Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

WTF 8800GS?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 30, 2007 11:27:46 AM

Well, I just recently found out about the 8800GS and it looks to a promising card that will give the 3850 a run for it's money, but I'm a little confused. The 786mb edition is going to be in the same price bracket as the 8800GT 256mb, so which one is faster? Also, wouldn't one of them cannibalize the other's sales? I'm guessing that they are releasing the 2 variations to compete with the 2 variations of the 3850, but I thought that's what the 8800GT 256mb was supposed to do. What do you guys think of the new card?

Either way, I'm happy because, the 7900GS has held up great for me and I can play all my games in 720p with pretty much everything maxed out and I usually get above 60 FPS (granted, it's heavily overclocked.) I'm going to get a 3870 pretty soon, so I can play Crysis and so I don't have to deal with Nvidia's craptastic overscan compensation.

More about : wtf 8800gs

January 2, 2008 10:34:04 AM

It's funny.

8800Ultra
8800gtx
8800gts 640
8800gts 512
8800gts 320
8800gt 512
8800gt 256
8800gs 768
8800gs 384

It's just funny that there are so many in the 8800 series.

(Just to clarify, the list is not necassarily in order of performance, just in order of suffix followed by most amount of memory.)
January 2, 2008 10:59:00 AM

Yes it is odd ^^ I can't see why nvidia need any more in the 8800 series - I just want the 9x00 series to come!

As for comparing the 2 cards IndigoMoss, I can't be sure. I would have a look at the brand you have chosen and compare the cpu mhz and memory mhz to the GT, but obviously an extra half gb of memory is going to help quite a lot and I think that it would out do the 256mb GT.
Related resources
a c 84 U Graphics card
January 2, 2008 11:00:01 AM

So is the GS just a slowed down GT, or something else? Never heard of it before...

It's starting to get confusing, again. lol
a b U Graphics card
January 2, 2008 11:01:07 AM

And two versions of the GTS 640MB also. (96 SP and 112SP).
January 2, 2008 11:03:17 AM

And don't forget the 8800 GT OC

A bit ridiculous - took me a week to figure out which version to get. And then another 2 days to change my mind.
a b U Graphics card
January 2, 2008 11:11:24 AM

Not exactly a slowed down GT. Yes, CLocks are lower (at least on the cheap 384MB version), but it's got a 192-bit memory interface vs 256 bit for the GT. I'm not sure if it's 112 sp or 96 sp, I expect 112 from rumors so far. Seems NV want to compete in price with the HD3850 and 3870 and can't do that with the 256MB and 512MB GT. (note I said PRICE)
January 2, 2008 11:12:08 AM

Memory doesn't mean a lot, the 8800GS has 112sp's etc but like 192bit bus if I remember so limited there by quite a bit.

8800GT available in 1GB too.
January 2, 2008 11:28:58 AM

Yeah I understand that, but what exactly is the 8800GS 786MB card supposed to achieve, if it performs slower than the 8800GT 256mb card, it's useless. If it performs better than the 8800GT 256mb card, the 256mb card is then useless. And if you think about it, how the hell are you going to benefit from such a high memory buffer when your memory bus is 192-bit?

Personally, I'd be nice to see the 8800GS 768mb version perform a little slower than the 8800GT, but have a nice overclocking overhead like the 7900GS did to get it to perform even better than the GT, but with more memory buffer, which will help with higher resolutions and heavier textures.
January 2, 2008 11:30:03 AM

seems like a very nice card, the 384 and 768mb memory look nice. Would be real nice if ati pulled a 1gb 3850 or 3870 to make this card obsolete. I wanna see benchmarks of it vs 3850 and 8800gts(320 and 640.)
i think it woulda looked better if nvidia had this naming scheme

8800 gts (320)
8800 gts (640)
8800 gtx
8800 ultra
8900 gs
8900 gt
8900 gts
??8900 gtx??? if only ati competed at this end

January 2, 2008 11:45:32 AM

I totally agree with you. All of the G92 based cards should have been named as a 8900, it would be a lot less confusing and it's just logical, since they are releasing the 9800 series soon. Unless they are saving those names for something?
January 2, 2008 11:47:25 AM

Is the GS AGP? Like the 7800 GS.
January 2, 2008 11:51:39 AM

Untill ATI/AMD can threaten nvid's top cards I'm sure they'll be in noooo rush to pull the 9000 rabbit out of the hat.. If ATI's offering had come anywhere near the gtx we would already be seeing the 9000 bunny..
Just my two euro centimes.
Ryan Nadds
a c 84 U Graphics card
January 2, 2008 11:56:09 AM

So nVidia is trying to make it cheaper by narrowing the memory bandwidht and lowering the clocks but at the same time they are putting more memory on it. Weird. Guess memory is so dirt cheap nowadays it doesn't really matter, and it might look more appealing to some people with lots of memory.
January 2, 2008 12:04:31 PM

The amount of memory doesn't automatically make the performance jump. It is a lot more complicated than that. A 1gb 3870 would have bugger all performance increase over the regular 512mb 3870 at anything but the most riduculouis resolutions.

If you don't believe me look at any reviews comparing the 2900xt 512mb and the 2900xt 1gb. There was no performance difference. The 2900xt also has a larger memory bus than the 3800 series.

As for Nvidia releaseing another low/mid range gpu and not a new GTX or 9000 series that is simlpy to do with lack of competion in the high end. They have no reason to release better faster cards if they are already the fastest. The low/mid range is where the largest market share is anyway.

Can anybody post some solid specs of the 8800GS?
January 2, 2008 12:14:49 PM

gpippas said:
Can anybody post some solid specs of the 8800GS?


+1

From what I have heard from... who knows where online, the 3870 x2 (the dual gpu one) is should be really good. This may be enough to cause the G 9000 line to come out of hiding.

It is strange. I understand that Nvidia is better, faster, smoother... but I still feel compelled to buy ATi. There is something there that ATi has that Nvidia does not. I can not put my finger on it.... but I can see it when playing games. I am not sure it is color representation or what.... but there is something different between the two vendors.
January 2, 2008 12:16:14 PM

Talking of 8800 variations, I just saw in rivatuner and GPU-Z that my EVGA 8800GTS 640 has 112SP. I thought the 112SP were only on the SSC edition...
January 2, 2008 12:49:24 PM

Quote:
Im reaching here but it depends on what resolution you want to run. I mean if you want to run 1600x1800 with a 256mb card, good luck. The 768mb GS card will probably outperform the 256mb GT at those resolutions. If you run low resolutions like 1024x768 or 1280 x 1024, go for the 256mb GT.


Wow... thread number 2 with a good point from MrsBytch.
January 2, 2008 12:54:06 PM

ok now i'm confused. the 8800GTS originally launched with 96SP. then the rumors were that with the G92 variant, it would be 112SP. but then it launched with 128SP to beat out the GT. was there indeed a 112SP GTS?
January 2, 2008 1:00:04 PM

Yes, there was. It was called the 8800GTS 640 SSC 112SP based off of the G80 chip.
January 2, 2008 1:01:40 PM

jesus, how long was that out? a month or two? i only started hearing about it at the advent of the G92 chips. tho i DID hear that it was supposed to be G80 based for the 112 GTS...
January 2, 2008 1:56:08 PM

The 112SP G80 GTS was being pushed in the period between the release of the 8800GT and before the release of the new g92 GTS. I believe it is still being sold, but who really cares anymore?

As for the 8800GS, this is the third result from a google search for "8800gs" (without the quotes). Looks like it will only have 12 ROPs. That in my opinion will hurt a lot more than the cut down memory bus, although technically the cut down bus is the reason for the lower number of ROPs. A strange route Nvidia has chosen with this architecture in terms of ROPs and memory buses.

Edit: Ha, forgot the link. http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/552
January 2, 2008 1:59:57 PM

IndigoMoss said:
Yes, there was. It was called the 8800GTS 640 SSC 112SP based off of the G80 chip.


Nvidia Geforce 8800 GTS 640 SSC 112SP... I want one just becuase the name is so freaking long!
January 2, 2008 2:25:04 PM

homerdog, sounds like they should name it the 8600GTX or 8700GS instead or something lol
January 2, 2008 2:32:49 PM

Its all about resolution and size. Each card has its soft spot. Memory size limits detail AND resolution. You would be supprised how many people buy a 1200$ display and dont have the platform to support a good native picture. People think well I can get the biggest badass card on the shelf and I am set. Its never that simple. I wish someone would make a display/platform tool for newbies. Something to help people figure out what results they should get when compiling hardware and display.
January 2, 2008 2:35:50 PM

This card would fit the 8700 role nicely, but I can see why they are sticking with 8800 as it is still a g92 chip. Now if they had only gone with 8900 for the g92 based cards...so much confusion.
January 2, 2008 2:59:17 PM

oswold said:
Talking of 8800 variations, I just saw in rivatuner and GPU-Z that my EVGA 8800GTS 640 has 112SP. I thought the 112SP were only on the SSC edition...

Sounds like you got lucky! EVGA seems to do this sometimes, I have seen plenty of people get a stock card clocked like the superclocked (SC) edition. They must be willing to take a slight financial hit to keep their stock up and their customers happy.
January 3, 2008 2:01:33 AM

Right now Im thinking that the 8800GS could be slower than the 3850. This is because if it has 96 shaders and lower clock speeds (gpu, shader, mem) then it would be somewhat slower than the 8800GT 256 which is only a bit faster than the 3850.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3175&p=6
January 3, 2008 3:38:15 AM

I get the feeling they should have called it 8600GTS (G92) and 8600GT (G92).
January 3, 2008 4:49:09 AM

badgtx1969 said:
Sounds like you got lucky! EVGA seems to do this sometimes, I have seen plenty of people get a stock card clocked like the superclocked (SC) edition. They must be willing to take a slight financial hit to keep their stock up and their customers happy.


Which is why Evga is the best.
a b U Graphics card
January 3, 2008 12:02:30 PM

http://en.expreview.com/?p=160

yeah, 192-bit memory, 12 rops, and 96 SP. Still looks very promising for the price. Can't wait to see street prices and it pitted against the HD3850.
January 3, 2008 12:45:31 PM

^ as long as it wont beat my 8800GT. i dont care. lol
January 3, 2008 1:59:33 PM

Will most likely beat the 3850 but will be destroyed by it in dual card situations.

I just see the lack of bandwidth being even more of a bottleneck.
a b U Graphics card
January 3, 2008 2:14:16 PM

8800GS = OEM's

That's the only reason I could think for releasing it.
January 3, 2008 3:06:01 PM

Quote:
Quote:
Wow... thread number 2 with a good point from MrsBytch.


Born in 1987 and he wonders why my points go right over his head. LOL.


Um... I guess you didn’t take that as a compliment. Its ok that I was born in 1987, and even though I have not seen as much as you or worked with what you may have, I am more then willing to learn about what I need to know, should know. Thus I am here. This was the main forum that had the enthusiast of computers who share my enjoyment of these machines. This site also has people who know a hell of a lot of stuff about things of how it was. There is history here that is nothing but interesting to learn about. Everyone starts somewhere. I started 10 years ago.

I have never wondered about any points you have made, maybe why you made them. All I said was that you made a good point.
January 3, 2008 5:10:18 PM

Born in 1987 and he wonders why my points go right over his head. LOL. said:
Born in 1987 and he wonders why my points go right over his head. LOL.

Come on MrsBytch, surely the Christmas spirit hasn't worn off that fast :) 
January 3, 2008 5:20:26 PM

runswindows95 said:
8800GS = OEM's

That's the only reason I could think for releasing it.

That's hard to say. Nvidia wants to reduce the cost of the 8800GT and GTS by using less materials. This shows that they want to be more competitive with the HD3870 and 3850. It would be natural to think that they want to compete further by releasing the 8800GS.
January 3, 2008 5:29:47 PM

runswindows95 said:
8800GS = OEM's

That's the only reason I could think for releasing it.

Only reason I see is to undercut the 3850's price-points.
a b U Graphics card
January 3, 2008 5:31:31 PM

That too.
January 3, 2008 6:07:42 PM

Evilonigiri said:
That's hard to say. Nvidia wants to reduce the cost of the 8800GT and GTS by using less materials. This shows that they want to be more competitive with the HD3870 and 3850. It would be natural to think that they want to compete further by releasing the 8800GS.

They will reduce PCB costs with this new card, but the GPU itself will cost just as much to make as the one that goes into a g92 GTS. A g92 is a g92, and takes the same amount of materials to make regardless of how many pipelines that Nvidia disables.

I'm not a huge fan of crippling GPUs to come up with different SKUs unless it is necessary to sell off some of the lower binned chips (HD2900GT for example). I suppose it's just cheaper for Nvidia to do it that way than to pay for the R&D to come up with a new chip design. Whatever, my "crippled" 8800GT is pretty darn fast, so I don't have much room to complain :p 
January 3, 2008 6:22:26 PM

spaztic7 said:
Is the GS AGP? Like the 7800 GS.


I would probably say no, mostly due to limited bandwidth. The AGP bus would be saturated with a card that powerful (assuming it is close to the preformance of the GT). You start seing preformance differneces when you lower the pci-e bus to 8x, and the agp bus only has an equal (approx) bandwidth of pci-e 4x. I think you would see a big performance hit if that card went agp.
January 3, 2008 6:51:15 PM

I'm believing it, was ever since the 3850 came out.

It'll be the fastest AGP ever. Even TGH states there may be one.
January 4, 2008 11:54:02 AM

sepayne21 said:
I would probably say no, mostly due to limited bandwidth. The AGP bus would be saturated with a card that powerful (assuming it is close to the preformance of the GT). You start seing preformance differneces when you lower the pci-e bus to 8x, and the agp bus only has an equal (approx) bandwidth of pci-e 4x. I think you would see a big performance hit if that card went agp.


I am not to sure there would be a huge performance hit. AGP 8x is just faster then PCIe x8. Yes... slower then PCIe x16. I think the only game that you would see any real hit would be Crysis... maybe...

"AGP 8x is a 32-bit channel operating at 66 MHz, strobing eight times per clock, delivering an effective 533 MHz resulting in a maximum data rate of 2133 MB/s (2 GB/s); 0.8 V signaling."

Well AGP 8x closer to 2.133 (1000mb = 1 gb) or 2.08 gbps (1024mb = 1gb).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Graphics_Port

PCIe is only 250mb per lane. So 250mb x 8(lanes) = 2000mb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCI_Express




I still think Nvidia should make a 8800 AGP solution.


Yeah, it is pretty well roumored that the 3850 is going AGP soon.
January 4, 2008 12:52:57 PM

it seems to be that nvidia has abandoned the rest of the 8 series and is only concentrating on the 8800 cards. well after all, the 8800's are so far ahead of anything else in the series.
January 4, 2008 1:01:56 PM

pauldh said:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQ0MCwx...

Look at [H]'s NV roadmap. They are saying the 8800GS is a shortlived inventory dump and we will see 320MB, 640MB and 512MB versions of the GS.


wow... it looks like they are just clearing out the rest of their stock to make room for something new. This is a good sign!
!