9800gtx in 3dmark 2006

Taking this was a 9800gtx, am i the only one disappointed with the score?


PS: i actually dont take much credit from 3dmarks, but i surely was expecting a little more the geforce 8800 gtx sucessor

Does'nt look legitimate,GTX cards have 768mb of memory,unless Nvidia has reduced them?

Hmm my 8800GTS 512mb oc'ed beats that, what the heck.

I got SM2.0 - 6740
SM3.0 - 6407

whatever card they benchmarked will not beat a 8800gtx or 8800gts 512

FAKE

also isnt 675 exactly the stock clock on the 8800gts? I dont remember the stock shaders but they can be pushed to over 1900 easily. The memory on one can easily go to 1100

Either way giving it a fancy name will trick a lotta people

What do you all expect with these new cards.....the second coming............? I mean come on they are usually modest improvements but not like quadruple you score with the new GOD video card. Yes now you and all your friends can own the last video card you will ever need to own..............................................it slices, it dices, it even does your taxes.............

My SM2.0/SM3.0 are both just over 6000 points where yours are 700+ points high because you have a quad core, me have dual core. Wait a minute, what processor do you have and what speed?

Ashame its not dx10.1/sm4.1

I sure hope Nvidia takes dual GPU single cards seriously, because Nvidia's CEO doesn't care much for multi-GPU cards. ATI is going multi-GPU big time so Nvidia better start getting their act together. I think the main reason ATI went dual GPU's is because one of their GPU's is no match for a single card from Nvidia.

I didnt look up the article but maybe they are using a Pentium 3 or something? Maybe thats bottlenecking it.

oh and systemlord, I have a Q6600@3.6. Your dual would probably score about the same clocked that high I dont think 3dMark uses the other two cores much if at all but I might be wrong.

How much processing power do you think it'd take to NOT bottleneck Tri-SLI?

1 PCB sure is alot easier to watercool, that's for sure.

No you may not.

PCHeck the scaling of preferably the 8800GT and 9600GT before you comment on how bad SLI is. What is it, like 70% average for 8800GT and 82% for 9600GT??

If you want ot run SLI in low res with no aa with stupid frames then complain about scaling like most newbs do then obviously its a waste.

Try switching on a bit of AA at low res then see how well it scales.

AKA Chrome 400

Noone can be sure that these screenshots are with a real 9800GTX. I can hack my 8800GTX's BIOS ID and make it appear as a 9800GTX or whatever. Then I can mod my forceware .inf to recognise the card and with a tiny overclock I can make these results. I don't think nVidia would sell such a low performing card as a 9800GTX. These results seem fake to me.

My (significantly overclocked) 8800GTX already makes SM2.0 : 6700marks and SM3.0:7200marks in windows vista and about 16300 total. I would expect the 9800GTX at stock clocks make at least 15000 with the 3870X2 already selling. I don't think nVidia are that stupid.

Not sure yet, but these results are probably fake.

I think all Nvidia is doing is shrinking the die from 90nm to 65nm to make a bigger profit, simply making more money on the same product.

However those looking at 24" monitors almost have no choice but to go SLI, I'm even considering SLI since running games at 1900x1200 with one card can be a strain on your system.

@dos1986, I think Nvidia is lowering the memory from 768 to 512MB because theres very little difference between the two at what most people are play at resolution wise. Plus this will allow better pricing for all, I think Nvidia may have realized that 768MB of Vram may have been a little much for todays standards.

Normally, I wouldn't buy that either, but I plan on using around $300 to $400 from the special tax rebate to get a 24" LCD. I was going to get a 20" next month, but I'll wait. We use our monitors as televisions anyways, with TV Wonder 650 cards, so 1920 x 1200 will work well for that, plus be ready for a Bluray drive when they drop in price.

Since I like the idea of a graphics card lasting 3 years, I plan on upgrading to a Crossfire board and a 45nm Phenom in the fall. The 4850's are reported as being clocked the same as my overclocked 3870x2 I got with part of the regular income tax return, and they'll only cost $249. So, it will be a decent CrossfireX system for a few years. It will only get upgraded when games force me to switch from high to medium settings, and framerates drop down to below 20 fps in CRPGs.

Yes, we aren't all 16 year olds with rich parents, but sometimes we can save up or there will be enough from a tax rebate to splurge on one good upgrade that will last 3 years. Not everyone who's an enthusiast gamer buys a new card every 6 months to one year just to have the latest.

I upgraded from a 405 chipset MSI board (same CPU) and a 7600gs and still have a 17" CRT. So, it's time to splurge this year!

Im going off topic on my own topic, but i always find hilarious those threads that are named "what do you think about my low\med system" and when you click it, all you can see is the very best hardware around lol...