway this is not the 65nm GX2 they plan on releasing some time later.. Every day I find my GTX so sweet. My card can easily do 650/1160 for 24/7 use, though with 80% + fan speed.. Best upgrade and value for high end I've ever made since 9700pro..

As for the performance tax comment that someone made, there's always games and settings that can tax even the highest end gpu in fillrate or bandwidth terms.. Oblivion, Stalker come into my mind without searching further..

 

[jdoggg12]

Originally posted by: chizow
Stalker performance issues stem from a rushed and unpolished game more than anything. Its nothing special visually.

Will be interesting to see if the 8800 Ultra has some OC'ing headroom past the 650MHz leaked specs. The original GTXs didn't OC all that well and unlike the 8600 GTS the 8800s do scale extremely well with clock speed. Still a bit disappointing NV didn't beef up the architecture a bit, but then again we're probably less than 6 months away from an 8900 or 9800 release.

Rushed? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

STALKER was a lot of things, but rushed isnt one of them

 

[chizow]

Ya, rushed when you take 4+ years and your publisher says its not going to take 5+ and pushes what you have out the door. A lot of content and features were cut which may or may not make it in future patches, which indicates it was rushed. The major bug fixes and performance improvements in the first patch indicate the game as shipped was unpolished. I'll personally wait a few more patches before I try playing it again or make any judgments about performance, but there's certainly better looking games out there that run better right now.

 

[jdoggg12]

They had a (relative to ID, Crytek, Valve, etc) poor team working on it. It was scrapped and restarted and STILL isn't up to par. They weren't rushed, they just did a bad job and were finally basically told 'deliver now or else'.

 

[Phynaz]

Its still a Dell leak nonetheless, so it should be accurate

Why would you think that? It's from fudzilla.

 

[Phlargo]

If this is the real part - I have to be honest - it doesn't seem very exciting. In my mind, Ultra should mean something truly special

 

[Cheex]

Originally posted by: Phlargo
If this is the real part - I have to be honest - it doesn't seem very exciting. In my mind, Ultra should mean something truly special

I totally agree. Just like what the "Ultra" did for the GeForce 6800.

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: chrismr


If the only difference between the Ultra and the GTX is clock speed, then I really don't understand why they bothered.

$$$

plenty of rich kids with money want to get the best. look at people dropping 2 grand for an xbox or ps3 when they are hard to find.

 

[Pugnate]

Originally posted by: yacoub

Originally posted by: chrismr
And I was beginning to think my GTX was going to be put to shame... every time I hear about the new cards coming (R600,8600) out I always feel better about my GTX.

If the only difference between the Ultra and the GTX is clock speed, then I really don't understand why they bothered.

Dude, you have no reason to feel bad about having a GTX. There's no games out there that can really tax that card so I highly recommend ignoring GPU news for at least another 6-12 months or until a game comes out that finally lowers your fps enough to consider upgrading.

Rainbow Six Vegas, STALKER, Oblivion... among others don't run ideally.

But to feel bad is odd. That's just the way of the industry.

 

[allies]

R6: Vegas = Poorly ported
STALKER = Poorly coded

Oblivion doesn't play well?

 

[Matt2]

The fact that Nvidia didn't even bother to put GDDR4 on the board doesn't speak highly of what they think R600 will be.

I'm sure Nvidia knows everything it needs to know about R600.

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: Matt2
The fact that Nvidia didn't even bother to put GDDR4 on the board doesn't speak highly of what they think R600 will be.

I'm sure Nvidia knows everything it needs to know about R600.

You and gstanfor are neck-and-neck for replacing Rollo as the biggest NVidia fanboi.

 

[Pugnate]

Originally posted by: allies
R6: Vegas = Poorly ported
STALKER = Poorly coded

Oblivion doesn't play well?

R6:Vegas runs fine when I have shadows on half. Oblivion on 1680x1050 does have some issues for me with sudden drops that pick up instantly, but it is annoying.

STALKER I don't actually care about that much.

I'm sure Nvidia knows everything it needs to know about R600.

I suppose they have some idea, but can't say for sure.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: yacoub

Originally posted by: Matt2
The fact that Nvidia didn't even bother to put GDDR4 on the board doesn't speak highly of what they think R600 will be.

I'm sure Nvidia knows everything it needs to know about R600.

You and gstanfor are neck-and-neck for replacing Rollo as the biggest NVidia fanboi.

Obviously you didnt read my post in the other thread about NOT being a fanboy in response to your accusations.

I just call them as I see them yacoub.

Nvidia has to have an idea of what R600 is going to be. I mean come on, they paid to have marketers enter video forums, you dont think they'd pay to find out what the competition has?

The only reason to release an 8800GTX "Ultra" is to take back the performance crown from R600 once it releases. If all they could come up with was a core overclock and a memory speed bump, then my reasoning says they don't think they have to do anymore than that to beat R600. I would have expected a lot more effort from Nvidia, something as simple as GDDR4, if they felt that they were going to get trounced.

There's nothing "fanboy" about that.