New 8800GTS - UPDATED with PICS

[SniperDaws]

i seriously wouldnt buy any graphics card now or in the next few months just to play Crysis because its gonna be a while until the graphics cards have enough oomph to run it at its recommended specs.

Im getting my card for -

CoD4 - which as far as im concerned looks as hot as Crysis and runs 20x better/

World in Conflict - which is the most addictive game ive ever played.

and i saw some gameplay footage of Assasins Creed and omg its looks amazing.

 

[redice]

I really hope this gets released on the 3rd. My step up ends on the 4th

 

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: redice
I really hope this gets released on the 3rd. My step up ends on the 4th

Damn that's bad timing. I wouldn't bank on it. Man and you have a GTS 640 worth some decent step-up cash too. I'll tell ya, I'd call them. Who knows, maybe they'll make an exception.

 

[bsix]

I'm just more interested in a dual slot cooling solution (from GTS 640MB) than absolute performance. My guess is that it will perform about 10% better than the GT. However we have to worry about lack of supply and the effect on retail pricing again. If the retail is just too much ($300+ which I don't think so since AMD right now has better availability than NVidia), the Gigabyte GT8800 with a Zalman cooler looks like a nice plan B.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Updated with PICS!

 

[Matrices]

What got lost in the GT hype is that it is outperformed by the GTS at high AA/AF/res in Crysis. Few reviewers even ran it against a GTS. But the question is: if GT was outperformed by GTS in those high-end situations, what was the cause? The 512MB RAM? If so then the new GTS will be useless.

 

[math20]

How much faster do you think this will be compared to the GT? Are there any preliminary benchmarks?

 

[Rusin]

math20:
Should have 23.8% better texture fillrate, 23.8% better ALU-performance, over 60% better pixel fillrate...compared to 8800 GT. Compared to 8800 Ultra it's 5-8% better.. but size of vram will bottleneck this card.. we need 8800 GTS 1024MB

 

[AzN]

Why didn't they use ddr4 instead and clock it 1200mhz? Not much difference between 8800gt and 8800gts when most GT are already clocked same as the new gts already. Only difference would be 16 more SP

 

[Rusin]

Azn:
Because memory bandwith ain't issue with these cards in first place..I think that Nvidia will skip GDDR4. There is 16SP's more and 56 TMU -> 64 TMU and 16 ROP -> 24 ROP

 

[Hauk]

Thanks Cookie for finding some pics. Gotta give credit to those Chinamen.

The card looks cool. I like the retro squared off look, kinda like how some cars and suvs are looking these days. I want one. Step-up here I come..

 

[Killfly]

Will a single 8800GT with 512Mb run a 40 inch monitor smoothly with good framerates and high resolution? Does this mean I have to go try and buy (when I can afford another) a second 8800GT to get good results? If I SLI I won't need to Step-UP to the upcoming G92 8800GTS but maybe I can just do that and get the 1Gb memory model for a single card solution. My 7950GT KO drives this 40" monitor now but I couldn't guess how much better my frame speed could be with nothign to compare it to.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Rusin
Azn:
Because memory bandwith ain't issue with these cards in first place..I think that Nvidia will skip GDDR4. There is 16SP's more and 56 TMU -> 64 TMU and 16 ROP -> 24 ROP

Hmmm I think that's a pretty big assumption that the G92 has 24 ROP like the G80. True the G92 GT has only 7/8 Shader/Texture clusters enabled, which would bring the G92 GTS to a full 64 Texture address/mapping units and 128 SPs, however, I'm not so sure the ROPs are tied into those clusters.

I'm actually pretty sure they're tied to the memory controllers, which have been reduced in every G92 configuration to 256-bit. When compared to the G80 GTS/GTX, that was 6/6 x 64-bit for 384 and 24 ROPs on the GTX and 5/6 x 64-bit for 320 and 20 ROPs given 4 render back ends for each memory controller. With a 256 bit configuration that would allow for 16 maximum.

Again, I may be wrong, but it would make sense given render back ends and memory controllers can increase transistor count significantly. Cutting down on these parts would lower manufacturing costs without decreasing performance too much, as seen on the G92. But in the end I still think the G92 needs to have more than 16 more ROPs and at least 768MB of RAM in order to be the GTX/Ultra killer and at this point I'm not really convinced it will (at least not the ROPs as a 1GB G92 GTS has been hinted at).

 

[fleshconsumed]

Thanks for the pics update OP. I'm glad to see it's a dual slot solution, perhaps if it's quiet I won't have to upgrade to aftermarket cooler. Even if it's not it's still a better design because it exhausts heat outside of the case.


EDIT: Just saw that retailers are starting to price gouge 3870 cards as well, would seem to me if anyone wants to get new GTS at a decent price anytime soon you'd have to camp for it on the release day.

Truly sad state of affairs which makes me think that retailers are price gouging cards not because of supply issues but because 8800GT/3870 perform so much better than much more expensive cards they are supposed to compete with/replace (G80 8800GTS and 2900XT respectively).

 

[VashHT]

Weren't there rumors of a 1Gb version of this card coming out as well? I hope so, I was hoping to step-up from my 8800gt to a 1Gb gts when they came out, but even if they don't I will step-up to a GTS anyway.

 

[zephyrprime]

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Truly sad state of affairs which makes me think that retailers are price gouging cards not because of supply issues but because 8800GT/3870 perform so much better than much more expensive cards they are supposed to compete with/replace (G80 8800GTS and 2900XT respectively).

There is a supply issue because if there weren't the shelves would be packed with $300 8800gt's but that is not the case at all. It's basic supply and demand.

 

[Dacalo]

Hmm, the new GTS seems a bit underwhelming. 16 more shaders and higher clocks for probably around $80~$100 premium during the price gouging, I don't think it's worth it. Now the 1GB GTS would be more justifiable.

 

[Aiden]

Originally posted by: Dacalo
Hmm, the new GTS seems a bit underwhelming. 16 more shaders and higher clocks for probably around $80~$100 premium during the price gouging, I don't think it's worth it. Now the 1GB GTS would be more justifiable.

It looks like all nvidia did, is unlock the same G92 Chip, giving it more capabilities. the question is, how much preformance gain over the Gt will that create. You can read numbers anywhere from 5-20% depending on what rumors you listen to.

If the card comes in at 300$ MSRP, and has a good preformance gain over the GT say 10% or so, then your looking at a very attractive card. However, i expect this card will end up being closer to 350$ at release, so they can keep MSRP on the 8800GT inflated.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Rusin
Azn:
Because memory bandwith ain't issue with these cards in first place..I think that Nvidia will skip GDDR4. There is 16SP's more and 56 TMU -> 64 TMU and 16 ROP -> 24 ROP

Hmmm I think that's a pretty big assumption that the G92 has 24 ROP like the G80. True the G92 GT has only 7/8 Shader/Texture clusters enabled, which would bring the G92 GTS to a full 64 Texture address/mapping units and 128 SPs, however, I'm not so sure the ROPs are tied into those clusters.

I'm actually pretty sure they're tied to the memory controllers, which have been reduced in every G92 configuration to 256-bit. When compared to the G80 GTS/GTX, that was 6/6 x 64-bit for 384 and 24 ROPs on the GTX and 5/6 x 64-bit for 320 and 20 ROPs given 4 render back ends for each memory controller. With a 256 bit configuration that would allow for 16 maximum.

Again, I may be wrong, but it would make sense given render back ends and memory controllers can increase transistor count significantly. Cutting down on these parts would lower manufacturing costs without decreasing performance too much, as seen on the G92. But in the end I still think the G92 needs to have more than 16 more ROPs and at least 768MB of RAM in order to be the GTX/Ultra killer and at this point I'm not really convinced it will (at least not the ROPs as a 1GB G92 GTS has been hinted at).

AFAIK, you're correct. So, if the card has a 256-bit bus, it will still have 16 ROP's. I'm not sure if the card really needs more than that, but I'd sure like to see a 1GB version.

 

[Skott]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime

Originally posted by: fleshconsumed
Truly sad state of affairs which makes me think that retailers are price gouging cards not because of supply issues but because 8800GT/3870 perform so much better than much more expensive cards they are supposed to compete with/replace (G80 8800GTS and 2900XT respectively).

There is a supply issue because if there weren't the shelves would be packed with $300 8800gt's but that is not the case at all. It's basic supply and demand.

Yeah, as much as I like to bash those etailers that do price gouge the real problem is supply from the manufacturers. According to the so called rumor is that nVidia miscalculated demand on the 8800GT and is now supposedly saying the supply will remain low until January. Considering how fast the etailers are selling out and only having limited supply to begin with when they get a batch in this seems to be true. Assuming it is true it makes me wonder if the new GTS will also have a supply problem as well. I'm guessing it will.

People who were hoping of picking up a 8800GT extra cheap on Black Friday are going to be dissapointed I think. Just not enough supply to allow for those price cutting sales. Unless the manufacturers throw in some kind of MIR I dont see the prices being any different than they are now.

Just my thoughts on the subject anyway.