More GeForce 9800 rumours

[theuprightman24]

More GeForce 9800 rumours-- thought it would prove to be a highly sort after topic.

Hmmm - maybe, might end up getting bored with the 9800 before its released.

Anyways heres the link:
http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/601215/rumour-control--geforce-9800-could-be-out-for-christmas.html

Rumour mill over and out!

 

[red_devil]

All speculative speculation.

The only thing we (might) know is that Nvidia (maybe) is releasing some graphics card from some generation this some year.

 

[theuprightman24]

Oh i never said it was fact--to be fair its same old story just on a different website...

But the point is -- Nvidia are ripping us off!!!

Oh yeah believe it!

£400 for a DX10 graphics card - if this was ay other industry they would be up for false advertising?

Come on guys this just isn't fair and you would expect better.

WE SHOULD MAKE A STAND - any ideas?

 

[vonwombat]

Why would it be false advertising?

 

[theuprightman24]

er - cause the 8800 series is NOT a DX10 graphics card - example:: If I purchased a car and it would only take me a mile would/could you advertise it as a road worthy card for general use? NO!

 

[vonwombat]

How is the 8800 not a DX10 card? If you are referring to poor performance, the so called DX10 games that are out now suffer from poor implementation of the DX10 features, you should wait for a real DX10 game like Bioshock or Crysis and you'll probably see that the 8800 can run DX10.

 

[theuprightman24]

you reckon? Because there is alot of people out there that would disagree

 

[predaking]

"WE SHOULD MAKE A STAND - any ideas?"

umm don't buy it.

 

[theuprightman24]

too late! but at least I only purchsed the 320MB version

 

[vonwombat]

you reckon? Because there is alot of people out there that would disagree

5 more days and we'll see.

 

[theuprightman24]

Oh believe me I would love for the 8800 series to work -- I really want a 8800 ultra, money all put aside for it but I am not spending out £400 to get something that won't see the rest of the year out

 

[xela]

"WE SHOULD MAKE A STAND - any ideas?"

umm don't buy it.

LoL

I don't know about Bioshock but Crysis and UT3 are promised to work well with 8800's.

You can also get a GTX @ 610Mhz from Newegg for 499$ BTW.. 400 pounds is not a very good offer even for an Ultra.

 

[xela]

Oh believe me I would love for the 8800 series to work -- I really want a 8800 ultra, money all put aside for it but I am not spending out £400 to get something that won't see the rest of the year out

Do you recon that all game manufacturers are retarded? Name one game that GTX can't run today? "Dx10" games that were tested today run waaaaay better in Dx9 mode (they were made to). BTW.. No one will release a game that 96% of the customers will not be able to run. Even a GTS 320 should easily last you one year as long as you stick to moderate resolutions (maybe two).

I think that what you are really pissed at is that if you spend a fortune on the best GPU today.. it will fade against a better model in the new future.. But that's expected and will not change until... never??

 

[theuprightman24]

Just bitching really...........

I know tech moves on thats whats so good about it its just seems graphics cards are not stable enough -- but I guess thats the way the game is played so to speak....

Guess I am more pissed that I purchased a 320MB card instead of a GTX.

 

[mactronix]

As the uprightman started it i will continue with the car analogies :lol:
Seriously its like buying a car though (see told you)no way would i ever buy a new car the amount of money you loose straight off of the forecourt makes it a no brainer as far as im concerned.
I use the same princable with graphics cards and it has turned out quite well this time i dont give a hoot about DX10 or Vista so a GTS will be a good buy for me when i get my new pc in the new year, i dont want/need the best and as games will be backwardsly compatable with DX9 for the forseeable future,well i wont need a new card for about 2 years and they might have made one that can play DX10 properly by then. :lol:
Mactronix

 

[xela]

Just bitching really...........

I know tech moves on thats whats so good about it its just seems graphics cards are not stable enough -- but I guess thats the way the game is played so to speak....

Guess I am more pissed that I purchased a 320MB card instead of a GTX.

I am ordering a new setup in a day or two and I am going wit 320MB GTS. My monitor (witch I adore) supports res up to 1280x1024 and if your monitor is anything like mine you have made a right choice. At lower resolutions GTS runs most games (with 1 or 2 exceptions) as well as GTX does even with full AA. Getting GTX/Ultra is only wise if you have a big*ss screen, otherwise it's a waste of cash as any game that GTS will miserably fail to run should kill GTX/Ultra as well and a new generation GPU will always be just around the corner

 

[theuprightman24]

Thats hit the nail on the head -- very easy to get caught up in getting the newist and best piece of hardware on the market -- but at the end of the day ask yourself is 130 FPS any better than 100 FPS.

The answer is human nature - your eyes can't react that fast anyway.
8800 series and/or 9800 is a no brainer.

 

[xela]

Well said

BTW The inq reported a day after the post you mentioned at the start of this thread that 9800 is likely to be delayed

The rumormill is certainly doing it's part in confusing the hell out of everyone who cares enough to read it !!!

--> I am to tired for this anyway, G'night

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

er - cause the 8800 series is NOT a DX10 graphics card - example:: If I purchased a car and it would only take me a mile would/could you advertise it as a road worthy card for general use? NO!

Ridiculous comment, not a good comparison.

They may be underperforming, but they do fit the minimum requirements. Which would be like YUGO and SKODA technically being 'cars' and their abilities vary based on expectation. That someone might think a 'SPORT' edition of these would allow them to compete in F1 or take on a Lamborghini etc. is their own problem.

It's not false advertising.

your eyes can't react that fast anyway.

Now THAT is false advertising.

 

[theuprightman24]

your eyes can't react that fast anyway.

Now THAT is false advertising.

So your telling me you can tell the differents between a game running at 100 FPS and 130 FPS???? (without using a FPS coun ter)?????

Think not!

 

[desidude006]

Personally my eyes cant anything above 50-60 fps.

 

[Mousemonkey]

So your telling me you can tell the differents between a game running at 100 FPS and 130 FPS???? (without using a FPS coun ter)?????

Think not!

If everyone was the exactly the same with no differences at all and were able perceive the nuances in speed then we could/would all be or indeed have the capability of being fighter pilot's, F1 drivers or anything else that requires an ability to see and react extremely quickly, as someone whose adult life has been spent riding fast motorcycles around central London I can tell you that whilst there are not many people who have the ability to perceive more than 25 fps some of us can, really s'true.

 

[fletch420]

ok hers my 2cents-
first- it's a well documented that your eyes can't discern much above 60fps- now of course it's really the loading that matters- yes mu gts hit 100 most of the time in 2142 but when there are 64 people going at it it occasionally drops a bit but not enough to be an issue.
2nd- 8800 is one helluva card period- It eats any well made SW out and will easily run what is slated for the coming year- which is a new paramount for HW companies usually they are good for what is already out and thats it. Talk sheet all you want and save your money too....those of us not that concerned about it are loving our 8800's

Enjoy

 

[No1sFanboy]

@ the upright man

If the 8800/2900 generation fails to run dx10 titles well I understand your frustration but I could think of a lot better places to point your finger.

I'm not an Nvidia fanboy but I would actually credit Nvidia with doing more to advance DX10 gaming. For 6 months Nvidia had the only dx10 hardware and arguably still has the best. Nvidia delivered the hardware before Vista or any dx10 title, patch or anything.

If I wanted to play the blame game this would be my order of blame.
-blame your own expectations, they were probably unrealistic.
-blame Microsoft, they own dx10 and couldn't deliver on time.
-blame the game developers, (late, crappy dx10 implementation etc.).
-blame AMD for allowing Nvidia to command a premium for so much of the year.

If you wanted dx10 gaming in 2007; from my layman's point of view Nvidia was the one company that held up their end more than any other.

 

[enewmen]

How is the 8800 not a DX10 card? If you are referring to poor performance, the so called DX10 games that are out now suffer from poor implementation of the DX10 features, you should wait for a real DX10 game like Bioshock or Crysis and you'll probably see that the 8800 can run DX10.

The 8800 is like an "FX" - as in the GF FX5800.
The FX had DX9 capability and was killer fast on DX8 games.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2003/01/27/nvidia_geforcefx/
However, when the first real DX9 games came out (like FarCry), the FX ran of of gas. Then forget about running Oblivion! It even had a fan as loud as a vacume cleaner.
Yes, the FX "can" run FarCry an Oblivion.
Thankfully the GF 6800 came out a year later which had 32bit color, twice the piplines, etc. and can run the games of the time smootly.

When I use the term 9700 type card, as in the Ati 9700 Pro, they got DX9 right from the start and had performance that couldn't even be used until a year later.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2002/08/19/ati_radeon_9700_pro_/
This review was back in 2002 - to give you an idea of how advanced this board was at the time.

I as hoping the HD 2900XT was another 9700, but it sadly didn't seem to be the case.
(just my 2 cents)