9800GX2 - Page 4

Hexus · 03-22-2008, 08:38 AM

Quote:

We (Tom's Hardware) do not recommend buying a GeForce 9800 GX2 for those who rarely change graphic cards and want to invest in a very high end card and keep it for a long time. There are times when a card like this should excel, like when games are played at high resolutions and with demanding settings, but the 9800 GX2 is barely better than a simple GeForce 8800 Ultra. The problem, as is the case with the 3870 X2, is the relatively meager 512 MB of memory, which is incompatible with very high resolutions and when antialiasing is activated. The numbers speak for themselves: the 9800 GX2 out performs the 8800 Ultra (with 768 MB) by 29% on average and up to 41% at a resolution of 2560x1600, while activating antialiasing at this resolution shortens the gap to 13%. Yet, for many games, it's the only mode that still isn't smooth and the 9800 GX2 doesn't deliver much.
At the same time, this is clearly the new very high end card from NVIDIA and it's sold as such. The Point Of View model was announced at €500 ($791) and even with the lower price announced by NVIDIA ($600), the price difference compared to the 3870 X2 that we can find for less than $400, barely matches the average performance gap. The price-performance ratio of the 9800 GX2 isn't the best and gets worse at very high resolutions. So, the card is in the very high-end price category, but it doesn't rank very high when it comes to price-per-performance.

Just saying....

-Hexus-

Letum · 03-22-2008, 01:18 PM

It has 1gb of memory, not 512. Unless they meant 512 per GPU, which is the case. However, because it essentially uses the same method of sli that two cards would, only 512mb of memory won't hurt you in high resolutions because that 512mb of memory is only rendering half the screen. Either way, it's still the fastest card out, it may not be a lot faster in every application, but it is in some and it does beat every other card in just about every application, even if only by a smaller margin.

gandulfy · 03-22-2008, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaige

Because Quad SLi is dumb for everything except Crysis, and is almost always CPU limited.

So unless you have a 30" LCD or a quad at 4Ghz+ quad sli is bragging rights and a fuckton of money.

Bah its not that much, I am waiting for them to come in now, and i use a dell 30inch WS, the contrast ratio is a bit meh, but I mainly play games on my pc and work from it. Its probably not a "smart" buy but I want to have fun with it :D.

Hexus · 03-22-2008, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hexus

They're talking about the per-card memory, don't mis-read or mis-interpret it.

If it was 768+ PER-CARD, would make a huge difference on the AA settings.

I would imagine 2 8800 GTX's in SLI would beat the new 9800gx2, but I haven't seen the hard #'s yet. With only a 13% improvement over the 8800 ultra, stands to reason that it would.

-Hexus-

Are you allowed to quote yourself from another post? Oh well, fuck it!

-Hexus-

Gaige · 03-23-2008, 02:32 AM

Hexus specs aren't everything. Have you actually read the myriad of reviews of the GX2 out there?

I bet you, at every resolution other than 2560x1600 the 9800GTX is faster than the 8800GTX with less memory.