GeForce GTS 250 Inches Closer Launch

[btarunr]

Does the card in the picture below look familiar to you? GeForce 8800 GTS-512? Well yes, but that's also what the GeForce GTS 250 is going to end up looking like. The 3+1 phase design on the 8800 GTS-512 allowed the 65 nm G92 GPU to be clocked at a reasonable 650 MHz, but come 55 nm G92b, and NVIDIA will look to use the same card design to accommodate the higher-clocked GPU which shares its clock-speeds and other machinery with the GeForce 9800 GTX+. The new card is going to use the upcoming CeBIT event as its launchpad. Think of it as 9800 GTX+ after liposuction.

The GeForce GTS 250 is expected to come with identical clock speeds to those of the 9800 GTX+. 738 MHz for the core, 1,836 MHz for the shaders, and 1,100 (2.20 GHz DDR) for the memory. Speaking of memory, NVIDIA's reference design is expected to come in 512 MB and 1 GB flavours, with partners being given the freedom to carve out their own designs. Some partners even seem to be contemplating 2 GB models. It comes with 128 stream processors. The 9 inch long PCB and cooler visually bear some resemblance with the GeForce 8800 GTS-512. Apparently NVIDIA feels the single 6-pin PCI-E power input is a spoon big enough to feed the card, something EVGA and Galaxy did months earlier, with its rated power consumption at 150W. The GTS 250 accelerator is NVIDIA's next card to plough the fertile sub-$200 market. NVIDIA will lift the NDA over this card on March 3, following which the cards will reach retail channels by March 10.

where will this stop. alrite let it come.

[js01]

Are they planning on charging more for these then the other card with a different looking cooler?

[rizla1]

WHO CARES! no offence to btarunr who spent his time writing this, just nvidia.

noob gpu buyers will see this and think its better than cheaper cards that are the exact same.
some 9800's still cost a good £20 more than 8800's

[newtekie1]

So now we have gone from the GTS250 being just a rebranded 9800GTX+, to it being a redesigned card.

And we've gone from the GTS240 being a rebranded 8800GT/9800GT, to it being a redesigned card also.

Seems nVidia isn't just rebranding the older cards, they are actually improving them. Glad to see this.

[W1zzard]

actually nvidia's renaming strategy makes sense in a way that the numbers are getting bigger the fast the card is .. unlike 7800 GTX vs. 8400 GS for example. i just wonder what they will do with the next generation cards. they will sure not call their dx11 low end part GTS 151

[sapetto]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

So now we have gone from the GTS250 being just a rebranded 9800GTX+, to it being a redesigned card.

And we've gone from the GTS240 being a rebranded 8800GT/9800GT, to it being a redesigned card also.

Seems nVidia isn't just rebranding the older cards, they are actually improving them. Glad to see this.

Great! Keep improving that cards another 10 years ....

[werty316]

More like inches closer to complete failure.

If only everyone was in the loop of things.

[mdm-adph]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

So now we have gone from the GTS250 being just a rebranded 9800GTX+, to it being a redesigned card.

And we've gone from the GTS240 being a rebranded 8800GT/9800GT, to it being a redesigned card also.

Seems nVidia isn't just rebranding the older cards, they are actually improving them. Glad to see this.

Can you please point out the ways in which this card is redesigned?

Originally Posted by W1zzard

actually nvidia's renaming strategy makes sense in a way that the numbers are getting bigger the fast the card is .. unlike 7800 GTX vs. 8400 GS for example. i just wonder what they will do with the next generation cards. they will sure not call their dx11 low end part GTS 151

I agree -- I love both ATI and Nvidia's new naming strategies -- I hated the confusing GTX/GTS/GTO/GT/GLS/GL crap.

[PVTCaboose1337]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

So now we have gone from the GTS250 being just a rebranded 9800GTX+, to it being a redesigned card.

And we've gone from the GTS240 being a rebranded 8800GT/9800GT, to it being a redesigned card also.

Seems nVidia isn't just rebranding the older cards, they are actually improving them. Glad to see this.

I thought they were just rebranding. I am very surprised.

[GPUCafe]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

actually nvidia's renaming strategy makes sense in a way that the numbers are getting bigger the fast the card is .. unlike 7800 GTX vs. 8400 GS for example. i just wonder what they will do with the next generation cards. they will sure not call their dx11 low end part GTS 151

How about Nvidia's mobile rebranding strategy ?

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

has the cooler of the 1st gen GTS G92.. hehehe

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by mdm-adph

Can you please point out the ways in which this card is redesigned?

GTS240: Uses the 55nm G92b core with 112SPs, unlike the previous 9800GT and 8800GTs, which used the 65nm G92 core with 112SPs, only a few 9800GTs used the 55nm G92b. GTS240 also brings a new redesigned PCB, aimed at reducing costs for manufacturers. The cheaper PCB, cheaper 55nm core, should lead to lower prices for the consumers. The new core should also reduce power consumption and heat, though the reduced power consumption might be negated by the changes in the power phases used on the new PCB, we will have to wait for the card's release to tell.

GTS250: Seems to use a similar PCB and cooler to the 8800GTS 512MB, however we can't be sure, it is likely that it will use the same PCB as the GTS240 just as the 8800GTS 512MB used the same PCB as the 8800GT(there is no good reason to produce two different PCBs when one will do the job). Even if it is the same PCB as the 8800GTS 512MB, it will use the newer 55nm G92b. The change in PCB will reduce costs compared to the current 9800GTX+, and the cooler should be cheaper also. Which should lead to lower costs for the consumer.

Lower Prices=Win for the Consumer

Originally Posted by W1zzard

actually nvidia's renaming strategy makes sense in a way that the numbers are getting bigger the fast the card is .. unlike 7800 GTX vs. 8400 GS for example. i just wonder what they will do with the next generation cards. they will sure not call their dx11 low end part GTS 151

I'm glad they are finally bringing all the cards into one unified naming scheme, it makes sense. It's not an easy thing to come up with names for cards that make sense, and give an idea about performance.

[Megasty]

If the card still performs the same..but saves it bit on a e-bill, its still the same in my book. The question is will someone buy this when they already have the prior version. Its just confusing the hell out of me. But I don't buy those cheapo cards so I really don't care one way or another. It is a fine way to fill the gaps in performance w/o spending the dough on the design of a whole new card.

[mdm-adph]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

GTS240: Uses the 55nm G92b core with 112SPs, unlike the previous 9800GT and 8800GTs, which used the 65nm G92 core with 112SPs, only a few 9800GTs used the 55nm G92b. GTS240 also brings a new redesigned PCB, aimed at reducing costs for manufacturers. The cheaper PCB, cheaper 55nm core, should lead to lower prices for the consumers. The new core should also reduce power consumption and heat, though the reduced power consumption might be negated by the changes in the power phases used on the new PCB, we will have to wait for the card's release to tell.

GTS250: Seems to use a similar PCB and cooler to the 8800GTS 512MB, however we can't be sure, it is likely that it will use the same PCB as the GTS240 just as the 8800GTS 512MB used the same PCB as the 8800GT(there is no good reason to produce two different PCBs when one will do the job). Even if it is the same PCB as the 8800GTS 512MB, it will use the newer 55nm G92b. The change in PCB will reduce costs compared to the current 9800GTX+, and the cooler should be cheaper also. Which should lead to lower costs for the consumer.

Lower Prices=Win for the Consumer

So, die-shrunk cores (with the same amount of SPs) and a different PCB (sometimes)?

Why didn't Nvidia rename the 9600 GSO when they started making it with a completely different number of SPs?

[jbunch07]

Originally Posted by mdm-adph

So, die-shrunk cores (with the same amount of SPs) and a different PCB (sometimes)?

Why didn't Nvidia rename the 9600 GSO when they started making it with a completely different number of SPs?

Because If this patter keeps up then the 9600 GT will become GT 210
ANd GSO will prob become GSO 200

oh and the 9800 GT will be 220? 230?

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by mdm-adph

So, die-shrunk cores (with the same amount of SPs) and a different PCB (sometimes)?

Why didn't Nvidia rename the 9600 GSO when they started making it with a completely different number of SPs?

The main thing isn't the die-shrink, it does help, but the 9800GTX+ was already using it. The main thing will be the redesigned/Changed PCBs.

And nVidia didn't rename the 9600GSO when they started using the G94 core because their stupid. But I don't really see what that has to do with this discussion.

Originally Posted by jbunch07

Because If this patter keeps up then the 9600 GT will become GT 210
ANd GSO will prob become GSO 200

oh and the 9800 GT will be 220? 230?

I thought I read somewhere that they were renaming the 9600GT and GSO using the new naming scheme. I think they are supposed to make up the GT200 series(GT230 and GT220 maybe?).

And the 9800GT is essentially becoming the GTS240 already, though with a new PCB, a 55nm core, and higher stock clocks.

[tkpenalty]

Yes! Finally a full G92 card that doesn't have a redundant amount of PCB... I wanted a 8800GTS 512MB...

[jbunch07]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

The main thing isn't the die-shrink, it does help, but the 9800GTX+ was already using it. The main thing will be the redesigned/Changed PCBs.

And nVidia didn't rename the 9600GSO when they started using the G94 core because their stupid. But I don't really see what that has to do with this discussion.



I thought I read somewhere that they were renaming the 9600GT and GSO using the new naming scheme. I think they are supposed to make up the GT200 series(GT230 and GT220 maybe?).

And the 9800GT is essentially becoming the GTS240 already, though with a new PCB, a 55nm core, and higher stock clocks.

Yeah I remember reading that somewhere I think...but I have to agree with W1zz this naming scheme is the easiest to understand out of all of them. They should have been doing this for years.

[TheMailMan78]

Why cant they just name them. That way you knew exactly what was faster. Like the Nvidia "Colon Cobra" would be faster than the Nvidia "Turtle Boner".

See the thing is I know a 9800 series is faster than the 8800 series but for a noob seeing the GTX260 might thing the card is slower because the number is lower.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Why cant they just name them. That way you knew exactly what was faster. Like the Nvidia "Colon Cobra" would be faster than the Nvidia "Turtle Boner".

See the thing is I know a 9800 series is faster than the 8800 series but for a noob seeing the GTX260 might thing the card is slower because the number is lower.

Really? You know for a fact that the a 9800 would be faster than an 8800? Always?

Buying video card based on name alone is stupid, and if you do it, you won't know you got a weaker card anyway, so it doesn't matter.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Really? You know for a fact that the a 9800 would be faster than an 8800? Always?

Buying video card based on name alone is stupid, and if you do it, you won't know you got a weaker card anyway, so it doesn't matter.

No of course not. But thats why the naming scheme is stupid. If they really were not trying to mislead customers they would have a small graph on the side of the box showing all their GPUs for the last 3 generations and the placement of the card by speed compared to the rest. But no. They list a slower card with a higher number and a faster card with a lower number. It's stupid.

FYI I think ATI should do the same thing with a graph on the box.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

No of course not. But thats why the naming scheme is stupid. If they really were not trying to mislead customers they would have a small graph on the side of the box showing all their GPUs for the last 3 generations and the placement of the card by speed compared to the rest. But no. They list a slower card with a higher number and a faster card with a lower number. It's stupid.

FYI I think ATI should do the same thing with a graph on the box.

Or a simpiler solution is that the consumer does research before buying. The companies shouldn't have to hold uneducated people's hands through the buying process.

And the majority of at least semi-educated consumers have realized long ago that a higher number doesn't mean dick.

And a graph on the side of the box doesn't really help much. What happens when the consumer starts comparing ATi cards and nVidia card? Or should they just not do that? Should be forcing both companies to include the competitions previous 3 generations on their graphs as well? This is start to take up a lot of room on the box... Where are they going to put all the fancy marketting BS? If they have the graphs taking up the whole back of the box, how will they get the consumer to believe that the HD4550 or 8400GS is the best gaming card on the market?

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Or a simpiler solution is that the consumer does research before buying. The companies shouldn't have to hold uneducated people's hands through the buying process.

And the majority of at least semi-educated consumers have realized long ago that a higher number doesn't mean dick.

With all due respect you know nothing of marketing. The dumber the better when it comes to selling a product. Its a companies marketing departments job to hold your hand.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

With all due respect you know nothing of marketing. The dumber the better when it comes to selling a product. Its a companies marketing departments job to hold your hand.

Oh, I know plenty about marketing, and an ideal consumer is dumber than a box of rocks, but that doesn't mean that the majority of consumers actually are dumb.

And it isn't the Marketting Department's job to hold their hand, it is the marketting department's job to tug on their hand. Those are two very different concepts.

Holding their hand means giving them all the possible information they can to allow the consumer to make an educated decision.

Tugging their hand means taking a turd and making the consumer believe it is the greatest thing ever.

This is why it is the consumers responsibility to educate themselves, not the companies.