Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Should I wait for the next gen 9 series Nvidias?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

Should I wait and purchase a 9 series later instead of a 8 series now?

Total: 68 votes (11 blank votes)

  • Yes
  • 45 %
  • No
  • 17 %
  • Depends on how much you want to spend
  • 26 %
  • How dare you talk of money when thousands of homeless Iraq's are struggling to eat
  • 14 %
September 2, 2007 10:11:35 PM

So should I or shouldn't I?
September 2, 2007 10:16:39 PM

Depends...If you want to game now you can nab a EVGA nvidia card and step up....The longer you wait the better just in case they run into delays. I've currently put my new rig on hold waiting for x38, g92, and possibly penryn..
September 2, 2007 10:28:21 PM

Umm except when don't know when nvidia is releasing a next series of cards, I wouldn't wait on the unknown, unless you have something decent enough to hold you over.
Related resources
September 2, 2007 10:40:24 PM

Depends, Do you need a faster card NOW for what you want to do?

If so, upgrade.

At this point we have no idea what NVIDIA is releasing.
Some say minor upgrades so the wait would be pointless.

Some say major upgrade, but in that case, the price may be $$$$$.

Are you poor? Are your rich?

Myself, I always follow the same rule.
I buy what I need today, today.
I buy tomorrow what I need tomorrow.
September 2, 2007 11:19:32 PM

Im so confused....from what I have been reading, even the base model 9 will outdo a GTX from today.
Cost is apparently comparetive to todays costs for 8800s.

Well I bought Bioshock and my 7600gt seems to struggle a bit. I need to get a program to find out exactly what frames I am getting, unless there is a command line option for bioshock? Otherwise I should get myself a 8800gts 640mb today. Or next pay at least.
September 2, 2007 11:23:56 PM

All that you've been reading are worthless and unfounded rumors, some guy thought it'd be funny to spread on the xbit forums (this is the reliable source from this rumor) the "GF9800" supposed specs. The "double performance" thing came from the rumor that it was supposed to break the 1Tflop mark (over the ~500s Gigaflops of the GTX), but it's just pointless to even quote that because Tflops have very little to do with gaming at all.

Basically there are nothing but unfounded rumors going around, and as we get closer it looks like the G92 will be a refresh (and a shrink) instead of a new line up, which makes sense, that way nvidia can get more money for their design especially because they'll produce a lot more chips.
September 2, 2007 11:54:10 PM

g92 is nothing but a replacement card for 8800gts. It doesn't matter when you get it. It just depends if you want the card now or later.
September 3, 2007 12:16:39 AM

The new series SHOULD support DX10.1, which means in terms of compatibility (until DX11 comes into play) should keep you for the next 2-3 years. In terms of speed that is another story. I have so many games that i have yet to play in DX9 that i really don't need to upgrade now. I can wait until end of November for something better to come out and upgrade then. So if you are in a rush go out and get an 8xxx series, otherwise wait 2 months down the track.
September 3, 2007 2:22:58 AM

ok theres another thing that gets me. If I get a dx10 video card, will I still be able to play dx10.1 games?
September 3, 2007 2:30:18 AM

yeah, it's been known for a while now that DX10.1 doesn't bring anything relevant to the table for either developers or consumers. Just don't worry so much about it, think of it this way... If you feel your games aren't running like you wish they did and you feel you need to upgrade, then do so, on the other hand, if they are running adequately, then wait.
September 3, 2007 3:08:51 AM

Dont wait, apparently G92 and G98 is just a replacement for GTS and the midrange cards, and summers ticking away, can you wait for november?
EDIT: Wow, last phrase sounded so much like an ad
September 3, 2007 3:32:39 AM

good to see emp and marvelous not fighting in this thread.



ha.
September 3, 2007 5:04:47 PM

snail,

I did my 1st build 2 months ago, and decided to buy a 2nd 7600GT and SLI instead of a new 8800.

There is not a day I dont want to just go out and buy an 8800GTX :pt1cable: 

But in my case the SLIed 7600s run most of my games well enough, even at 2560x1600, so I am staying put till x'mas.

Then for being so good with staying within my wife's imposed budget hopefully Santa will bring me either an 8800GTX or if the g92s are out then one of those if the price/performance is worth it.

Either way it is all good:
- buy 8800 GTS 640 now and you get a great card today
- wait to get a g92 card and get a much faster card for the money (if the teraflop thing is true)
- wait and get an 8800 for a lower price

Oh forgot to mention 1 thing, the 8800 cannot support HDCP on a Dual Link DVI! so if I get a HD optical drive I wont be able to use it to play movies except at 1280x800 :-( So that is the main reason I am waiting, so I voted yes.

Enjoy your decision and let us know what you decided. My bet is you are gonna get that 8800 GTS :D 
a c 169 U Graphics card
September 3, 2007 5:42:10 PM

i have a 8800gtx and i enjoy it also there are some many rumors that g92 is a refresh
September 3, 2007 11:45:10 PM

Why wait? Most games aren't written to take advantage of such technology, not until it's been out in the field for a while.

Plus, you need to spend a bucket load of cash to get decent performance, as NVIDIA has in the past, offered next-gen compatibility without next-gen performance. Anyone who upgraded from a GF4 Ti 4200 to an FX 5600 will be familiar with this dilemma.

A Geforce 8800 GTS or GTX can run most games at blistering speeds, so my advice would be to just get a card and enjoy playing the game. There's always supposed to be something better just around corner, which is always way ahead of the software. However there's always tried and trusted cards that offer the best bang per buck for the here and the now.
September 4, 2007 12:52:17 AM

I vote to wait. In two, maybe three months, the new cards will be out. Unless you really need a card now, the only good way I see to buy a card would be from Evga and then use their step up program. The new Nvidia cards are supposed to be DX10.1 compliant, and a bit faster as well. I don't believe the rumors about the new card being twice as fast, though. Just faster than what is available now.

As it is, the 8800 series has been out for nearly a year and Nvidia has yet to be able to fix all the bugs in it. I have a 8800 GTS 640, and while its good in many ways, its got a few things that really annoy me. I'm starting to wonder if there are some hardware deficits that prevent it from being fixed all the way. In comparison, you can look at ATI's 2900 XT. It came out and was slow, yet ATI stepped up to the plate and after a series of new drivers, its working pretty good. I myself am looking forward to the new card from Nvidia.
September 4, 2007 1:03:28 AM

G92 is supposed to replace the 8800GTS. The 8800GTX is still supposed to be faster than it.
September 4, 2007 1:27:42 AM

tomorrows card, chip or whatever is always going to be bigger, badder, faster than the card, chip or whatever from today.

Card prices are falling. $1 here, $5 there. The cutting edge cards are going to drop the most regardless of what the 9series card have in store for us.

You have a 7600 GT is working for ya. Moving up to a 8800whatever is going to be an improvement. The 9series may be a killer of a card at really cheap prices. Which means you would kill yourself for jumping on an 8800. The 8800's are going to come down in price. Which means you might wanna kill yourself after the price drop.

The 7600GT is working for ya. It may not be the biggest, baddest card on the market. But it is working for ya.

This is one case were I would seriously consider waiting to see what the future brings, unless you got $ to burn, or just can't wait because your ego needs stroking.
September 4, 2007 1:34:43 AM

Thanks for everyones advice....special thanks to SpeedyVV for a very detailed answer :-)

I am now leaning towards a ATI 2900 actually, after reading Toms comparisons it seems the 2900XT can outdo a standard GTX in some things.

Now I am really stumped. But in a few weeks after I move into my new place, I will get my new card, and let you all know how it went.
September 4, 2007 2:18:30 AM

I voted yes on the condition:

You can wait 3-5 months for 9x series.

Realize this: your platform (MB, CPU, RAM) looses 3-5 months use, =25% of it's gaming life before it is defunct.
September 4, 2007 3:10:17 AM

Snail said:
ok theres another thing that gets me. If I get a dx10 video card, will I still be able to play dx10.1 games?

It will be a LONG time before there are 10.1 games-This will come after crysis.
The HD 2900XT has some DX10.1 features (so it will do better in some advanced benchmarks), but not 100% 10.1 complient.
For NOW even a X1950XT is fast enough for near all games.
If you care about performance, get the next-gen high-end card. Since the mid-range cards don't seem to exist anymore.
Anyway, I voted yes since I expect the hardware, divers, DX10.1, Vista64, etc will be more mature by then,.
September 4, 2007 5:52:30 AM

Falken699 said:
... Realize this: your platform (MB, CPU, RAM) looses 3-5 months use, =25% of it's gaming life before it is defunct.


Falken699, that is a great line!!! I am gona tell my wife that I need that GPU NOW, since in 3 months all that money I spent on the 680i mobo is gonna be defuncted!!!

Nah, I dont think she'll buy it :pfff: 
September 4, 2007 11:55:00 AM

As regards DX10, the games should contain DX9 code paths..unless the developers want to deny the majority the right to spend their hard-earned cash ;) 
September 4, 2007 12:44:15 PM

I'd wait (well I actually am too).

My 7600GT runs Bioshock at full settings at 1024x768 without forced AA or AF, which is fine by me as it still looks pretty. I dont wont to spend £200 on a 8800GTS when its performance in future games is unproven, and the same with 2900XT (which I'd rather get as i'll be able to do crossfire).

Bioshock and Oblivion are the only games I own that require me to run at 1024x768 for full settings, although I havent tried Stalker yet.

If you are getting poor Bioshock performance, do you have the latest drivers? They really helped boost FPS.
September 4, 2007 1:16:21 PM

I have an athlon X2 4200+, 2 GB ddr2 800 and a 7600gt, running the bioshock demo at full settings @1024x768 gives me like 5-10fps, even if I turn down the graphics there is still no improvement.

and yeah, im using the latest beta drivers and have the dual core optimizer installed
a b U Graphics card
September 4, 2007 1:18:01 PM

Look at it this way, there's not a current generation CPU that can send enough workload to the current 8 series cards to fully utilize them. It almost doesn't make sense to go SLI with these cards yet until you see what performance you will get from the new CPU's that are coming out.

If you don't buy one of these cards now, the reason really should be because of the lack of CPU performance to utilize them, not that the cards themselves will be outdated by the 9 series cards.

I personally own the EVGA 8800GTX ACS3 768mb video card and I love it. My personal plans for future upgrades will be to build around my video card. If the new CPU's show a 20-30% performance gain and my current motherboard doesn't support it I will buy a new CPU, motherboard, maybe more/different memory and get a second card for SLI.

It's that simple. If your worried about having the latest and the greatest I hope you have very deep pockets and can buy every 3 months. If not, you should do what I suggested that I am doing.

It's your life, your money and your decision you have to live with whatever you do so you do what you think is right...

Antec 900 Gaming Case
Antec 700 Watt PSU
Gigabyte GA M55SLI-S4 Rev.2 mobo
AMD 6000+ AM2 CPU
4G OCZ 6400 800Mhz SLI Memory
EVGA 8800GTX ACS3 768MB Video Card
250G & 200G SATA WD HD
2 Sony DRU 710A DVD Drives
1 Sony DRU 835A LS DVD Drive
Media Center 2005 OS
September 4, 2007 2:09:23 PM

I'm glad I bought an 8800-640 nearly a year ago, I've had a full year of "everything on max" gaming and won't bat an eyelid at replacing it as my christmas present to myself if the G92 or whatever does turn out to be the rumoured GTX killer
September 4, 2007 2:14:47 PM

G92 is supposed to replace 8800gts with a lower price tag. I don't think it would matter if you bought g92 or g80. Probably consume lower power with new fabrication is what I'm thinking.

Supposed to be 256bit memory controller instead of 320bit memory controller. Probably going to compensate the difference through faster memory.

Think of g92 and g80 like 7900gs was to 7900gt.
September 4, 2007 2:36:54 PM

Well I above 15fps minimum and usually around 25 as average. My 7600GT is overclocked a bit, but that should'nt give me an advantage of 10fps. Sure you arent forcing any AA or AF though the Nvidia Control Panel?
September 4, 2007 2:49:06 PM

oswold said:
Well I above 15fps minimum and usually around 25 as average. My 7600GT is overclocked a bit, but that should'nt give me an advantage of 10fps. Sure you arent forcing any AA or AF though the Nvidia Control Panel?


yep, everything is application controlled. This is the only game I'm having problems with though. Even if I drop the resolution to 800x600 the game is still choppy.

EDIT: ran fraps, i get around 10fps minimum and 20fps maximum which is better than I thought but still not great.
September 4, 2007 8:40:59 PM

Id have to admit....im not one who wants the latest and greatest PC components. Id rather spend less now and I am generally able to play games on medium settings at the resolutions my monitor handles. I am really hanging out for Assassins Creed so my plan is to get a video card to run that at a brilliant setting at 1680 x 1050. Unfortunately due to the specs not being out as the game is still 4 months away it makes the decision harder. I think I will end up with either an ATI X2900XT or a 8800GTS 640mb version, or the 320 OC version.
!