9800GX2 or 9800GTX?

M

mrand01

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
341
Can't decide what to get...from what I understand, the GX2 is pretty much 2x 8800gts slapped on one card. Pretty nice...is the 9800GTX a true 9-series tho? I've been outta the loop for awhile, just wanna make sure i get the right thing. I don't do much PC gaming, but when I do, I want something to make everything look nice and pretty...
 
What resolution? If your just running at 1280x1024 a 9800GTX will more than take care of you. The GX2 is also SLI so no second monitor. If you can wait, the 10 series is around the corner in July (according to the rumors) which is the real new tech.
 
as far as price vs performance goes then go with the 9800gtx. this card is basically an overclocked version of the newer 8800gts. the 9800gtx will run anything out there on max settings except Crysis - but even the gx2 cant do that either. for the performance vs price, it is not worth it going all the way to the gx2.
 
This is really simple. If your running an intel board 9800GX2. If your running an SLi board 9800GTX SLi. No if's ands or buts if you want the best performance that's your answer :D
 
bluehaze013 said:
This is really simple. If your running an intel board 9800GX2. If your running an SLi board 9800GTX SLi. No if's ands or buts if you want the best performance that's your answer :D
Click to expand...

Its not that simple as if you can do 9800GTX Sli you can do 9800Gx2 quadSli to and that beats its smaller brothers 9800GTX Sli and if only ONE card is the choise a 9800Gx2 wins hands down anyway so the motherboard has no inpact of the choise of chipset.

Besides the 10xxx is NOT here in July, that is the G92b 55nm 9900-series.
True 10xxx with GT200 wont be here untill fall or even winter if not 4870X2/R700 is better than expected.

Yes 9800Gx2 can run crysis on very High DX10 in 1900x1050 in Vista and keep over 25FPS, any higher is not needed to make that game running smothly.
 
Niceone said:
Why not? GT200 already taped out early March and Nvidia have had working GT200-prototype cards for weeks now.

http://www.dailytech.com/NVIDIA+AMD+Set+to+Square+Off+Once+Again+This+Summer/article11451.htm
Click to expand...
As they don´t need it yet to keep the top dog position. Rumor say 9900 IS G92b and they go back to the original scheme and make money out of G92 first and it make no sence at all to have a 55nm 9800GT and a 65nm GT200 at the same time.
Just because they have taped it out and perhaps a working prototype says nothing about when it will be out as marketing is a diffrent story and decieds when a product will be released and it wil not be out befre it realy needs to be and nvidia is stupid if they don´t do that as making money is the prime goal of running bussiness, not meet demands from spoild brats once every 18 month if it not is needed and ATI has droped the ball hard with DX10 cards and are not in the game yet to even put up a fight on top dog-spot.
 
E.R said:
Yes 9800Gx2 can run crysis on very High DX10 in 1900x1050 in Vista and keep over 25FPS, any higher is not needed to make that game running smothly.
Click to expand...

That is an extremely false statement. You need 50+ for a game to feel right, especially in an FPS. 60+ is ideal.
 
E.R said:
As they don´t need it yet to keep the top dog position. Rumor say 9900 IS G92b and they go back to the original scheme and make money out of G92 first and it make no sence at all to have a 55nm 9800GT and a 65nm GT200 at the same time.
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't they release GT200 65nm [if it is 65nm..not 55nm]? I mean HD4870 should beat 9800 GX2, not to mention HD4870X2..so they would hand high end to AMD just like that?
 
Frag0Lution said:
That is an extremely false statement. You need 50+ for a game to feel right, especially in an FPS. 60+ is ideal.
Click to expand...
You are SO wrong when it come to Crysis i perticular as the motion blur doet its thing and 30FPS+ in general as low mark IS enought for smooth running.

Niceone said:
Why wouldn't they release GT200 65nm [if it is 65nm..not 55nm]? I mean HD4870 should beat 9800 GX2, not to mention HD4870X2..so they would hand high end to AMD just like that?
Click to expand...
GT200 will be 65nm as it will be hot and a powerhog , something around 250W on singleGPU card says it not is 55nm.

Since ATI just stated that RV770/4870 IS "on par with expectations" meaning just 50% faster than 3870 and not even a 3870X2 beats a 9800Gx2, just around -30% performace and 8800Ultra/GTX still beats a 3870X2 in the most cases.
that gives that 4870X2 will in best case be just about 10-15% faster than 9800Gx2 IF the driver that 2900XT never got according to fanboys that did not see the desighflaw with 2900/3870 core.
AT most 4870X2 is just 20% faster as +50% never can be more than 50% and that is no big deal for a 9800Gx2 to fix with some OC and improved driver as nvidia can deliver driver.
How it performs in the CPU-game 3dmark have no reallife meaning as that game IS ATIs hometurf and CPU-scaling like hell just frooze over, better then to use something that don´t scale with CPU like Crysis that is what 3dmark should have been in the first place. For all i care 4870X2 can have 2Ghz core, 4GB:s of 5Ghz DDR7 memory and 1024-bit interface and 4 GPU:s but as with ATI i perticular specs says nothing of reallife performance, if that was true then HD2900XT would have been that great card 8800GTX is/was.
 
Daycare playground in 1991: I can beat up Johnny, and since Johnny beat you up, I can beat you up, too. :rolleyes:

I'll wait for the benchies.
 
well its going to be running on 42" 1080p westinghouse. so 1920x1080. The board is not SLI enabled, its an intel chipset. How does EVGA's step-up progrma work? If i get a 9800gtx and want something better down the line, how do i do it?
 
HD2900 XT had worse specs than 8800 GTX and it was expected that it would lose against it. This time it's easier to predict since we already know how R600-generation cards work so you can tell lot from those numbers. HD2900 XT's and HD3870's biggest flaw is number of TMUs..and with HD4870 that number is doubled..this will remove biggest bottleneck of that card.

GT200 can be 55nm even if it's powerhog. If it is, as speculated, basically 9800 GX2 on single chip then even with 55nm it should be like 450mm^2 monster and should be powerhog..
 
actually a single GX2 can easily play crysis maxed out, but I would only be able to support this claim on resolutions up to 1680x1050 because that's my monitor size. I play on dx9 with everything on very high and 16x AF no AA, averaging no less than 30 fps ever. And to anyone who says 30 fps is unplayable in crysis, you obviously have not played the game. 30 fps looks smooth mainly because of motion blur. Even then, I still generally get around 40 fps, sometimes going into the 50's.
 
get an 8800GTS, save a $100 over a 9800GTX and over clock the GTS like mad :)

a gx2 cant play it maxed out easily, pending on resolution,. sure the blur effect helps on the sub 30FPS where most cards get on crysis, perhaps upto 1680 x 1050 , but no AA isnt "maxed out" as you say.
 
Niceone said:
HD2900 XT had worse specs than 8800 GTX and it was expected that it would lose against it. This time it's easier to predict since we already know how R600-generation cards work so you can tell lot from those numbers. HD2900 XT's and HD3870's biggest flaw is number of TMUs..and with HD4870 that number is doubled..this will remove biggest bottleneck of that card.

GT200 can be 55nm even if it's powerhog. If it is, as speculated, basically 9800 GX2 on single chip then even with 55nm it should be like 450mm^2 monster and should be powerhog..
Click to expand...
But still ATI just said that #it is on par with expectations" and by that meaning it is 50% faster than 3870, i did expect a lot more out of it and not a card that bearly beats 9800Gx2 when in its 4870X2 costume. Add drivertrouble to that i we have a new HD2900XT ib worst case even if they work away some bottlenecks but not the major problem since 2900XT was released.
 
E.R said:
But still ATI just said that #it is on par with expectations" and by that meaning it is 50% faster than 3870, i did expect a lot more out of it and not a card that bearly beats 9800Gx2 when in its 4870X2 costume. Add drivertrouble to that i we have a new HD2900XT ib worst case even if they work away some bottlenecks but not the major problem since 2900XT was released.
Click to expand...
Where have AMD stated that 50% faster is their expectation?
 
VR-Zone reported that Nvidia is going to change the GPUs powering 9800 GX2. They are now using G92-450 and new GPU will be named G92-451. They are doing this to get better yields. VR-Zone speculated that this could be 55nm dieshrink.
 
E.R said:
Its not that simple as if you can do 9800GTX Sli you can do 9800Gx2 quadSli to and that beats its smaller brothers 9800GTX Sli and if only ONE card is the choise a 9800Gx2 wins hands down anyway so the motherboard has no inpact of the choise of chipset.
Click to expand...


Hmm 600 bucks for 9800GTX SLi or over 1000 bucks for 9800GX2 Sli let me decide...::D Considering most people who bought 2 9800GX2 for Quad SLi are currently selling them I think i'll pass on that!

Mobo is the biggest impact on what you get simple as that, stuck without SLi mobo then go 9800GX2 for SLi on a card but if you've got SLi mobo then 9800GTX Sli is noticeably faster than 9800GX2. Quad Sli sucks so it's pointless, The verdict is still out on Tri-SLi but I suspect it might end up just as pointless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top