View Full Version : ASUS GeForce 9800GTS
http://www.nordichardware.com/image3.php?id=4618
http://www.nordichardware.com/image3.php?id=4616
GeForce 9800GTS was fairly unknown until earlier today. Roadmaps have spoken of 9800GX2, 9800GTX and 9800GT, but no GTS. Obviously, this would also be based on the G92 core, but since the 8800GTS 512MB is based on G92 (G92-370), you would think that it would sport higher frequencies. According to the information posted by VictorWang, it doesn't. It's actually lower.
GeForce 8800GTS 512MB has a core operating at 650MHz, shaders at 1650MHz and memory chips at 1940MHz. The card VictorWang got his hands on has a core operating at 600MHz, shaders at 1500MHz and 1800MHz (although they are rated 1ns, which means they can do 2000MHz, at least).
He's posted pictured of the card, including the bare PCB and they are strikingly similar to a regular GeForce 8800GTS. Better PWM, but that might be the work of ASUS' engineers. Along with the pictures he's also published a couple of benchmarks, which are decent, but shows little, if any, improvement over the 8800GTS.
Whether this is an authentic GeForce 9800GTS or not, we're uncertain, but it is a new card, that's for sure. Let's just hope that the replacement for the GeForce 8800GTS 512MB is better than this.
Victor Wang is a member of extremesystems forum
http://www.unihw.com/html/18/n-118.html
G92 how many ways can they possibly rehash this chip.
Doesn't bode well for the 9800GTX.
BioHazZarD
03-04-08, 02:38 PM
Hell why not a 9800GT while we at it..
Madpistol
03-04-08, 10:46 PM
This fortifies my choice to spend $550 on an 8800 GTX in December '06. Amazing how it's still an amazing card.
:thumbdwn: 9 series.
Hell why not a 9800GT while we at it..
HAHAHA
12920 3dmarks score.... with the CPU at 4500mhz?? I can almost get that with one 8800GT and my cpu @ 3200mhz... that's terrible :thumbdwn:
Delbert
03-05-08, 02:40 PM
Okay... i am confused about this card.
My 8800GTS is clocked highger and i get better 3d06 scores than those published.
Is the 9800 series got some extra bits that i do not know about ?
Otherwise, i can not see the point...
I'm not liking this 8 series refresh (AKA the 9-series), I might still go for the highend part, don't want to waste my step up.
Anyone reckon they have something much bigger waiting in the wings?
a12ctic
03-05-08, 07:47 PM
This is the same refresh AMD did with the HD3x00 serieis.
It was obvious that is all the 9 series would be, I don't understand why this is such a shock to everybody?
The should have called them 8900s. This reminds me of the 7800 7900 refresh.
Redeemed
03-05-08, 09:34 PM
The should have called them 8900s. This reminds me of the 7800 7900 refresh.
Actually, the 7900GTX was a nice bit faster than the 7800GTX. Well worth the refresh. This... this is at best what we already have... just renamed and possibly priced a bit lower. Nothing new... really. And with the 9800GX2 only being about 30% faster than an 8800Ultra at best... this is far worse than the refresh of the previous generation (7-series).
Hopefully nVidia's next completely new architecture offers as big a performance boost as the GeForece8 series did out the door. As for the 9 series... I'm planning on passing it up completely. My dual GTSs are still suiting me just fine well over a year year later.
Atomizer
03-06-08, 01:10 AM
I made the leap in about May last year and purchased a 8800GTX, from a 6600GT, and a long line of low end video cards before(apart from the GeForce 2 Ti, and GF4 Ti, they were pro), and was completely expecting to get an update this year, so ive been lingering for any info for new hardware, but unfortunatly, it seems the one time I get money and go all out, is when things go into a slump, go figure :/
Blacklash
03-06-08, 03:45 PM
I find that hard to believe.
An 8800GT I tried @ 700|1000 1700 got; 5996 in SM2.0, and 5655 in SM3.0 under Vista. It was supported by a 3.6GHz Q6600.
BTW HQ driver settings = 5903 SM30, 5553 SM20.
Bman212121
03-06-08, 05:00 PM
I find that hard to believe.
An 8800GT I tried @ 700|1000 1700 got; 5996 in SM2.0, and 5655 in SM3.0 under Vista. It was supported by a 3.6GHz Q6600.
Believe it. :D
On my 9600GT with only 64SP it gets 4675 SM2.0 and and 4582 SM3.0. It is factory OC'ed to 700MHZ core 1900MHZ ram.
http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/7250/3dmark069600gt2fk8.jpg
Those numbers really incidate to me that a 9800GTS is going to be 96SP based off of the tweaked G94 core.
Blacklash
03-06-08, 05:18 PM
Well yuck to that.
IMO folks should spring for an 8800GT 512Mb or a 8800GTS 512Mb. Both are at very nice prices now.
The best I was able to get out of that GT under Vista was SM 20 6326 and SM30 5826-
http://www.madonion.com/compare?3dm06=5195459
That was @ 746 on the core.
nvidia ****ed up on the 9-series just like their FX series back in the day.
CaptNKILL
03-06-08, 05:49 PM
nvidia ****ed up on the 9-series just like their FX series back in the day.
Oh for god's sake. :p
No, if this was even remotely close to the FX series fiasco, these cards would be slower than the 7 series.
As it is, they are probably on par with and in some cases better than the current 8 series cards. Nothing great, but they are more efficient and nvidia is in a position where they can get away with products like this.
This isn't a failure, it just isn't a real big step forward.
Oh for god's sake. :p
No, if this was even remotely close to the FX series fiasco, these cards would be slower than the 7 series.
As it is, they are probably on par with and in some cases better than the current 8 series cards. Nothing great, but they are more efficient and nvidia is in a position where they can get away with products like this.
This isn't a failure, it just isn't a real big step forward.
In a way it is a failure, in a way it isn't. When Nvidia went from 7-series to 8-series, the increase in performance was drastic. Now from 8-series to 9-series, gimme a break, 20% gains according to sources of 8800 ULTRA, and about the same as the 3870X2 which you can get for $430 now.
I think Nvidia has lost this round, such a huge disappointment. I was hoping the 9800GX2 would increase 100%+, so I could go pickup a card.
Blacklash
03-06-08, 06:09 PM
If the drivers shape up an X2 + an HD 3870 might not be a bad upgrade path for some.
CaptNKILL
03-06-08, 06:21 PM
In a way it is a failure, in a way it isn't. When Nvidia went from 7-series to 8-series, the increase in performance was drastic. Now from 8-series to 9-series, gimme a break, 20% gains according to sources of 8800 ULTRA, and about the same as the 3870X2 which you can get for $430 now.
I think Nvidia has lost this round, such a huge disappointment. I was hoping the 9800GX2 would increase 100%+, so I could go pickup a card.
Like I said, they don't really need to release a card twice the speed of the 8 series to stay on top of the market. ATI's current lineup isn't bad at all but nvidia is just owning the market completely. The 9600GT has pretty much eliminated the need for the HD 3850 and 3870 and to be honest, I see very few people jumping on a dual chip crossfire card given that ATI's reputation for drivers still isn't that great and the last dual chip card that was available (7950GX2) was a nightmare for most users.
Don't get me wrong, we all have every right to be disappointed with the small speed boost offered by the 9 series (so far) but its hardly a failure on nvidia's part.
How many people are going to go out and buy an HD 3870X2 just because nvidia didn't double their performance? The 9 series is still going to be the fastest line of cards on the market, it just won't be by much.
killahsin
03-06-08, 06:31 PM
who here wants to place bets that the 9 series cards go faster at each tier then the 8 series cards? This is not the FX series fiasco. Just place your bets come on. Stop telling people to buy 8 series cards over 9 series cards until you get hard numbers. I.E. in game benchmarks.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.