Geforce 8800 Ultra Review.

They are running it on a Core2 E6400, no indication of overclocking. Most of the benches are probably CPU-limited to some degree.
 
Its an overclocked 8800GTX i both mine running at 660/1620/1075 (2150) watercooled. Just think about it. Save $1000 *what must of us heard* for that card or get 2 8800GTX and overclock them.

I also think that the test is fake.
 
wow in some of the charts the 8800ULTRA is 4x faster than the GTX.. oh wait, the scale is screwed up...
 
I certainly welcome this addition. If these benchmarks are true then that spells good news for price reductions on the rest of the 8 series lineup! I can essentially just overclock a regular GTX and get similar or better performance for less money overall! :D
 
According to that review the Ultra has a lower TDP (2W) at higher clocks than the GTX (talk of a Vcore bump as well). Using improved transistor design, so maybe a core revision. It also says the Ultra uses 0.8ns GDDR3, to get 2.2GHz mem speed (should reach 2.5Ghz easily), while the GTX uses 1.0ns or 1.1ns.

I have a feeling these are going to clock like mad. Higher than the GTX.

 
I'm considering getting an 8800 Ultra for the sig rig, which I now have dual booting into Vista Ultimate 32bit now. I'll probably be getting a 1920x1200 monitor as well. I want to hold off on a new dream rig until the next gen DX10 parts, Barcelona and Penryn come out.

Think that's overkill for a Socket 939 4800+ X2 @ 2.6? Thing is QUAD-SLI doesn't work in Vista, and really, the only thing faster than that would be an 8800GTX/ULTRA or the X2900 series, and no games are yet CPU bound by this system, so I think the upgrade to at least an 8800GTX would be worth while.
 
Been looking around the Ultra core is labeled G80-450-A3, the GTX I can find are G80-300-A2. Also 0710A3 would be week 10 or mid march, so a new batch. Anyone have a GTX A3?




Want a pic?

 
I won't doubt the validity of the review (it was a mess looking through it) but doesn't this card seem a little unnecessary right now? AFAIK nothing really even challenges the 8800GTX yet.
I would've saved this hand until something like Crysis where people need some extra horsepower.
 
Domingo said:
I won't doubt the validity of the review (it was a mess looking through it) but doesn't this card seem a little unnecessary right now? AFAIK nothing really even challenges the 8800GTX yet.
I would've saved this hand until something like Crysis where people need some extra horsepower.
Click to expand...

We don't know if it's even going to be released this soon. Rumors mentioned it would take on R600 XTX, but since that seems to be even more delayed, the Ultra might not be released now.
Or, NVIDIA just wasn't expecting that the XTX would be so powerless (according to still uncofirmed benchmarks), against a 6 month old 8800 GTX. But since the Ultra was already done, they might aswell release it.
 
Its rumored to be released mid-late may, and I've actually read that in two or three places.

Who knows for certain though. The price range puts it out of the market for around 99% of users, if its as much as people claim it to be.
 
Neist said:
Its rumored to be released mid-late may, and I've actually read that in two or three places.

Who knows for certain though. The price range puts it out of the market for around 99% of users, if its as much as people claim it to be.
Click to expand...

If you mean the $999 non-sense, it's not going to happen...
 
Silus said:
If you mean the $999 non-sense, it's not going to happen...
Click to expand...

You might see e-tailers gouge up that high if supply is low. The 7800gtx 512mb was selling for $1k even when MSRP was lower.
 
J-Mag said:
You might see e-tailers gouge up that high if supply is low. The 7800gtx 512mb was selling for $1k even when MSRP was lower.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about MSRP. What e-tailers charge for the products they sell, is up to them and up to the consumers, to decide if they want it that bad.
The rumors surrounding this $999 non-sense, say the card will come out at that price i.e. MSRP, which is just BS.
 
If Nvidia was truly worried about the 2900XTX coming out and taking the GPU crown, they likely planned on releasing this at the GTX price point. Thus dropping the cost on the rest of their product line. Now, with the 2900XTX not being the be-all-and-end-all of GPUs (reportedly), they may be rethinking their strategy.

If the 2900XTX does not beat the GTX for the same price, then there is no need to drop the price on the GTX when they introduce the Ultra. They may as well introduce the Ultra as the GPU king, with a higher price point (maybe $999) and wait to drop the price down the road.

That way they are still positioned well in the market without losing market share or profit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top