Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Nvidia 5 series question.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 12, 2010 9:57:00 PM

So we now know whats packed into the very nice 580 GTX but now im scratching my head about something... Sense the 580 is in essence what nvidia meant to build the first time around with the 480 GTX what would the lower model cards be? 470 is basically a gimped 480 and so on and so forth.. but what would the 570/560 be? The same thing as a 470/460 but with an added polymorph? That wouldnt seem fesable to sell any other 5 series cards sense I would assume they would just overlap so closely to the 4's right? What's your guys' take on this cause im stumped between this and ATI naming cards wrong lol

More about : nvidia series question

a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 12, 2010 11:32:12 PM

Your talking about the company that called the 8800GT the 9800GT. What was the big difference? The 8800GT could only do dual SLI, while the 9800GT can do tri. There were no new things added to really make it a new card. I'm sure Nvidia has no problem turning out a 570 which would have the same specs as the GTX480.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 2:54:03 AM

4745454b said:
Your talking about the company that called the 8800GT the 9800GT. What was the big difference? The 8800GT could only do dual SLI, while the 9800GT can do tri. There were no new things added to really make it a new card. I'm sure Nvidia has no problem turning out a 570 which would have the same specs as the GTX480.

The 9800GT is only dual SLi, the 9800GTX is tri SLi.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9800gt_us.html
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 3:35:07 AM

The Nvidia 5 series suck in performance!
I have the 5600XT and it sucks!

:lol:  Hope you got da joke!
a c 212 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 3:38:03 AM

Welcome to the wonderful world of marketing ..... when was it exactly that 1 GB transformed from 1024 MB to 1000 MB ? :) 

Don't try and make sense of it. While confusing for consumers, (that is the marketing slugs intent), once ya wrap ya head around it, it's only an issue really for geeks like us who actually know a G-104 from a G-whatever and fanboi's who will point to "the other team" doing mean and nasty things but somehow excuse their team when doing the exact same thing.

Simply put the 580 has a 5 unlike the 4 in 480 with the idea that consumers will be able to remember that the 5 represents the "newer" card over the "older" 4. Sometimes the change will be say DDR5 is used instead of DDR3.....sometimes it will be the result of board modification where performance is similar but it runs cooler or more efficiently. Ya can try and read something sinister into it but it's as simple as that.

It gets a little harder with the 6870. Where the 580 is faster than the 480, the 6870 is actually slower than the 5870.

a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 4:30:02 AM

All the talk about Nvidia and the rebranding is now turning over to AMD, especially with the 6000 series cards.

The 5000 cards are faster than the 6000 cards, so why name it that.

When nvidia rebranded the 9000 series from the 8000, everyone cried.

The point is, you have to do your research before buying anything. Companies will turn you in every direction with their numbers and release dates.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 4:42:12 AM

Your talking about the company that called the 8800GT the 9800GT. What was the big difference? The 8800GT could only do dual SLI, while the 9800GT can do tri. said:
Your talking about the company that called the 8800GT the 9800GT. What was the big difference? The 8800GT could only do dual SLI, while the 9800GT can do tri.


apart from what mm already said, and the fact you're wrong, the 9800gt can also do hybrid power.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 4:43:37 AM

All the talk about Nvidia and the rebranding is now turning over to AMD, especially with the 6000 series cards.

The 5000 cards are faster than the 6000 cards, so why name it that. said:
All the talk about Nvidia and the rebranding is now turning over to AMD, especially with the 6000 series cards.

The 5000 cards are faster than the 6000 cards, so why name it that.


i believe you didn't get the memo, the 6800s are midrange cards.
a c 216 U Graphics card
a c 80 Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 4:49:56 AM

soundefx said:
All the talk about Nvidia and the rebranding is now turning over to AMD, especially with the 6000 series cards.

The 5000 cards are faster than the 6000 cards, so why name it that.

When nvidia rebranded the 9000 series from the 8000, everyone cried.

The point is, you have to do your research before buying anything. Companies will turn you in every direction with their numbers and release dates.


It's not that the 6000 series is slower, it's that they made a strange move to alter their numbering scheme.

The 68xx cards are the newer version of the 57xx cards and the 69xx cards will replace the 58xx cards. It's kind of stupid if you ask me.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 4:50:00 AM

I know that. But just like nvidia and the 9000 = 8000. The ATi 6000 < 5000.

The naming and numbering is a different form of rebranding to me. All to cause confusion in my book.

By the time the 7000 series comes out, which one will it be faster than, the 5000 or the 6000. I am hoping it will be faster than the 5000, other wise we will have another 5000 series card on our hands.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 4:53:34 AM

bystander said:
It's not that the 6000 series is slower, it's that they made a strange move alter their following numbering scheme.

The 68xx cards are the newer version of the 57xx cards and the 69xx cards will replace the 58xx cards. It's kind of stupid if you ask me.


Now this I agree with.

If they were replacing the 5700, shouldn't it be named 6700 and the 5800 replacement be named 6800?

Look, that makes sense. But instead we have the crack headed, idiotic numbers we have now.

And believe it or not, I actually like AMD....lol.... but they are falling into nvidia bad habits. It is starting to leave a bitter taste.
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 6:06:48 AM

I'm pretty sure we've gone over this before monkey. The 9800GT can do tri SLI. Or perhaps someone forgot to tell Asus.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/asus_en...

Quote:
Note the two SLI tabs available on the 9800GT. NVidia have seen fit to make the 9800GT TRI-SLI compatible should your motherboard support this feature.


Sure I'm wrong?
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 6:27:57 AM

4745454b said:
I'm pretty sure we've gone over this before monkey. The 9800GT can do tri SLI. Or perhaps someone forgot to tell Asus.

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/asus_en...

Quote:
Note the two SLI tabs available on the 9800GT. NVidia have seen fit to make the 9800GT TRI-SLI compatible should your motherboard support this feature.


Sure I'm wrong?



http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9800gt_us.html

go to specification tab, ctrl+f the word sli

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9800_gtx_plus_us.html


do the same on this page.

if asus happened to create a tri-sli 9800gt good for them, nvidia specs says otherwise.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 6:58:18 AM

wh3resmycar said:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9800gt_us.html

go to specification tab, ctrl+f the word sli

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_9800_gtx_plus_us.html


do the same on this page.

if asus happened to create a tri-sli 9800gt good for them, nvidia specs says otherwise.

Thank you wh3resmycar and I think that was the point that was raised last time as well, Asus do a few one off's and that might have been but it was not an official card and so doesn't count as far as I and Nvidia are concerned (if it did I'm sure they would have mentioned it).
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 8:24:36 AM

There were others as well, I assume they all wrote their own special drivers?

Edit: By extension all those people who ran the 4850x2 didn't really have that card because AMD didn't make it?
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 8:52:24 AM

4745454b said:
There were others as well, I assume they all wrote their own special drivers?

Edit: By extension all those people who ran the 4850x2 didn't really have that card because AMD didn't make it?

No one said that the card(s) don't exist just that they are not officially supported, like the Asus Mars for instance.
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 9:01:56 AM

Quote:
The 9800GT is only dual SLi...and the fact you're wrong


I'm not wrong, they can do Tri-SLI. Many could only do dual, but there were Tri SLI 9800GTs. There were no Tri SLI 8800GTs.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 9:04:09 AM

4745454b said:
There were others as well, I assume they all wrote their own special drivers?

Edit: By extension all those people who ran the 4850x2 didn't really have that card because AMD didn't make it?


using your logic, would you agree that the difference between the gtx260-216 and its predecessor the 192 variant, apart from the sp count and die shrink, is that the 216 has a separate physx processor since evga came up with one?






a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 9:26:15 AM

I don't know what your talking about. Are you talking about one of the Co-op cards?

I'm not sure what's so hard to follow about this. I mentioned one of the minor differences between the 9800 and 8800GT, and people think I'm wrong about it. Have we forgot about the 9800GT already?
November 13, 2010 10:22:26 AM

soundefx said:
Now this I agree with.

If they were replacing the 5700, shouldn't it be named 6700 and the 5800 replacement be named 6800?

Look, that makes sense. But instead we have the crack headed, idiotic numbers we have now.

And believe it or not, I actually like AMD....lol.... but they are falling into nvidia bad habits. It is starting to leave a bitter taste.



6800 series is not replacing 5700 series. They had 5700 and 5800, but wanted something in between. So they develpoed 6800 series. The 5700 will be rebranded to 6700 and the new one which will replace 5800 will be 6900.

5700 will be 6700
6800 will be for new market which they missed in 5xxx days
5800 will be 6900.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 10:30:55 AM

^ so the word "big" is "minor" in your context??? can i have some of whatever it is that you're smoking.








a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 10:34:43 AM

oops, after scouring the internets i found this:

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=641

The 9800 GT does not OFFICIALLY support 3-Way SLI even though the card sports the necessary SLI connection for it. The answer from ASUS is that because the 9800 GT Matrix shares some manufacturing options with other cards, the connectors were left on for easy transition. If someone were so inclined, they could likely modify the firmware in such a way to activate that second SLI connector and perhaps get a set of 9800 GTs working together. said:
The 9800 GT does not OFFICIALLY support 3-Way SLI even though the card sports the necessary SLI connection for it. The answer from ASUS is that because the 9800 GT Matrix shares some manufacturing options with other cards, the connectors were left on for easy transition. If someone were so inclined, they could likely modify the firmware in such a way to activate that second SLI connector and perhaps get a set of 9800 GTs working together.


turns out the other sli connector is a dud. there you go buddy.

edit: matrix is their flagship 9800gt, so im guessing if 3way dont work with the matrix, no way it'll work on the lower skus.
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 13, 2010 10:52:36 AM

Then keep reading about 3way 9800GT SLI. Asus wasn't the only one who made cards that could do it. Might not been official, but there were 9800GTs that could do it.
a b U Graphics card
November 13, 2010 9:11:28 PM

^ i can't find anything from google, apart from that suspicious chinese website benchmark, well feel free to post it here.

Asus wasn't the only one who made cards that could do it. said:
Asus wasn't the only one who made cards that could do it.


and it seems obvious that you're not reading, they made that card with 2 sli connectors but they never made a 9800gt that can do tri-sli. is that really too hard to understand?

oh so yeah another aib might've made one with 2 sli connectors, are you sure that both of them are working??

OFFICIALLY 3-Way SLI IS NOT SUPPORTED BY 9800gt, take a moment to let it sink in........there... okay?

i'm sorry but ima call BS on your comparison. :|
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 14, 2010 3:21:25 AM

I was going to find the post I made to I think MM where I linked a bunch of tri SLI 9800GTs, but I now see you wouldn't believe it. All those companies made cards with two sets of SLI fingers because they felt like it. I'll list what I can, but so far it isn't much.

Doing a search of the forums I can name some people who also have claimed this.

Doomsdaydave11 - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/254933-28-pentiumd-20...

Jitpublisher - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/257410-33-dual-9800gt...

Hatman - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/248899-33-9800gx2-880... He writes several times in that thread. There is a chart he made.

Quote:
9800GT = 8800GT with Tri-Sli
9800GTX = 8800GTS 512 with Tri-Sli
9800GX2 = 2x.. 8800GTS 512


RodneySB - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/257757-33-matching-vi...

Quote:
***9800GT like the HD 4850 is an over-clockers dream. 9800GT is $35 cheaper per unit and the ability to have two and even three in a system


I'm sure myself and all these people are wrong right? For something more official, does this work?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/248818-33-geforce-980...

I'll keep scanning the forums, perhaps I'll be able to find SOMETHING you might believe.
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 14, 2010 3:32:42 AM

Gone a bit off the GTX500 series topic :lol: 

To the OP, I think the 560 will be the 460 with all cores enabled. Should be an excellent card.

As for the 570, no clue. A 580 with 32 cores disabled would be a 480, with ever so slightly better power consumption (in other words, completely pointless) - Unless it just takes over as an identical replacement as the remaining 480's disappear. The 560 (if a fully enable 460) should easily beat the 470.
a b U Graphics card
November 14, 2010 5:07:18 AM

4745454b said:


I'm sure myself and all these people are wrong right? For something more official, does this work?

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/248818-33-geforce-980...

I'll keep scanning the forums, perhaps I'll be able to find SOMETHING you might believe.



you call that official? were you dropped on your head or something?? you could've at least check the date on it and count the months before the 9800gt actually hit the market (june or july 2008?).


the link on that link links out to a speculation link to another speculation link, wherein the OFFICIAL NVIDIA SPEC contradicts. 9800gt on nvidia' official spec sheet says otherwise, even ASUS, the brand you've been claiming to have done so says it doesn't.

and you're not surprised none of the reputable tech websites ever done a 3-way 9800gt sli review?

so we should believe some thread poster here than the actual nvidia spec sheet. now that's fun.




a b U Graphics card
November 14, 2010 5:17:35 AM

oh and last parting words.

* if to you NVIDIA's own OFFICIAL spec sheet is not official enough, wherein OFFICIAL comes in a form of message board post, then well done, you've succeeded in life.

* try typing "9800gt review" on google and check how many cards sports 2 sli connectors.

* stop spreading misinformation.
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 14, 2010 6:38:56 AM

I agree this is now way of topic, my final post on the matter.

http://pden.zotac.com/index.php?page=shop.product_detai...

Quote:
NVIDIA SLI technology enables up to three ZOTAC GeForce-series (3-way SLI support varies by model) graphics cards in one system for up to 280-percent performance gains.


I agree that the 9800GT probably doesn't have "official" support from Nvidia for tri SLI, but by looking at what I've posted so far there does seem to be a lot of 9800GTs out there that can do it. I bet if I took the time to go through youtube I'll be able to find someone with a video of having it. I'm not sure why you're so concerned about official things from Nvidia. Think of the Galaxy 9600GSO which could unlock into an 8800GTX. I'm sure thats not on any official lists from Nvidia. Doesn't mean the card didn't exist.

I think the OP poses an interesting point. If the 580 is what the GTX480 should have been, how do you disable groups and not have identical performance? It won't be quite that bad because they found a way to increase clock speeds by quite a bit. So disabling one cluster should still be faster then a GTX480. An interesting idea on the GTX560 as well. I personally would have called it the GTX490, and found a way to do a full dual GTX460 and call it the GTX495.

Anyone else starting to worry about how fast we are naming cards? Next gen for AMD will be the 7k series, which "they" have already done. At this rate in about two years we'll be at the 9 series all over again.
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2010 4:32:57 AM

I agree that the 9800GT probably doesn't have "official" support from Nvidia for tri SLI, but by looking at what I've posted so far there does seem to be a lot of 9800GTs out there that can do it. said:
I agree that the 9800GT probably doesn't have "official" support from Nvidia for tri SLI, but by looking at what I've posted so far there does seem to be a lot of 9800GTs out there that can do it.


i dunno, i just can't help it. the images, if you actually believe the link you posted, features a 9800gt with only 1 SLI connector.

you can't even understand the statement you quoted, its the general term "SLI" being defined there.

feel free to pm me if you actually found a working "official" 9800gt 3-way setup.

* stop using the word official as it is unpleasant if it comes from your posts.
a c 271 U Graphics card
a c 168 Î Nvidia
November 17, 2010 4:38:32 AM

4745454b said:
I think the OP poses an interesting point. If the 580 is what the GTX480 should have been, how do you disable groups and not have identical performance? It won't be quite that bad because they found a way to increase clock speeds by quite a bit. So disabling one cluster should still be faster then a GTX480. An interesting idea on the GTX560 as well. I personally would have called it the GTX490, and found a way to do a full dual GTX460 and call it the GTX495.

Anyone else starting to worry about how fast we are naming cards? Next gen for AMD will be the 7k series, which "they" have already done. At this rate in about two years we'll be at the 9 series all over again.

Could you elaborate on that a bit more please.
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2010 5:21:52 AM

JackNaylorPE said:
Welcome to the wonderful world of marketing ..... when was it exactly that 1 GB transformed from 1024 MB to 1000 MB ? :) 


Giga has always been 1000Mega. The wonderful world of binary multiples turned it into 1024.
a c 164 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
November 17, 2010 6:15:21 AM

Quote:
Could you elaborate on that a bit more please.


Sure, and this should be easy. Take a GTX580, and disable one cluster/whatever Nvidia calls it. How does this "GTX570" have performance any different then a GTX480? They would have identical specs, only the clock speeds would/could be different. Nvidia can either start their practice of rebranding all over again, or we will have an entire generation of only one card. As I said earlier the GTX580 should have been called the GTX490, while their dual GPU card is the GTX495. Save the GTX5xx for when they actually have a new line.
!