GeForce 8900 - overclocked and driver optimized G80

[manson_ze]

GeForce 8900 is the most natural and obvious answer for NVIDIA to ATI's coming R600-based series of graphics cards. The Inquirer now reports that NVIDIA is planning to launch this card to about the same time as R600 to compete with ATI's coming cards. GeForce 8900 will be based on an overclocked G80 circuit, but also sport some driver optimizations. The fact that NVIDIA is working on improving its drivers is old news, but what these optimizations really are is hard to say.

source: nordichardware

 

[L|NK|N]

The fact that NVIDIA is working on improving its drivers is old news, but what these optimizations really are is hard to say. source: nordichardware

Maybe the 8900 series will ACTUALLY SUPPORT DX10. J/K no flames please.

 

[JC316]

Hehe this is taking me back...... Geforce FX 5800, then 4 months later the Geforce FX 5900, which was nothing more than an overclocked 5800.

 

[tkpenalty]

This is why nvidia is going to choke again T_T.

 

[Ketxxx]

group hug for ati

 

[mullered07]

nvidia: hmmm lets save some money and overclock a 8800 and call it a 8900, mugs will buy it anyway :shadedshu

 

[OOTay]

nvidia is lamers, i like my sig for this reason.

 

[x800professor]

An 80nm GDDR4 8900 would make more sense, but who knows. I'm no fanboy, I simply buy the best card I can find for the amount I can afford. I'm mostly interested in seeing what all this does to prices.

 

[cjoyce1980]

maybe for once if nvidia would try and stop being the first for every thing and actual put some proper development time into there products, they wouldn't on the back foot every time ATi release something new.

 

[tkpenalty]

^Agreed, I have to say, its probably just a 7900GTX that has been beefed up so much. It "emulates" DX10 with major difficulty which is rather amusing.

The 8900 is an obvious act of desperation. IF the X1950XTX was revised with DX10 programmed into it, it would outperform the 8800 surely.

Back when the 9700/9800 series kicked nvidia butt, nvidia decided to release the FX5900, then the 5950, just to save themselves, failing what they wanted. They then jumped ahead and quickly released the 6 Series, t'was good but crappy thing was people couldn't unlock. The 1k series wasn't that sucessful due to the fact that ATI didn't have SM3.0 but 2.0.

Then you find later, ATI and Nvidia have launched the 7 Series, the X1k series having a bunch of new features including the thoughtful physics function (not used yet, will be useful soon). The 7 Series wasn't very revolutionary IMHO, nothing much new, just the same old SLI and SM3.0.

Nvidia is already showing signs of making horrible mistakes right now.

 

[AshenSugar]

think u ment the x serise not 1k seirse but i dissagree about them not being successfull, the x800 range sold VERY well, and infact are still decent compared to newer cards, the x800pro/xt x850pro/xt range cards where and are still decent for older systems or as a hold over card.

the x1k seirse kicks arse, and i agree, as i have said b4, nvidias looking realy bad to techs and non fanboi geeks because their drivers are sucking so bad!!!

 

[Ketxxx]

Nvidia know their boned, hence the 8900, news of the 8900 really does only point to one thing - they cant get DX10 workin on the 8800.

 

[tkpenalty]

@Ashen

Yeah, the X800 series is still selling strong, I say it is a better alternative for mid-range now. Unlockable, affordable and still packs heaps of power. At least ATI didn't laser cut their cores like nvidia did, they know people are doing it but they know not many people know about it.

The X1k series will still hold into the next Generation of DX10; thanks to shader intensive games, and not vertex intensive (vertex intensive = ugly and extrmely inefficient and time consuming to program). Also as a physics card, being waaaaay more powerful than the Aegia Physx, the X1050 outperforms the Physx HARD.

Nvidia are digging their own grave releasing the 8900GTX, we know the R600 will be a space heater, but, that is with a newer architecture that actually supports DX10. Also comes stock configured with water cooling =D. The low end offerings are the complete opposite of the R600; using barely any power.

 

[AshenSugar]

i hope the r600 midrange variants are good this time around, the low end and midrages for x1k where kinda bad in the early days, well the x1800gto wasnt bad for what it was, but still.

 

[AshenSugar]

i hope the r600 midrange variants are good this time around, the low end and midrages for x1k where kinda bad in the early days, well the x1800gto wasnt bad for what it was, but still.

 

[Ecthlipsis]

Haha, fanboys...

Sorry ATI lovers, Nvidia is going to mop the floor with them... Read =X

http://www.dailytech.com/ATI+Radeon+HD+2900+XTX+Doomed+from+the+Start/article7052.htm

I know this will be hard for some of you to hear, but ATI is bent over and ready to get ass raped from Nvidia... amusingly, AMD is now in the same boat from the Core 2 and both companies are taking it up the arse together.

I support whatever company is producing the best card for the money, and that is without a doubt, Nvidia for this generation.

It has been SIX MONTHS since the 8800 series was released and ATI still hasn't released their answer on the shelves yet...

But wait... what's this? The R600 XTX is an expensive piece of shit that isn't even as fast as a GTS? And what's this? The R600 XTX is only around 1 FPS faster than the XT, and in some cases slower? That's right...

GDDR4 was a poor choice, as it is too expensive and ATI will feel sorry soon. In fact, word on the street is that they aren't even going to release the current XTX because they know it will just be mocked.

What's really special is the fact that this is SIX months later than the 8800 series... these cards SHOULD be destroying Nvidia but they suck =X

And the 8900 is not a bad idea... lol... when you have your opponent on the ground and about to crush him, might as well add some extra weight. The Ultra is the OC'ed 8800, the 8900 promises some nice performance boosters. ATI can't even keep up with the 8800 and the 8900 is about to come... not a good time to be AMD/ATI.

Oh, and don't forget to note the extremely large lead the GTX has over the XTX... it's 6 months older and still rapes the shit out of ATI's top end.

 

[ex_reven]

In fact, word on the street is that they aren't even going to release the current XTX because they know it will just be mocked.

While the rest of your opinion may be somewhat valid, i think you pulled this statement out of your ass

 

[Grings]

why ati and nvidia even bother advertising anymore i have no idea

 

[Ecthlipsis]

While the rest of your opinion may be somewhat valid, i think you pulled this statement out of your ass

"The less than stellar performance benchmarks are no surprise to board partners and AMD insiders. Two independent ATI board builders told DailyTech that Radeon HD 2900 XTX will not be a part of their initial portfolios. Given the additional memory cost and bulky card footprint, it seems unlikely the XTX will ever see the light of day."

So while this is merely my interpretation of that reviewer's conclusion, it does make logical sense to me for ATI to not release the current XTX model if it is just going to get stomped like that.

One thing that people need to realize is that I am not a Nvidia fanboy. If the R600 crushed the 8800's and we're comparable in price I would definitely get one. However, I do find this situation very amusing, especially in regards to people that are pro-ATI and have been saying things like "Nvidia is just a piece of shit, wait til ATI released the R600... it will DESTROY the lame 8800's."

I hope they do make it better... as is there is no competition and this no real reason for prices to drop.

 

[HellasVagabond]

Nvidia already has the 1st place from beta benchmarks for the new X2900XT so why release an entrirely different GPU when they can OC an 8800GTX to lets say 650/2000 from 575/1900 currently and have their partners OC them even further to lets say 700/2100 ?
I think it would easily kill the X2900XT if not the XTX also.

 

[mandelore]

Nvidia know their boned, hence the 8900, news of the 8900 really does only point to one thing - they cant get DX10 workin on the 8800.

hmmm interesting point, why bring out the 8900 soon after their flagship 8800 series? it points out to me that something needed fixing...

 

[GSG-9]

amusingly, AMD is now in the same boat from the Core 2 and both companies are taking it up the arse together.

Aeh, ok, if you say so.

Last I checked (Yesterday at 11:30pm) low end amd chips still screw the c2ds by 18fps at most resolutions...ya the c2s are newer, and better IF OVERCLOCKED.

But the simple fact of the matter is, most people do not overclock there cpus, and in real world testing Amd beats Intel in that area (Lowend), Period. Don't get me wrong, my E6300 is great, at 2.2 Ghz it ties the E6600 and beats the 6700 at a few memory tests, but at stock, its kinda crappy at most games, and even in Oblivion my Opty 168 @ 3.2Ghz actually had better performance than my current rig (It was on XP x64 but still, the performance difference between XP x64 and Vista X64 is minimal.)

 

[mandelore]

Nvidia already has the 1st place from beta benchmarks for the new X2900XT so why release an entrirely different GPU when they can OC an 8800GTX to lets say 650/2000 from 575/1900 currently and have their partners OC them even further to lets say 700/2100 ?
I think it would easily kill the X2900XT if not the XTX also.

the xt beat its rival, and thats not even taking into account the ability to oc the 2900xt, once both overclocked i reckon the xt will do sum spanking, anyhoo, with the xtx benchies being so close to the xt's i think theres summit seriously wrong with the benchmarks.

 

[Wile E]

Sorry ATI lovers, Nvidia is going to mop the floor with them... Read =X

http://www.dailytech.com/ATI+Radeon+HD+2900+XTX+Doomed+from+the+Start/article7052.htm

I know this will be hard for some of you to hear, but ATI is bent over and ready to get ass raped from Nvidia... amusingly, AMD is now in the same boat from the Core 2 and both companies are taking it up the arse together.

I support whatever company is producing the best card for the money, and that is without a doubt, Nvidia for this generation.

It has been SIX MONTHS since the 8800 series was released and ATI still hasn't released their answer on the shelves yet...

But wait... what's this? The R600 XTX is an expensive piece of shit that isn't even as fast as a GTS? And what's this? The R600 XTX is only around 1 FPS faster than the XT, and in some cases slower? That's right...

GDDR4 was a poor choice, as it is too expensive and ATI will feel sorry soon. In fact, word on the street is that they aren't even going to release the current XTX because they know it will just be mocked.

What's really special is the fact that this is SIX months later than the 8800 series... these cards SHOULD be destroying Nvidia but they suck =X

And the 8900 is not a bad idea... lol... when you have your opponent on the ground and about to crush him, might as well add some extra weight. The Ultra is the OC'ed 8800, the 8900 promises some nice performance boosters. ATI can't even keep up with the 8800 and the 8900 is about to come... not a good time to be AMD/ATI.

Oh, and don't forget to note the extremely large lead the GTX has over the XTX... it's 6 months older and still rapes the shit out of ATI's top end.

What reviews have you been reading? The GTS get crushed by the XT. Doesn't say much about the recent XTX benchmarks tho, but the fact that the XTX actually loses to the XT in some benches, suggests that there is something wrong. It could be a simple driver fix, or it might, in fact, be a hardware problem. Fact is, we won't know until the cards release. These benches also say nothing of DX10 performance. I'm willing to bet that a 1GB frame buffer will come in handy soon. What if ATI loses on the DX9 front, but crushes in DX10? I'll sacrifice some DX9 perf for better future performance. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanboy by any means. I just buy the best I can afford. I have $400 saved for a vid card, but I'm waiting to see what ATI's offerings bring to the table. If, after R600's release, the fastest card in my price range is an nVidia, that's what I'll buy. But I'm not going to jump into DX10 without seeing what the competition brings first. Hell, we still don't know what 8800's are capable of in DX10, let alone ATI.

 

[mandelore]

What reviews have you been reading? The GTS get crushed by the XT. Doesn't say much about the recent XTX benchmarks tho, but the fact that the XTX actually loses to the XT in some benches, suggests that there is something wrong. It could be a simple driver fix, or it might, in fact, be a hardware problem. Fact is, we won't know until the cards release. These benches also say nothing of DX10 performance. I'm willing to bet that a 1GB frame buffer will come in handy soon. What if ATI loses on the DX9 front, but crushes in DX10? I'll sacrifice some DX9 perf for better future performance. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanboy by any means. I just buy the best I can afford. I have $400 saved for a vid card, but I'm waiting to see what ATI's offerings bring to the table. If, after R600's release, the fastest card in my price range is an nVidia, that's what I'll buy. But I'm not going to jump into DX10 without seeing what the competition brings first. Hell, we still don't know what 8800's are capable of in DX10, let alone ATI.

well said, tho im an ATI lover at heart