Cool, so expect prices of 8800/9800's to drop soon then? :D

Edit: I wander if it would be the same PCB, it'd be sweet to be able to flash your 8800/9800 card to the new named bioses.

Blah. They are really getting shameless now... :shadedshu

lol, so 8800gt became 9800gt which now becomes the GTS 240. I wonder how many people will fall for this and end up thinking that the GTS 240 is more powerful than the 8800gt and pay more for it.

wtf, this should be illegal...

Seriously? More rebadgeage?

This is pathetic.

This is actually stupid for 3 reasons;

1. Its Confusing even reading about it

2. They could of kept the current names (8800gt, 9800GTX) and used the names GTS 240 etc for new cards! Their just using up what they could use for futures sake.

3. Doesn't this mean they will have to start distributing these to companies such as EVGA and XFX just so they can print GTS 240 on them? Wasting mooooonneey!

awesome - that means that id be able to flash the equivalent of a 8800GTS 512 into a a 8800GTS 512 for some schmexy SLi slap n tickle.

Considering there's no mainstream GPU to succeed G92 from NVIDIA until Q3 2009, they must have thought this was important. They can't sell the same 8800 GT for 2 years with the same name.

like i have been saying all along
"renaming will be nvidia's downfall" :nutkick:

Good thing i think...ok its another re-badge but now everything comes under the GTX/S 2xx banner which is a more streamlined way of setting up nvidias product listings instead of 9800gt>9800gtx>Gtx260>Gtx280>Gtx295/Gx2 etc...

There is positive and negative thing by doing that.. re branding means new product with sharing some old features but with additional new technology.. mean the product has improvement.. maybe not in performance but it could be more energy efficient.. better power consumption.

The bad thing, those who already know or having the 8800/9800 GT/GTS/GTX+ will see no benefit to buy the new card bcoz its actually still the same card. Minor change on the card (customer viewer) even actually step up from 65nm to 55nm is a big change (GPU Chip maker viewer)

well to those still not own this card it will be a good choice, and hopefully its cheap.. for ppl out there who already have 8800/9800 GT/GTS/GTX+ forget about this card.:slap:

So, I'm guessing that Nvidia's not going to have anything new for the mainstream market for a while, and is having to rebrand older cards because of it?

Either way, I still like Nvidia's new naming system, expecially with the way they're not naming their new dual-processor card something silly like "Gx2," just GTX 295. I just wish they weren't renaming old cards to do it.

seriously its not even fun to read the rebading news from Nvidia every other month. I think somebody already reported on rebadging the same cards a few months back .

Nvidia get more products out than names

Haha LOL!!!
This is ubelievable :D

Nvidia just can't be serious...

Well, I really don't like the renaming/rebadging of cards. However, in this instance I can see why they are doing it. I wouldn't have done it completely different myself, but the way nVidia did it, with the way the market worked out, I can certainly see why they did it this way.

The problem is that G92 was simply a damn good core. It is actually a smart move to keep it going and have it fill the mid-range section of the next generation. They save money by not needed to design a new GPU to fill that need, and we still get some damn good mid-range cards.

Now, obviously there are some down sides. It is confusing to the customer, especially when the same card has already had a rebadge. However, that is where research comes into play. Everyone should be doing research before buying any video card. If they don't do research, and see that the card is the same, then they did nothing more than screw themselves over.

oli_ramsaylol, so 8800gt became 9800gt which now becomes the GTS 240. I wonder how many people will fall for this and end up thinking that the GTS 240 is more powerful than the 8800gt and pay more for it.

This is, again, where research comes in. Besides that, it is almost never worth it to upgrade from a high-end card from the previous generation to a mid-range from the current. You are almost always looking at little to no performance improvement. How many people will upgrade from a HD3850 to a HD4650 because they think it will be more powerful? Those are the same people that would upgrade from an 8800GT to a GTS 240, because they don't do proper research before buying...I like to call them idiots.

apheX?This is actually stupid for 3 reasons;

1. Its Confusing even reading about it

2. They could of kept the current names (8800gt, 9800GTX) and used the names GTS 240 etc for new cards! Their just using up what they could use for futures sake.

3. Doesn't this mean they will have to start distributing these to companies such as EVGA and XFX just so they can print GTS 240 on them? Wasting mooooonneey!

1.) Not really.

2.) They are plenty of names, a few missing wont matter.

3.) Actually, this is a big money saver. Either way, the companies like eVGA and XFX would have to come up with badging for the cards, so there is no wasted money there. However, it saves a shit load of money in R+D costs to develope a new core quick enough to fill the need these cards will fill.

I bought my 8800GT's at $250, and right now the GTX260 is at $250.
Right now, the price of 8800GT is ~$100, and when they re-brand these G92 cards, It'll probably under $100. Which fit rights under low and mid range cards.

newtekie1This is, again, where research comes in. Besides that, it is almost never worth it to upgrade from a high-end card from the previous generation to a mid-range from the current. You are almost always looking at little to no performance improvement. How many people will upgrade from a HD3850 to a HD4650 because they think it will be more powerful? Those are the same people that would upgrade from an 8800GT to a GTS 240, because they don't do proper research before buying...I like to call them idiots.

Are you sure about your comparison? The way I'm hearing it, there's absolutely no difference between an 8800GT/9800GT/GTS240 other than die-size, but between the HD3850 and 4650 there are differences like 5.1 v 7.1 surround sound, power usage, perhaps better blu-ray decoding -- "more powerful" can mean more than just speed.

mdm-adphAre you sure about your comparison? The way I'm hearing it, there's absolutely no difference between an 8800GT/9800GT/GTS240 other than die-size, but between the HD3850 and 4650 there are differences like 5.1 v 7.1 surround sound, power usage, perhaps better blu-ray decoding -- "more powerful" can mean more than just speed.

No, "more powerful" means "more powerful". I think what you were after is the word "better". And while there are added features that come with the HD4650 over the HD3850, it is still less powerful. Meaning that performance in game will be lower with the HD4650 than with the HD3850. What do you think most people who will make that researchless upgrade will be doing it for? The 7.1 sound/lower power consumption or for better performance?

Since we don't know the final specs of the GTS240, we can't say it won't be "better" than an 8800GT or 9800GT. The smaller die will definitely improve power consumption at the very minimum, however it should allow for higher clocks(hopefully higher stock clocks) while still giving lower power consumption. And I, for one, am hoping for a new PCB that allows for Three-Way SLi on the GTS 200 cards.

I can see the need to do this, to get the names all set how they should be.
But NV needs to get it done and stop this crap.

SeleneI can see the need to do this, to get the names all set how they should be.
But NV needs to get it done and stop this crap.

Couldn't agree more. I think nVidia tripped over its own feet with their naming scheme. They need to just get it sorted out already.

newtekie1Couldn't agree more. I think nVidia tripped over its own feet with their naming scheme. They need to just get it sorted out already.

meh comparing the 3850 to 4650 is blatantly stupid IMO even when not doing research its friggin clear that 4650 and 3850 do not compare for a minute, the clocks, gddr2 vs gddr3, heck that analogy is busted. excuse for that one.

Now I could understand if you were talking 3850 vs 4670 now that could be an issue. Besides users by now should have a small understanding of naming spec.

ATI

3 - 5 spec low end. Eg. 4350, 4550
6 spec midrange 4650 - 4670, with the 50 and 70 noting changes
8 spec mid high/high end. This has been around for a long time... 4850 4870 lists goes on
9 spec top of the line not getting any higher unless they change the suffix at the end.

Nvidia does the same thing with their cards.

GTX 295 yea this would be top end. given the 9 spec
GTX 280 same deal here.
GTX 260 this will throw you for a loop a little bit but it's more midhigh.

so after that shouldn't be too difficult to figure out the rest. Nvidia is probably banking on stupidity of customers...ah the Geforce 4 MX days.

kysgmeh comparing the 3850 to 4650 is blatantly stupid IMO even when not doing research its friggin clear that 4650 and 3850 do not compare for a minute, the clocks, gddr2 vs gddr3, heck that analogy is busted. excuse for that one.

Now I could understand if you were talking 3850 vs 4670 now that could be an issue. Besides users by now should have a small understanding of naming spec.

There are HD4650's with GDDR3 memory. So, no, it is not "blatantly stupid". And I wasn't comparing the cards. Also, looking up clocks and if the card has GDDR2 or GDDR3 is RESEARCH, to think it isn't is "blatantly stupid".

However, I was pointing out the same issue exists regardless of if the cards are actually new cards or rebadged cards. The name on the card shouldn't matter, however oli_ramsay seems to think that all customers are stupid enough to buy cards based solely on name. I agree, that there are some out there, like this, but most intellegent consumers do research before buying.

The naming schemes are not that easy to figure out, especially when comparing between two different series. How can the customer know if a card from the 4 series will outperform their current card from the 3 series? That is where the issue comes in. If you look at nVidia's scheme, you have the 8800GT and 9800GT, which is better? Neither, they are both the same, but it seems like one should be better than the other. Or the 8800GS and the 9600GSO, which is better there? How about ATi's side, what about the HD3850 or the HD2900XT? How about the HD2600XT and the HD3650?

newtekie1There are HD4650's with GDDR3 memory. So, no, it is not "blatantly stupid". And I wasn't comparing the cards. Also, looking up clocks and if the card has GDDR2 or GDDR3 is RESEARCH, to think it isn't is "blatantly stupid".

However, I was pointing out the same issue exists regardless of if the cards are actually new cards or rebadged cards. The name on the card shouldn't matter, however oli_ramsay seems to think that all customers are stupid enough to buy cards based solely on name. I agree, that there are some out there, like this, but most intellegent consumers do research before buying.

True, but still It's not like nvidia hasn't done this before. Geforce 4 mx...ATI has also done the same thing...

newtekie1There are HD4650's with GDDR3 memory. So, no, it is not "blatantly stupid". And I wasn't comparing the cards. Also, looking up clocks and if the card has GDDR2 or GDDR3 is RESEARCH, to think it isn't is "blatantly stupid".

However, I was pointing out the same issue exists regardless of if the cards are actually new cards or rebadged cards. The name on the card shouldn't matter, however oli_ramsay seems to think that all customers are stupid enough to buy cards based solely on name. I agree, that there are some out there, like this, but most intellegent consumers do research before buying.

The naming schemes are not that easy to figure out, especially when comparing between two different series. How can the customer know if a card from the 4 series will outperform their current card from the 3 series? That is where the issue comes in. If you look at nVidia's scheme, you have the 8800GT and 9800GT, which is better? Neither, they are both the same, but it seems like one should be better than the other. Or the 8800GS and the 9600GSO, which is better there? How about ATi's side, what about the HD3850 or the HD2900XT? How about the HD2600XT and the HD3650?

yea ya got me on suffixes for that one, could have sworn I noted it though but if I'm correct.

8800GS and 9600GSO should be about the same matter of fact I can't remember.
2600XT is actually ahead of 3650 believe it or not. but depends of whether its gddr4 or gddr3. 2600XT gddr4 > 3650 > 2600XT gddr3 or roughly the same.


and I didn't realize they pumped out a 4650 with gddr3, my bad.
and the 2900XT hmm I don't remember the performance numbers too well. I want to argue that they would be the same. 3 series was a die shrink anyway but something tells me 2900XT would have edged it out barely.