Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

OMG OMG OMG 9800GTX SPECS RELEASED

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 25, 2007 8:23:57 PM

source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/discussion/3953.html



1. By Q4 2007 (Xmas) NVIDIA will be releasing their GeForce 9800 series GPUs.
Unlike previously expected the codename for nVidia's next generation GPU will NOT be "G90" but instead be "G92".

I have some info form NVIDIA insider about the upcoming G92 graphics processors.

G92 will be released in November 2007 timeframe in the form of "GeForce 9800" series.

"G92" GeForce 9800 GTX specs.

- 65nm process technology at TSMC.
- Over one billion transistors.
- Second Generation Unified Shader Architecture.
- Double precsion support (FP64).
- GPGPU native.
- Over one TeraFLOPS of shader processing power.
- MADD+ADD configuration for the shader untis (2+1 FLOPS=3 FLOPS per ALU)
- Fully Scalar design.
- 512-bit memory interface.
- 1024MB GDDR4 graphics memory.
- DirectX 10.1 support.
- OpenGL 3.0 Support.
- eDRAM die for "FREE 4xAA".
- built in Audio Chip.
- built in tesselation unit (in the graphics core"
- Improved AA and AF quality levels

Pros.

65nm process will allow for better yields and better power consumption. power consumption will be lower than that of a GeForce 8800 GTX.

GeForce 9800 GTX will be over two times faster than a GeForce 8800 Ultra in real world games and applcations.

Release date : November 2007. There will be TWO products at launch: The flagship GeForce 9800 GTX and the second fastest GeForce 9800 GTS.

price for the GeForce 9800 GTX will be 549-649 USD.

price for the GeForce 9800 GTS will be 399-449 USD.



July 25, 2007 8:28:33 PM

"I have some info form NVIDIA insider"

Yeh, sureee you do.

This seems wayy to good to be true. And you know what they say about things that seem way too good to be true. This just seems to be based on the rumor started in April about the so called "G92", and notice how he says "it won't be G90 (like you all thought) but instead G92!", when the only rumor was G92 and no one ever said G90.

But if this IS true, then Q4 2007/Q1 2008 will be the best time to buy. X38 + 45nm Conroe + 9800 GTX al released at the same time.
July 25, 2007 8:30:19 PM

this is not me saying that! this is the guy that wrote the article from XBITLABS
Related resources
July 25, 2007 8:33:48 PM

baaf said:
Pros.

65nm process will allow for better yields and better power consumption. power consumption will be lower than that of a GeForce 8800 GTX.

GeForce 9800 GTX will be over two times faster than a GeForce 8800 Ultra in real world games and applcations.

Cons:

Price: $5000


lol
July 25, 2007 8:36:57 PM

baaf said:
this is not me saying that! this is the guy that wrote the article from XBITLABS


And what sources does he cite for these unbelievable claims? NONE.

Ah, how Xbitlabs discredits itself forever.
July 25, 2007 8:36:57 PM

Track said:
And what sources does he cite for these unbelievable claims? NONE.

Ah, how Xbitlabs discredits itself forever.


Kind of shooting down the messanger?

Who knows, if the article is right, at 550-650 I'd probably pick one up.
July 25, 2007 8:38:51 PM

pchoi04 said:
If the article is right, at 550-650 I'd probably pick one up.


Thats a laugh.

The 8800 GTX still costs 600$ and since it has no reason to go down in price, there is NO way nVidia is going to release an 9800 GTX and there is NO reason they will price it below twice the cost of the 8800 GTX.

It's just simple market strategy based upon logic and history.
July 25, 2007 8:42:53 PM

Track said:
Thats a laugh.

The 8800 GTX still costs 600$ and since it has no reason to go down in price, there is NO way nVidia is going to release an 9800 GTX and there is NO reason they will price it below twice the cost of the 8800 GTX.

It's just simple market strategy based upon logic and history.



Man... Calm down. Did someone $h!t in your wheaties today? It's all in good fun.
July 25, 2007 8:43:17 PM

Track said:
Thats a laugh.

The 8800 GTX still costs 600$ and since it has no reason to go down in price, there is NO way nVidia is going to release an 9800 GTX and there is NO reason they will price it below twice the cost of the 8800 GTX.

It's just simple market strategy based upon logic and history.



if we would assume that what u say is true then by now we would have got cards that cost over 10000$ ;) 

every time there is a new chip on the market the previous ones should go down in price so the new one could take the old price tag!
July 25, 2007 8:44:24 PM

Track, how can you tell the future so effectively all the time? You should be rich. Besides, why do you care what the price is gonna be? You're still gonna be gaming at 60FPS on your P4 so don't worry about it k buddy??
July 25, 2007 8:47:05 PM

But will the drivers be there for Vista?
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 25, 2007 8:47:13 PM

baaf said:
if we would assume that what u say is true then by now we would have got cards that cost over 10000$ ;) 

every time there is a new chip on the market the previous ones should go down in price so the new one could take the old price tag!

Your right in what you both say to some degree its normally the old price tag plus a fair few dollars untill the fuss and sales die down and they find a real level.
Mactronix
July 25, 2007 8:51:58 PM

I am pretty sure they would not call it a 9800.........remember the ATI 9800 Pro......?
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 25, 2007 9:00:15 PM

Well if this card does come out on time and is as good/quick as these"sources" seem to think it will be then ati had better get something pretty special out there soon or give up and go home.
As nvida have more or less a monopoly of the higher end cards(above the 1950s and 7950s)with the obvious exception of the 2900 which has too many cons at the min for me, power and heat being the main ones.
If Nvidea can resist putting an insane premium price on this card and as has been sugested already lower the price of the 8800s then the gts will become true midrange ,gtx/ultras mid-high and the new card highend.
Before anyone starts shouting fanboy i would like to point out that i have never owned a pc with an Nvidea card in it but it looks like the next one will.
Mactronix
a b U Graphics card
July 25, 2007 9:02:31 PM

IF they release the 9800 they would only be damaging them selves as nVidia dose not have high competition against the 8800's from ATI in price/performances.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 25, 2007 9:05:59 PM

Shadow703793 said:
IF they release the 9800 they would only be damaging them selves as nVidia dose not have high competition against the 8800's from ATI in price/performances.

Its called kicking the competition while its down as i eluded to in my first post if they price right they can own the top sector of the market for a while.
Mactronix
July 25, 2007 9:11:52 PM

mactronix said:
Its called kicking the competition while its down as i eluded to in my first post if they price right they can own the top sector of the market for a while.
Mactronix


No. It's called wasting your money.

The 8800 GTXs are still selling like hotcakes and they are still the #1 cards.
Not to mention that ATI is not going to make any new cards.

Without Intel, nVidia have no reason make new graphics card unless everyone already has the 8800 GTX and now they need to make them buy a new card. But not everyone has an 8800 GTX because they havn't even lowered the prices.

It took a year a half for nVidia to release the 8800 GTX after the 7800 GTX, and then they had the toughest competition ever. Now they have nearly 0 competition and they are going to release a card that is THAT much better only a year afterwards?? Thats insane.
They havnt even had to make an 8900! They HAVE NO REASON to make either one and you say that they are going to make a 9800? Thats bullshit.

And yes, I am pissed off because I need to buy an 8800 GTX right now or otherwise I won't have a chance to actually enjoy it before the school year starts.
July 25, 2007 9:14:02 PM

Quote:
ehm, i think this has been posted a couple of months plus ago and if you look closely, it is practically the exact same specs as the R600 so those saying it is too good to be true, might want to rethink that. if i am right this was the specs the inq posted as regards to what R600 would be although i may be wrong.


It's still only a stupid rumor and nothing more.

Logically however it also makes no sense.

Thus I deem it- bullshit. :pfff: 
July 25, 2007 9:16:11 PM

Track said:
Thats a laugh.

The 8800 GTX still costs 600$ and since it has no reason to go down in price, there is NO way nVidia is going to release an 9800 GTX and there is NO reason they will price it below twice the cost of the 8800 GTX.

It's just simple market strategy based upon logic and history.



Dude when the 7900GT game out it was cheaper, faster and cooler than the 7800GTX. New fab = cheaper

if it really is going to be 65nm it will cost nvidia a lot less to make 1 9800GTX then 1 8800GTX. The savings is then passed on.
July 25, 2007 9:19:10 PM

track ur only pissed because u want to get a 8800GTX and all of a sudden u got this! :lol: 


just CHILL dude and lit us enjoy this moment :sol:  releasing a new card is good for every1 ! i dont give a f*** if releasing the card wont help nvidia financially (but it will), the most important thing here is that we only r going to gain good things from this release :) 
July 25, 2007 9:25:06 PM

pchoi04 said:
Kind of shooting down the messanger?

Who knows, if the article is right, at 550-650 I'd probably pick one up.


Not a joke. I might do the same. I won't buy any video card over $600, no matter how trick.
Not sure if the g92 or g100 will be the NEXT big update.
If the g90s is more like a GTX Ultra, then I'll skip it.
Anyway, the specs for the g92 seems (above) looks like the first DX10 card I was planning on getting.
I also want to see the R700 :bounce: 
July 25, 2007 9:33:14 PM

o ma god o ma god o ma god !!! breath breath


lol jk... seems waaaay too good to be true but im just glad that we should be seeing the G92 around Christmas time
July 25, 2007 9:45:07 PM

Second gen DX10 cards are needed to power the upcoming DX10 games. Anandtech did some quick benchmarking of some of the new DX10 games and the GTX and Ultra cards can barely keep up(with max settings and higher resolutions). This is a logical step. It also makes sense financially.
July 25, 2007 9:47:38 PM

hmmm seams unlikely they'd skip the 8900,8950,8950x2 blahahblah i think theres definatly more money to be made by invidia by subtly tweaking the 8series before pushing forward
July 25, 2007 10:03:54 PM

If this were true (I have no idea to the validity of it), then I would say that nVidia watched the Intel vs. AMD and don't want to end up in AMD's position. If they hit now, then ATI wont have much of a chance to catch up or overtake them as Intel did to AMD. They know ATI is still working on new cards and don't wanna wait for them to smack them with a potentially superior product.

Besides, you give people an upgrade path and the ones that always feel the have to be on the bleeding edge will buy them up plus they will have time to get the drivers up to par before the DX10 games hit.

Smart for them all the way around.
July 25, 2007 10:10:07 PM

Since everyone is running around saying todays highend cards won't be able to play very well when true DX10 games come along,it would be smart of Nvidia to have a capable part waiting in the wings.When games get all the way on the DX10 bandwagon the company with the card to play them wins.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 25, 2007 10:17:58 PM

baaf said:
this is not me saying that! this is the guy that wrote the article from XBITLABS


Actually, read the link.

The article is about PCIe 2.0 what you linked to is a FORUM post by some sot, not the Author.

The date of April 1 on the original article mean anything to ya'?


I wouldn't bother with the speculation on the G92, it's since been counter speculated and back again.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 25, 2007 10:33:02 PM

Track said:
And what sources does he cite for these unbelievable claims? NONE.

Ah, how Xbitlabs discredits itself forever.


He's not affiliated with Xbit other than posting in their forums, so I don't see how he has anything to do with their credibility.

However your inability to gleen or filter that out though puts into question your own.

July 25, 2007 10:51:08 PM

i guess there is no reason to put my 8800 gts in sli...im sad now.
July 25, 2007 11:08:55 PM

Well i don't really get why people are making this such a big deal.

If there is a new card coming, then it's mostly widely known. And most of the time the first sites who have it are chinese or something.

But for people who have an 8800, i don't understand what's the big problem. The 8800 is a great card and will stay like that for a while to come.
July 25, 2007 11:21:20 PM

Are there games that complement these cards? Its like having a 1000 foot fence in the outfield. You have a big ball park but no one will knock it over the fence. Not even Barry whats his name. Gimme some Balcore
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 25, 2007 11:25:19 PM

Games that would compliment such a card if it existed would be the old games at nutar resolutions and AA.

Games that may be a best fit and really start to need something similar to what's spec'ed out above would be Crysis, UT3, Bioshock, etc. But you wouldn't know for sure until they both shipped.
July 25, 2007 11:42:44 PM

Yeah i did hear from a couple of places that the 9800 series is emerging towards the end of this year. HOWEVER. *looks at suggested specs, laughs until he dies* they wont be that powerful methinks
July 26, 2007 12:03:15 AM

9800 GTX spec are fake, no question about it. Also there is no slightest point to kill own current high-end cards.

What nVidia will do IMO, will release in autumn updated 8800 65nm core with whatever new name - 8850 or 8900. This will increase distance from ATI offerings, will be cheap to do (unlike totaly new core), and STILL sell like hotcakes for the same price they would charge new core. In the end it would be win-win strategy for nVidia, why would they hurt their own profits with expensive to make new chip with 1 bln transistors? This doesnt make any sense.

Thats why its reasonable to expect Nvidia will keep refreshing current core untill ATI has remotely anything to threaten their fastest offering, while in labs silently preparing and refining new core, which will be released after another year if ATI wont offer anything breathtaking OR sooner if R700 will be a beast in Q2+ 2008.
July 26, 2007 12:36:12 AM

While I don't buy the specs I think there is very good change that Nv's next card will be twice fast as the 8800GTX. They need to push that performance into the mainstream. I've been play the World in Conflict Beta at 1600 x 1200 with the recommended settings at my frame rate drop to 24fps in the action. That needs to be mainstream performance for DX 10 to take off.

Like enewmen, many people wont spend over $600 or $400 for that matter. If Nv releases a card that can push the 8800GTX into the $400 range they still make money and increase volume. They also force ATI to lower their prices. It's a wise business move if you can do it.
July 26, 2007 12:49:08 AM

Nobody has mentioned this, and apparently none of you nooblets have caught it.

Observe:

nVidia G92 GPU is expected to be released in November on a 65nm process. G92 is the mid range successor to G84, featuring support for PCI Express 2.0 and utilising a 256-bit memory interface. The performance of this part is expected to be between a GeForce 8600 GTS and an 8800 GTS.

G92 is not the 9800GTX...
July 26, 2007 12:57:01 AM

OH NO...... OH NO!!!!!!
I just had an accident in my pants!

If this is true....

:D 


Tho i would have expected NV to milk the 8-series 'brand name' a little more before moving onto the 9's... u know... since this 8's are a pretty popular and well respected card.

So what comes after 9... 10? 1098?
I chopped a 1098 the other day :p 
July 26, 2007 1:14:05 AM

So i guess you completely ignored my post hmm?
Nvidia is NOT releasing the 9 series this year.
July 26, 2007 1:17:04 AM


I'd expect a November release date for G90. The CEO has been quoted many times saying they want a 12mo GPU cycle. Also, it would make business sense to release in Nov. since it would unfortunately put another nail in AMD/ATIs coffin.

This is great news since I'll be building a new rig around that time. G90 SLI here I come :sol: 
a b U Graphics card
July 26, 2007 1:50:31 AM

Pros- Everthing already posted in this thread over and over.
Cons- Pricey
Won't run under Vista.......
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
July 26, 2007 1:55:11 AM

Yes it all depends on which 'current rumour' you want to believe. The one attributed to Michael Hara posted on the InQ about the G92 being close to a 1 TeraFlop performer, or the one by Fuad saying that the G90 is the next card and the G92 is the mid-range. Hence my statements about counter speculated and back again.

I tend to think nV will follow thier usual pattern of X0 fo flagships, but that concept doesn't make the rest of the topic more/less credible, heck the name is almost irrelevant to the glutton of specs cobbled together above.
July 26, 2007 2:21:29 AM

How big of an impact or how many features are nVidia losing out on without DX10.1? If games are coming out soon that will use these features, I would think nVidia would want to be right there with it.

Track said:
Thus I deem it- bullshit. :pfff: 
I'll agree to that. It's usually what I do with 99.9% of your posts. It works for me.
July 26, 2007 2:27:20 AM

JFC people: DX10 isn't even out, and no one can even say WHEN it will be! Worse, DX10 is being neutered as we speak because nVidia can't get virtualization working (or something like that).

To go on further, how many DX10 titles are coming out this year? 3? 4? What OS does one need to run DX10? Vista? No thanks. And how many power plugs will this one require (and how about the size of the PS)?

The Apester is right- the only real beneficieres (did I get that right? :)  ), are the older DX9 games.

Now, when can I buy one? jk.
July 26, 2007 2:44:02 AM

I think it's even funnier that people are wasting all of this time talking about something that doesn't exist anyhow.
July 26, 2007 2:48:18 AM

Newbie, I guess you missed the DX10 patch for Company of heros.
July 26, 2007 2:58:06 AM

baaf said:
source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/discussion/3953.html



1. By Q4 2007 (Xmas) NVIDIA will be releasing their GeForce 9800 series GPUs.
Unlike previously expected the codename for nVidia's next generation GPU will NOT be "G90" but instead be "G92".

I have some info form NVIDIA insider about the upcoming G92 graphics processors.

G92 will be released in November 2007 timeframe in the form of "GeForce 9800" series.

"G92" GeForce 9800 GTX specs.

- 65nm process technology at TSMC.
- Over one billion transistors.
- Second Generation Unified Shader Architecture.
- Double precsion support (FP64).
- GPGPU native.
- Over one TeraFLOPS of shader processing power.
- MADD+ADD configuration for the shader untis (2+1 FLOPS=3 FLOPS per ALU)
- Fully Scalar design.
- 512-bit memory interface.
- 1024MB GDDR4 graphics memory.
- DirectX 10.1 support.
- OpenGL 3.0 Support.
- eDRAM die for "FREE 4xAA".
- built in Audio Chip.
- built in tesselation unit (in the graphics core"
- Improved AA and AF quality levels

Pros.

65nm process will allow for better yields and better power consumption. power consumption will be lower than that of a GeForce 8800 GTX.

GeForce 9800 GTX will be over two times faster than a GeForce 8800 Ultra in real world games and applcations.

Release date : November 2007. There will be TWO products at launch: The flagship GeForce 9800 GTX and the second fastest GeForce 9800 GTS.

price for the GeForce 9800 GTX will be 549-649 USD.

price for the GeForce 9800 GTS will be 399-449 USD.
I love my 8800GTX, but this wreaks of BS.
July 26, 2007 3:16:01 AM

bydesign said:
While I don't buy the specs I think there is very good change that Nv's next card will be twice fast as the 8800GTX. They need to push that performance into the mainstream. I've been play the World in Conflict Beta at 1600 x 1200 with the recommended settings at my frame rate drop to 24fps in the action. That needs to be mainstream performance for DX 10 to take off.

Like enewmen, many people wont spend over $600 or $400 for that matter. If Nv releases a card that can push the 8800GTX into the $400 range they still make money and increase volume. They also force ATI to lower their prices. It's a wise business move if you can do it.


+1

The graphics card industry is really at the lowest I can remember it being in a LONG time. Call it bad timing or whatever, but the last six months have been pathetic for graphics cards. You have all of these DX10 cards, yet no DX10 games (other than the 'tacked on' DX10 games like Lost Planet and Call of Juarez).

Most people are still using cards from 3+ years ago because there is no need to upgrade to SM3/4 cards because the games SUCK. The last Splinter Cell game for instance, was full of bugs and it pretty much flopped on the PC.

Advances in graphics are pushed by FPS engines mainly. Whether it by CRYEngine, Unreal Engine, Source Engine, etc. - that's the *main* reason people buy new graphics cards - so they can play groundbreaking shooters like Half Life 2 and Crysis.

You look at the 'great' games that have come out since Half Life 2 - the ones that get ratings of 9/10 from most reviewers - the ones that people upgrade their systems in order to play, and then look at the minimum graphics requirements:

World of Warcraft - GeForce2+
F.E.A.R. - GeForce4 Ti+ / Radeon 9000+
Civilization IV - GeForce2+ / Radeon 7500+
Oblivion - GeForce FX 5700+ / Radeon 9500+
Company of Heroes - GeForce 3 / Radeon 8500
Prey - GeForce3+ / Radeon 9600+
C&C 3 - GeForce4 / ATI Radeon 8500
Supreme Commander - GeForce 6x00

If you can play all of those games with a Radeon 9600 or a GeForce 6600, why upgrade?

And that there is the crux of the matter, people won't really start to upgrade until there's a need to. IIRC, Valve's latest hardware survey pretty much confirmed that - of the identified cards, something like 45% of them were equivalent to Radeon 9/Radeon X/GeForce 6/Integrated Graphics (i.e. low end DirectX 9 cards). About 14% were unidentified, so you can assume that at least 5% of those were 'low end' cards.

That's at least 50% of the gaming population still using cards from over 3 years ago.

The next 40% use Radeon X1K/GeForce7 (high end DirectX 9 cards).

And less than 10% currently have GeForce 8xxx / ATI HD 2xxx (Direct X 10 cards).

Granted, this data isn't exact, but it's a good generalization of what the market looks like right now.

IMHO, Nvidia isn't going to jump to the next generation of cards (i.e GeForce 9800) until at least 40% of the gaming population is using GeForce 8xxx series / Radeon HD 2xxx series.

At this point it wouldn't make any sense - Nvidia (essentially) controls the DX 10 market at this point, and the 'mainstream' cards (i.e. GeForce 8600) are hardly mainstream - at least not like the Radeon 9600 was back in it's day or even the GeForce 6600.

July 26, 2007 3:40:43 AM

james_8970 said:
Newbie, I guess you missed the DX10 patch for Company of heros.


Can one miss something for which one was not looking? :) 

You're right, but I don't play CofH. I actually did the real thing and games just don't do it for me. See pic for reference.
July 26, 2007 9:40:28 AM

Well i must add one thing there will never be a 8800gx2 because have you looked at what cooler needs a single 8800gtx how can you put 2 pcb's together you couldn't cool them unless you are making a 4 slot card, maybe a 8800 on 65nm yes but a 8800gx2 never.
July 26, 2007 10:00:47 AM

ben72227 said:

...You look at the 'great' games that have come out since Half Life 2 - the ones that get ratings of 9/10 from most reviewers - the ones that people upgrade their systems in order to play, and then look at the minimum graphics requirements:

World of Warcraft - GeForce2+
F.E.A.R. - GeForce4 Ti+ / Radeon 9000+
Civilization IV - GeForce2+ / Radeon 7500+
Oblivion - GeForce FX 5700+ / Radeon 9500+
Company of Heroes - GeForce 3 / Radeon 8500
Prey - GeForce3+ / Radeon 9600+
C&C 3 - GeForce4 / ATI Radeon 8500
Supreme Commander - GeForce 6x00

If you can play all of those games with a Radeon 9600 or a GeForce 6600, why upgrade?


That's the minimum requirements though to just run the game. Now try and turn the graphic settings up to high where those games will look their best and watch them struggle to be playable.
!