g92 (512MB/1024MB) "8800 GTS" Specs and Pics

[ZeroTM]

So I wanted to find out more about this card for my next PC and went on an information frenzy. Hope this information is interesting to you guys as well:

IMAGE 1

We have heard about a 128SP GeForce 8800 GTS 512 card in December a while back and this time round, a China website IT168.com has managed to get hold of the card photos and specs. The 8800GTS 512 card uses the same G92 core but has 128 shader processors instead of 112 on the 8800GT. It is clocked slightly higher at 650MHz for core, 1940MHz for the GDDR3 1ns memories and 1625Mhz for the shaders. The card takes up 2 slots due to a beefier cooling solution. The card is expected to be priced between US$299-349 and launch on Dec 3rd.

http://www.vr-zone.com/article...cs_%26_Specs/5405.html

IMAGE 2

NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 GT might be remembered as one of the most successful NVIDIA graphics cards of our time, at least according to the flurry of reviews this week. Virtually every top tier e-tailer managed to sell out of the card in less than two days.

Yet NVIDIA isn't done yet. A G92-derivative will appear later this year with even more shader units. According to company guidance, the new G92 will launch in early December and feature 128 shader units as opposed to the 112 featured on GeForce 8800 GT.

This would be mean the additional 16 shader units exist on all GeForce 8800 GT cards, but are disabled for yield or marketing purposes. In addition to the extra shaders, the new G92 will also feature higher core frequencies and support for up to 1GB GDDR3.

The new 65nm G92 has a tentative SKU designation of GeForce 8800 GTS. This might sound confusing as NVIDIA already sports a GeForce 8800 GTS card based on the 90nm G80 silicon. However, since G92 sports a 256-bit memory interface, the new 8800 GTS cards will feature traditional memory blocks of 512MB or 1024MB. The older, G80-based GeForce 8800 GTS features 320-bit memory blocks of 320MB or 640MB.

As the new GeForce 8800 GT generally outpaces the existing GeForce 8800 GTS, the new GeForce 8800 GTS will likely surpass NVIDIA's high-end GeForce 8800 GTX and potentially GeForce 8800 Ultra.

NVIDIA doesn't just risk cannibalizing its own high-end offerings -- AMD's launch schedule for Radeon HD 3800 (RV670) is slated for just a few days before NVIDIA's G92 re-launch. AMD corporate guidance suggests the company will launch its Phenom desktop processor and RD790 desktop chipset simultaneously with its new graphics offering.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=9474

IMAGE 3

So,

• 300 - 350 USD.
• 512MB and 1024MB flavors.
• Based on g92 chipset with 65nm process.
• 256-bit memory interface.
• 128 shader units.
• 650MHz core clock.
• 1940MHz memory clock.
• 1625Mhz shader clock.
• Supported release date as December 3rd.

It's also likely that this card may be named something new.

Sorry if it has already been posted but hopefully you like this layout.

 

[darkxknight]

if its faster than a ultra, then i might hold off on the 3870 and get this bad boy.

 

[Griswold]

Originally posted by: darkxknight
if its faster than a ultra, then i might hold off on the 3870 and get this bad boy.

Its pretty safe to say it wont be faster than a Ultra if you love high resolutions and lots of AA/AF - if the statement about the 256bit interface holds true.

 

[requiem1]

I still think it is going to cost $400+

 

[ZeroTM]

Originally posted by: requiem1
I still think it is going to cost $400+

If there's low supply and high demand, probably.

 

[taltamir]

with 1GB of ram it might be faster then an ultra... actually it will PROBABLY be faster then an ultra... it will DEFINATELY be faster if you put it in a PCIE2 board where it gets double the bandwidth, taking away the ultra one advantage (bigger memory bandwidth)

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: darkxknight
if its faster than a ultra, then i might hold off on the 3870 and get this bad boy.

Its pretty safe to say it wont be faster than a Ultra if you love high resolutions and lots of AA/AF - if the statement about the 256bit interface holds true.

Well.. memorybandwith doesn't hold down 8800 GT. It's biggest draw back is it's 512MB vram amount.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: taltamir
with 1GB of ram it might be faster then an ultra... actually it will PROBABLY be faster then an ultra... it will DEFINATELY be faster if you put it in a PCIE2 board where it gets double the bandwidth, taking away the ultra one advantage (bigger memory bandwidth)

PCIE1 is nowhere near saturated. How will a PCIE2 board make a difference? What bandwidth is doubled? PCIE2 may have it's advantages, but making boards faster is not one of them.

 

[MarcVenice]

I think it will be faster then an ultra, it's pretty simple if you ask me, the memory bandwith bus might smaller, but in the end due to higher speeds the bandwith will still be the same or even more. Besides, the 8800GT is showing that even with the 256bit interface it's still faster then the old 8800gts.

 

[Hauk]

If December 3rd is a hard launch, product should be shipping. And if that's the case, we should see leaked benchies this week.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
I think it will be faster then an ultra, it's pretty simple if you ask me, the memory bandwith bus might smaller, but in the end due to higher speeds the bandwith will still be the same or even more. Besides, the 8800GT is showing that even with the 256bit interface it's still faster then the old 8800gts.

I doubt it could even beat a gtx.

 

[Jules]

Not interested at that price. Ill stick to my gt.

 

[trajan2050]

It smokes the GTX.

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: trajan2050
It smokes the GTX.

Link?

 

[nullpointerus]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
I think it will be faster then an ultra, it's pretty simple if you ask me, the memory bandwith bus might smaller, but in the end due to higher speeds the bandwith will still be the same or even more. Besides, the 8800GT is showing that even with the 256bit interface it's still faster then the old 8800gts.

Doesn't the Ultra already have insane memory speeds, say ~2160, not counting o/c?
How can 320-bit x 1950 MHz overcome the bandwidth of a 384-bit x 2160 MHz board?

EDIT: completely forgot about the odd memory bus width on these cards!

This new GTS is a refresh part that will beat the old GTS on features and performance.

IMO, SLi/CF-on-a-card products will be the new "high end" in the near future -- there's no point in introducing such multi-GPU solutions if a new single-GPU GTX/Ultra-killer is on the horizon because in that case few people would bother with the SLi/CF-on-a-card products.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: taltamir
with 1GB of ram it might be faster then an ultra... actually it will PROBABLY be faster then an ultra... it will DEFINATELY be faster if you put it in a PCIE2 board where it gets double the bandwidth, taking away the ultra one advantage (bigger memory bandwidth)

There has to be a game that takes advantage of more than 768mb of ram. Second, PCIe doesn't limit 8800Ultra at the moment so there will be no advantage to PCIe 2. Double the bandwidth doesn't mean the card actually uses it to its advantage.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

loads of Vram is nice for high AA + Vsync Triple buffering

 

[Sheninat0r]

I've seen these pictures before... as in MONTHS ago. Smells like fake to me.

Also, only one SLi bridge?

 

[BlizzardOne]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: darkxknight
if its faster than a ultra, then i might hold off on the 3870 and get this bad boy.

Its pretty safe to say it wont be faster than a Ultra if you love high resolutions and lots of AA/AF - if the statement about the 256bit interface holds true.

Well.. memorybandwith doesn't hold down 8800 GT. It's biggest draw back is it's 512MB vram amount.

Sure it does. Linky (yea yea, i know it's Tom's.. so sue me). Check out the Crysis numbers, the GTX delivers an absolute bitch-slapping at 16x12 w/AA.

 

[chizow]

Don't expect this part to be on par with a GTX/Ultra unless it has both 1GB and more than 16 ROPs. There's numerous reviews that show the old G80 GTS performs comparably to the G92 GT at similar clock speeds (OC version GTS vs. stock GT).

As I've posted previously, I think the extra render back ends simply don't exist on the G92; they were linked to the extra memory controllers that got cut in the G92 which probably only has 16 ROPs (4 for each 64-bit controller) compared to the G80 which has 24 ROPs (4 for each 64-bit on the GTX, 1 cut on the GTS).

 

[secretanchitman]

wow...1GB of memory? damn...

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: BlizzardOne

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: darkxknight
if its faster than a ultra, then i might hold off on the 3870 and get this bad boy.

Its pretty safe to say it wont be faster than a Ultra if you love high resolutions and lots of AA/AF - if the statement about the 256bit interface holds true.

Well.. memorybandwith doesn't hold down 8800 GT. It's biggest draw back is it's 512MB vram amount.

Sure it does. Linky (yea yea, i know it's Tom's.. so sue me). Check out the Crysis numbers, the GTX delivers an absolute bitch-slapping at 16x12 w/AA.

Exactly.. Sure G92 has 1:1 ALU/TEX ratio and thus great texel rate and some optimizations in the memory interface but it certainly gets crippled @higher resolutions with filters enabled. And that's where G92 in general "hurts" many times compared with the GTX and especially Ultra. I don't see how GTS can change this picture. It will be damn fast or faster though that the current high end at lower resolutions.

 

[Denithor]

2900XT: (1650MHz)(512-bit/8) = 105.6GB/s
G80 8800 Ultra: (2160MHz)(384-bit/8) = 103.7GB/s
G80 8800 GTS: (1600MHz)(320-bit/8) = 64.0GB/s
G92 8800 GTS: (1940MHz)(256-bit/8) = 62.1GB/s
G92 8800 GT: (1800MHz)(256-bit/8) = 57.6GB/s

So the new GTS at stock speed will have even less bandwidth than the G80 GTS. However, as shown by the 2900XT, extremely high bandwidth is not critical to great performance. It is also worth noting that the 8800GT with 10% less bandwidth than the G80 GTS still manages to get the upper hand in most games (the only place where it comes up short is due to limited VRAM, not bandwidth, because it beats the GTS-320 in every case).

Keep in mind these cards are being launched as the new "mid-level" cards. I expect within the next several months we will see the next generation "high-end" cards launched with significantly higher bandwidth (purely my opinion).

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: Denithor
2900XT: (1650MHz)(512-bit/8) = 105.6GB/s
G80 8800 Ultra: (2160MHz)(384-bit/8) = 103.7GB/s
G80 8800 GTS: (1600MHz)(320-bit/8) = 64.0GB/s
G92 8800 GTS: (1940MHz)(256-bit/8) = 62.1GB/s
G92 8800 GT: (1800MHz)(256-bit/8) = 57.6GB/s

So the new GTS at stock speed will have even less bandwidth than the G80 GTS. However, as shown by the 2900XT, extremely high bandwidth is not critical to great performance. It is also worth noting that the 8800GT with 10% less bandwidth than the G80 GTS still manages to get the upper hand in most games (the only place where it comes up short is due to limited VRAM, not bandwidth, because it beats the GTS-320 in every case).

Keep in mind these cards are being launched as the new "mid-level" cards. I expect within the next several months we will see the next generation "high-end" cards launched with significantly higher bandwidth (purely my opinion).

X2900XT enormous memory bandwidth was not effective for other reasons. (AA resolve through shaders and low z-fillrate necessary to take advantage of this monstrous bandwith). It was an unbalanced solution in every aspect. This has nothing to do with G80/G92.
New G92 GT/GTS are a different story.They have optimizations in Z-culling which means that they are more effective in the same amounts of memory bandwith than their G80 predecessor. Of course they cannot still compete with G80 high end @high resolutions with filters enabled.

 

[Munky]

It looks kinda ugly to me. Anyway, maybe the 1GB model will prove useful at high resolutions with AA/AF, but I don't expect the 512MB model to be substantially faster than a 8800gt. In any case, this is still not the high end cards we should have 1 year after the 8800gtx launched.