Last message on previous page:
I wonder if it is something with the G92 architecture that does not allow  
more that 256 bit of mem. bus ...  
 
i mean i hate just 256 bit mem bus in this card  ...  

I actually think a 256 bit bus is not such a bad idea.  Sure 512 is more lanes, but faster memory can prevent bottlenecks. Even the next-gen much-faster ati-RV770 will have a 256 bit bus with much faster GDDR5 memory. Did you notice a SATA connection is a whole lot faster than the old parallel printer connection? (It's not that simple)
Yes, I also think the g92 has some problems and some bottlenecks, but I don't think the bus is one of them.
 
BTW, I'll finally stop calling AMD graphic cards ATI cards after they finally make a 8800GTX killer.

Nvidia has a huge lead with their 8800GTX and they made lots of cash. I wonder what kinds of problems nVidia can be having now??
Edit:  I'm just speaking about nVidia in general. Not about problems with Intel, x86, etc..
But yes, Intel has some serious manufacturing and R&D capability. I'll be scared to..

Thats the question. To me, to wait on the G200 release only denies it the benefit of the testing grounds, us. heheh

 
So the reviewer thinks that a card released as 9800GTX being faster than 8800GTX by just 7% is very good performance?
Looking at the performance recap page the 8800GTS 512 is about 10% slower than 9800GTX, how is that supposed to put it out of the running? Have you considered the current pricing?
MSI NX8800GTS 512M OC GeForce 8800GTS (G92) 512MB - $229.99 ($199.99 after $30.00 Mail-In Rebate)
EVGA 768-P2-N831-AR GeForce 8800GTX 768MB - $339.99 ($289.99 after $50.00 Mail-In Rebate)
PNY XLR8 VCG98GTXXPB GeForce 9800 GTX(G92) 512MB - $329.99

i think nvidia is pissed. They released tooo powerful a card like the 8800gtx and ati couldnt compete against it...even after a year. I think nvidia is taunting Ati, waiting till they release a good card and boom they got better. Just like the 3870 was a great card until the 8800gt arrived.

I just dont see how this is even profitable for Nvidia. If I had a 8800GTX or Ultra(I have a GT), Unless you seriously have that much money to throw away, why on earth would you get a 9800 (yes even the GX2) for seriously what amounts to a few extra frames.  All I see them making money off of here, are people with older systems just now upgrading, or people that just NEED to have the latest model.  They arent going to make the money off the "sensible" people that already have an 8 series card.  Possibly with the exception of those with the earlier gts.

And a few LESS frames with AA/AF enabled.  No thanks.  And the GX2 at $600+, no thanks again.
 
But as has been pointed out, it's a 9 and 9 > 8 -- it'll sell well with the OEMs who will try (and in most cases succeed) to dupe the consumer who can follow the logic 9 > 8, but when you start talking about AA/AF the consumer gets glassy eyed.

If you do a little digging on Jen-Hsun Huang you should be able to see what his plans are for nVidia:
 
Exercises options (March '08)
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/200 [...] 07032.html
 
Does NOT like dual-GPU graphics cards (Feb '08)
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nvi [...] 8793.shtml
 
Acquisition of Ageia (Feb '08)
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/14147
 
Says they are NOT working on a CPU (June '07)
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/ [...] on_a_cpu/1
 
Says the PS3 will last 10 years (July '06)
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/n [...] tory=10196
 
Plans to make the CPU obsolete (July '02)
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.07/Nvidia.html
 
Paints a pretty clear picture of where nVidia are going to me.

 
You give a 6 year scrapbook and don't share with us your paint brush, van Gogh?
 
Do tell us where nVidia are going.
 
That we don't already know.

A console, their OWN console -- not a host, but their own to go head to head with XBOX360, PS3, Wii, etc.
 
1.  They already have the necessary fabs/technology
2.  They've got strong relationships with game developers/publishers
3.  They know who to release a dev kit
4.  They've got what they need to produce a gaming processor units (notice not a CPU, but close) with Ageia's help
5.  They don't want to take on Intel, they can't period -- let Intel and AMD/ATI duke it out for GPU honors in shrinking niche market share
 
Who is "we"?  And what do you know about "we"?  I certainly have no clue what you already know.
 
What other option does nVidia have?  Their options are take on Intel in an ever shrinking market (PC gaming) or take on Microsoft and Sony in an ever increasing market.
 

I don't know why everybody is so upset about the 9800GTX.  I guess that's what happens when expectations are so high.  As far as I'm concerned, the 9800GTX is right on par with the 8800 Ultra for half the price (Ultra = $600  &  9800GTX = $300).  Seems like a good enough deal to me.  Just because it doesn't blow the 8800GTX out of the water doesn't mean its release was a bust.  
 
I originally bought two 8800GTS 512's for my new system, but amazon sent me the AR instead of the A3 by mistake & I wasn't able to get the $30 rebate.  So I decided to send them back & now I'm trying to make a decision between getting two 9800GTX with the option to buy another sometime in the near future, or getting one 9800GX2 with the option to get another one of those sometime soon.  
 
I really can't complain about the kind of performance two 9800GTX cards will give me for $600.  Especially with the idea of running a third pretty soon thereafter bringing the total to around $900.  However, if anybody thinks the better option is to get one 9800GX2 for now & ultimately end up with a couple of those, please let me know...  
 
Your input is much appreciated.....  
 
evga 790i ultra, intel E8400, 4GB OCZ 1600Mhz, zalman 9700 NT, kingwin mach1 1000w psu, cooler master cosmos S, LG blu-ray/HD DVD drive, zalman mfc2 controller, samsung lnt5271f 52" 1080p monitor, logitech diNovo keyboard & revolution mouse...