Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9800GX2, 9800 GTX, what is the real 'scoop' ?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
February 23, 2008 3:44:21 AM

Alright everybody, I have been sitting on an 8800gtx for over a year now, and I am desperate to upgrade (because its just so dam fun to upgrade) But I have a few questions. Why do I hear everybody saying that they are going to wait for the 9800 GTX, is it going to outperform the GX2 ? Also, I hear alot of talk about SLI 9800GTX and how powerful it will be....well why don't I hear about SLi 9800GX2, surely 4 G.P.U.'s will reign supreme over two. Now, I understand that over 2, and espescially over 3 Gpu's that the performance will be minimal, but who doesnt want the bragging rights of having 4 GPUs in their rig, thats just sick. Oh, and because I plan on getting two GX2's for SLI on my 680i, what kind of a power supply should I be looking at ? I am assuming somewhere 1000W and greater.
Sorry for another 9800 thread, but who isn't excited about some fresh (good) stuff from Nvidia.
a b U Graphics card
February 23, 2008 4:01:44 AM

"Quad-SLI" with the 7950GX2 was a flop, thats probably why nobody is considering 2 GX2s
a b U Graphics card
February 23, 2008 4:09:40 AM

True, but didn't that have something to do with DX9 only being able to effectively utilize three of the g.p.u.'s Maybe I am mistaken, but didn't DX10 'fix' that problem, so it shouldn't matter ( at least w/ DX10 titles )
Related resources
February 23, 2008 4:23:58 AM

Quad SLI is some crazy stuff, but the price of the cards combined with the power they'll require combined with the heat they'll produce will probably make them a less-than-optimal solution for most mid-to-high-end enthusiasts.
February 23, 2008 4:38:51 AM

Not to be rude, but how many DX10 titles we have out yet...? Titles worth playing in DX10 anyway... Maybe 1 or 2 (Crysis and WiC come to mind).
February 23, 2008 6:58:05 AM

Well there's also,
-Company of Heroes dx10
-Lost Planet DX10
-Gears Of War DX10
-Bioshock????

Upcoming title in the coming year looks crazy good.
So crazy from Pong to Crysis. Woot woot.

Back on the 9800gx2 topic:
30% faster then the Ultra sounds good.
How much faster is two g92 8800gts in SLI than the 8800 ULTRA?
As much as I like to wait, I'll likely to pick on on 9800gx2 from evga and step up as the 9 series get release.

Those who have an ultra or a 3850x2 now I bet is more than happy with their setup. I guess those who wants to have a strongest graphic card wants be like those who bought the ultra. Secure for a little while and still be a bit happy with their setup after a while. And for about 500$ compare toward the 700-800$ when the ultra was release. That's even better as well. :D 

p.s: Also in case those of you with ultra who's upgrading toward the 9800gx2 is CRAZY! lol. I guess if you have the $ to buy the ultra in the first place. You can afford to get a new card. lol.
February 23, 2008 8:34:38 AM

bsan89 said:


Back on the 9800gx2 topic:
30% faster then the Ultra sounds good.


Not to me is doesn't 18 months on since the launch of the 8800 GTX and the best Nividia can muster is a card that is only 30% faster then it previous generation card and they occouplish it by takeing two existing card and joining them as one. No new technology, no breakthroughs, more heat, more power..............I'll stop now I could moan all day about this. At least there are some decent mid range card coming out now which wasn't the case 12 months ago.
a b U Graphics card
February 23, 2008 9:04:43 AM

Now that ATI has come with the 3870, nVidia can release the monster its been sitting on for almost a year now
February 23, 2008 9:13:01 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Now that ATI has come with the 3870, nVidia can release the monster its been sitting on for almost a year now



I guess thats a good point. Nvidia has waited over a year for ATI to play catch up. Surely they have something up there sleeves? Or were they just twiddling there thumbs for a year? I guess we'll find out here in the months to come.
February 23, 2008 10:33:46 AM

JeanLuc said:
Not to me is doesn't 18 months on since the launch of the 8800 GTX and the best Nividia can muster is a card that is only 30% faster then it previous generation card and they occouplish it by takeing two existing card and joining them as one. No new technology, no breakthroughs, more heat, more power..............I'll stop now I could moan all day about this. At least there are some decent mid range card coming out now which wasn't the case 12 months ago.

lol yep except a die shrink from 90nm to 65nm, 2gpus on one card and moderatly improved tech for texture units.



I have an idea, how about before going on a rant, wait for it to come out, and then decide.
February 23, 2008 11:26:16 AM

Hatman said:
lol yep except a die shrink from 90nm to 65nm, 2gpus on one card and moderatly improved tech for texture units.



I have an idea, how about before going on a rant, wait for it to come out, and then decide.


I haven't seen or read anything about improved texture units and even if what you say is true by your own admission is only a small improvement. Twin PCB boards, die shrink, 2 GPU's.............none of this is new its been done before, the die shrink is a natural progression and a necessary goal since it makes producing the chips a lot cheaper. The bottom line is the 9800 GTX is two 8800 GTS 512Mb crafted into one.
February 23, 2008 1:09:13 PM

And the G92's have improvements over the G80's.


9800GX2 is 2 in one.. GTX will just BE a G92 512 basically...

Aslong as it scales as well as the 9600GT then im happy with ti, and using WC it SHOULD beat the hell out of an ultra...
a b U Graphics card
February 23, 2008 4:07:37 PM

Guys, I love the discussion, really I do, but back to my origional post, does anybody know anything about the 9800GTX? And how much power will two GX2's need, because that is what I want to get. Thanks
a b U Graphics card
February 23, 2008 4:09:04 PM

emp said:
Not to be rude, but how many DX10 titles we have out yet...? Titles worth playing in DX10 anyway... Maybe 1 or 2 (Crysis and WiC come to mind).


You are absolutely correct, but no doubt, DX10 is going to be the future.
February 23, 2008 4:10:56 PM

I really want to know too, but I'm not sure that anyone knows at this point. We'll have to wait until closer to the 11th.
February 23, 2008 5:12:51 PM

Annisman said:
Guys, I love the discussion, really I do, but back to my origional post, does anybody know anything about the 9800GTX? And how much power will two GX2's need, because that is what I want to get. Thanks



Well one GX2 is reccomended at least a 580watt power supply.


I said already, the 9800GTX will jsut be a slightly higher clock 8800GTS 512 with tri-sli capability. Sorry but there will not be any super breathroughs anytime soon...
February 23, 2008 7:46:35 PM

For power, probably anything above a PC P&C 750W psu should do the trick. I am using one of those right now with 6 hdds, 4GB ram, and 8800Gt, and a quad-core. I still have plenty of headroom, and I plan on getting a 9800GX2 as well.

But yeah, no one knows anything for sure right now. This (http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/248827-33-geforce-9800-card-appears) is about as much as we know, and who knows how accurate that is. Hopefully by March 11th we will find something out :D 
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2008 1:15:57 AM

bsan89 said:
Well there's also,
-Company of Heroes dx10
-Lost Planet DX10
-Gears Of War DX10
-Bioshock????

CoH: Patched.
Lost Planet: Terrible console port, probably also patched.
Gears of War: Don't know about that one.
Bioshock: Decently implememented but to no great visual improvement.

Now to add to the list.

Crysis: Poorly implemented code, runs like crap, not a great deal of visual improvement.
World in Conflict: Noticeable increase in visual quality but significant performance drop and nothing that DX9 can't do with better performance.
Call of Juarez: Worst DX10 implementation of any game, also patched. Completely unplayable on all but the most powerful systems at low resolution.

All current "DX10" titles have minor to ridiculous performance hits with no added visual features that can't already be done in DX9. DX10 is currently a moot point that is being used to sell windows Vista and DX10 compatible hardware. It has potential, but in the year or so that it has existed in the mainstream market, it has simply been used to display advanced DX9 features.
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2008 3:34:51 AM

randomizer said:
CoH: Patched.
Lost Planet: Terrible console port, probably also patched.
Gears of War: Don't know about that one.
Bioshock: Decently implememented but to no great visual improvement.

Now to add to the list.

Crysis: Poorly implemented code, runs like crap, not a great deal of visual improvement.
World in Conflict: Noticeable increase in visual quality but significant performance drop and nothing that DX9 can't do with better performance.
Call of Juarez: Worst DX10 implementation of any game, also patched. Completely unplayable on all but the most powerful systems at low resolution.

All current "DX10" titles have minor to ridiculous performance hits with no added visual features that can't already be done in DX9. DX10 is currently a moot point that is being used to sell windows Vista and DX10 compatible hardware. It has potential, but in the year or so that it has existed in the mainstream market, it has simply been used to display advanced DX9 features.



All, true, and excellent points, oh, and because you didn't know about GEARS OF WAR I will tell you, I have read reviews stating that there is absolutely no difference between DX10 and 9 other than a massive performance hit.
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2008 3:54:00 AM

That sounds about right :sarcastic: 
February 24, 2008 5:29:04 AM

DK 2, fallout 2 anyone? i think the game main problem is in the lame gameplay/mechanics, for eye candy...i'd rather praise God & set my view to the beautiful woman that breathes than watch monitors.
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2008 6:05:33 AM

Physics are more important than IQ to me. So far I am yet to be impressed by the physics in any game.
February 24, 2008 6:10:05 AM

Nvidia isnt going to give us a huge single card breakthrough until ati, now amd, produces a single card that is comparitive to the gts, or the gtx. Only reason why were seeing the x2 come out is finally ati came out with it, just a answer to there challenge so to speak. As far as direct x10, im still holding my opinions, since most games take 2 to 3 years to complete, the gaming industry hasnt yet really had time to bring out a good direct x10 game, and as everyone says, its just patches, which shows the games werent made with the direct x10 specifically in mind, just made to work with it. So expect problems, im not touting direct x10 is great. Im just saying it takes time, people have to get used to programming new code, make new engines, etc. Look at xbox and playstation, with both of there new launches it took a better part of a year to come out with a game that wasnt just a port. And the console market doesnt have anything near the variables in components, operating systems, drivers, etc. that consoles do, all im saying is give it time, after all do you really want a worse solution to direct x10 then they are already offering ?
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2008 6:18:36 AM

blacksci said:
after all do you really want a worse solution to direct x10 then they are already offering ?

Let's keep this discussion realistic, please :kaola: 
February 24, 2008 6:26:48 AM

Realistic would be, screw direct x10, direct x9 is getting the job done right now, and they are still improving on what it can do. :pt1cable: 
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2008 6:28:47 AM

I don't think DX9 is near the end of it's capabilities yet, but it will get there. DX10 is yet to show us any of it's capabilities outside of tech demos, and after a year I expect to see something.
February 24, 2008 6:33:05 AM

How long did it take to go from direct x8 to 9? I should go take a look at that.

Btw, are you following me responding to my posts? lol j/k
February 24, 2008 8:47:16 AM

At the end of this post I'll put the roadmap voor the 9000 series.

But to answer your question:
I think I'll get the GTX SLI and maybe 3-way later on for 4 reasons :
1/ Scaling is not perfect and the 4th GPU is not worth it so 3 faster cards will be faster than 4 slower ones. See http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3232
They compare scaling crosfireX (4 gpu with ATI X2) vs 3way SLI with ultra.
Keep in mind the ATI X2 could barely beat the Ultra and the new GTX is faster.

2/ Heat : Those GX2 have the gpu's facing each other between 2 cards.
That's probably why the GTX can be clocked faster and cooled better.
I'm sure watercooling and overclocking will be much easier too.

3/ I'm getting a new system as soon as the GTX and 790i chipset are available. I'm still using a P4 ;-) . The reason for the 790i :
What is 790i? In one sentence: a good reason not to look at the 780i at all. Now, the multiple PCI-E v2 is native within the northbridge, avoiding all the bandwidth and latency roadblocks in the 780i.
It also has enhanced SLI. It's mainly two new features called PW Shortcut and Broadcast. PW Shortcut creates a direct path between the GPUs, via the northbridge. This should not only improve performance of SLI systems, but most of all take a load off the CPU, as with a normal SLI systems it has to go GPU#1 > northbridge > CPU > northbridge > GPU#2. Broadcast allows the CPU to send information to all GPUs of a system with a single packet.

4/ Nvidia is planning software PPU (like physics) on a GPU card :
The idea of using SLI for more than graphics has been brought up by NVIDIA in the past. "It might - and probably will - encourage people to buy a second GPU for their SLI slot. And for the highest-end gamer, it will encourage them to buy three GPUs." using SLI, a second GPU can be used to perform physics computations. The feature is customizable and a user can set their SLI configuration in either graphics+physics or graphics+graphics (traditional SLI) modes.

Card Core Launch Price
GeForce 9800GX2 G92-450 March 11 <$599*
GeForce 9800GTX G92-420* Late March <$399*
GeForce 9800GT G92-x April 3 <$299*
GeForce 9600GT G94-300 Launched $179
GeForce 9600GS G94-x May -
GeForce 9500GT G96-300 June -
GeForce 9500GS G96-x July -

Card SPs GPU clock Bus Mem clock
GeForce 9800GX2 2x128 600MHz 256-bit 2000MHz
GeForce 9800GTX 128 750MHz+ 256-bit -
GeForce 9800GT 112* - 256-bit -
GeForce 9600GT 64 600MHz 256-bit 1800MHz
GeForce 9600GS - - - -
GeForce 9500GT 48* 650MHz* 128-bit 1800MHz*
GeForce 9500GS - - - -


* Not confirmed, and should be considered with a pinch of salt

February 24, 2008 9:35:55 AM

I just found this :
http://en.expreview.com/?p=274#more-274
SO the GTX might be clocked lower than I tought, then It does not seem so good anymore.
In this case I'd probably get the GX2 SLI , more bang for the buck ;-)

We'll have to see the benches...
February 24, 2008 8:43:20 PM

Another advantage of only 2 cards vs 3 (extreme situation) would be that they can both use PCIe 2.0
With 3 it would be 1.0, zould this make a big difference you think?
February 24, 2008 11:11:37 PM

Annisman said:
Alright everybody, I have been sitting on an 8800gtx for over a year now, and I am desperate to upgrade (because its just so dam fun to upgrade)


oh my..
Upgrade just for the sake of it is somewhat pointless, but that's your money we're talking about heh
a b U Graphics card
February 25, 2008 2:24:26 PM

Yeah, it is my money, and there are other factors too. Such as Crysis, and other games coming out ( Far Cry 2 etc.) that do not yet have a GPU answer. Also, who wouldn't enjoy upgrading if they had the means to ?
February 25, 2008 3:05:22 PM

tjoepie said:
I just found this :
http://en.expreview.com/?p=274#more-274
SO the GTX might be clocked lower than I tought, then It does not seem so good anymore.
In this case I'd probably get the GX2 SLI , more bang for the buck ;-)

We'll have to see the benches...


Yeah, most rumors are say the 9800 GTX is g92 based - so it will be a pumped up 8800GTS 512MB. I've seen some threads that say it has a 384bit memory interface and 768 MB or > GDDR4. This is not the performance leap that the 8800 GTX was.

Wait till the summer for ATi's RV770. They are saying that a single RV770 core has 50% greater performance than RV670. If they do implement the dual or quad cores in a single package with logic, performance increases could be even more substantial.

(and yes there is much debate as to whether or not multi-core makes sense for GPUs)

a b U Graphics card
February 25, 2008 6:10:01 PM

Guys, on a tangent... is it safe to say that (2) 9800GTX in SLI > (2) 9800GX2 in SLI. I know we can only speculate, but does this make sense ? Higher clocks, less heat, etc.
February 25, 2008 6:50:38 PM

Annisman said:
Guys, on a tangent... is it safe to say that (2) 9800GTX in SLI > (2) 9800GX2 in SLI. I know we can only speculate, but does this make sense ? Higher clocks, less heat, etc.


How do you figure? Based on these 'rumored' specs, if the drivers are right (big if) that puts 2 cores against 4 nearly identical cores. The only big difference is clocks, and its not drastic. I think 1 extra core will scale better and yield a higher performance increase than the boosted clocks.

I still don't see how the 8800GTX has a wider memory bus and more memory than the 9800GTX. I think some tweaks to the G92 core (opening up the bus and expanding the memory) could make the 9800GTX the monster we want. Maybe they are saving that for the Ultra? Alas it is yet to be mentioned in the lineup as it the 9800GTS?

From Nordichardware:
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7394.html

Card SPs GPU clock Bus Mem clock
GeForce 9800GX2 2x128 600MHz 256-bit 2000MHz
GeForce 9800GTX 128 675MHz 256-bit 2200MHz
GeForce 9800GT 112* - 256-bit -
GeForce 9600GT 64 600MHz 256-bit 1800MHz
GeForce 9600GS - - - -
GeForce 9500GT 48* 650MHz* 128-bit 1800MHz*
GeForce 9500GS - - - -

* Not confirmed, and should be considered with a pinch of salt
February 25, 2008 7:01:12 PM

There is one thing im just not getting about this thread. Its the DX10 DX9 arguement.

All the new cards are DX10 capable, and we will certainly see an increase in DX10 games. So why complain about it? When people are building systems, the most frequent phrase I hear is "future proof." Does this not apply with our video cards?

And the DX10 cards are all compatible with DX9, so I just see no reason whatsoever to complain about DX10. DX10 is coming just like all the version before it...and all the games will eventually support it, JUST like always has been. Might as well have a GPU thats ready for it?
February 25, 2008 7:06:22 PM

badgtx1969 said:
I still don't see how the 8800GTX has a wider memory bus and more memory than the 9800GTX. I think some tweaks to the G92 core (opening up the bus and expanding the memory) could make the 9800GTX the monster we want. Maybe they are saving that for the Ultra? Alas it is yet to be mentioned in the lineup as it the 9800GTS?


OR maybe nVidia is leaking false information because they want ATI to fall flat on their face when the product is finally released.

My fear is that nVidia is going to disappoint a lot of folks that are holding out for something special....just may not happen.

February 25, 2008 7:17:28 PM

rallyimprezive said:
OR maybe nVidia is leaking false information because they want ATI to fall flat on their face when the product is finally released.


We can only hope :sweat: 

I think I saw a guy from Taiwan or somewhere that had a 9800GTX and his GPU-Z screenshot. It seemed to confirm these rumored 9800GTX specs. However, GPU-Z recognized it as a G92 880GTS, well have to wait and see.
February 25, 2008 8:17:40 PM

i would pick up a evga gx2 and if the gtx is a lot better stepup to it
February 25, 2008 8:37:21 PM

rallyimprezive said:
OR maybe nVidia is leaking false information because they want ATI to fall flat on their face when the product is finally released.

My fear is that nVidia is going to disappoint a lot of folks that are holding out for something special....just may not happen.


This would be great news :D 

The GTX will be released a few weeks after the GX2 so I'll have to wait, wait and wait for benches to compare them :cry: 

Do you guys think they would release the best card first or keep the best for last?

They have already showed us the mainstream 9600 :??: 

I'm sure there is a very good marketing strategy behind this and the release of the 790i chipset will also be in there.
a b U Graphics card
February 26, 2008 3:07:00 AM

For as lame as these cards (could) end up being, there sure is alot of anticipation and excitement revolving them, it almost seems like more is at stake here than ATI's release of the 3870X2, an excellent card. This is what happens when there is little competition for a long time, and people itching to finally upgrade ( like me ) are scratching at peanuts to find a performance gain.
a b U Graphics card
February 26, 2008 4:43:35 AM

rallyimprezive said:
There is one thing im just not getting about this thread. Its the DX10 DX9 arguement.

Yep it does appear as though you aren't getting it.

rallyimprezive said:

All the new cards are DX10 capable, and we will certainly see an increase in DX10 games. So why complain about it? When people are building systems, the most frequent phrase I hear is "future proof." Does this not apply with our video cards?

Who's complaining about cards being DX10? There's no problem with that at all. Same as there's no problem in having a 64 core processor, it's just a feature that can't be used. "Future proofing" is the term given to the empty hope that some people have that the hardware they buy today will not be "obsolete" in 12+ months. In reality this never really happens, the 8800GTX/Ultra is the only exception I can think of off the top of my head.

rallyimprezive said:

And the DX10 cards are all compatible with DX9, so I just see no reason whatsoever to complain about DX10. DX10 is coming just like all the version before it...and all the games will eventually support it, JUST like always has been. Might as well have a GPU thats ready for it?

No reason to complain about DX10? You must have your head in the dirt. In the year or so that DX10 has been in the mainstream region, what has it given us other than a drop in framerates and something for the ignorant to get a bigger e-peen over?
a b U Graphics card
February 26, 2008 4:49:11 AM

omg kitty, you pwned/gangbanged that guy
a b U Graphics card
February 26, 2008 4:52:55 AM

Don't mess with me when I'm tired *yawn*
February 26, 2008 8:34:55 AM

I like the look of the card but it seems retarded that they couldn't have put the 2 GPU's on 1 board. Plus it makes it a little hard for aftermarket coolers.
February 26, 2008 8:52:05 AM

[quote|Fudzilla article]big fan on the back of the card that blows through air the whole card trying to keep it cool.[/quote]

A slip up in the wording there! :lol:  ;) 
February 26, 2008 8:55:43 AM

Yeah from all the rumors I've read about the heat output and the power consumption I'm surprised that this thing doesn't have an H20 requirement.
a b U Graphics card
February 26, 2008 9:33:43 AM

Every 6 months usually comes a refresh in graphic cards. Here we are over a year into "DX10" and no REAL DX10 games out. How many generations will we go thru before DX10 appears? Also, Id like to point out that many of the implementations on DX10.1 was actually meant for DX10, but was rolled back. ATI made their hardware to work with alot of these implementations and was severly burned doing so. This has brought on the non competitive situation we had to endure for the last year. So anybody that ISNT complaining about DX10 is looking thru rose colored glasses. And I wont EVEN mention Vista
!