Is there going to be 9900 series cards?

Hard to say, its been speculated but thats it, the "9900 series" turned out to be the gtx200 series.

Knowing Nvidia, which no1 does, anything is game. We can even see a 7950 Revision for all we know 

I'm surprised there's no 9850 GX2 . But I think he 9900 series are just the 280s....really odd to lower the numbers and call it high end.

Thats why ATI is so easy...bigger number...bigger scores...generally speakin 

well... before the gtx 280 name tag was actually announced... it was speculated that the new cards would be the 9900 series... and it was also speculated that this new series was just ANOTHER revision of the g80 architecture...

the gtx 200's appear to be just another revision of the g80 architecture... although most people say its an all new chip... I highly suspect its not... because why would nvidia sit on its hands for over 18 months... and not come up with a true successor to the 8800 gtx...

I believe all cards that came after the 8800 gtx were just slight improvements to the architecture... and the first REAL new architecture from them is due in 09.... as it says in this article...

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-directx-drivers...

the features they talk about in this article may or may not be true... but the fact that these are the features that SHOULD be implemented speaks a lot about what they're next generation might be...

I think ^ that architecture was and still is meant to be the next 8800 gtx... for if the claims are even close to being accurate... (1.5 - 2 times faster) then the jump from the gtx 200 series to that would be the same as the 7900 gtx jump to the 8800 gtx...


done rambling  

I don't think its rambling if I learn something from it  And I did!

Are you asking if the company that put out 3 different 8800GTS cards is going to release a 9900 card? I agree, we have no idea what they are going to do.

I suspect that we won't see a 9900 card. They have released the GTX2x0 series, so they are mostly done with 8800/9900. Seeing as the GTX2x0 are large power hungry cards, the only place I can think of where a 9900 would fit in would be a laptop chip. A Go/m 9900GT/GTS could be released, that would make some sense. The other place this makes sense is for lowered GTX. For example, calling it the 9900GT instead of the GTX220.

These are more new cards then the 9800s were. They aren't as much new as the 8800s were from the 7800s, but they are still newer. Even the AMD 4800s aren't a total redesign from the 3800 series. Nvidia and AMD both did the same thing, bump up the number of SP, and find a way to increase memory bandwidth/size.

Not really. It had become entirely too confusing, as there was no real rhyme or reason to nearly all of it. Had they named the 200 series the 9900s, it just would have made even less sense than it already did. It's ridiculous how many variations there were of the 8000 and 9000 series, and yet, how similar many were. Some literally are identical, like the 8800GS and 9600GSO. But what on earth about their name tells you that? You just had to know for yourself what the differences were, if any, which they assumed most people did, but at a certain point, they're alienating potential customers.

Since they were about to hit a 10000 series had they continued upon the same path, which I'd say should have marked a significant difference from the previous series, but would have just become hard to read, they made a good choice and just threw their old system out the window, although by basically wasting much of the remaining higher model numbers for nothing but gimmicky marketing purposes. I believe that's also why the 9800 GTX+ simply has the '+' added, as it's much more obvious than an entirely new random model designation.

ATI have gotten better about not tacking on seemingly meaningless letters to the model number, but their system isn't really much better. They already did the same thing by nearing a 10000 model, but they basically just rolled it over and kept on with the same system that has no real identifiable meaning. They've lost me on their system of having various R700 labeled GPUs, with little to no real relation to their corresponding HD4000 designation. At least the Geforce 200 names suggest somewhere around 200 stream processors and identify the name of the GPU.

This sort of stuff is why there are a gazillion computer hardware manufacturers out there, but only Apple really has any notoriety to the public, even if they just sell the same old stuff for a premium. Ridiculous serieses of numbers and letters are not remotely identifiable or marketable compared to easily memorable names.

I'm just ranting at this point, but it's so funny to see all the new "netbooks" cropping up from so many manufacturers. With so many similarities between them, you can tell which ones are destined for failure just based on their forgetable model designations consisting of meaningless and downright confusing numbers. I don't know how anyone hopes to compete with the "EeePC" or "Wind" with the "X092340923," and yet, many of them do it, anyways. It's amazing how out of touch with consumers they are.

because most of the population has an IQ of a 100... lol

lol more like -100  "Research" isn't apart of the human vocabulary anymore. Its more like,

OMG that card looks good, or 1 gig or RAM that must be awesome...or my friend said 

At least thats what I encounter with my friends