4850 x2 says hi! and this dual 250 card wont out perfom a 5850 (dx11) which it should be priced near 5850(it=250s). and by the time this comes out, the 5850 should drop to at least $250 anyway. seems a bit too late now.

yea the 9800gtx to 9800gtx + was a die shrink thats all it really was which is why ppl were able to in some cases get them to work in sli if i remember correctly same with the gtx + and gts 250 i dont feel like looking it up but its generally excepted the 8800gts became the 9800gtx and its follow up and is at the heart of the gts 250

as far as the 8800gtx goes its only slightly faster then the 8800gtx 512 which could overclock to compensate thats why the 9800gtx was on par with the older G80 it may have a few limitation but otherwise they trade blows

and more on topic id still like to see what 2 of these gts 250x2s could do in sli (quad sli) id also like to see how they do with F@H

It is to think about buying one of these before leaving the fermi..hehe

crazyeyesreaperyea the 9800gtx to 9800gtx + was a die shrink thats all it really was which is why ppl were able to in some cases get them to work in sli if i remember correctly same with the gtx + and gts 250 i dont feel like looking it up but its generally excepted the 8800gts became the 9800gtx and its follow up and is at the heart of the gts 250

as far as the 8800gtx goes its only slightly faster then the 8800gtx 512 which could overclock to compensate thats why the 9800gtx was on par with the older G80 it may have a few limitation but otherwise they trade blows

and more on topic id still like to see what 2 of these gts 250x2s could do in sli (quad sli) id also like to see how they do with F@H

"The multi-GPU system is contained within the board, with no SLI fingers for expansion"

I think there is no Quad SLI suport :)

Nemo~www.tomshardware.com/reviews/exclusive-nvidia-geforce-9800gx2,1755.html

I'm quoting "We know that the 9800GX2 has 2 printed circuit boards (PCBs)"

This is a 9800GTX+ X2, surely there will be nothing to counter it! mIrite? :laugh:
This thing owns hardcore! (In Geforce 9 times :nutkick:).
Oh wait the 4850X2 that Sapphire don't bother selling anymore. :p

crazyeyesreaperyea the 9800gtx to 9800gtx + was a die shrink thats all it really was which is why ppl were able to in some cases get them to work in sli if i remember correctly same with the gtx + and gts 250 i dont feel like looking it up but its generally excepted the 8800gts became the 9800gtx and its follow up and is at the heart of the gts 250

as far as the 8800gtx goes its only slightly faster then the 8800gtx 512 which could overclock to compensate thats why the 9800gtx was on par with the older G80 it may have a few limitation but otherwise they trade blows

and more on topic id still like to see what 2 of these gts 250x2s could do in sli (quad sli) id also like to see how they do with F@H

THe 8800GTX is a completely different an outdated G80 chip. The 9800GTX+ and more importantly the GTS250 stomp it. The GTS250 is practically a 9800GTX+ with 1gb which outperforms the 9800gtx+, which outperforms 9800GTX, which outperforms 8800GTS 512mb. All based on basically the same chip but performance factors are slightly higher with each. Not only that but im pretty sure the GTS250 overclocks better than any of them. Im sure this will smoke a 9800GX2 in terms of performance as long as they have the proper cooler.

Strap this on big bang with a 4850x2, i wonder what it would do. :cool:

Dude, I'd totally buy this if it wasn't a rediculous price or was slower than the 5830 most of the time.

PP MguireTHe 8800GTX is a completely different an outdated G80 chip. The 9800GTX+ and more importantly the GTS250 stomp it. The GTS250 is practically a 9800GTX+ with 1gb which outperforms the 9800gtx+, which outperforms 9800GTX, which outperforms 8800GTS 512mb. All based on basically the same chip but performance factors are slightly higher with each. Not only that but im pretty sure the GTS250 overclocks better than any of them. Im sure this will smoke a 9800GX2 in terms of performance as long as they have the proper cooler.

Strap this on big bang with a 4850x2, i wonder what it would do. :cool:

8800GTX at ultra speeds (very easy to achieve) is about the same as a gts 250. Only noticeable difference is power consumption.

Im not paying around 600 bucks for 2 ultras to do the same thing this single card can do with less power :laugh: Not only that, but then you start to overclock this and it goes well beyond an ultra.

PP MguireIm not paying around 600 bucks for 2 ultras to do the same thing this single card can do with less power :laugh: Not only that, but then you start to overclock this and it goes well beyond an ultra.

I got my 8800GTX in late '08 for 115. :laugh:

unless its 300 or lower . . . hell 250 even, its not worth the money, and there are variants of the 9800GTX+ that are exactly the same as the reference GTS250's,

the 8800ULTRA(and the 9800GTX stock) now can be outperformed by a 9800GT oc'd to like 760/1800/2000 which is not hard to get too

sorry PP i think i may not have been clear in what i ment

the 8800gts 512 offered within 5% of the 8800gtx perfromance at the time but what i was trying to say is the 8800gts has been renamed and rebaged and slightly altered untill it became the gts 250 the point i was making was that even with the rebadge the 8800gtx in many cases was faster then a 9800gtx not so much the gts 250 (due to clock speeds) and i was also saying the same thing this is what the 9800gx2 SHOULD have been as in 2gb = 1gig usable memory compared to the 512 mb usable on the 9800gx2

9800GX2 anyone? What got me was when People moved from the G80 GTS to the G92 GTS and they practically were wasting their time and money on a minor upgrade when the 8800GTX/Ultra was still superior. The Other funny point is when framebuffer started to become useful, people were having better chance with a G80 GTS 640 over the 512MB versions.

yea unless this chip is priced at 200 or lower....pointless.

And yep, idk who i'd be agreeing with, but the G80 was a better chip than the G92, imagine how much better the G80 would've been if it came clocked at 738mhz stock like the GTS 250. And just a question/assumption, the only reason i could think of that G92 was made was that G80 for some reason didn't go to planned if/when nvidia attempted to shrink it so they tweaked it around to make G92 which did work and was cheaper. Yes? or am i wrong lol cause G80 would've been a beast at GTS 250 speeds+GTS 250 overclocking.

WEWT, I will be getting one of these if it's under $200 if not I will be sticking with my EVGA GTX 260 Core 216.

Its somewhat cool, should be a good folder. It'd be nice if it was SLI capable though :/

Its also kind of useless since the 9800GX2 is basically 2 x 9800GTX, while the DualCore GTS250 will only be like 2 x 9800GTX+'s. The only real advantage of this card would be that it uses less energy and is on single PCB.

I might get one of these to replace my 9800 GX2 simply because of the lower power requirements and doubled memory capacity. Pity about the lack of quad-SLI capability, but hopefully that means this card will be well-priced.

Also, I'm very interested to see what the cooling solution will look like... if they use a cut-down version of the GTX 295 cooler it would also save money on R&D.

eidairaman19800GX2 anyone? What got me was when People moved from the G80 GTS to the G92 GTS and they practically were wasting their time and money on a minor upgrade when the 8800GTX/Ultra was still superior. The Other funny point is when framebuffer started to become useful, people were having better chance with a G80 GTS 640 over the 512MB versions.

I must have had a different card then because i went from the reference 8800GTX to a 512MB 8800GTS (I sold the GTX for a fantastic price which bought the GTS with profit) and the GTS was at least 10% faster, on top of that, for those interested in synthetics, in the same PC system, my 3D mark 2006 score went from 15,300 to 17,100. I do acknowledge however that in the very high resolutions, the 8800GTX did more than hold it's own over the 8800GTS with it's larger memory and bus.

Also at the time of 8800GT and even 8800GTS release many retailers were still selling the G80 8800GTX and charging double the price (still) over the 8800GTS.

AssimilatorI might get one of these to replace my 9800 GX2 simply because of the lower power requirements and doubled memory capacity. Pity about the lack of quad-SLI capability, but hopefully that means this card will be well-priced.

Also, I'm very interested to see what the cooling solution will look like... if they use a cut-down version of the GTX 295 cooler it would also save money on R&D.

thats what i want to do. get 2 of these instead of using my current GX2's. Obviously a bios flash wouldnt work but if I dump the bios of one of these cards (if they are locked) and tag it as a GX2 in nibitor and reflash it i wonder if it will fool the drivers into enabling SLI. you dont need a bridge you can do it though the bus and at PCI-E 2.0 with the GX2 already not able to saturate it you shouldnt loose to many points.

crazyeyesreapersorry PP i think i may not have been clear in what i ment

the 8800gts 512 offered within 5% of the 8800gtx perfromance at the time but what i was trying to say is the 8800gts has been renamed and rebaged and slightly altered untill it became the gts 250 the point i was making was that even with the rebadge the 8800gtx in many cases was faster then a 9800gtx not so much the gts 250 (due to clock speeds) and i was also saying the same thing this is what the 9800gx2 SHOULD have been as in 2gb = 1gig usable memory compared to the 512 mb usable on the 9800gx2

You should realize nVidia doesn't always release GPUs to top their older GPUs in performance. Their strategy for quite a while now has been to release a super powerful GPU, then work to release GPUs that keep the same performance level while consuming less power and producing less heat, while being cheaper to manufacture. They did the same thing with G70 and G71.

The 8800GTS 512MB was worse than the 8800GTX, but was very close to the 8800GTS 620. However, it was cheaper to the consumer and to manufacture, ran cooler, and consumed less power than the 8800GTS 640.

The 9800GTX was not a rename, it was a very different beast from the 8800GTS 512, and was planned from the beginning of G92's life. Besides the obvious Tri-SLi option on the 9800GTX, it also performed about 10% better then the 8800GTS at stock speeds. It did match an 8800GTX, well about 1% difference between the two, but again was cheaper to manufacture and cheaper to buy, while running cooler and consuming less power. Not to mention most 8800GTS 512s couldn't even match 9800GTX clocks due to the poor power setup on the 8800GTS, and forget about matching a 9800GTX in overclocking. You can voltmod the 8800GTS to be close to the 9800GTX without volt mods though. Of course the die shrinks, PCB and GPU revisions did eventually give us the GTS250. The very few games where framebuffer actually makes a difference, I can only think of GTA:IV, the 8800GTX was better than the 9800GTX, but that was not enough to negate the overall performance benefit of the 9800GTX in other areas.

I think you got that backwards. Like tatty said, the 8800GTS 512 was faster than an 8800GTX while using less power and generating less heat. The 8800GTS 512mb and the 9800GTX are the same chip with different board features. The 9800GTX+ on the other hand was alot different than them all with the main difference being its a g92B chip and was on a 55nm manufacturing process. The GTS250 is essentially a rename with 1gb of rams.

I got my 8800GTX in late '08 for 115.

Thats a GTX. Im talking Ultra that still goes for a considerate amount these days.

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTS_512_MB/20.html

8800GTX steam rolled across the board. Wonder why TPU didnt include an Ultra :confused:

PP MguireI think you got that backwards. Like tatty said, the 8800GTS 512 was faster than an 8800GTX while using less power and generating less heat. The 8800GTS 512mb and the 9800GTX are the same chip with different board features. The 9800GTX+ on the other hand was alot different than them all with the main difference being its a g92B chip and was on a 55nm manufacturing process. The GTS250 is essentially a rename with 1gb of rams.

Thats a GTX. Im talking Ultra that still goes for a considerate amount these days.

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTS_512_MB/20.html

8800GTX steam rolled across the board. Wonder why TPU didnt include an Ultra :confused:

I find it odd that you like to the 3DMrk06, which means essentially nothing when it comes to real world performance, but does back up your position, but not to the overall performance page one page later in the review...of course that is probably because the overall performance page shows you are wrong...

The 8800GTX was faster than the 8800GTS 512 and the 9800GTX was virtually identical overall:



And the Ultra was just an overclocked 8800GTX, down to the PCB being identical, it just had a beefed up cooler to handle the extra heat. I don't think W1z ever actually had an 8800Ultra to review, though the 8800GTX was easily overclocked to match the Ultra specs probably wasn't worth the hassle to include in the review though...

And actually the 9800GTX+ wasn't really that much different, nVidia designed it this way. G92b was pin compatible with G92, so no changes to the PCB were made between the 9800GTX and 9800GTX+, not even the GPUID changes, which is why it is impossible for software like GPU-z to tell the difference between the 65nm and 55nm version of the G92. This is why we had so many threads back when the 9800GTX+ was popular asking why GPU-z said it was 65nm. The real changes didn't come until the GTS250, where the G92b was essentially put on the 8800GTS 512 PCB(slightly modified for Tri-SLi).

Galaxy must be bored to tears!!!!!

well since the G92 cores are dirt cheap for partners maybe another company will see this GTS 250x2 and make one that is sli capable

NVIDIA invented hot water once more.

am i the only one that noticed the series of pins next to the two power connectors? I'm thinking it could be some sort of sli-bridge they custom made, since the memory arrangement of the first gpu (near the dvi) pretty much takes up the space where they would have put the sli connectors. i know those pins aren't for the fan b/c that's at the bottom left (dvi end) and the audio conector for hdmi is at the top left. just an idea of what could be... and if it were true that'd be sweet.

pic again for reference...