Geforce 6800NU/GT/Ultra Review

[imported_rachel]

I just found a website which got all the NV40 card but it is a chinese website, hope enjoy.

http://www.hkepc.com/hwdb/6800nugt-1.htm

 

[Corporate Thug]

interesting post, thanx

seems like the 6800 NU is like a 9800 XT on steriods

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Wow, the 6800 nu is horrible.

http://www.hkepc.com/hwdb/6800nugt-4.htm

Check out the UT2k3 botmatch score. 59.71

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1421&page=7

Looks like the 9700 Pro gets 68.61.

I bet overclocked 9800 Pros and XTs could match the 6800 nu.

 

[MichaelZ]

maybe you should wait for more reviews before labling something as horrible.

 

[McArra]

6800 doesn't look good

 

[tfinch2]

why do people benchmark next gen cards on old ass games?

 

[GeneralGrievous]

They benched it on Farcry and 3dmark03 as well. Neither score was impressive.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: McArra
6800 doesn't look good

but the gt does!

 

[Acanthus]

You guys were expecting more out of the FX5200 of the new generation? These are going to be the crap cards of the future... same with the X800SE.

 

[rbV5]

The 6800nu isn't that far from x800pro on those charts from my view. If it overclocks well.....

 

[McArra]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: McArra
6800 doesn't look good

but the gt does!

But the GT competes with the X800XT and the Ultra with the X800XT PE.

 

[nitromullet]

I'm not sure if the 6800 is intended to be the FX5200 of the next gen... I'm sure there will be a 6600 or somthing like that as well. The FX5200 basically was the equivalent of nVidia's MX series in previous generations, not a gaming card. I would imagine that the 6800 will still go for around $200 upon it's release, making this card intended for the budget performance crowd. Of course, I think a 9800 Pro is a better way to spend $200.

Edit: McArra, I think that the GT is meant to compete with the X800 Pro, and the Ultra with the XT.

 

[rbV5]

I would imagine that the 6800 will still go for around $200 upon it's release,

$299 MSRP is what I've seen. It will be interesting to see where these cards price at when they settle down.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: rbV5

I would imagine that the 6800 will still go for around $200 upon it's release,

$299 MSRP is what I've seen. It will be interesting to see where these cards price at when they settle down.

Yep, you're right, that certainly doesn't make the 6800 the FX5200 of the next generation...

 

[McArra]

McArra, I think that the GT is meant to compete with the X800 Pro, and the Ultra with the XT.

Not according to the inquirer... but who knows XD

 

[Illissius]

I don't know R300/50/60 benchmark numbers by heart, but if they /are/ faster than than the 6800 numbers in this review, then either their specs are bogus, or their benches are. The 6800 Ultra has roughly twice the specs of a 9800XT, and accordingly, it performs roughly twice as fast. The 6800NU has ~33% faster specs than a 9800XT, and this should be reflected in its performance. Or else the specs are wrong.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

The 6800NU has ~33% faster specs than a 9800XT, and this should be reflected in its performance. Or else the specs are wrong.

But it doesn't. It might have 12 pipelines but it also has:

Slower core
Slower memory
A core that is not as effective at proccessing todays PS 2.0 games.

 

[Illissius]

The specs are:
325MHz 12 pipe core => 3.9G fill rate
700MHz 256-bit memory

The 9800XT has a 3.3G fill rate... so it's actually just a ~20% increase, so the roughly 33% I mentioned was incorrect, sorry. Regardless, unless it's hugely bottlenecked by the memory (it shouldn't be), it'll be faster. And that it's bad at PS2.0 is just bogus. PS3 is in addition to PS2, it does not detriment it in any way. Clock for clock, pipe for pipe an NV40 is just as fast as an R3xx or R420, a bit faster actually. (And that's with the GeForce doing 32-bit to the Radeon's 24, mind; if the GeForce uses 16 it's a good 20-30% faster.) What this means is that the X800XT PE has a 30-40% higher fill rate than the 6800 Ultra, and benchmarks show that it is in fact that much faster for the most part, meaning the same should hold true for the 6800 and the 9800XT - the 6800 should be ~20% faster.

 

[Pete]

A core that is not as effective at proccessing todays PS 2.0 games.
How did you conclude the core is the problem? I think nV has more legit driver optimization left to do on their new core.

The 6800 seems to compare well to the (overpriced) 9800XT:

3DM03 Overall (6800@HKEPC, 9800XT@TR): 7912, 6570
3DM03 PS2.0 test (6800@HKEPC, 9800XT@TR): 83.2, 57.6
3DM03 VS2.0 test (6800@HKEPC, 9800XT@TR): 22.8, 19.7

The 6800 looks pretty good (with slightly less memory bandwidth) in the few and mismarked (they switched "PS" and "VS" 3DM03 scores) benchmarks , and it offers SM3.0 to boot. If it drops some from its $300MSRP, it may end up being a smarter buy than even a $200 9800P.

It's not "horrible," in any case, and you can't compare UT2K3 benchmarks across sites if you don't know that they're using the same demo (or system). I wouldn't base my whole opinion on a single 16x12, no AA, no AF number, either. Most people here who buy 9800Ps and 6800s do so to use AA+AF, not to run 16x12 without any goodies.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

How did you conclude the core is the problem?

I'm not saying its a problem. But just by looking at the X800 benches, the Radeon cores seem to have a slight advantage in games like this.

If it drops some from its $300MSRP, it may end up being a smarter buy than even a $200 9800P.

That's probably true. At $250 it would be a nice buy.

Most people here who buy 9800Ps and 6800s do so to use AA+AF, not to run 16x12 without any goodies.

The only problem with this is that its only getting 60 fps at 16x12 without AA/AF. How playable will this card be with all of that on?

What this means is that the X800XT PE has a 30-40% higher fill rate than the 6800 Ultra, and benchmarks show that it is in fact that much faster for the most part,

Since when is the X800 XT 30% faster than the 6800 U?

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: McArra

But the GT competes with the X800XT and the Ultra with the X800XT PE.

Of course this makes a lot of sense since X800XT = X800XT PE because they are the same card :roll:
____________________
Also I dont think 6800NU is the 5200 of the new generation

ATI will have X300 and X600 series besides X800 (X800se, x800Pro, x800xt)
So logically I think Nvidia will release something else besides 6800 as these cards are positioned as high-end
and they need to compete at lower price levels besides $299 set by 6800NU.

 

[McArra]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: McArra

But the GT competes with the X800XT and the Ultra with the X800XT PE.

Of course the X800XT = X800XT PE because they are the same card :roll:

According to The Inquirer X800XT=500/1000-->comeptitor to the 6800GT

X800XT PE=525/1120--> competitor of 6800U

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: McArra

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: McArra

But the GT competes with the X800XT and the Ultra with the X800XT PE.

Of course the X800XT = X800XT PE because they are the same card :roll:

According to The Inquirer X800XT=500/1000-->comeptitor to the 6800GT

X800XT PE=525/1120--> competitor of 6800U

My bad then, didnt follow the news so closely. Thanks for pointing this out. This is great news since the core will surely overclock to 525 and that RAM will hit 1.1 no problems.

 

[McArra]

Yep that's good news: less price for almost the same think (like 9800pro-->9800XT).

 

[Illissius]

Damn. If ATi /does/ release a 500/500 X800XT at $400 - which I'm rather skeptical of, seeing as only /one/ site is reporting on it, the Inquirer, and Fuad at that - I wouldn't want to be in nVidia's place. I mean, what can they do, drop the GT to $300? :/
Price wars <3.