9800 GTX Reviews Thread

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
April 1st was the perfect day for this, considering the card is a joke

<snip>

He's 100% right.

Yes he is right, about the sour grapes that is.

How can these ATI supporters cry about the 9800GTX when ATI has had nothing even close to the 2 year old 8800GTX? ATIs top GPU is barely even a midrange card.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
April 1st was the perfect day for this, considering the card is a joke

<snip>

He's 100% right.

Yes he is right, about the sour grapes that is.

How can these ATI supporters cry about the 9800GTX when ATI has had nothing even close to the 2 year old 8800GTX? ATIs top GPU is barely even a midrange card.

:laugh::music:

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
April 1st was the perfect day for this, considering the card is a joke

<snip>

He's 100% right.

Yes he is right, about the sour grapes that is.

How can these ATI supporters cry about the 9800GTX when ATI has had nothing even close to the 2 year old 8800GTX? ATIs top GPU is barely even a midrange card.

So I guess this ati fanboy stuff is ok with the mods, but really a silly way to support a respin. Nice to see lower power consumption but the fancy multi-card stuff leaves me yawning.

 

[Keysplayr]

Crysis ver 1.2.1 (Using built in GPU benchmark)

Q6600 @ 2.4GHz (stock)
eVGA 790i Ultra SLI (stock speeds)
2GB DDR3 PC1600
2x9800GTX (SLI)
Driver: 174.74's
Direct X 10. Windows Vista 32 SP1


1600x1200
0xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: Very High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 23 Average: 34.2 Maximum: 42 (FRAPS ver 2.9.4)

1600x1200
2xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: Very High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 22 Average: 27.1 Maximum: 33 (FRAPS ver 2.9.4)

1600x1200
4xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: Very High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 14 Average: 19.7 Maximum: 24 (FRAPS ver 2.9.4)

1600x1200
0xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 26 Average: 43.1 Maximum: 66 (FRAPS ver 2.9.4)

1600x1200
2xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 22 Average: 37.7 Maximum: 56 (FRAPS ver 2.9.4)

1600x1200
4xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 18 Average: 27.2 Maximum: 37 (FRAPS ver 2.9.4)

 

[Anath]

why does everyone bench to crysis. I am tired of seeing reviews on crysis' performance. I would like to see more reviews on newer and better games. (no offense keys )

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Anath
why does everyone bench to crysis. I am tired of seeing reviews on crysis' performance. I would like to see more reviews on newer and better games. (no offense keys )

Give me a chance. Jeez.

 

[Piuc2020]

Originally posted by: Anath
why does everyone bench to crysis. I am tired of seeing reviews on crysis' performance. I would like to see more reviews on newer and better games. (no offense keys )

Newer? There is nothing newer than Crysis... at least nothing that's more demanding, every other game runs perfectly fine on these cards... Crysis is the best game to test new cards because it's just about the only game that fails to run at maximum settings on this cards.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Anath
why does everyone bench to crysis. I am tired of seeing reviews on crysis' performance. I would like to see more reviews on newer and better games. (no offense keys )

Basically there isn't a card that can play Crysis properly so people bench. All other games you can play the max settings without much trouble with any of the upper midrange cards.

 

[Hauk]

What do you think of the cooler Keys? Can you tell how many heatpipes it has? That slot on the pwm end, is it drawing air in hitting the caps?

 

[imachip]

Originally posted by: Piuc2020

Originally posted by: Anath
why does everyone bench to crysis. I am tired of seeing reviews on crysis' performance. I would like to see more reviews on newer and better games. (no offense keys )

Newer? There is nothing newer than Crysis... at least nothing that's more demanding, every other game runs perfectly fine on these cards... Crysis is the best game to test new cards because it's just about the only game that fails to run at maximum settings on this cards.

That's the unfortunate fact about PC gaming at the moment, the dire lack of games. Looking over the next 3-4 months, we have Rainbow 6: Vegas 2, Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect and.. That's about it!

I've questioned for the first time since getting an original Voodoo 3DFX card why I need to spend so much money on a gfx card and processor upgrade to pay so few new games. I hope this 'gaming alliance' will force more developers to create proper PC titles or at least match what comes out on a console (and I personally loathe consoles!). Ok, rant over....

 

[idiotekniQues]

looking at the benchies, id be hard pressed to justify the extra 100 bucks over an 8800GTS 512MB

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: batmang

ATi isn't losing THAT bad. They just need more cards in certain ranges. The 3870X2 is still a good buy IMO. It performs well for what your paying. I'm hoping their new cards bring the competition back.

The 9800GTX provides as good or better performance than the 3870X2. Plus it's cheaper and is not crippled by Crossfire.

i dont see this statement reflected in reviews at all. in fact i see the 3870x2 beating the 9800gtx more often than not, in crysis the 9800gtx wins but not by much.

i looked at the reviews on here that also show the 3870x2, and just to doublecheck i went to go look at the benchies on the 3870x2 review sites and compared it to the 8800gtx and 8800gts stats of which the 9800gtx barely beats mostly, and the 3870x2 consistently beat them quite well in most games, which leads me to believe your statement has little grounding in anything factual.

 

[HOOfan 1]

HardOCP had an answer for all the people complaining that they used too few games in their benchmarks. They basically said, other than Crysis, most of the $200+ cards now can max out and use AA even at high resolutions on most games out now. Right now is the first time I can think of that there isn't a game on the horizon making everyone itch to upgrade, although there is one that has been out for 4 months now that can do that. The next Id Engine doesn't look all that special. Will there be another Valve engine? Will there be another Lithtech engine?

 

[BFG10K]

man 9800gtx sli is sometimes slower than 8800 ultra sli. ugh what gives?

I'm not surprised given a single 9800 GTX is often slower than a single 8800 Ultra.

 

[BFG10K]

How can these ATI supporters cry about the 9800GTX when ATI has had nothing even close to the 2 year old 8800GTX? ATIs top GPU is barely even a midrange card

It?s not just ATi supporters though. nVidia supporters like me lament the fact we keep getting rehashes of the same thing and thus have nowhere to upgrade to.

i went to go look at the benchies on the 3870x2 review sites and compared it to the 8800gtx and 8800gts stats of which the 9800gtx barely beats mostly, and the 3870x2 consistently beat them quite well in most games, which leads me to believe your statement has little grounding in anything factual.

His performance comments were definitely off but he did have a point about Crossfire issues. HardOCP for example reported visible input lag on the 3870 X2 in Jericho despite having a higher framerate.

This is more evidence you can?t always trust framerate graphs from multi-GPU setups.

Will there be another Lithtech engine?

Project Origin I?d wager.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
April 1st was the perfect day for this, considering the card is a joke

<snip>

He's 100% right.

Yes he is right, about the sour grapes that is.

How can these ATI supporters cry about the 9800GTX when ATI has had nothing even close to the 2 year old 8800GTX? ATIs top GPU is barely even a midrange card.

:roll:

Whos talking about ATI? AMD is doing an even worse job, they cant even get a decent high end card out, but that is no excuse for this... disaster

For being named 9800GTX, it does even worse than the 5800FX did at the time compared to the previous gen, how can you take it seriously? Take off your green tinted glasses before posting here

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SteelSix
What do you think of the cooler Keys? Can you tell how many heatpipes it has? That slot on the pwm end, is it drawing air in hitting the caps?

The cooler is doing it's job well. It's the same cooler found on the 8800GTS512. Three heat pipes. The only difference I see is the longer shell to cover the longer PCB.

Each card is idling at 40-41C. Going to check load temps in a bit.
EDIT: Running Crysis bench I'm getting 63-64C at peak.
So, I think the coolers are more than adequate.

Temp Log for GPU1 and GPU2

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself


For being named 9800GTX, it does even worse than the 5800FX did at the time compared to the previous gen, how can you take it seriously? Take off your green tinted glasses before posting here

It's a top end card for $330! What did you expect? Buy 2 of em. Buy a GX2.

 

[v8envy]

GX2 is SLI. Two GTXes would also be SLI.

SLI has many drawbacks which are not present in single GPU solutions. There's more to gaming than running benchmarks.

Multi-GPU is a stop-gap hack not worthy of my system. Add in downgrading to an nvidia chipset motherboard (790i for $500, awesome. I want some of what nv's marketing department is smoking) and you can see how SLI is simply NOT an option for anyone who is not in the nv focus group. I wouldn't touch a sandwich card like the GX2 with your wallet.

The GTX is a disappointing, nearly imperceptible upgrade from a GTS, and a step back from the 1.5 year old Ultra. There is no other way to look at it. Like the 3870 at release it's a reasonable bang for the buck, but that's not how high end video cards are evaluated. If you bring in value for the $, the 9600GT or 8800 GTS are a far far far far far far far far far far better value.

It (and the GX2) fall flat on their faces at 25x16 with FSAA -- the only reason to have a high end GPU. The lower cards do fine with eye candy turned down. Nobody cares about running HL2 at 220 fps at 16x10. 150 is good enough.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Originally posted by: v8envy

Multi-GPU is a stop-gap hack not worthy of my system. Add in downgrading to an nvidia chipset motherboard (790i for $500, awesome. I want some of what nv's marketing department is smoking) and you can see how SLI is simply NOT an option for anyone who is not in the nv focus group. I wouldn't touch a sandwich card like the GX2 with your wallet.

Everybody has an opinion on this issue but there are many good cards available on the cheap that scale great in SLI. I debated going with a 9600GT, 8800GT, or a 8800 GTS SLI system before I decided to step up to a 9800GTX. Imo from reviews on this site and others the price of these various SLI setup is more than met by their performance.

And granted Asus charges $500 for their 790i mobo, but the reference model can be picked up for $350, and while it's not cheap with DDR3 memory, it seems a worthy upgrade for those who want a high-end SLI capable motherboard.

 

[v8envy]

Let me quote to you from Keys' benchmarking of Crysis a few posts up:


1600x1200
4xAA 0xAF
All advanced settings: High
Vsync: OFF

Minimum: 18 Average: 27.2 Maximum: 37 (FRAPS ver 2.9.

Now that's with * TWO * 9800GTX, and a 790i motherboard, at comparatively low res. And still can't handle Crysis.

If you think ~7 fps a worthy upgrade for $350 (cheapie 790 board), 2x $329 (2x 9800gtx) and $400 (4g of DDR3 ram) = over $1300, not including PSU upgrade or cost of shipping for RMAs once the nv chipset board fries itself or your ram.... more power to you. I happen to disagree.

SLI is a farce right now. It's not a good solution at high res (see: benchmarks at 25x16 with FSAA and AF enabled), and overkill for low res. The performance is higher than you can get with any single card, yes. But the cost is large in both dollars and drawbacks of the tech.

 

[CP5670]

SLI has many drawbacks which are not present in single GPU solutions. There's more to gaming than running benchmarks.

Multi-GPU is a stop-gap hack not worthy of my system. Add in downgrading to an nvidia chipset motherboard (790i for $500, awesome. I want some of what nv's marketing department is smoking) and you can see how SLI is simply NOT an option for anyone who is not in the nv focus group. I wouldn't touch a sandwich card like the GX2 with your wallet.

Even the benchmarks don't look that good if you examine them more carefully:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...y/geforce9800-gx2.html

Notice that the minimum framerates in a number of the games are no better than a single 512MB GTS, even when the averages shoot up. In some cases, the minimums are actually lower. I don't know it's getting bottlenecked by the memory amount/bandwidth or what, but this is not impressive at all. Those minimum drops are what you notice when actually playing games. On top of that, DX10 performance is still garbage across the board, with single digit minimums in a lot of cases.

I wouldn't consider anything multi-GPU anyway (given the various odd problems with vsync and microstuttering, and a general hassle in getting lesser known games to work properly), but in this case it falls flat even in the benchmarks, except in two or three games.

More sites need to start showing these minimums, and even Xbit strangely doesn't show them for some games. The averages shown in most other reviews aren't giving the whole picture here.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: v8envy
GX2 is SLI. Two GTXes would also be SLI.

SLI has many drawbacks which are not present in single GPU solutions. There's more to gaming than running benchmarks.

Multi-GPU is a stop-gap hack not worthy of my system. Add in downgrading to an nvidia chipset motherboard (790i for $500, awesome. I want some of what nv's marketing department is smoking) and you can see how SLI is simply NOT an option for anyone who is not in the nv focus group. I wouldn't touch a sandwich card like the GX2 with your wallet.

The GTX is a disappointing, nearly imperceptible upgrade from a GTS, and a step back from the 1.5 year old Ultra. There is no other way to look at it. Like the 3870 at release it's a reasonable bang for the buck, but that's not how high end video cards are evaluated. If you bring in value for the $, the 9600GT or 8800 GTS are a far far far far far far far far far far better value.

It (and the GX2) fall flat on their faces at 25x16 with FSAA -- the only reason to have a high end GPU. The lower cards do fine with eye candy turned down. Nobody cares about running HL2 at 220 fps at 16x10. 150 is good enough.

yup

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

nVidia just isn't executing well in 2008. .

umm.. its only march 2008.. what do u expect?

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

For being named 9800GTX, it does even worse than the 5800FX did at the time compared to the previous gen, how can you take it seriously? Take off your green tinted glasses before posting here

Incorrect. 5800 was slow and expensive.

9800 is faster and cheaper than ultra.