• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Does the GTX prefix mean anything anymore?

Red Hawk

Red Hawk

Diamond Member
It used to be that the GTX prefix/suffix for Nvidia cards meant you were getting the best. 8800 GTX, 9800 GTX, etc. Now though every single card in Nvidia's Geforce 600 series is a GTX card except for the GT 640 at the very bottom. What is the point to even using the GTX prefix anymore?
 
NV switched their naming scheme after the 9 series of cards to be easier to understand, the number is all that matter now.
 
It sounds cooler, ATI tried it once but went..........................overkill

X1950XTX, an XFX version wouldve been XFX X1950XTX XXX edition.
 
Last edited:
They do it with cars too.

Cool GTX;

1971_plymouth_gtx-pic-39029.jpeg


Not so cool GTX;

eagle-2000-gtx-01.jpg
 
The industry is rife with stupid naming systems. Particularly when you get to rebadging, and even worse when you move product level around to where a 6850 is worse than a 5850. Insane.
 
Arkaign said:
The industry is rife with stupid naming systems. Particularly when you get to rebadging, and even worse when you move product level around to where a 6850 is worse than a 5850. Insane.
Click to expand...

Well, in that situation AMD was sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place. Cayman/Barts/Turks were supposed to be produced on 28 nm, but the process wasn't ready in time. Thus they couldn't sell the Barts series at the price of the Juniper series (5700), and they didn't want to retire Juniper yet. But if they named Barts as the 6700 series, they would be making two n700 series simultaneously and that could lead to more confusion. Barts didn't match Cypress' performance, but at least after Cayman and Barts released Cypress would be retired from production. So they went with 6800.
 
motsm said:
NV switched their naming scheme after the 9 series of cards to be easier to understand, the number is all that matter now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the number is all that matters, so go buy a GTX660... it'll be the same thing as a GTX660Ti, only cheaper...

Oh wait...

It won't.
 
Red Hawk said:
It used to be that the GTX prefix/suffix for Nvidia cards meant you were getting the best. 8800 GTX, 9800 GTX, etc. Now though every single card in Nvidia's Geforce 600 series is a GTX card except for the GT 640 at the very bottom. What is the point to even using the GTX prefix anymore?
Click to expand...

Same reason why they got unused 0s in the end. Or non saying HD in front.

We could just as well have AMD 797, nVidia 68 and so on. But the moniker like HD or GTX makes sure you know its a GFX card.
 
ShintaiDK said:
Same reason why they got unused 0s in the end. Or non saying HD in front.

We could just as well have AMD 797, nVidia 68 and so on. But the moniker like HD or GTX makes sure you know its a GFX card.
Click to expand...

AMD/ATi started calling all the Radeons "Radeon HD" with the 2000 series because the market was transitioning to the 16:9/16:10 format. The HD prefix never really meant much because AMD gave it to all its new cards. GTX used to mean that a graphics card was the cream of the crop for Nvidia, now it doesn't anymore.
 
Red Hawk said:
AMD/ATi started calling all the Radeons "Radeon HD" with the 2000 series because the market was transitioning to the 16:9/16:10 format. The HD prefix never really meant much because AMD gave it to all its new cards. GTX used to mean that a graphics card was the cream of the crop for Nvidia, now it doesn't anymore.
Click to expand...

Before GTX they used Ti and Ultra, then they brought the Ti back for 560 and 550 cards, never understood that either. The more confusing the better for NV and Amd, makes it that much easier for the uninformed to be fooled.
 
I'm thinking the next word they add will be "tactical" as it automagically adds 20% to the prices. Just like with guns and gear. It'll be GEFORCE 7xxGTX TACTICAL Video Card.
 
Arkaign said:
The industry is rife with stupid naming systems. Particularly when you get to rebadging, and even worse when you move product level around to where a 6850 is worse than a 5850. Insane.
Click to expand...

Not exactly true. With updated drivers, 6850/6870 are faster than 5850/5870 (anandtech bench shows this), albeit slightly. Worst are the nVidia low-ends which are full of rebadging and crippling of cores, which is fine if each generation is improving like generations past (remember when a mid-range 6600 or 7600 was on par with previous generation's flagship model?). However, the new 630 appears to be slower than the 530.
 
ShintaiDK said:
Same reason why they got unused 0s in the end. Or non saying HD in front.

We could just as well have AMD 797, nVidia 68 and so on. But the moniker like HD or GTX makes sure you know its a GFX card.
Click to expand...

These things also happen in other markets...

like the

Lancia Delta Integrale Evoluzione II HF
or worse...
Subaru Impreza WRX STI Spec C Type RA
 
Concillian said:
Subaru Impreza WRX STI Spec C Type RA
Click to expand...

Well...for this example, it's a little different.

WRX is the model of Impreza, and STI qualifies it as a Performance Edition (ala Mopar Dodge/Nismo Nissan/etc) and Spec C Type RA is the class the car is based on, I'm sure their are other modifiers to identify street legal vs non.

Skyline GT vs Skyline GT-R Spec A, I know which one I would love to drive 😀 I don't think videocards have such narrow specifications, if that were true a GTX 650 Ti is a kick in the balls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top