PC Hardware forum

General discussion

GeForce 9 series?

by cubs123 / August 30, 2007 3:14 PM PDT

While shopping online for a new video card (8800 GTS), I read something about a Q4 release of a 9 series of GeForce graphics cards. They are said to have DirectX 10.1 capability but does that mean the 8 series cards won't? Please post your insight and comments about this topic.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: GeForce 9 series?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: GeForce 9 series?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
doubt geforce 9000 until spring 2008
by ramarc / August 31, 2007 5:09 AM PDT
In reply to: GeForce 9 series?

the g92 is almost ready for primetime but nvidia has no reason to rush it since ati/amd has no product to compete with the full 8800 lineup. ati's next gen r680 isn't scheduled until january 2008 and even if they manage to get a hd2950 (based on r600) out this fall, it probably won't dethrone the 8800gtx. so nvidia will probably milk the 8800 line for the rest of the year, and use the extra time to make sure their g92 drivers are top-notch.

Collapse -
thanks for responding
by cubs123 / August 31, 2007 6:08 AM PDT

yeah, I was just wondering because I didn't wanna purchase a new card and then be told that that not new anymore. But will there most likely be new drivers for the 8800 GTS for Dx 10.1?

Collapse -
dx 10.1 features are optional
by ramarc / August 31, 2007 7:59 AM PDT
In reply to: thanks for responding

nvidia and amd have both said they won't support dx 10.1 in curent silicon and may not in their next releases either. no game developers have stated support for 10.1 in the near future, so it shouldn't be a factor in your purchase decision.

Collapse -
thanks
by cubs123 / August 31, 2007 9:32 AM PDT

thats a big weight off my bag

Collapse -
i meant
by cubs123 / August 31, 2007 9:35 AM PDT
In reply to: thanks

i meant back*

Collapse -
I would still
by ozos / September 2, 2007 4:49 AM PDT
In reply to: thanks

wait for a bit, I've heard rumor of some price drops in November, at least on the nVidia side, and there is an almost guranteed price drop after Thanksgiving from both nVidia and AMD/ATI (christmas season, and yes things like graphics cards get dropped for it, either new releases, or big sales, anything to bring in buyers).

G92 has quite a bit of stigma around it, so does R700, generally my view on the hype for unreleased products: take all of the speculated performance, divide by roughly half, and you have a more accureate rough prediction of where the card will sit.

Speaking on past experience (ignoring the FX 5950 Ultra to 6800 Ultra jump) you can expect about 40 to 60% performance increase between top tier generations (so GeForce 8800 Ultra to whatever the top G92 SKU is, the reason I excluded 5950 to 6800 is that was closer to a 90% jump in some applications, not because of 6800 being so revolutionary, but because of 5950 (and its contemporaries) being so (comparatively) slow)

So if we figure that 8800 Ultra is already more power than anyone should need for any game on the market (unless you're playing 2560x1600, in which case it isn't enough power, but 2x8800GTS 640's is) add another ~45% to that performance, and it should be where G92 will sit (this ignores any new features it may bring, like HDCP upgrades, video decoding, various hardware acceleration through CUDA, etc)

Also figure it'll probably cost $699+ on launch, due to hype and so on, and no software on the market will likely need the power it offers (usually takes 2-4 months for developers to catch up).

Add to this the knowledge that most developers are shying away from PCs due to the sublime performance offered by PlayStation 3, Xbox360, and Wii (this should die down in 18 to 24 months, unless Sony and Microsoft decide to release new consoles every 2 years), the other reason they shy away is that the average PC simply can't offer the graphicsp rocessing performance (the performance delta, GPU wise, is too large currently, even though CPU wise its almost nonexistant)

This roughly means that if staying 100% up to date with games is your primary goal, going with a PlayStation 3 or Xbox360 might be a financially wiser choice, however if you intend to build a nice, top shelf PC, going with Radeon HD 2900 or GeForce 8800 would be perfectly acceptable, just ensure you buy a system with some upgradability to it (so LGA 775 would be a good choice, as would AM2, while things like Socket 939, PATA-133, DDR1, etc would be poor choices).

The advantage of this upgradability (especially if you get a high end power supply that can dish out 700 to 900W, such as the Enermax Galaxy 850W) is that you can buy whatever new graphics board in H1 2008 without much problem (now that PCI Express is stabilized as the accepted standard), so you shouldn't be left out in the cold by that.

Although, another general rule of thumb I've learned from experience:

A PC's performance decays at the rate of around $100/yr for graphics cards, or $1000/yr for the entire system, up to around $350 for the graphics, and around $2500-$2750 for the entire system

example:

GeForce 6800GT 256MB, ~$300 in 2004, as of late 2007, you would just now be feeling its age and just now noticing its sluggishness in only a few titles, but its just about enough to make you want to upgrade, or roughly a $100/yr investment, although buying the 6800 Ultra 512MB for $700~, wouldn't give you performance out to 2011, only out to around 2007 as well.

This is viewable in any graphics card purchase, Radeon 9800Pro was around $200-$250 when new in 2003, and lasted to mid/late 2005 with ease, and into 2006 with some strain

GeForce FX 5900XT was around $170 in late 2003, and barely made it into late 2005

GeForce 7900GT was around $250, in 2006, and still provides acceptable performance levels in late 2007, 7800GTX was around $380-$420, and still provides acceptable performance levels in late 2007 (even if its rare to find a working 7800GTX)

Hope this helps a little with deciding when to upgrade

Collapse -
Listen to this guy...
by Falcon978 / September 2, 2007 6:16 AM PDT
In reply to: I would still

Ozos,

Thanks again for helping me with my "Issue" with the dual channel crap.

For anyone else. I would suggest to listen to this guy.

Late,
Jeff

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

FALL TV PREMIERES

Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!