7800GTX 512MB Coming out!!!!

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: crazydingo

As far as we know this card won't have different clock speeds from its 256MB brother but this could easily change.

And I was attacked & flamed for suggesting the same. Rollo, keysplayer2003 & others. :roll:

No, you were flamed because you implied that it was not possible for NV to build a GTX with a core at 490 and memory equalling that of the memory on the X1800XT. Clearly a GTX core can run reliably at 490 (I have two of them), and obviouly NV could use the same RAM as ATI. I think all us explained this to you quite thoroughly at the time, do you get it now?

I gave my reasoning for that also. Will Nvidia clock high which means they need better yeilds = reducing profit margins or simply provide a similar clocked 512MB board requiring similar yeilds maintaining same big ass profit margins.

One vendor ocing to a specific clock does not make it an industry standard. Other vendors had to use different cooling solutions for the same clocks which I consider the industry standard.

Get it now ?

I understood your argument perfectly fine at that time, and I also noticed that your points changed as you were proven wrong. I believe it started out as you saying it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a GTX with the aforementioned specs, then when a few of us gave you examples of manufacturers already selling cards with cores at 490 with stock coolers, then you started in with all these conditions about what was and wasn't standard based on your own definition (as you still are). It's impossible to debate with someone who wants to change the parameters constantly.

 

[Dainas]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
This is true... I don't know why though. Even when set to Ultra, many of the textures in Q4 look like crap. What are they doing? Making the already hi-res textures higher and leaving the low-res ones low? Whatever they did, it doesn't make any sense IMO... The game doesn't look noticably better with Ultra selected, but it does play noticably worse.

Edit: I have 2GB of system RAM and I get stutters with Ultra selected, so I think that the 256MB of vRAM is the culprit.

Supposedly the only difference is between HQ/UQ is {compressed .DDS/uncompressed .TGA}

On the 512mb7800GTX, yeah I heard bout nvidia's purchase of alot of 1.26nm ram, hopefuly it will go into the new card, why would they buy it now at a higher price and then not use it for a card thats going to be released within 4months? I know planning ahead is a good idea, but it doesnt make sense in this context. BTW my card is reference cooler and does 490 fine, the ram gets iffy at times.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I understood your argument perfectly fine at that time, and I also noticed that your points changed as you were proven wrong. I believe it started out as you saying it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a GTX with the aforementioned specs, then when a few of us gave you examples of manufacturers already selling cards with cores at 490 with stock coolers, then you started in with all these conditions about what was and wasn't standard based on your own definition (as you still are). It's impossible to debate with someone who wants to change the parameters constantly.

You conveniently omitted the 7800 Ultra which was also being discussed in that thread. :roll: Omitting parameters is worse than changing them. Not that I changed my stance but given the overall topic in that thread, my post didnt warrant the attacks I recieved.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

And? We all know the 7800's are cheaper right now. Im questioning the "better multi gpu" comment, among others. And the "fact is" that we have yet to see a X1K Crossfire review yet.

Wouldn't the fact that there is no X1K Crossfire previews available yet, by default, indicate that the widely available for a long time nV multi GPU route is proven to be superior as of right now? I can only assume that it would take an idiot to come to any other conclusion.

For the record- I'm currently waiting to purchase an 1800XL Crossfire setup once they are a viable option- but that need not make me in to a blind raging fanatic.

So because I dont agree, Im an idiot? And then you go on to point me to the sticky with rules for no name calling? How hypocritical.

Perhaps you should read the post I quoted again. He suggested the 512mb 7800GTX would be the better option for multi GPU. No we dont have reviews out yet for XT crossfire, but guess what, we dont have any out for 512mb GTX's either. So how can it be superior? Answer: We dont know yet. The price alone could make it a poor option.

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Cooler? There arent any official drivers for the XT yet.

New supercool ATi drivers are going to chill that 600MHZ plus part to below that of the GTX- does that require phase changing drivers or simply water cooled? In all seriousness, there is no way they are going to get the heat levels of the 1800xt below that of the GTX. Not that I personally care in the least one way or the other.

As I said, temps are reported being 20c lower, with the beta ATi tools. We'll have to wait for real drivers to confirm, or deny this. What I was pointing out, that the alleged 90c temps might not be so true after all. Or maybe they are. Like you, I dont care either way. My 6800GT was 87c at load. One thing the XT does that the GTX doesnt do, is exhaust the hot air outside the case. Not keeping it in the case, making the overall case temp higher.

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Why dont you mention all the things that the XT has over the GTX?

Did I miss something, this thread seemed to be about the 7800GTX- not the 1xK series of parts.

Yes you did miss something. Rollo said he would get the GTX over the XT, then citing a few reasons why. I simply questioned them, and offered a different view.

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

So one sided as usual, sigh.

Can you avoid trolling please? The moderators have asked explicitly. Rollo made a comment about the GTX in a thread about the GTX- he didn't ask for the fanatics to p!mp the parts they are lusting in this thread about a nVidia board.

[/quote]

Its not trolling. His post is one sided, saying so is not trolling. Lising all good for one card, bad for the other, is one sided. But see the first part of my post for your hypocrical standpoint.

Dont expect another reply like this, they annoy me with all the extra work it takes...

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I understood your argument perfectly fine at that time, and I also noticed that your points changed as you were proven wrong. I believe it started out as you saying it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a GTX with the aforementioned specs, then when a few of us gave you examples of manufacturers already selling cards with cores at 490 with stock coolers, then you started in with all these conditions about what was and wasn't standard based on your own definition (as you still are). It's impossible to debate with someone who wants to change the parameters constantly.

You conveniently omitted the 7800 Ultra which was also being discussed in that thread. :roll: Omitting parameters is worse than changing them. Not that I changed my stance but given the overall topic in that thread, my post didnt warrant the attacks I recieved.

Does it matter what NV calls the card? You got flamed because you put out flamebait by claiming that it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a 7800 card (GTX or Ultra) that ran at 490 with with the same RAM clocks as the X1800XT. You bait the hook, someone might bite... The point then (as it is now) is that there are a number of GTX's being sold with cores running at 490MHz and that there is no reason why NV can't use the same RAM ATI is using on the XT... Why is this so difficult for you...?

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I understood your argument perfectly fine at that time, and I also noticed that your points changed as you were proven wrong. I believe it started out as you saying it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a GTX with the aforementioned specs, then when a few of us gave you examples of manufacturers already selling cards with cores at 490 with stock coolers, then you started in with all these conditions about what was and wasn't standard based on your own definition (as you still are). It's impossible to debate with someone who wants to change the parameters constantly.

You conveniently omitted the 7800 Ultra which was also being discussed in that thread. :roll: Omitting parameters is worse than changing them. Not that I changed my stance but given the overall topic in that thread, my post didnt warrant the attacks I recieved.

Does it matter what NV calls the card? You got flamed because you put out flamebait by claiming that it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a 7800 card (GTX or Ultra) that ran at 490 with with the same RAM clocks as the X1800XT. You bait the hook, someone might bite... The point then (as it is now) is that there are a number of GTX's being sold with cores running at 490MHz and that there is no reason why NV can't use the same RAM ATI is using on the XT... Why is this so difficult for you...?

Um, let me clear this again

People were lusting for a 7800 Ultra and a 512MB GTX clocked at 490/1500. I said the second one was wishful thinking keeping in mind the place for Ultra.

I didnt bait anyone, I just didnt go into virtual reality la-la land and wish for 10 different things from Nvidia.

Get it now? :roll: Be my guest and reread my posts in that thread. I was/am still making the same point. Only difference is people are now giving it a fair thought instead of attacking me.

 

[nRollo]

Ackmed:
It's hard to discuss the X1800XT stuff as it doesn't really exist yet, but here's why I stated nV's multi GPU seems better, based on what I've read:

1. ATI still using bolt on compositing chip because the GPU is not designed for multi GPU capability

2. Awkward dongle cable in back

3. nVidia has a year head start of retail units in place. Logically, they will have fewer driver issues, more tested profiles, etc..

4. Even if they review well, ATI/ULI (ALI) is not the industry standard multi gpu motherboards and still have to prove themselves in the field

5. Preliminary prerelease data on the X1800XT showed it to be hotter, not a good thing when doing multi gpu. It's also louder, which is a big deal to some.

6. Not to mention pricing issues. Unless you think that ATI is going to have a huge supply of these 25% higher clocked cores than the XLs they're barely getting to market?

7. Availability- it says in Anands article the XTs are supposed to be here the 5th- but now we're hearing more like the 20th? So can't they buy RAM or get yield on chips? Strange how it's now a month and a half after the "launch"?

Etc.

Anyway, as has been noted, this thread is about the 512MB GTX, which I think you'll be seeing at lots of retailers, in many brands, very soon. I'm very interested to see the clock on these beasts and how they compare with the MIA XT.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I understood your argument perfectly fine at that time, and I also noticed that your points changed as you were proven wrong. I believe it started out as you saying it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a GTX with the aforementioned specs, then when a few of us gave you examples of manufacturers already selling cards with cores at 490 with stock coolers, then you started in with all these conditions about what was and wasn't standard based on your own definition (as you still are). It's impossible to debate with someone who wants to change the parameters constantly.

You conveniently omitted the 7800 Ultra which was also being discussed in that thread. :roll: Omitting parameters is worse than changing them. Not that I changed my stance but given the overall topic in that thread, my post didnt warrant the attacks I recieved.

Does it matter what NV calls the card? You got flamed because you put out flamebait by claiming that it was "wishful thinking" that NV could produce a 7800 card (GTX or Ultra) that ran at 490 with with the same RAM clocks as the X1800XT. You bait the hook, someone might bite... The point then (as it is now) is that there are a number of GTX's being sold with cores running at 490MHz and that there is no reason why NV can't use the same RAM ATI is using on the XT... Why is this so difficult for you...?

Um, let me clear this again

People were lusting for a 7800 Ultra and a 512MB GTX clocked at 490/1500. I said the second one was wishful thinking keeping in mind the place for Ultra.

I didnt bait anyone, I just didnt go into virtual reality la-la land and wish for 10 different things from Nvidia.

Get it now? :roll: Be my guest and reread my posts in that thread. I was/am still making the same point. Only difference is people are now giving it a fair thought instead of attacking me.

Sorry, but I dropped out of that debate before you changed your stance for the second time, so I didn't read your about the Ultra and GTX possibilities. Your original "wishful thinking" post was in regards to potential clockspeeds on the X1800XT vs. the potential clockspeeds of the GTX, and then you changed it it so NV had to have a single slot cooler and what was a was not reference (apparenlty, you're part of some sort of standards review board). I think I dropped out when you informed us all that the eVGA 7800GTX KO was a dual slot card because it was at about that point that I realized that you didn't have a clue as to what you were talking about.

 

[blckgrffn]

Personally, I would love to see a 512 meg 7800GT with higher speed memory too, coming to market about $40-$50 more expensive than they current stock, making them $350-$400. I think at this point I would rather spend $400 for a GT with 512 megs of ram than than the same or a little more amount of money for the GTX 256 meg. Games like COD2 are going to need that much ram on a high performance card, and that GT would fit into my budget a lot better than any GTX...

I don't think that would be too unreasonable, I just wonder if Nvidia would do that as it might cut into their GTX sales.

Just my $.02.

 

[Cook1]

If you have a 256MB 7800GTX then what games would really benefit from a 512MB 7800GTX?

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
Sorry, but I dropped out of that debate before you changed your stance for the second time, so I didn't read your about the Ultra and GTX possibilities. Your original "wishful thinking" post was in regards to potential clockspeeds on the X1800XT vs. the potential clockspeeds of the GTX, and then you changed it it so NV had to have a single slot cooler and what was a was not reference (apparenlty, you're part of some sort of standards review board). I think I dropped out when you informed us all that the eVGA 7800GTX KO was a dual slot card because it was at about that point that I realized that you didn't have a clue as to what you were talking about.

"Dropping out" is stepping in at your convenience, make snide remarks and then conveniently "drop out". I was responding to three people at the time on different issues people assumed from my "wishful thinking" post.

The fact remains that you guys are experts in snow balling an issue.

 

[solofly]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/10/26/512mb_7800gtx_on_nov_7th/

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: biostud
personally I would wait for next generation before shelling out for 512Mb memory.

Agreed. I'm standing pat with my GTO2 until the next gen. of cards from NV comes out. I'll be on the market by then.

 

[moonboy403]

how much will the new gtx be priced at?
anyone?

 

[Rage187]

Originally posted by: moonboy403
how much will the new gtx be priced at?
anyone?

I'll venture a guess and say $549, hitting $499 within the first 2 weeks.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet
Sorry, but I dropped out of that debate before you changed your stance for the second time, so I didn't read your about the Ultra and GTX possibilities. Your original "wishful thinking" post was in regards to potential clockspeeds on the X1800XT vs. the potential clockspeeds of the GTX, and then you changed it it so NV had to have a single slot cooler and what was a was not reference (apparenlty, you're part of some sort of standards review board). I think I dropped out when you informed us all that the eVGA 7800GTX KO was a dual slot card because it was at about that point that I realized that you didn't have a clue as to what you were talking about.

"Dropping out" is stepping in at your convenience, make snide remarks and then conveniently "drop out". I was responding to three people at the time on different issues people assumed from my "wishful thinking" post.

The fact remains that you guys are experts in snow balling an issue.

Actually, I dropped out as soon as you had shown that you didn't know what you were talking about...

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: crazydingo
"Dropping out" is stepping in at your convenience, make snide remarks and then conveniently "drop out". I was responding to three people at the time on different issues people assumed from my "wishful thinking" post.

The fact remains that you guys are experts in snow balling an issue.

Actually, I dropped out as soon as you had shown that you didn't know what you were talking about...

Yeah believe what ever you want. :roll: Fact remains people like to gang up on newbs.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Rollo


I think a 490/1300 512MB GTX would be the card to get for Christmas, in light of the better multi gpu, cooler, smaller, 24 vs 16 pipes, etc..

We havent had a review for the X1k cards in Crossfire, so how can you say better multi GPU?

Cooler? There arent any official drivers for the XT yet. A beta version of ATi tools has a temp of about 20c lower than the drivers are giving. Perhaps its right, perhaps not. We dont know yet.

Smaller? They are the same length. Yes the XT is dual slot, the cards themselves are the same size.

24v16 pipes? Who cares? As anyone can see, the XT is very competitive with the GTX, being overall faster most of the time.

Why dont you mention all the things that the XT has over the GTX? So one sided as usual, sigh.

I am considering this a bait attempt Ackmed. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

As far as we know this card won't have different clock speeds from its 256MB brother but this could easily change.

And I was attacked & flamed for suggesting the same. Rollo, keysplayer2003 & others. :roll:

Must have been the way you said it. Normally I would not do such a thing if the information was presented in a mature and reasonable way.

 

[Keysplayr]

To All ATI fans, enthusiasts, fanatics alike:

Do not flame, bait, or hate nvidia fans for being enthusiastic about the 512MB 7800GTX.
There is no reason for this. NONE.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

As far as we know this card won't have different clock speeds from its 256MB brother but this could easily change.

And I was attacked & flamed for suggesting the same. Rollo, keysplayer2003 & others. :roll:

Must have been the way you said it. Normally I would not do such a thing if the information was presented in a mature and reasonable way.

I would have if I wasnt being attacked simultaneously by 3 or more people. Maybe next time you should give others some time to explain their posts/points.

 

[RampantAndroid]

Originally posted by: Amuro

Originally posted by: RampantAndroid
It will be clocked the same, I'll bet on it...esp since a single slot cooling solution is what everyone has wanted to see from nvidia as of late. If you want higher clock speeds, and the heatsink will do it for ya, go buy a VF700.

I got my GT up to 460MHz core, and negligible heat increases, with stock cooling.

Not that 512mb has any advntage right now....the previous 512 cards showed that...not even Far Cry used it...

Well, if you want to play Quake 4 @ ultra quality you need 512MB.

Hows that, Q4 is based on the ID soft Doom3 engine, right? Doom 3 sees NO difference between 256 and 512.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: crazydingo

As far as we know this card won't have different clock speeds from its 256MB brother but this could easily change.

And I was attacked & flamed for suggesting the same. Rollo, keysplayer2003 & others. :roll:

Must have been the way you said it. Normally I would not do such a thing if the information was presented in a mature and reasonable way.

I would have if I wasnt being attacked simultaneously by 3 or more people. Maybe next time you should give others some time to explain their posts/points.

I surely will. But it may help a bit to explain your posts/points in the very same post.
Just a suggestion.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: crazydingo
"Dropping out" is stepping in at your convenience, make snide remarks and then conveniently "drop out". I was responding to three people at the time on different issues people assumed from my "wishful thinking" post.

The fact remains that you guys are experts in snow balling an issue.

Actually, I dropped out as soon as you had shown that you didn't know what you were talking about...

Yeah believe what ever you want. :roll: Fact remains people like to gang up on newbs.

No they don't... But, they do like to call poeple on BS...

It isn't my job to try to figure out what you meant by your words, but your's to articulate yourself well enough to be understood. How is someone supposed to take this statement?

I'm not the one with the "wishful thinking" here: 490/1500 clocks ...

Most people (who speak English) would think you were pretty much saying that 490/1500 was wishful thinking... Is this not the case?

If you find that people often misunderstand you, maybe it's the way you communicate.... Just food for thought.

 

[Kalessian]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

It isn't my job to try to figure out what you meant by your words, but your's to articulate yourself well enough to be understood. How is someone supposed to take this statement?

True.

I'm still not sure of crazydingo's argument. To me, he's saying that a hypothetical 7800 512mb @ 500/1400 could not exist because 1) It would likely require dual-slot cooling and 2) It would preclude everyone else's hopes for an Ultra.

Which doesn't make any sense. Obviously, dual-slot is more than possible - ATi does it. And otherwise, just because some people called this hypothetical card a GTX and others called it an Ultra, doesn't mean we assume there will be a higher card.

Is it not possible that nvidia COULD release a 512MB GTX without an increase in clocks, as TheINQ suggests, and then LATER release our hypothetical card as an Ultra? What if they called it a Mega or a Super?