GT200 only high-end for launch timeframe

Yes the 9900gtx and the 9900gx2 r going to be the high-end cards. The rumors are that the 9900gtx will be priced at 500$ since there replacing the 9800gx2, but nvidia could change there price due to amd/ati offering far cheap cards.

Well.....It will be a repeat of the 8series it seems, in the beggining, with the GTX, and the GTS640, and then a HUGE!!!!! gap between those cards and the 128bit G84, simply pathethic. Anyway, unfortunately those cards will be VERY pricey, so if your looking at that range for money, then get the RV770, whcih will suit your needs, but I doubt it will beat our 8800GT by much, if at all, unfortunately, NVdia really outdid themselves with G80.

But what about the 9900GT or 9900GTS?

So you can pay them less? Yeah right. It's Nvidia we're talking about.  

No, its a corporation thing period...that were talking about, standard procedure, extract maximum profits.

Unfortunately, High end isnt very profitable because very few people buy it.

Not sure wat the price is for the 9900gts or gt. But im guessing the 9900gts will be about 349$ wile the gt will be priced at 299$. The 9800gtx will fall around 249$ just my guess.

I think you got your prices a little mixed up, I think the GTS will end up being around $320 and no more than $250 for the GT also I think you meant to put the GTX as $450.

EDIT: I thought you put 9900GTX so nevermind.

we all know nvidia is known to overprice there cards. i wouldnt be surprised if my guess comes true.

Where were those at G80 launch?
Oh yeah the GT was a year away and didn't exist even as an engineering sample and the GTS was the 640 that was already mentioned which cost $400 since it was still the big huge chip and complex PCB just with slight cutdown.

You bought your card toward the end of the life cycle of the G8 series, you'll have to do the same if you want the same value, so think think either Xmas time or next spring.

BTW, what's the rush to replace the GF8800GT?

I love to see the speculation, i love it better when hopes and dreams are crushed.

well from what the article today implied; the next big thing is going to be onboard physics for video cards - so maybe that'll be the norm in next gen games

but then again, probably not; I don't remember reading anything about physics being a main feature of some of the newer pc titles

I think i'm gonna just do a step up to a 9800 gx2 and call it a day; I get a feeling unless you're willing to drop a lot of money on a platform upgrade then you're not gonna benefit from 9900s that much for the cost of them..

someone else kinda made this point before in another thread: "whats the point of huge ownage 1000$ video arrays if none of the games utilize them"

I just hope that there will be a card with a dual slot cooler, around $350 or less, have the performance of 3870X2, and be out in mid June.

That's what I was hoping for with the 4870. I know I want a dual slot cooler, I like quietness and the security knowing I have the extra cooling.

Anything next gen will be a nice step from my x1950 pro. But I want it to be at least twice as fast, which requires about a 3870X2.

And I'm willing to spend up to $350. $400 if the performance is really great.

So it looks like I won't have any luck from ATI, since I want to buy in July. Maybe I'll finally get an nvidia card.

Im wondering if theyll just leave it as is, drop the 88xxs and have a 9900GT thats a dumbed down GTX. Itll still be costly tho, with that huge chip aboard.

What high end does is set the perception of who's on top. So, when midrange cards are released, buyers take the high end into consideration. It's all marketing, which leads to profits; but marketing is bupkis.

I generally go ATI for AVIVO and good video quality as well as decent gaming. I skipped the 2xxx series altogether, not finding it worthwhile to ditch even the lowly X1650 Pro and 7600gs in our two PC's but bought new cards when 3xxx matured.

The 4xxx series looks good and should beat current Nvidia cards, but I expect G200 will be a bit better in terms of pure frames per second in many popular games. So, Nvidia should 'win' by the end of summer.

That won't make the G200 good enough for me. Nvidia hasn't done well enough outside of games to make me want to buy another one after the budget 7600 I tried out in 2007.

I'll admit, the Crysis gamers will be quite happy with G200 and Nvidia will sell quite a few to the FPS enthusiast crowd.



Well, Nvidia has Aegia and Intel has Havok, but ATI's doing some sort of GPGPU physics with the 4xxx series. It will be interesting to see what games support which.

IMHO, physics only works in FPS. In Oblivion, the physics of watching a daedra roll down a hill wasn't so thrilling when that very same physics made it a rather difficult affair to set your table in the house you bought.

When in game physics can differentiate between the rag doll effects people want in FPS and a real world simulation such that you can set your table for easy role playing purposes, then it will be something I'll look for in games.

Well the g200 should be better by big margin. The 4xxx series are middle range cards for price of $250-$400. The G200 is huge chip, with 512 bus so expect $650 for that GPU ferrari... It's comparable to 8800GTX and ultra, it's bigger, it has wider bus... Do you remember how much 8800GTX cost at the beginning, and even today?

Did someone said that ATI is going to come back highend at 2010? So far we will have good middle range cards from Nvidia and ATI and one highend from Nvidia, so no competition in there so no price war highend.

The best thing is that we will see new card from both companies!

So the GT200 is going to be released first? Ok then. And I have high hopes for this card, it better not turn out to be another 9800 GTX which we don't need.

Should be interesting, the 4800 series vs the 9900 series, I wonder which card is going to come out on top.

Latest rumor is itll be faster than the GTXx2

Latest Rumor names the GT200 as the GTX 280 not a 9900 series.
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

Well its not like ATI does a "top to bottom launch" like how Henri Richards once stated the 2000 series was supposed to be. Now all we saw that time was a delayed 2900XT and a 2900XTX that sank at launch.

Yeah, but does it really matter?

There hasn't been top-bottom launches since the GF2 and early Radeon Days when there was basically 2 models (top and bottom).

The closest thing to Top to bottom launches were the X1300/1600/1900 and GF7300/7600/7900 launch and both of those had slight delays to make it fully top-bottom.

Don't think it makes much difference. It's an admirable desire, but meh, I don't care about the entry level user, and I doubt mareters do for launch either, they aren't as twitchy as the mid-high end and are more price sensitive, not timing and performance sensitive.

does anyone no the final spec of the 9900gtx? or when there going to release the info?

Its all speculation until nvidia comes out and says this is what it will do, also its supposed to be coming out in the next month or two, if they dont have any delays that is, i could see a convinient delay though with ati deciding to not release until july, but well see.

hey i have a ? im returning my 9800gx2 because of a defect. one of the cores dont work! should i get the same card or get 2 8800? or should i wait a month for the 9900?

9900 won't be out in just a month. 2 8800gts will significantly outperform one 9800gx2, but they use up the sli option. Up to you.

GF9900 is supposed to be out at the end of June, so if you could, it's probably the best choice.

Otherwise I prefer the 2 x GTS idea for two reasons. First it performs better, second you can re-sell them individually or together for probably more than just 1 GX2 should you decide to do so when the GF9900 or HD4xxx does ship.

idk wats ur opinion on sli. i hated cf and i had a 9800gx2 when it worked the sli sucked lol. i prefer single card setup. i dont think i can wait over 1 month for the 9900gtx grrrrr. is there any nvidia cards that can tri sli. not including 9series.
one more thing if i wait for the 9900gtx do u think my antec 500 earthwatt would be enough for this single card, i no the spec arent out but will it actually use more power then a 9800gx2??

The 9800gx2 is single card, but dual gpu. It's performance scales the same as a sli setup, not a single gpu. No advantage there. The only advantage is it will work on a non-sli motherboard.

The GF9800GX2 is actually dual card, single slot.

The thing is while I dislike SLi/CF in general if your options are 2 GTS or 1 GX2, then I'd go with the 2 GTS.

I Think, but don't know, that the GF9900GTX would require about the same amount of power as a GX2. Likely noticably more than the HD2900 and GF8800GTX, but probably at or below a GX2.

The only other cards than the GF9 series that can TRI-SLi are the 8800GTX/Ultra.

Name change is a very good sign..

When somethings name is changed, it means those who changed the name dont want the product or service to be related in anyway..

If they named it 9900gtx, I would be worried..

Gtx 280 is a sign of whole new tech, which should never be confused with 4 digit series..

I would guess that this card will sell for $599/ €450 and will be more than twice as fast 8800 Ultra ( not sli ) @ 2560 by 1600 ..

If an 8800 Ultra can get 10fps on Crysis @ 2560 by 1600, the Gtx 280 will do 22fps imo..

Meaning Cryis @ Very High will run like butter on a 22"

ya so i heard it uses a good amount of power but more then the ati hd 2900!!
y so much? but if u think its around a 2900 power consumption would u say a antec 500 earthwatt would work?

Should be fine..

Your pc will never pull that ammount, Ive ran 6 hdds, tri sli etc etc ona 620w Corsair psu. And it was grand.

An example for you, a friend of mine who is a sparks decided to see how much his pc would use under full load, not a fantastic spec but a good c2d, 8800gt few hdds and all that jazz and it never pulled more then 200w. The only thing you need to look for is strong rails.

the rails on the antec earthwatt 500 is 12v1 has
17amp and 12v2 has 17amp total 34amp.

Very good rails, you should have no problem

antec puts our a great product, maybe not the best, but definetly something you can stand by.

yup hopefully it will work with a 9900.
now im gonna pack my 9800gx2 off to newegg and patiently wait till end of june. wat a long wait!!! better pay off.

Hopefully you are right and it deserves a name change, not just NV's desire to simplify their names and deal with hitting the GF10 series (like ATI going with X instead of 10).

Latest fud say's the GTX 280 will be out June 18th. And so will the GTX 260. Both are single GPU solutions.
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

on june not to bad. ati cards coming around the same time.

We can hope that ATI will come out with a high end card by 2010, but I bet AMD's more into putting R&D into Bulldozer instead.

I still think the monster GPU's need to get hit by their own virtual asteroid. ATI's high end for this launch will be the 4870x2. That is the wave of the future that even Huang will have to acknowledge. Nvidia came out with the 9800gx2 just to beat ATI for a bit, but they aren't really reconciled to dual GPU cards at Nvidia and didn't even attempt a single PCB.

GPU's are basically back in same situation Intel was with Prescott, and Huang's promising monster GPU's the way Intel once promised 10 gigahertz on Netburst architecture. Intel had to change, Nvidia will too.

Perhaps Nvidia doesn't like dual GPU and future dual core GPU's because it relies upon games actually supporting SLI well?

Dual gpu's have yet to have there day, and until then nvidia is going to go with the sure fire thing, a single core, with properties they can manage, i mean really besides crysis, which was a dumb idea in the first place, where does a dual gpu have a place to go right now? Let alone the dual gpu can only stagger to its own feet.

Well intel did well when they clued together two dual core to get quad core prosessor to the market. It's a solution where bad CPU worked as an single core low end variants (by disabling the not working core) and using normal duo core as middle range CPU and using two of them together as an highend variant.
It's not so easy to make completely fine multicore solution, so putting multiple sigle core chips together seems to be easier alternative.
I thinks that yipsl is right that in the long term, multi core GPU will see light.

It's guite possible that ATI will try to make let's say four core GPU and then sell two, tree and four core variants of it if they try to get back to the highend solutions. I am not expecting that ATI will go back to one monster size single core GPU anymore. With multicore solution you can use the same basic core design in your low and and highend products, that is much cheaper than making separate chips to different market areas.
It's even possible that the same GPU core can be part of that bulldoser CPUGPU solution, and use the same GPU core in normal graphick card solutions.

Can anyone see that you can have 4 CPU cores + 2 GPU cores in your CPUGPU and with that separate 4 core GPU craphich card? In that way we could have 6 indentical GPU cores in the same enthusias system.
Low and solution would be 2 CPU + 1 GPU CPUGPU system alone. If you want to have more speed, you can buy 1 to 2 GPU cores graphic card to help in graphicks. All this with only one CPU core design and one GPU core design. Very economical solution.

I agree that were going to see dual gpu in the future, and its gonna be the standard, the games just havent come out that really take advantage of it, its like the mulitcore cpu's (of which i own) Nothing is really "optimized" in the game market yet for them. There are only a handful of games really taking advantage of them, but for some guy like me, who likes to multitask, they work great. Same as with the gpu, nothing "optimized" but a few people have high enough resolutions, or play crysis enough to justify purchasing them. But the one thing i dont really see coming to light is the cpu-gpu combination. For now it just takes too much money to have a core that serves 2 purposes when building it. Also amd-ati is the only ones currently able to try this, but there in a financial bind right now, and playing catch-up with both the cpu, and the gpu market. Maybe in a few years we might see something like this, But also keep in mind, most of us enthusiasts put our own comps together for one very big reason. Freedom of choice. And if a cpu-gpu maker is doing it for us, it detracts from the overall product.

There is much more to the R700 arch than just using multiple cores to step from bottom to top end.



For a start, there is the shared memory for the X2 - not a big deal you might think.... until you consider how this integrates with say.... 3 CPU cores on a future fusion die.


Then there is the GP-GPU nature of R600 being extended onto R700 - ok, this was coming before AMD arrived - but was a reason for AMD buying ATI - again... your GP-GPU incorporated onto the same die as the CPU and sharing main system memory.

One problem AMD have on the horizon for fusion is minimising memory latency for the GPU.


Split powerplanes.... griffin anyone? Its an extension of this concept for use in notebooks with fusion.




AMD have a long term plan, and R700 is another step towards executing it.

I feel we have maybe two more generations of single core killer gpus. That being said, I still believe the X2 models will still be the fastest of the fastest. Going with GDDR5 will show some promise if it comes thru, with the ability to share on card memory with some built in corrections. I find this ro be very interesting. Lets hope that GDDR5 doesnt bring the same problems that GDDR4 did, which prevented nVidia from using it, or that nVidia solves their noise problem and itll work on their cards

Single core monster gpus will be around for quite some time I think, were still only on 55nm, so weve still got 45nm and 40nm to go yet. The g280 is nvidias first monster gpu since the g80, just wanted to say that by the way.

You forget the G92, that processor has also proven itself, hell my 8800GTS only comes in a few frames lower then a ultra, at half the price.

Well I don't consider 8800GTS as an moster chip. It's very clever and sensible instead! Good speed without huge power reguirements.

Yep, it just seems like a monster because with some moderate oc, it runs like an Ultra, which is considered a monster... a year ago. Ultra is is old. It's long past its prime.  

but yet, its what the second fastest single card solution right now ?