bit-tech.net

G80: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX

Comments 1 to 25 of 146

Reply
FIBRE+ 8th November 2006, 19:05 Quote
Did you just finish writing that up? :D

I'm gonna read it now :)
DougEdey 8th November 2006, 19:16 Quote
Anyone else notice that the I/O chip has "Eng Sample" on it?

I wanna see the Other cards in the series.

And Tim, any ideas about the January new release rumours?
Tim S 8th November 2006, 19:17 Quote
January release rumours?
DougEdey 8th November 2006, 19:18 Quote
Sorry, meant to say February
GoTaLL 8th November 2006, 19:20 Quote
damnit i need 1 of thoose .. i just got a 7950gx2 and now i need to change that :P
DougEdey 8th November 2006, 19:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoTaLL
damnit i need 1 of thoose .. i just got a 7950gx2 and now i need to change that :P


I'll take it :D
Tim S 8th November 2006, 19:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
Sorry, meant to say February
I don't know. NVIDIA hasn't talked to me about lower-end versions of G80, but I had guessed that they'd launch by March. :)
saeghwin 8th November 2006, 19:25 Quote
Price? :D
Highland3r 8th November 2006, 19:28 Quote
Nice review mate, skipped all the arcitecture shizzle etc, need to read back over that later on.

Performance looks to be very nice indeed, doesnt seem quite as quick as I initial expected though. It's not _that_ much faster than the GX2 or ATI's current flagship card. Guess its the kinda performance/quality that you've got to witness first hand. Numbers on a (web)page don't really do it justice.
Roll on DX10 though, should be good to see how well this card can cope :D

<edit> Typo on 2nd page "memory chips build" build = built? </edit>
specofdust 8th November 2006, 19:35 Quote
Reading said architecture shizzle right now and it's got images that can't be read due to being teeny weeny.

Yet again, requesting click for big pictures everywhere - now back to this epic review :D
koola 8th November 2006, 19:40 Quote
It's a good try by Nvidia, but I think the X1950XTX still wins by having image quality hard to compaire with the G80, better power consumption (green tax anyone ) and its phyisical size.

Nice review though ;)
Fozzy 8th November 2006, 19:40 Quote
Hmmm. Interesting. I'll get one when they shrink down the die process. Right now it's too powerhungry for me. But it is sweet. Also my monitor doesn't go that high with resolution. It goes close but I'm betting the GTS will be a better choice for me
alastor 8th November 2006, 19:43 Quote
Read pretty much all of it, best review ever I think. Big pats on the back for you Tim (and probably a new keyboard after all that).

There any chance of some 2560*1600 screenshots from the games? Would be awesome if you could.
Tim S 8th November 2006, 19:45 Quote
I'll try and sort some tomorrow if and when I wake up - I'm off for a nap. :p
Tim S 8th November 2006, 19:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highland3r
Nice review mate, skipped all the arcitecture shizzle etc, need to read back over that later on.

Performance looks to be very nice indeed, doesnt seem quite as quick as I initial expected though. It's not _that_ much faster than the GX2 or ATI's current flagship card. Guess its the kinda performance/quality that you've got to witness first hand. Numbers on a (web)page don't really do it justice.
Roll on DX10 though, should be good to see how well this card can cope :D

<edit> Typo on 2nd page "memory chips build" build = built? </edit>
The performance increase in canned benchmarks is not really noticeable, but when you start playing games with unheard-of frame rates and anti-aliasing at 2560x1600, you'll realise that there's simply no contest between this and ATI's Radeon X1950XTX.
Highland3r 8th November 2006, 19:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S
The performance increase in canned benchmarks is not really noticeable, but when you start playing games with unheard-of frame rates and anti-aliasing at 2560x1600, you'll realise that there's simply no contest between this and ATI's Radeon X1950XTX.

Thought as much... Bung us one in the post then ;) might give a better idea of performance :p
atanum141 8th November 2006, 19:49 Quote
i chukkled at the fact in the article, says that the way the card is set out internally that the user gets 2xAA or free default levels.

Really nice card but once can only dream of having one with a huge 30" monitor.
M4RTIN 8th November 2006, 19:54 Quote
looks like its basically pointless at less than 1600x1200 tho, always true with monster cards tho.. i wonder how many people will buy this run it on a 1280x1024 monitor and wonder why it isnt any better than a 7900gtx sli or 1950xtx.
specofdust 8th November 2006, 19:59 Quote
Great review there Tim. Just read the vast majority of it and it really covered pretty much everything I could want to know. It's obviously a stupidly powerfull card, but for most people probably OTT. It seems like someone like me who plays in 1600x1200 would be far more efficiently served just by waiting for the "mid-range" G80's, and I don't imagine that the majority of gamers out there are playing a whole lot higher then this.

Did flinch a little at the OcUK link at the end though :p
smoguzbenjamin 8th November 2006, 20:04 Quote
Aaargh this is frustrating. I was looking at getting a 7600GT this crimbo and then picking up one more in the coming year (money is scarce for me unfortunately), but if there's going to be an 8600GT (or the likes) out coming year I might need to opt for that. If history is anything to go on, the 8600GT should rival the 7900 series, but I can't afford any of that stuff :( Drat drat and double drat. Oh well. 7600GT (and perhaps SLi) it is for now I guess :(

Hey look at the bright side, here's hoping that the 7600GT prices will be cut in the next 12 months with the new G80 series out... May be not so bad after all...
Flibblebot 8th November 2006, 20:08 Quote
Nice review, but I think I might wait a year or so for the price to come down :eeek
You can't really call nVidia the Green Machine now that ATI's also gone green now...unless you want to distinguish with shades of green ("The Bright Green Machine" perhaps?)
Tyinsar 8th November 2006, 21:01 Quote
;) Tim

I'm now eagerly waiting to purchase a quad core CPU (though co$t might will make it dual core) on a 680i board (after I see the reviews) with a 8600GT :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flibblebot
...("The Bright Green Machine" perhaps?)
:) who gets to be the "bright" one then?
WilHarris 8th November 2006, 21:17 Quote
Pookeyhead 8th November 2006, 21:21 Quote
Three Hundred and Fifteen Watts!!!!! I wonder how the 65nm chips due later on will fare against this. To me, this is getting stupid now. Kentsfield, two of these bad boys in SLI, and all the rest of the gear in your rig, and your looking at one serious amount of power.

Am I the only one concerned about the cost of running today's high end rigs?

Having said that... I still want one really badly :)

Good review as usual. ;)


Dugged.... or is that digged? Done it anyway. :)
Da Dego 8th November 2006, 21:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highland3r

<edit> Typo on 2nd page "memory chips build" build = built? </edit>
I have stared at this article in proofing several times, and you have to find the ONE thing I missed :p
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums