Theres a new card, released in this year. Some people say that ... hes a stig (joking) ... that its the next level of the 9800gtx+. Is that true? Does anybody own this card? Its pretty new and there are no enough good benchmarks out there. Im planning to buy it just because im a nvidia fanboy and its smaller than those other huge monsters what wont fit in my mid-case.
It´s the 9800 GTX+ with a new label. The only difference is that the new card comes definitely with 1100 Mhz memory speed whereas the 1 GB version of the 9800 GTX+ has only 1000 Mhz.
It's a 9800gtx+, but it's chip is manufactured with 55nm tech instead of 65nm, which means less power and less heat. Also the 1gb version's board is about 1.5 inches shorter. It also performs better.
I read an article, I wish I could say where, it's been over a month, about this, the big talk was about Nvidia using the G92 again lol, but the word is basically the same all around, even with the majority of consumers, as long as the performance go's up, it's priced properly and so competes very well with ATI both in price and performance, it's not a problem. Had they not made the move to 55nm, this never would have happened. Many people don't realize, they didn't move the 9800GTX(+) from 65 to 55 "only" for the 9 series, it was a test bed for yet another card(s). IMO G92 was and still is pretty sick, especially at 55nm now, it's just awesome, I don't mind seeing it around still, I like it so much I bought two of the BGF GTX+ 1GB versions, knowing the memory was a little slower, but also knowing the sick amount of headroom for overclocking. I easily got the performance beyond that of the 512MB versions using Rivatuner, and the tempuratures are still so impressive I dunno what to say. It's like the perfect video card. Unless you have a giant monitor, I can't suggest any other card, not even for a casual gamer, the cost is just too perfect.
I haven't retested the "difference" in temps since installing the second card and running them both at 2200mhz instead of 2000mhz, but my temps are nice and cool always, neither card has ever hit 70c, not even when I fooled around and bumped the core clock to 800mhz. That was just foolin' around, I've left the core and shader clocks alone. The core clock on these cards is already kick ass so I haven't bothered, and the shader clock is even more impressive, so I've left that alone as well. I only did the memory so I could reach the 70GB/sec memory bandwidth. I only play at 1680x1050 but I do plan on 1920x1200, which is the only reason I bought the second card, otherwise one was plenty of power, even for Crysis. Man oh man do these two cards run great, and for less money than one Radeon 4870 hah. <Not knocking the 4870, badass chip right there, rips games apart no doubt, good luck with drivers though wink:
Damn, I am so pissed @ nVidia. They've been rebadging GPUs for like 3 generations now. It sucks. "Hey, let's rebadge GPUs so some stupid retard comes and buys an 8800GTS 3 ****ing times?"
LOL. Look at the generations that they've used G92 for. Like 3! The GTS250 is G92 based card right? If that is true,
- 9600GSO.. They've been changing everything so many times, that it isn't funny. 384 mb / 512 / 768 mb variants, 48 / 96 SP , 192 - bit, 256 bit respectively...
However, the G92 did own such the 8800GT and GTS, and GX2! I love the fact that they are lowering manufacturing processes from 65, to 55, and maybe even 45 later on if they bring it into a 4th generation (GTX3)... But can't nVidia be a bit more creative? New cores?
"If you hate nVidia so much, then don't buy their cards!"
Don't worry, I'm going for ATi now... Maybe later
EDIT: Woops, looked at date of last post... sorry for grave - digging...
Well, im already on ATI Radeon HD4870 1GB Factory Clocked and i gotta say that it was the best choice i could ever make in this price class. I owned GTX275 on FurMark with about 1000 points. It has its goods and bads but to be honest, i see now bads because its not like everyone is sayng. Before buyng i did alot of research and saw people telling everywhere that there will be massively many errors and compability issues - i just lol on them. The only little bug i had was with LFS bloom, checked the bugfix on 1 and works perfect. The physics works fine in all games, also using Ageia PhysX wich works fine for me. But, i gotta say that people are right about the noise ATI cards make. Im still not getting used to it because if i run Crysis for example, then it feels like i have a damn jet over here. And i hate the ATI profile thing wich is similar to Intel's core stepping. On idle its 500 and while gaming its 780mhz (on my card). But the good thing is that i can play every single game on max settings 1920x1080 and 2x/4x AA - gives me minimum of 32fps wich happened in GTA IV, Crysis runs faster for me. Some 4870 (newer ones) even support DirectX 10.1 and so does mine - sadly i havnt tested it out yet.
Well lol, i didnt want to type that long text but take it as a little review. I kinda recommend u to consider about ATI because its just better as it seems to be.
Personaly i dont think you will see the diff between a 9800GTx+ and a gtx250.
From my experiance: 2 Months ago i got the GTX 260. before i was having a X1950 PRO. The diff was dissapointing if you ask me. the GTX 260 wasnt a that great card.
Now 2 Months later i got my self a HD4890 1GB Supercoold (so can clock up to 1600 mhz). and i am much and much more happy. Back to ati = back alive.(just a joke).
No personaly i have a feeling that a HD4890 or HD4870(very fast one) is much better then a GTX250. i know that a GTX250 can be cheaper, but if the money is a problem i would really really keep the 9800GTX+ because that is a great card.
An other question is what kind of video editing / gaming are you doing. if you are only playing race games / or old school shooters then there is no reason to update. if you are goind for far cry2 then i would go for a gtx290.
Well, i got farcry2 installed - using it only for sandbox fun. Max settings and 1920x1080 and im on 60fps vsynced ... should i have any problems with it?
The HD4870 and 4890 basically are the same, 4890 is just a update. But runs on the same graphics engine.
And, is that a good idea to run 2 different architecture drivers on the same PC? I dont, dont know why..
