G92 taped out boys

[n7]

Originally posted by: jdoggg12

Originally posted by: n7
I'm really hoping for a huge upgrade from this 8800 GTX, as it really can't handle newer titles @ 2048x1536+.

God i hope you're kidding....

What's next? "wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh my 9800gtx wont run 7536244356348x9p86764685764 with 64AA smooth.... wahhhhhhhhhhhhh"

WTF?

There are many people out there running SLI or Crossfire, which means there is a market for a much better card than the 8800 GTX/Ultra.

I personally have no desire to run an SLI/CF disaster though, so i'm really hoping for a card that can handle UT3 multiplayer 2560x1600 maxed (all i want is 4x AA).

Heck, i'm willing to settle for 2048x1536 even, but i already know it's very unlikely a single card is gonna do that very well for UT3 online.

So pardon me, but just because you run a 1280x1024 display or something doesn't mean there isn't a need a for better cards.

I know it sounds bad, but the 8800 GTX ain't that good when you have a 2560x1600 display.

So yeah, i want better.
And i want better for less , since nV has been raking in the $$$ scamming us on the $600 GTXs, as anyone with any common sense can see they're likely marking them up 50% or more.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: jdoggg12

Originally posted by: n7
I'm really hoping for a huge upgrade from this 8800 GTX, as it really can't handle newer titles @ 2048x1536+.

God i hope you're kidding....

What's next? "wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh my 9800gtx wont run 7536244356348x9p86764685764 with 64AA smooth.... wahhhhhhhhhhhhh"

WTF?

There are many people out there running SLI or Crossfire, which means there is a market for a much better card than the 8800 GTX/Ultra.

I personally have no desire to run an SLI/CF disaster though, so i'm really hoping for a card that can handle UT3 multiplayer 2560x1600 maxed (all i want is 4x AA).

Heck, i'm willing to settle for 2048x1536 even, but i already know it's very unlikely a single card is gonna do that very well for UT3 online.

So pardon me, but just because you run a 1280x1024 display or something doesn't mean there isn't a need a for better cards.

I know it sounds bad, but the 8800 GTX ain't that good when you have a 2560x1600 display.

So yeah, i want better.
And i want better for less , since nV has been raking in the $$$ scamming us on the $600 GTXs, as anyone with any common sense can see they're likely marking them up 50% or more.

Well, look at it this way, you are the minority. Yes, the minority. Very few people run those resolutions compared to all the people running smaller displays that cannot display that high of a rez. That being said, the midrange market is where the money will be made.

 

[n7]

I will admit my perspective on video cards changed somewhat after getting the 3007WFP.

But considering how 1920x1200 is fast becoming the standard for enthusiasts, i don't think my desires are unreasonable.

Granted, 2560x1600 is still close to double that...

Assuming i like UT3 (i very likely will), i will pretty much pay whatever atrocious amount they want for a nice beast of an upgrade to my 8800 GTX, since that will potentially become my main game for the next couple years (like UT2k4 has been since it came out).

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: n7
I will admit my perspective on video cards changed somewhat after getting the 3007WFP.

But considering how 1920x1200 is fast becoming the standard for enthusiasts, i don't think my desires are unreasonable.

Granted, 2560x1600 is still close to double that...

Assuming i like UT3 (i very likely will), i will pretty much pay whatever atrocious amount they want for a nice beast of an upgrade to my 8800 GTX, since that will potentially become my main game for the next couple years (like UT2k4 has been since it came out).

That's up to you really. I'm just saying that companies can't bank on the 1 or 2 people like youself who have loads of money to burn up with the click of a mouse on newegg.com

Just kidding. I wish I could afford a new monitor myself.

 

[deeznuts]

I haven't PC gamed since Counterstrike years ago. That said, I just bought a 1920x1200 monitor, want to play native, and want a card that will handle Crysis. All eye-candy doens't need to be on, but I want it decent, I hope one of these refresh cards will accommodate that.

And not consume too much power.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Not sure why anyone thinks a totally new card would come out after only a year. Especially since they have no competition for the GTX and have had little reason to drop the price on it.

Well because Nvidia has said it?..and they have done it before (actually they have once had three generation on one year..)

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Rusin
(actually they have once had three generation on one year..)

Really so the 5xxx, 6xxx and 7xxx all came out in one year?

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Rusin
(actually they have once had three generation on one year..)

Really so the 5xxx, 6xxx and 7xxx all came out in one year?

I think he means the 2, 3 and 4 series. They all came out pretty close to each other. Hell, I don't even remember hearing much about the Geforce 3's. I went from GF2 MX to GF4 Ti4200. Now THAT was an upgrade.I could read the text in Black & White, being able to play above 640x480 - and it was SMOOTH!

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Not sure why anyone thinks a totally new card would come out after only a year. Especially since they have no competition for the GTX and have had little reason to drop the price on it.

Well because Nvidia has said it?..and they have done it before (actually they have once had three generation on one year..)

Ok, we get it. You want it to be true. Run with it. Enjoy.

 

[bryanW1995]

I'll be happy with just a 2950 pro...

 

[Rusin]

Ok, we get it. You want it to be true. Run with it. Enjoy.

Well I believe more Nvidia's word than anonymous rumours..when we don't have any reason to believe that this information would come from someone who should really know something about G92.

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Rusin
(actually they have once had three generation on one year..)

Really so the 5xxx, 6xxx and 7xxx all came out in one year?

I think he means the 2, 3 and 4 series. They all came out pretty close to each other. Hell, I don't even remember hearing much about the Geforce 3's. I went from GF2 MX to GF4 Ti4200. Now THAT was an upgrade.I could read the text in Black & White, being able to play above 640x480 - and it was SMOOTH!

Actually:
Riva TNT2 (march 1999) -> Geforce 256 (october 1999) -> Geforce 2 (april 2000)

Geforce3 - february 2001
Geforce4 - february 2002
Geforce FX - march 2003 (and was badly late..)
Geforce6 - april 2004
Geforce7 - june 2005
Geforce8 - november 2006
Geforce9 - november 2007 ?
---

Thing is that GF9 will be the same kind of architechture as GF8 (Same way as GF6 and GF7 were) so it's not complitely new thing..

 

[chiew]

Yeah, I understand that the 3007WFP owners are a bit of a minority, a minority that I may join soon (since I work with 10+ MP pictures). I wish there were a card that could run that nicely, but there probably won't be for awhile.

How easy is it to scale games down? ie would it be possible to get a 3007WFP, and play crysis at 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 in a window? I know people are going to say: why get a 3007 and play in a small window? Well, there are other reasons for screen real estate (movies, editing pictures), and unfortunately I wouldn't want to spend 2x the money on SLI.

edit: I just found a 3007WFP-HC for $920...sweet! guess I just need to wait on a G92...fortunately my 7800GT has duallink DVI.

 

[speckedhoncho]

Don't video game developers lag in making games that take full potential of the card technologies by at least a year?

Right now playing a game at 2560x1600 creates a low frame rate even with the 8800GTX. But a year from now, when new engines or adaptations of engines, the streaming processors might be used more effeciently. If they are, then the 8800GTX's lifetime will be extended, although for users with 2560x1600 and max filtering and image quality most likely won't.

I am a little surprised that now card manufacturer has tried to put two G80's on a card. It's been a full year and nothing that innovative with the macro-architecture.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: chiew
Yeah, I understand that the 3007WFP owners are a bit of a minority, a minority that I may join soon (since I work with 10+ MP pictures). I wish there were a card that could run that nicely, but there probably won't be for awhile.

How easy is it to scale games down? ie would it be possible to get a 3007WFP, and play crysis at 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 in a window? I know people are going to say: why get a 3007 and play in a small window? Well, there are other reasons for screen real estate (movies, editing pictures), and unfortunately I wouldn't want to spend 2x the money on SLI.

edit: I just found a 3007WFP-HC for $920...sweet! guess I just need to wait on a G92...fortunately my 7800GT has duallink DVI.

WTF are you finding 3007WFP-HC for $920?!? :Q

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Ok, we get it. You want it to be true. Run with it. Enjoy.

Well I believe more Nvidia's word than anonymous rumours..when we don't have any reason to believe that this information would come from someone who should really know something about G92.

How's this then?:

G92 is GeForce 8700GTS - VRZone Link

Published September 6th. In their time zone

G90 will be the flagship, whenever that comes around.

Why Nvidia chose to use G9x codes remains to be seen. This technically should have been something like "G82". This thing is going to have to have at least 96 shaders onboard if it's going to replace the 8800GTS. 256-bit bus, and 900 to 1000MHz GDDR3 1ns.

Only thing I can think of is that NV scrapped their actual 9 series project and going straight to G100. Why might they do something like this? Ask ATI.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Rusin

Ok, we get it. You want it to be true. Run with it. Enjoy.

Well I believe more Nvidia's word than anonymous rumours..when we don't have any reason to believe that this information would come from someone who should really know something about G92.

How's this then?:

G92 is GeForce 8700GTS - VRZone Link

Published September 6th. In their time zone

G90 will be the flagship, whenever that comes around.

Why Nvidia chose to use G9x codes remains to be seen. This technically should have been something like "G82". This thing is going to have to have at least 96 shaders onboard if it's going to replace the 8800GTS. 256-bit bus, and 900 to 1000MHz GDDR3 1ns.

Only thing I can think of is that NV scrapped their actual 9 series project and going straight to G100. Why might they do something like this? Ask ATI.

Maybe so they don't compete with themselves until the clear the inventory of 8800gtx/ultra parts just before the replacement for that comes around?

 

[bryanW1995]

the past year has been rough on the video card consumer imho. no decent mid-range cards has probably gotten many to hold off until gts 320 goes below 200 or a new card comes out. Gary Key is confident that nobody is releasing a new vid card until Q1 08 and I'm not betting against him, so that means we still have another 4 mos minimum to wait...

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd


Maybe so they don't compete with themselves until the clear the inventory of 8800gtx/ultra parts just before the replacement for that comes around?

That would make a ton of sense. :thumbsup:

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
the past year has been rough on the video card consumer imho. no decent mid-range cards has probably gotten many to hold off until gts 320 goes below 200 or a new card comes out. Gary Key is confident that nobody is releasing a new vid card until Q1 08 and I'm not betting against him, so that means we still have another 4 mos minimum to wait...

Well, honestly I believe the GTX to be high end, the GTS to be mid range (HD2900xt too here), and the 8600 etc to be low end. Just based on the price points.

I would never place the 8600 in the mid range section.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd


Maybe so they don't compete with themselves until the clear the inventory of 8800gtx/ultra parts just before the replacement for that comes around?

That would make a ton of sense. :thumbsup:

I think they're milking the GTX for all it's worth at the moment.

 

[chiew]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
the past year has been rough on the video card consumer imho. no decent mid-range cards has probably gotten many to hold off until gts 320 goes below 200 or a new card comes out. Gary Key is confident that nobody is releasing a new vid card until Q1 08 and I'm not betting against him, so that means we still have another 4 mos minimum to wait...

I thought that G92 is released on Nov 12th?

 

[Rusin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003


How's this then?:

G92 is GeForce 8700GTS - VRZone Link

Published September 6th. In their time zone

G90 will be the flagship, whenever that comes around.

Why Nvidia chose to use G9x codes remains to be seen. This technically should have been something like "G82". This thing is going to have to have at least 96 shaders onboard if it's going to replace the 8800GTS. 256-bit bus, and 900 to 1000MHz GDDR3 1ns.

Only thing I can think of is that NV scrapped their actual 9 series project and going straight to G100. Why might they do something like this? Ask ATI.

Perhaps I should right now publish news like:
"I have learned that G92 is most likely high end chip"
Then I would be guessing some numbers for that card. This would proof something about G92..and would be more valuable because this news would be more recent? Again we are not given anything why to think that VR-Zone should know that kind of things about G92.

Again.. there have been only one news about G92 that came from person who should know something about G92. Nvidia's vice president said that G92 is high end chip and Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle where they first bring high end chips at Q4 and mid range chips at spring.

 

[BenchZowner]

Originally posted by:cmdrdredd
Maybe so they don't compete with themselves until the clear the inventory of 8800gtx/ultra parts just before the replacement for that comes around?

Originally posted by:keysplayer2003
That would make a ton of sense.

Not really, as they're already out of chips in the channels for the G80 based cards ( 8800 GTS/GTX/Ultra ), demand is still here, and every chip that goes through leaves the shop by the time it arrives ( or close to )

 

[chewietobbacca]

Originally posted by: Rusin

Again.. there have been only one news about G92 that came from person who should know something about G92. Nvidia's vice president said that G92 is high end chip and Nvidia doesn't have any reason to break that cycle where they first bring high end chips at Q4 and mid range chips at spring.

Actually if you read that article carefully, he never specifically states G92 = high end. The article states that he is speaking of a high end card, which is rumored to be the G92 project. That doesn't mean no high end exists, it just doesn't mean G92 automatically is high end. Anyways, the Gxx numbers are all rumors but it is know that a mid range and low end card are coming out soon and a high end will be around sooner or later, it just might not be released earlier than the G92/G98 this time around.