Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nvidia preps early launch of G98 in Dec

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 18, 2007 10:07:19 PM

But they say its going to be a 8400GS.

I would have thought that would be the new Gen ULTRA or at least GTX type. They are confusing me with their strange release order.

I don't care about the new sub level cards. We need the new Gen ULTRA to play Crysis without limits.


Link.
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071115PD220.html
November 18, 2007 10:41:10 PM

ya im dieing i neeed a new pc desperately and im not about to buy something over a year old... NEED A 9800GTX or a 8900 or something
November 18, 2007 11:29:23 PM

i guess it's time to buy a new video card
November 19, 2007 12:46:23 AM

What i dont get is the 8400GS already exists based on the G86 Architecture? why the hell they going to make a G98, something to replace the 8600GT/GTS maybe?
November 19, 2007 1:18:23 AM

Naming is probably the worst problem hardware producers have. Remember the GT outperforming the GTS recently. We used to be able to tell performance a bit by name, but now we just have to wait for respectable sites to post benchmarks.
November 19, 2007 1:22:27 AM

trinix said:
We used to be able to tell performance a bit by name, but now we just have to wait for respectable sites to post benchmarks.

True... true.
November 19, 2007 1:43:50 AM

but then again, just think
in ten years
maybe we'll have the...

GeForce 9889980GTXXT ULTRA X64!
and then...ati will follow with the
Radeon XX9899570XTXRXGX X64XT! PRO!
November 19, 2007 1:50:09 AM

trinix said:
Naming is probably the worst problem hardware producers have. Remember the GT outperforming the GTS recently. We used to be able to tell performance a bit by name, but now we just have to wait for respectable sites to post benchmarks.



Not intending to be repetitive(rodney_ws has already said it), but trinx is right on the money. With all the inconsistency with their naming, It was never clear to me what 8800GT was suppose to be. It wasn't until site reviews started real world comparisons, that I realised that despite the hype, the card was useless for me. Sure great value for money, but Crysis still brings it to its knee's at high end settings.

Stop stuffing us around Nvidia, and bring on the Crysis killer card.
November 19, 2007 2:12:28 AM

rodney_ws said:
True... true.


Now remind me again. Which sites are respectable?

Lets not forget that a new 8800 GTS 640 is coming out. So how is the average person (not the enthusiast) to know whether its the old 8800 GTS 640 or the new 8800 GTS 640 that someone or some site is talking about? I think someone in marketing needs to stop and rethink the whole naming process. Otherwise, frozenlead may end up being called a prophet or something.
November 19, 2007 5:34:18 AM

@Sailer, the 8800GTS 640MB, carry the moniker SSC, i believe whereas the regular are w/o that naming.

Silly if you ask me to even continue the 8800GTS, for even when it was released its price/performance ratio was horrible, and still is, pointing to the fact that the 8800GT tromps both versions 112/96Shaders or not the 8800GT will, in time, lower in price to around 250> while the 8800GTS will still sell for 350/400. Heck no to mention the G92 Architecture is more efficient then the 8800GTS you have either be either crazy or very misinformed to buy one now.

Who really knows what the next "killer" card from Nvidia is going to be... they really don't see the need. When the 8800GTX has yet to be trounced by ATI. yes it wins sometimes but unless you like spending 400-300$ to play without AA be my guest.

In the end buying ATI was a horrible financial mistake if you ask me, and now upon hearing even more lackluster responses from the HD3870, ATI might as well have to pull a Miracle out of their A$$ to save themselves and AMD.

(Nvidia FTW! ;)  )
November 19, 2007 5:42:54 AM

There is m ore to the graphics market than the high-end. Every 15 year jobless kid who relies on his parents for money will go for a $200 board with, not one at $250. ATI basically owns the $150-$220 market, which, incidentally, makes up more more of the overall market than does high end chips.
November 19, 2007 6:11:05 AM

Xazax310 said:
@Sailer, the 8800GTS 640MB, carry the moniker SSC, i believe whereas the regular are w/o that naming.




I don't know about that because Evga already has a 8800GT SSC which is their highest factory overclocked version, but maybe your right and it just adds a little more confusion.

Nvidia doesn't have to release a new top card until someone challenges them and if they do release something that beats the Ultra they will just price it higher and leave the other prices where they are.
November 19, 2007 6:18:39 AM

Xazax310 said:
@Sailer, the 8800GTS 640MB, carry the moniker SSC, i believe whereas the regular are w/o that naming.


I ran across an early review of the new EVGA 8800 GTS 640 and it does have the moniker of SSC, meaning Super Super Overclocked. Still, to the non-enthusiast that just goes down to Best Buy or where ever, he may not have any idea of the difference. Worse, he may end up paying too much for the old card thinking that he can just overclock it and it will be the same as the new card.
November 19, 2007 6:32:41 AM

nukchebi0 said:
There is m ore to the graphics market than the high-end. Every 15 year jobless kid who relies on his parents for money will go for a $200 board with, not one at $250. ATI basically owns the $150-$220 market, which, incidentally, makes up more more of the overall market than does high end chips.


We'll have to see what the 8800GT 256MB version does to the sub-200 category.
!