bit-tech.net | G80: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX

Mother-Goose 9th November 2006, 08:55

Thats the badgers nazzers Tim! AND I now understand what the unified stuff is all about! Well written, good facts! I am very intrigued to see ATI's response now as I think it is amazing that the X1950XT was actually a patch on it ( i know, full res on a 30" it isnt but everything else it was alot closer than I expected).

Awesome Tim, just awesome. I forwarded it around the office. No one seems to care although someone asked when it will be in a laptop.....I've just stolen his lunch.

Mother-Goose 9th November 2006, 08:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Techno-Dann
And will the retail version ship with an extra SLI bridge so two of them can be put in SLI, or will they just expect customers to find a second bridge somewhere?

As far as I am concerned, it's too much money for too little improvement over the X1950 XTX, especially as I don't game any larger than 1280x1024, and don't plan on going widescreen. Besides, there's no way my current PSU and cooling could handle one of those monsters.

It's a record-smashing peice of hardware, but I'd rather wait, thanks.

Probably for you then what you have is more than enough, and for most people in all honesty. BUT at big res's you can still have everything on full. the X1950TXT can't do that :)

keir 9th November 2006, 09:25

I'd like to see that in a mobo, its mahoosive!

Tim S 9th November 2006, 10:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omnituens
tbh, some of it was a little tech heavy for me, so i skipped a bit.

you mentioned the dual SLi connector, then "more on that later"

is that in the article, or do you mean another, future article?

Sorry, I forgot to come back to it - I've edited that bit accordingly.

Tim S 9th November 2006, 10:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by karx11erx
I wonder how you can claim the 8800's AF is as good as ATI's while you can still clearly see moiree in the cobblestones on the 8800 screenshots. Was it a case of "there cannot be what must not be"?

We're talking about NVIDIA's default AF quality on GeForce 8800 GTX. ATI's default AF quality is much worse than NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 GTX AF quality - it's closer to GeForce 7950 GX2 AF quality. With High Quality AF, it's about the same - some instances look better on NVIDIA hardware, and some look better on ATI hardware.

I wanted to make some videos but unfortunately ran out of time after spending ~30 hours writing the article. :)

I'm interested to see how High Quality driver mode affects things on GeForce 8800 GTX - I'm probably going to look into that one soon.

Mother-Goose 9th November 2006, 10:32

So there are different levels of anti-aliasing? I'm confused I just thought there was the different multiples (2x, 4x etc) but there are different grades? (normal, high etc)

Tim S 9th November 2006, 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mother-Gooser
So there are different levels of anti-aliasing? I'm confused I just thought there was the different multiples (2x, 4x etc) but there are different grades? (normal, high etc)

I'm going to be doing a much closer investigation into AA quality very soon.

In a nutshell though, there's 2x 4x 8xQ (these are all full multi-sample AA patterns) and there's 8x and 16x which use the same colour/Z samples as the standard 4xAA but with 8/16 coverage samples meaning that you get higher AA along the edges of polygons. Then there is the 16xQ mode which uses the same colour/Z samples as 8xQ but 16 coverage samples meaning that you get higher quality edges on rigid objects.

The difference between 8x/16x and 8xQ/16xQ is that there are more colour/Z samples, meaning that things like shadow edges are sampled better. With 16xQAA, you'll get 16xAA on the edges of objects, and 8xAA on things like shadows and with 16xAA, you'll get 16xAA on the edges of objects and 4xAA on shadows, etc. :)

flabber 9th November 2006, 10:49

Uhm, how can it be tóó fast for monitors with a lower resolution (like the 1680x1050)?
With a game like Crysis, wouldn't it be perftect to run it with this card, éven if you "only" have a 20" monitor?

My XFX 7900gt runs like the wind, but I could definately use some more speed. Since I don't want/need Sli (too expensive, and too powerhungry for me), a card similar to this one would be perfect right?

Tim S 9th November 2006, 10:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by flabber
Uhm, how can it be tóó fast for monitors with a lower resolution (like the 1680x1050)?
With a game like Crysis, wouldn't it be perftect to run it with this card, éven if you "only" have a 20" monitor?

My XFX 7900gt runs like the wind, but I could definately use some more speed. Since I don't want/need Sli (too expensive, and too powerhungry for me), a card similar to this one would be perfect right?

Of course it would... I guess the question you have to really ask is whether you could do with more speed... then you've got to ask yourself "how much more speed". Without doing any testing yet, I'd say the GTS is a better buy for those with 20" panels.

Mother-Goose 9th November 2006, 11:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim S
I'm going to be doing a much closer investigation into AA quality very soon.

In a nutshell though, there's 2x 4x 8xQ (these are all full multi-sample AA patterns) and there's 8x and 16x which use the same colour/Z samples as the standard 4xAA but with 8/16 coverage samples meaning that you get higher AA along the edges of polygons. Then there is the 16xQ mode which uses the same colour/Z samples as 8xQ but 16 coverage samples meaning that you get higher quality edges on rigid objects.

The difference between 8x/16x and 8xQ/16xQ is that there are more colour/Z samples, meaning that things like shadow edges are sampled better. With 16xQAA, you'll get 16xAA on the edges of objects, and 8xAA on things like shadows and with 16xAA, you'll get 16xAA on the edges of objects and 4xAA on shadows, etc. :)

:) :( ;) - that sums up my facial reactions to reading that hehe (beat that smalley )

flabber 9th November 2006, 11:06

True Tim, but when I buy Crysis (for example), my issue isn't my monitor, but how high can i turn my graphics settings :) And a faster videocard helps a lot on that right?

Tim S 9th November 2006, 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by flabber
True Tim, but when I buy Crysis (for example), my issue isn't my monitor, but how high can i turn my graphics settings :) And a faster videocard helps a lot on that right?

Of course it does - if you can afford the GTX, buy it because it's simply awesome. You should be able to run 16xAA in most games too.

If you can't afford a GTX, the GTS should satisfy most of your needs on that screen. :)

rupbert 9th November 2006, 11:43

Best review I have ever read for a piece of hardware, and I've read literally thousands.

specofdust 9th November 2006, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim S
We measured total power consumption of the system, since it's the easiest thing to do. :)

Now that is interesting. Overall power consumption was very low. This was a bench setup I assume? Even so, if you did a poll with those system specs and then 8800GTX and asked people "will a 330W seasonic PSU power all this" I imagine you'd have got close to all "no's". Just another example of people waaaay overestimating power needs, what with all the talk of 700W and 800W PSU's for G80.

DougEdey 9th November 2006, 11:48

I agree with Spec, seems as though we (as consumers) are getting fed FUD.

Mother-Goose 9th November 2006, 12:08

I reckon an SLI setup you could get away with a 500W? Deppending on how many hdd's and fans obviously, but it is certain interesting. Are there any power Specs for the QX6700?

Highland3r 9th November 2006, 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mother-Gooser
I reckon an SLI setup you could get away with a 500W? Deppending on how many hdd's and fans obviously, but it is certain interesting. Are there any power Specs for the QX6700?

Lol no chance :)

phat-ant 9th November 2006, 12:19

Nice Review Tim, I have the xfx 8800 gtx on my desk, however the rest of my new parts are yet to arrive.
Any suggestions on a suitable fitting case to wack it all in :)
as it is rather large. ;)

http://img283.imageshack.us/img283/5202/p1010644bw3.jpg

g3n3tiX 9th November 2006, 12:26

lucky boy.....
About the card : Oh.My.God.
i's crayzee !!

Iago 9th November 2006, 12:44

AWESOME piece of hardware information. Congratulations guys...as rupbert said, one of the best articles I've read on new tech.

By the way...when are we going to see some GTS numbers? I'm pretty sure that in my 20' wide screen (1680x1050) I'd notice 0 difference between the GTX and GTS...but my wallet would certainly notice it ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by specofdust
Now that is interesting. Overall power consumption was very low. This was a bench setup I assume? Even so, if you did a poll with those system specs and then 8800GTX and asked people "will a 330W seasonic PSU power all this" I imagine you'd have got close to all "no's". Just another example of people waaaay overestimating power needs, what with all the talk of 700W and 800W PSU's for G80.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey
I agree with Spec, seems as though we (as consumers) are getting fed FUD.

I've been on that boat for months...
http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=123643&page=3&pp=20

In January, I decided to power my rig with a 460w TACENS Valeo as it had the better power/price/noise ratio I could find (btw, recommended PSU brand if you find one), and had to suffer enough "that's not enough", "DX10 parts will kill your system", "spend 200 on a 700W PSU", "you are not future-proofed" comments for two lifetimes. If that's the worst power consumption is going to get for a while, I feel perfectly safe with my little PSU ;)

zr_ox 9th November 2006, 12:49

Great review Tim, thanks for pushing the late nights to bring us the review.

One question though is you did not touch on the "CUDA" technology, which will allow the graphics chip to simulate physics processing and aid in general-purpose computing?

Many people here are perfoming some kind of distributed computing when not gaming, and it would be handy for them.

My current screen is only 19" but I have to get me one of these for Crysis and whack everything up and I cannot wait.

Mother-Goose 9th November 2006, 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Highland3r
Lol no chance :)

FINE, 800w :P

Tim S 9th November 2006, 13:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by specofdust
Now that is interesting. Overall power consumption was very low. This was a bench setup I assume? Even so, if you did a poll with those system specs and then 8800GTX and asked people "will a 330W seasonic PSU power all this" I imagine you'd have got close to all "no's". Just another example of people waaaay overestimating power needs, what with all the talk of 700W and 800W PSU's for G80.

It's a bench setup with 1xHDD, 1 DVD drive, and the "system components". 450W is the minimum recommended for a single GeForce 8800, 750W (G80 SLI Certified) for SLI.

Tim S 9th November 2006, 13:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by phat-ant
Nice Review Tim, I have the xfx 8800 gtx on my desk, however the rest of my new parts are yet to arrive.
Any suggestions on a suitable fitting case to wack it all in :)
as it is rather large. ;)

http://img283.imageshack.us/img283/5202/p1010644bw3.jpg

I think the Stacker 830 should fit it just fine - nice card you have there. :D

DougEdey 9th November 2006, 13:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim S
It's a bench setup with 1xHDD, 1 DVD drive, and the "system components". 450W is the minimum recommended for a single GeForce 8800, 750W (G80 SLI Certified) for SLI.

Based on some quick math, that'll mean that nVidia expect 300W for an extra card. I'm concerned however that the "SLI Certification" scheme for power supplies is merely a way for PSU manufacturers to charge premiums.

Log in

G80: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX

Comments 51 to 76 of 146