GeForce 7800GTX Review

[xtknight]

very disappointing...I hope future drivers fix this. last year when 6800ultra came out, even the first drivers delivered all the games a 2.5x increase...and here I see like..15fps? I don't know why they didn't use an overclocked FX-55 or FX-57, though.

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: linkgoron
Is it just me, or is the 7800 losing more FPS(%) than the 6800 from 1600*1200 to 1600*1200 4AA 8AF?

It's theoretically more than 50% more powerful, yet has only 10% more bandwidth. It'll "lose" more performance simply because it's even more bandwidth-limited than the 6800U, which itself was more bandwidth-limited than the 5950U before it. GPUs are gaining shader power and fillrate faster than they are bandwidth.

The scores show a nice improvement in the relatively CPU and bandwidth-limited tests, but the 7800 may be much faster than the 6800 in games like UE3 if nV did in fact pack in two full ALUs as well as separate the texture processor from the first ALU in each pipe. Can't wait to see HDR scores.

 

[xtknight]

hmmm...should I get an athlon64 x2 (and hope for those dual-core NVIDIA drivers) this xmas or a 7800 plain/GT? the 7800's transparent antialiasing looks decent. it took them long enough...

 

[CP5670]

This doesn't really look like a big increase, kind of remniscent of the Geforce 2/3/4 days where perfomance jumps between generations were smaller. Hard to tell though since they don't show the minimum framerates. It might be worth considering if it works well at 2048x1536 without any AA, as many new games only run consistently smoothly at 1280x960 without AA on the overclocked 6800 GT I have now.

 

[jdogg707]

looks like unless these chips become much cheaper, I will just slap a VNF700-Cu on my X800XL and overclock it. No sense in spending money for gains I most likely will never see. Hopefully once I can read a review in native English things will make more sense, otherwise, onto the R520 unveiling!

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Pete

Originally posted by: linkgoron
Is it just me, or is the 7800 losing more FPS(%) than the 6800 from 1600*1200 to 1600*1200 4AA 8AF?

It's theoretically more than 50% more powerful, yet has only 10% more bandwidth. It'll "lose" more performance simply because it's even more bandwidth-limited than the 6800U, which itself was more bandwidth-limited than the 5950U before it. GPUs are gaining shader power and fillrate faster than they are bandwidth.

The scores show a nice improvement in the relatively CPU and bandwidth-limited tests, but the 7800 may be much faster than the 6800 in games like UE3 if nV did in fact pack in two full ALUs as well as separate the texture processor from the first ALU in each pipe. Can't wait to see HDR scores.

Hmm, I thought the entire concept of the 6800s and X800s had them moving away from being bandwidth limited towards being fillrate/pixel shader limited?

Didn't 6800 GTs gain much more from core OCs than memory OCs?

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: trinibwoy
Not too bad so far. The transparency AA looks sweet - now to see some benchmarks for it and HDR as well.

Yes it does... that's what I was looking for. Better AA... I wonder if they improved AF at all too.

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: ryanv12

Originally posted by: Avalon
Poor card is CPU limited in half the tests at 1600x1200. Hmm...run this baby at 20x15?

I can't wait for someone to try that sucker on an Apple 30" Cinema

No sh!t! Let's do some test runs at 1920x1200 (for the Dell 2405 people) and 2560x1600 ( for the 30" Apple CD people).

That would be a sight to see. I hope someone does.
Not that it matters to me, as I won't be close to running those resolutions for years, but I think it would just be neat to see how far gaming resolution has come.

 

[James3shin]

the CoD benchmark made me chuckle

 

[StrangerGuy]

I am not impressed at all. 7800GTX giving just 10 more frames than a 6800U in D3 16x12 4xAA/8xAF? The increase is pathetic to say the least, considering the card costs so much to start with. IMO the GTX only made the 6800GT more appealing than ever. I'm hope time proves me wrong though.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
I am not impressed at all. 7800GTX giving just 10 more frames than a 6800U in D3 16x12 4xAA/8xAF? The increase is pathetic to say the least, considering the card costs so much to start with. IMO the GTX only made the 6800GT more appealing than ever. I'm hope time proves me wrong though.

the 6800GT just keeps getting better and better (bang for buck deal)......Nvidia's Ti4200 replacement

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: biostud

Originally posted by: DaveA
well it looks like the 6800 GT is truely the next ti4200.

except the GT costs the double of what the 4200Ti did.

surely its all relative though?

the 6800U probably costs doube what the 4600 did

but i could be wrong

 

[Zenoth]

Anandtech should wait for FX-57 to test G70. Or perhaps make two tests. One with dual cores, and another, later, with FX-57. As for testing with Intel CPU's, personally, I don't care if they don't.

 

[Rudee]

Based on these specs I'm willing to pay a 15% premium over the price of the 6800 GT for this card, but not a dime more. The performance just doesn't justify the price, indeed if the suggested retail prices are true. If I had the same attention span/interest for games now that I had 10 years ago, I could probably justify such a price increase, but just not today when most games bore the hell out of me rather quickly.

 

[DarkKnight]

If i wanna get this just for gaming, i wont buy this card for more that $300 cause the xbox 360 gpu is gonna kill this

 

[xtknight]

Personally I like ATI's decision better (to make a faster chip at the expensive of lower yields). I would rather wait 6 months for a super chip than to buy a neutered one now. If, however, R520 doesn't have the transparent antialiasing then it won't be on my xmas list either. If NVIDIA fixed their PureVideo to do encoding and the rest of the crap they never delivered then it's possible I'll buy a 7800 vanilla, just for the transparent AA and encoding features. A little bird tells me they didn't, though. (I've got Inquirer syndrome.) :Q

 

[JBT]

I'll personally be waiting to see if Nvidia releases an Ultra model or even for R520.

This current GTX doesn't appear to give me enough speed for the price. Of course we REALLY won't know until the NDA is lifted and a new driver has been tested. But we'll see.

 

[sparkz]

Originally posted by: linkgoron
4671 in 3dmark05 with 1600*1200 4XAA 8XAF is not bat at all, compared to the 1009 of the 6800 Ultra, and 8611 with SLI...

Yes, people are going to realize that benchmark scores at the default settings of 1024x768 no AA no AF will become meaningless. These new cards will shine when benched at 16x12 4xAA 8xAF -

 

[rise]

so whats going to be the best cpu for the money to pair with this? a 3700+ sandy oc'd to 2800? or will the extra cache not make much difference and its just clock speed?

 

[MegaWorks]

Ok let me get this straight, a card that costs $649.00 for 15% increase in performence! nVidia think that buyers are idiots or something. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

nVidia should lower the prices to influence their product.

 

[imported_Alx]

It's like 90% of the people on this forum have never followed the graphics market before. There is absolutely nothing exceptional about this launch. $650 is not the MSRP, nobody knows what the pricing will be. GeForce3 was supposed to have an MSRP of $600. The sky is not falling.

 

[Killrose]

Originally posted by: Alx
It's like 90% of the people on this forum have never followed the graphics market before. There is absolutely nothing exceptional about this launch. $650 is not the MSRP, nobody knows what the pricing will be. GeForce3 was supposed to have an MSRP of $600. The sky is not falling.

Exactly, it's like no one was around when the 6800 Ultra was released.

 

[Actaeon]

What a disappointment, everyone touted that it would be faster than 6800Us in SLI. Now benchmarks only show it is a tad bit better than the 6800U. Glad I didn't play the waiting game (not that I had much choice, being stuck on AGP).

Either they're CPU limited or the GPU isn't as great as initial speculation made it seem.

 

[Pete]

zendari, that really depends on the games and the level of AA. More shaders means more benefits from core improvements, while more AA simply requires more bandwidth. You should see clearer differences (assuming no CPU limitations) at 16x12 or 20x15 without AA.

Alx, someone here or in another forum said their store system showed the BFG and PNY 7800GTXs will sell for $600 MSRP, $505 at cost. Yeah, seems too high to me, but I don't think retail stores do the same thing as online stores (jack up prices for the initial shipments).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Ok let me get this straight, a card that costs $649.00 for 15% increase in performence! nVidia think that buyers are idiots or something. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

nVidia should lower the prices to influence their product.

I would definately reserve judgement until they hook this puppy up to a CPU that can feed it. I have a feeling it is starving for CPU cycles that just aren't there and cannot be there without some sort of LNO2 on a FX57 or something.

Learn to reserve judgment people until we get some non incredulous foreign translated site reviews.