Nvidia GeForce 9800 GX2 Review
Table of contents
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Voodoo 6 5500?
- 3. HybridPower
- 4. Specifications
- 5. The Review
- 6. Flight Simulator X
- 7. Unreal Tournament III
- 8. Call Of Duty 4
- 9. Test Drive Unlimited
- 10. Crysis
- 11. World In Conflict
- 12. Supreme Commander
- 13. Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
- 14. Power Consumption
- 15. Noise
- 16. Conclusions
- 17. Summary
- 18. Performance Roundup
We received a testing sample of Nvidia's GeForce 9800 GX2 a few days ago and are able to report our test findings today. The card is not quite ready for prime time. For example, the drivers provide such poor performance that Quad SLI benchmarks had to be postponed. But, we are ready to report on our findings in other areas.
Nvidia 9800 GX2 manufactured by Point of View
Nvidia's objective with the GeForce 9800 GX2 is simple, as with all very high end cards. The company wants to take back the coveted title of the most powerful 3D card that NVIDIA surprisingly lost by a small margin when ATI's Radeon 3870 X2 came out. It doesn't seem natural, even today, to build a card on two mainstream chips. Yet, as we've noted before, it's a design that has some advantages from a production point of view.
(Compare Prices on nVidia GeForce Video Cards)
We aren't the only ones to take this position. NVIDIA's CEO himself stated last month that he was convinced the GeForce 8800 GTX remained the most powerful card and that a single GPU board was the best approach, though if a dual-GPU board was the fastest in the world, it would be accepted. Is that the case with the GeForce 9800 GX2?
Related Stories :
- Nvidia GeForce 9800 GTX Review
- Nvidia intros dual-GPU card Geforce 7950 GX2
- GeForce GTX 650 Ti Review: Nvidia's Last Graphics Card For 2012
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 And 660 Review: Kepler At $110 And $230
- GeForce GTX 660 Ti Review: Nvidia's Trickle-Down Keplernomics
- Nvidia GeForce GT 640 Review: Cramming Kepler Into GK107
- GeForce GTX 690 Review: Testing Nvidia's Sexiest Graphics Card
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 Core Review: GF110 On A Diet
- The Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Review: Take Off Your Ti
- Nvidia GeForce GTX 590 3 GB Review: Firing Back With 1024 CUDA Cores
This author continues to refer to ATI as AMD in multiple articles. Not only does this bring into question this author's competence, it also causes me to question the accuracy of all articles on Tom's Hardware since the editors have overlooked such a blatant error.
I am wondering about your competence. What does it matter if he refers to the parent company of ATI. If you aren't aware or have been MIA from the tech world in the last year. AMD owns ATI at a large 5.4 billion dollar so far debt that has yet to help my AMD shares.
I think you owe an apology to the site, dwfresch. When was the last time you visited www.ati.com and what did you first notice?
honestly, i know amd owns ati, but the two are totally seperate entities. the product solutions for one are different and when i talk about graphics card, i refer to them as ATI or NVIDIA, rather than AMD and Intel. If I stood up in front of you trying to convince you to gain our market share and talk to you about our products, im not going to say "The new AMD Radeon HD 3800 Series" because its NOT AMD, its ATI. And if i make simple stupid errors like that, how do you know that the rest of my information is right? My facts on resolution, memory bus, core speed, may all be just as wrong as getting the ACTUAL COMPANY NAME THAT PRODUCED THE PRODUCT wrong. Attention to detail gentleman. Having 200 cars isnt the same as having 500. Having a Mayback Exelero isnt the same as a Kia Rio. The LAPD is not the NYPD. Get the drift? Thank you
Its AMD NOT ATI, and I think the above comment has lost the point completely tbh.
aww yer ana a 550watt power supply
listen what is the best value for money graphics card that can play crysis cuz im upgrading with a 64 bit 3.06 gig hert processoer asus p5n sli and a gforce 7600GT
so yer i dont wanna spend grands on my rig id b happy with a rig thats 80% up dere with the market cuz getting 100% up with the market is to expensive