7800GTX 512MB Coming out!!!!

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Originally posted by: crazydingo
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... .

We may be referring two different groups of people here. One group attacks in packs and it cant differentiate between BS & la-la land. :roll:

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?

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.

I still stick by that post of mine. If 490/1500 clock is true:
1. Nvidia would have to use a dual-slot cooler (Only anomaly is evga that offers a single-slot card but it is clocked 490/1300.)
2. Give it a different name since it performs considerably better than the 430/1200 256MB GTX. (I havent seen any card ATI or Nvidia that is 60/300MHz faster with a same tag)
How hard is that to understand? :roll:

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo
I still stick by that post of mine. If 490/1500 clock is true:
1. Nvidia would have to use a dual-slot cooler (Only anomaly is evga that offers a single-slot card but it is clocked 490/1300.)
2. Give it a different name since it performs considerably better than the 430/1200 256MB GTX. (I havent seen any card ATI or Nvidia that is 60/300MHz faster with a same tag)
How hard is that to understand? :roll:

Still stick by that post of yours. We still don't know what you meant by it. Is it that you believe it impossible for a GTX to hit those clocks with faster memory? Or you do believe that it is possible? Which is it?

1. Actually, I still think they might be able to get away with a single slot copper cooler seeing how they can use aluminum for 490/1300.
2. HIS graphics card company has been well known to offer highly overclocked (well over factory spec) ATI cards and are still called by their same model name.

And it's only 60/150MHz faster.

Not hard to understand after we decipher the code.

 

[CP5670]

A dual slot cooler would be very nice anyway if it's the Quadro 4500 cooler.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: CP5670
A dual slot cooler would be very nice anyway if it's the Quadro 4500 cooler.

I wouldn't mind a dual slot cooler at all. Heck, a lot of people are putting NV5 rev.3's on their GT's GTX's anyway. That Quadro cooler looks real tough.....! I was going to buy an NV5 cooler, but my temps are so low with the stock cooler that I don't even feel it is anywhere near necessary. For me anyways. I don't o/c at all.

 

[will889]

A 512MB 7800GTX would be the perfect card for those that are running S754 PCIe mothrboards without SLI. One killer card.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Still stick by that post of yours. We still don't know what you meant by it. Is it that you believe it impossible for a GTX to hit those clocks with faster memory? Or you do believe that it is possible? Which is it?.

Did I suggest GTX cant clock that high?

I'm saying expecting a 490/1500 GTX from Nvidia is over-the-top. It will either be clocked that high and have a different name or it will have the same clocks.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
1. Actually, I still think they might be able to get away with a single slot copper cooler seeing how they can use aluminum for 490/1300.
2. HIS graphics card company has been well known to offer highly overclocked (well over factory spec) ATI cards and are still called by their same model name.

And it's only 60/150MHz faster.

Not hard to understand after we decipher the code.

1. Nvidia usually keeps some headroom. Using a single-slot cooper cooler (evga's example) and hitting 490/1500 leaves very little headroom.
2. HIS is a partner, just like evga, bfg etc. They dont make up the SKU (GTX, GT, Ultra).

I wouldnt call a difference of 60/150MHz as "only". A difference of 50/50MHz warranted the name to change from 6800 GT to 6800 Ultra.

 

[nitromullet]

Did I suggest GTX cant clock that high?

That's just it... Yes, you did... You just later backtracked once you realized that your statement was absurd.

Go back and re-read the other thread:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1713465&enterthread=y

There is absolutely no mention of the naming to be used for the card prior to your post.

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

How did you expect that statement to be taken...? Not to mention the fact that if that wasn't what you meant, then why didn't you just say that you felt that NV would save the faster clockspeeds for an "Ultra" card instead of going off on the your dual slot cooling and what was and was not standard tangent?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Still stick by that post of yours. We still don't know what you meant by it. Is it that you believe it impossible for a GTX to hit those clocks with faster memory? Or you do believe that it is possible? Which is it?.

Did I suggest GTX cant clock that high?

I'm saying expecting a 490/1500 GTX from Nvidia is over-the-top. It will either be clocked that high and have a different name or it will have the same clocks.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
1. Actually, I still think they might be able to get away with a single slot copper cooler seeing how they can use aluminum for 490/1300.
2. HIS graphics card company has been well known to offer highly overclocked (well over factory spec) ATI cards and are still called by their same model name.

And it's only 60/150MHz faster.

Not hard to understand after we decipher the code.

1. Nvidia usually keeps some headroom. Using a single-slot cooper cooler (evga's example) and hitting 490/1500 leaves very little headroom.
2. HIS is a partner, just like evga, bfg etc. They dont make up the SKU (GTX, GT, Ultra).

I wouldnt call a difference of 60/150MHz as "only". A difference of 50/50MHz warranted the name to change from 6800 GT to 6800 Ultra.

Can anyone here explain to me why dingo adds in these little extra's all the time? This is what we mean. You are hardly ever consistent and cannot stick to a subject very often from one post to the next. Causing confusion and misinterpretation. When did "headroom" come into play here? We are talking about 490/1500. I think your arguing points just for the sake of not agreeing with anyone ever. A copper single slot cooler can handle 490/1500 if an aluminum single slot cooler can handle 490/1300. I don't have much doubt there.

We are not attacking you dude. Just trying to explain why we can't properly communicate with you if you're not CLEAR about what you are saying. It's like you are thinking of a full sentence in your head, but only post part of it and we have to figure out the rest.

 

[Kalessian]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I think your arguing points just for the sake of not agreeing with anyone ever.

That's certainly how it comes across, and it has always bothered me.

It may not be the case - but I remember something about Dave Chapelle dressing up as a cop, then getting upset when people thought he was actually a cop.

EDIT: Then when you try to go further into detail, it's either along the lines of "wow nv lover" or somthing like "your violent attitude proves you are inferior" or something.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet

Did I suggest GTX cant clock that high?

That's just it... Yes, you did... You just later backtracked once you realized that your statement was absurd.

Go back and re-read the other thread:

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1713465&enterthread=y

There is absolutely no mention of the naming to be used for the card prior to your post.

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

How did you expect that statement to be taken...? Not to mention the fact that if that wasn't what you meant, then why didn't you just say that you felt that NV would save the faster clockspeeds for an "Ultra" card instead of going off on the your dual slot cooling and what was and was not standard tangent?

I need not reread my own posts. Maybe YOU should read the thread TITLE. It has 7800 ULTRA (the name) in it. :roll: If you ignore that, just read the first post and admit your mistake.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Can anyone here explain to me why dingo adds in these little extra's all the time? This is what we mean. You are hardly ever consistent and cannot stick to a subject very often from one post to the next. Causing confusion and misinterpretation. When did "headroom" come into play here? We are talking about 490/1500. I think your arguing points just for the sake of not agreeing with anyone ever. A copper single slot cooler can handle 490/1500 if an aluminum single slot cooler can handle 490/1300. I don't have much doubt there.

What extras are you talking about? Headroom is like a safety margin. Nvidia doesnt clock it that high. Ask Rollo or any other Nvidia fan for that matter. How hard is that to understand? How convenient that you didnt respond to point #2.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
We are not attacking you dude. Just trying to explain why we can't properly communicate with you if you're not CLEAR about what you are saying. It's like you are thinking of a full sentence in your head, but only post part of it and we have to figure out the rest.

I dont want to spoon feed anybody. If you keep assuming the other half of my post, then I'm not the one to blame. :roll:

 

[lifeguard1999]

Getting back to the topic at hand...

It is well known that the 7800GTX could handle 512MB of memory since that is what the Quadro 4500 is. I do not think that it will be clocked higher. Instead, NVidia will release just a 7800 GTX with more memory. I think that they are counting on ATI not being able to deliver the x1800XT in quantity.

As we all know, most video cards sold are not the top of the line GT/GTX/XL/XT, but are the midrange cards (~$200). Again, NVidia is already delivering (6600GT) and is rumored to have something else waiting in the wings.

Next spring, NVidia will have their refresh with higher clocks.

ATI has done great on the performance level. Once they lick the supply problem, they will be in a good position.

 

[nitromullet]

I need not reread my own posts. Maybe YOU should read the thread TITLE. It has 7800 ULTRA (the name) in it.

ok, here you go... From the other thread:

Originally posted by: Rollo
Interesting news, not entirely unexpected. We knew the 512s were coming, and that several vendors are already sell 490/1300 GTXs.

I'm thinking that a 490/1400-1500 GTX with 512 of RAM would be a very nice card indeed.

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

Its waste arguing with you since you are intent on taking the attacking approach. Besides arguing over unannounced, unreleased products is a waste. (speculations) :laugh:

Now from this thread:

Did I suggest GTX cant clock that high?

Clearly, yes, you did...

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
ok, here you go... From the other thread:

Originally posted by: Rollo
Interesting news, not entirely unexpected. We knew the 512s were coming, and that several vendors are already sell 490/1300 GTXs.

I'm thinking that a 490/1400-1500 GTX with 512 of RAM would be a very nice card indeed.

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

Its waste arguing with you since you are intent on taking the attacking approach. Besides arguing over unannounced, unreleased products is a waste. (speculations) :laugh:

Now from this thread:

Did I suggest GTX cant clock that high?

Clearly, yes, you did...

Really ? Read again. I was responding to ZobarS.... not Rollo.

This is a perfect example of nitro taking things out of context. Whats next ?

You didnt accept that Ultra was mentioned earlier in that thread. How many more mistakes will you make nitro? :roll:

 

[nitromullet]

Really ? Read again. I was responding to ZobarS.... not Rollo.

This is a perfect example of nitro taking things out of context. Whats next ?

You didnt accept that Ultra was mentioned earlier in that thread. How many more mistakes will you make nitro?

Funny, because Rollo is the only one that mentioned 490/1400-1500... So, you apparenlty were reading ZobarStyl's mind...

Here is the post that immediatley precedes your own from ZobarStyl... He seems to think you don't make much sense either, but more importantly, he doesn't mention anything about 490/1500. He does mention "wishful thinking" though. Maybe I gave you too much credit thinking that you were responding to two previous posts with one statement.

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl

Originally posted by: crazydingo
I dont think AA performance will get a boost just by the extra memory. I depends on AA algorithms.

As for the XTPE part, the XTs overclock very well. 625/1500 clocks is conservative.

*EDIT* I read the article and it looks like bit-tech is doing a fair amount of guess work. Extrapolating Inq's comments and introduction of a new gpu (NV42) isnt that concrete either.

Whether or not it's true, neither one of your former points makes sense. There's no evidence whatsoever that XT's can overclock well: extreme cooling only got 865 (vs GTX's that have hit 810, you do the math) and DH got artifacts past 10% o/c. That's not exactly overclocking 'very well' considering GTX's are sold at ~15% o/c's with full factory warranties. Your wishful thinking and reality are two distinct and very seperate things here.

As for your first point, you don't seem to be paying much attention. Go read the indepth performance article on AT, and you'll see that while yes, ATi's AA algorithm is better, the XL with its 33% slower RAM than XT loses a lot of AA performance comparatively. You can't honestly say that memory speed isn't a very important factor for the performance of these cards. Why else do you think the GTX wins almost all non-AA tests but loses with AA? You don't think a 25% increase in memory speeds has anything to do with that?

edit: You can't keep referencing XL's overclocking abilities and pretending that has anything to do with XT's O/C's. Do the words 'speed binning' mean anything to you?

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
Funny, because Rollo is the only one that mentioned 490/1400-1500... So, you apparenlty were reading ZobarStyl's mind...

Here is the post that immediatley precedes your own from ZobarStyl... He seems to think you don't make much sense either, but more importantly, he doesn't mention anything about 490/1500. He does mention "wishful thinking" though. Maybe I gave you too much credit thinking that you were responding to two previous posts with one statement.

Ofcourse why would he agree with me ? He's not neutral. Figures. :roll:

Its normal for an X1800 XL to oc to 575 just like the GTX can oc to 590. Zobar... referred to XL's oc as "wishful thinking" and using the same logic I implied the other half. At which point you and others threw the hissy fit, apparently you are still doing so.

Just own up to your mistakes or drop it.

 

[nitromullet]

So, wait... Lemme get this straight... you put Rollo's words into ZobarStyl's mouth, and the rest of us were just supposed to know that you weren't actually replying to Rollo's posts a few posts up, but that you were "using logic" to refute something that ZobarStyl never even said?

Ok, well you can now count me as one of the people who can't differentiate between your BS and your la-la land... The line has gotten pretty blurry and neither your BS or la-la land make any sense.

 

[crazydingo]

Ok, in lame-man's terms just because some people dont get it:

1. Zobar says XTs dont oc.
2. I say they do.
3. Rollo says they dont and wants a 490/1500 GTX
4. Zobar says XTs dont oc and its "wishful thinking".
5. I reply saying that its the same as wishing for 490/1500 ..

Do you get it now?

And you still dont accept your mistakes.

 

[Azkarr]

I didn't read many of the posts here, but I think 512 MB using the same design won't help too much, just like with the X800XL and 6800 Ultra. But since the GPU has 24 pipes, I'm not exactly sure.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo
Ok, in lame-man's terms just because some people dont get it:

1. Zobar says XTs dont oc.
2. I say they do.
3. Rollo says they dont and wants a 490/1500 GTX
4. Zobar says XTs dont oc and its "wishful thinking".
5. I reply saying that its the same as wishing for 490/1500 ..

Do you get it now?

And you still dont accept your mistakes.

Even if I didn't get it, the mods sure just did. I told you. I'm not playing anymore. Every single insult and bait you produce goes to the mods.

 

[Pabster]

Yippee!!! Now I can't wait to get my hands on a 512MB 7800GTX. :thumbsup: to nVidia.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Even if I didn't get it, the mods sure just did. I told you. I'm not playing anymore. Every single insult and bait you produce goes to the mods.

Bait? Insults? For christs sake I'm explaining my post as clearly as possible just because people are taking it out of context and accusing me.

And you should start taking your own advice and stop stalking my posts & threatening me.

 

[BenSkywalker]

So because I dont agree, Im an idiot?

I never said you were an idiot in any way. You can't honestly expect anyone to believe you do not recognize the clear superiority of nV's multi GPU solution as of right now.

So how can it be superior? Answer: We dont know yet. The price alone could make it a poor option.

It is proven to work at acceptable resolutions and refresh rates. We know in theory that the ATi parts should be capable of this, but we have yet to be able to confirm this. In reality Crossfire is inferior to a single ATi board in most respects in terms of the currently available solutions(ad by that I mean that a Crossfire 850xt setup is inferior so a singe 850xt).

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.

Readings using a thermal probe have nothing to do with the drivers, and they are quite a bit higher then the GTX. I really don't care, I have my XIII case to deal with heat, but a 90nm part clocked that high is going to be throwing quite a bit of heat.

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.

Where did he say he was comparing the GTX to the XT exactly?

Even if they are the same speed, presumably the vendors already factory OCing (XFX, Leadtek, Asus, EVGA, BFG) will continue to do so.

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..

Have to say I'm impressed, nV just keeps taking it to ATI- the resulting competition can only benefit all in the long run.

This thread is about the GTX, were you thread crapping or trolling?

 

[SolMiester]

Whatever guys, anyone knows Nvidia has always been the leader and ATI plays catch up EVERYTIME, when they can produce a card that is. Nvidia stole the ball from ATI when they bought out 3DFX, ATI then thought they would fill the gap left by the Voodoo, only there drivers and hardware were never as good, fullstop! Call me a fanboy, I dont care, I have been buying card since Diamond Virge LOL. Our WS all had issues in there day with ATI graphic chip and I swore then I would never buy one. period.

Thats my blag over, sorry...lol

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Even if I didn't get it, the mods sure just did. I told you. I'm not playing anymore. Every single insult and bait you produce goes to the mods.

Bait? Insults? For christs sake I'm explaining my post as clearly as possible just because people are taking it out of context and accusing me.

And you should start taking your own advice and stop stalking my posts & threatening me.

I am part of this conversation am I not? It's not like I go looking for your comments. They are plentiful everywhere we go in video. Your "lame-man" comment did not go unheard. If you behaved yourself in the first place, there would be no quotes going to the mods and hence you won't feel threatened. See a pattern?

 

[Keysplayr]

Ok, apologies from me to Lifeguard1999. Sorry for the OT, I have just had it with the baiting and sudden innocence.

So when is this new GTX due? Any definite dates besides this source? The article says Nvidia will have about 3 weeks advantage over ATI's XT release. Which tells me that it could be anywhere from now, to November 5th seeing that the XT has been delayed til November 20th.