 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
 |
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT Performance Preview October 29, 2007 |
|
 |
|
| |
Summary: It isn't often that we're blown away by the performance of a $250 graphics card -- today's introduction of the GeForce 8800 GT is one of those times! The GPU delivers 8800 GTX levels of performance at a fraction of the price in games like Crysis and Call of Duty 4. Don't believe us? Then check out the benchmarks inside this article!
 GeForce 8800 GT Performance Preview | Page:: ( 1 / 19 ) |
It’s raining games!
We’ve already been hit by the first wave of games. This included DX10 titles like World in Conflict and BioShock, while fans of WW2 were treated to Medal of Honor: Airborne. The second wave of games is wrapping up now and was definitely more extensive; games in this wave include Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, CoH: Opposing Fronts, Clive Barker’s Jericho, Flight Simulator X: Acceleration, and then Valve gave us a real workout with 3 games at once: Half-Life 2 Episode 2, Portal, and Team Fortress 2! Later this week the second wave will finish up with games like Hellgate: London, Tabula Rasa, The Witcher, and Timeshift.
It’s the third and final wave that will probably blow your mind though. This November we’ll see the release of multiple blockbuster titles that would normally command all the attention and sales in a given year, all released in a span of just a couple of weeks. Games like Call of Duty 4, Gears of War PC, Unreal Tournament 3, and of course you can’t forget the 800-lb gorilla everyone’s been buzzing about named Crysis. We’ve included benchmarks with the Crysis demo in this article and believe us folks, this game in particular can bring your system to its knees if you go overboard with the graphical eye candy!
So with all these great new games coming out and tech deals for the holidays starting to kick in, naturally there’s going to be a huge wave of gamers and hardware enthusiasts looking to upgrade in the coming days and weeks. AMD, Intel, and NVIDIA all plan on releasing new products to cater to this crowd, but it’s NVIDIA’s brand new GeForce 8800 GT that we’re here to talk about today.
[image]
| <% print_image("01"); %> | <% print_image("02"); %> |
Taking over the mainstream: the GeForce 8800 GT
Prior to the release of the GeForce 8800 GT, the GeForce 8600 GTS and 8600 GT took on the brunt of the work in the mainstream segment, and while NVIDIA’s 8600 GPUs were competent performers in comparison to the competition from AMD, neither card really captured the hearts and minds of gamers in the market for a $150-$200 video card who follow this website; many of you guys continually slammed the 8600s and Radeon 2600s for their lack of performance in comparison to their predecessors the GeForce 7900 GS/7950 GT and the Radeon X1950 Pro.
As you correctly pointed out, these mainstream DX10 cards often performed slower than their DX9 predecessors in the games that were out at the time (most of which were DX9 titles), yet they also didn’t have the shading horsepower necessary to deliver good frame rates in DX10 games either. Knowing this, many gamers and hardware enthusiasts decided to pick up X1950 Pro and 7950 GT cards instead of upgrading to the 8600 and 2600 cards that were available, or, if they had a little extra money to spare, they opted to get a GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB.
Priced at an MSRP of $299, the GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB has been a very popular upgrade for enthusiasts who want to really crank up the eye candy and still get respectable performance. In newer titles though like World in Conflict and BioShock with 4xAA we’ve begun to see the limitations of the card’s 320MB frame buffer, particularly as you crank up the screen resolution. In these cases the card’s memory subsystem becomes a bottleneck – it just doesn’t have enough onboard memory to load everything and frame rates begin to become choppy as a result.
[image]
| <% print_image("03"); %> | <% print_image("04"); %> |
To service this segment of the mainstream market, NVIDIA has come up with a brand new card based on their equally new 65-nm G92 GPU. G92 is based largely on the G80 GPU found inside the GeForce 8800 GTX/GTS, only NVIDIA has implemented a number of improvements.
| Inside The G92 Graphics Core | Page:: ( 2 / 19 ) |
65-nm process inside
G92 is built on TSMC’s smaller 65-nm manufacturing process. Previous NVIDIA GPUs, including the G84 chip used in the 8600 GT/GTS utilized TSMC’s 80-nm or 90-nm process. The smaller process allows NVIDIA to cram more transistors into G92 (approximately 754 million in G92 versus 681 million in G80) without severely increasing the size of the GPU’s die. This makes the GPU cheaper for NVIDIA to produce as a result – the 8800 GT will sell for an MSRP starting at $199 so this is important.
Another benefit of the smaller process is reduced power consumption. With lower power consumption, the chip generates less heat. This allows NVIDIA to cool the chip with just a single-slot heatsink/fan unit, versus the dual-slot cooling NVIDIA used previously for the GeForce 8800 GTS line.
112 stream processors running at 1.5GHz
If you recall the architecture of the G80 GPU used in the GeForce 8800 GTX, NVIDIA arranged the stream processors into groups of sixteen. Each group of stream processors had its own dedicated texture address and filtering units as well as L1 cache. For ease of use we’ll refer to each of these groups of sixteen as a “bank” of stream processors. With 16 stream processors per bank, and 8 banks total, that adds up to a total of 128 stream processors inside the GeForce 8800 GTX, while two banks were deactivated in GeForce 8800 GTS for a grand total of 96 stream processors in the GeForce 8800 GTS. (As a side note, NVIDIA also disabled one ROP in GeForce 8800 GTS.) The following block diagram illustrates this nicely:
[image]
| <% print_image("05"); %> | <% print_image("06"); %> |
For GeForce 8800 GT NVIDIA employs a similar layout, although in this case instead of leaving six banks of stream processors active and deactivating two as in the case of the GeForce 8800 GTS, only one bank is deactivated, leaving a total of 112 functional stream processors:
[image]
| <% print_image("07"); %> |
One additional tweak NVIDIA has integrated into the stream processors that you can’t see very well in the above block diagram for G92 is the addition of four additional texture address units, bringing the total number of texture address units to eight. G80 was previously limited to just four texture address units. With the additional texture address units, G92 can address 8 textures and perform 8 texture filtering ops/clock, previously it was 4 and 8 respectively. As a result of this addition, the GeForce 8800 GT can address 56 textures and perform 56 texture filtering ops/clock (versus 32 and 64 respectively in the 8800 GTX and 24 and 48 in the 8800 GTS).
This change has a profound affect on the GeForce 8800 GT’s texture fill rate; G92 can filter 33.6GTexels/sec while the GeForce 8800 GTS can filter just 24GTexels/sec peak.
Comparing the block diagram of the GeForce 8800 GT with that of the 8800 GTX you can also see that two ROP partitions are no longer present, leaving just four total. To help offset this, NVIDIA has come up with more efficient color and z-compression for G92. This enhanced compression should help at high resolutions, particularly once AA is applied, as available memory is used more efficiently, helping to keep memory usage in check.
[image]
| <% print_image("08"); %> | <% print_image("09"); %> |
The GeForce 8800 GT is also the world’s first PCI Express 2.0 graphics card. PCIe 2.0 offers double the bandwidth of PCIe 1.1; 8.0GB/sec in each direction, providing a total of 16GB/sec of total memory bandwidth. Of course, we still haven’t come close to saturating the bandwidth offered by PCIe 1.1, but presumably this could come in handy for lower-end value cards with less onboard memory.
256-bit GDDR3 memory interface
Yep, you read that right -- the GeForce 8800 GT reverts back to utilizing a 256-bit memory interface. To help offset this NVIDIA has cranked up the memory speed to 900MHz – the same speed as the 8800 GTX – but the 8800 GT still gives up nearly 7GB/sec of memory bandwidth to the GeForce 8800 GTS (64GB/sec versus 57.6GB/sec). In theory, this could come back to haunt the GeForce 8800 GT at high resolutions with AA, but we’ll just have to wait and see how it all plays out in the benchmarks later in this article…
Better video
Right now you’re probably wondering why the GeForce 8800 GT’s G92 GPU contains more transistors if it has fewer stream processors aren’t you? We’ve been told that the bulk of the new transistors come from the display portion of the chip. If you recall G80, NVIDIA previously used an external display chip for input and output. This chip has now been integrated directly into the G92 GPU and continues to support two dual-link displays with HDCP. NVIDIA has also taken the VP2 video processor used in the GeForce 8500/8600 and integrated it into G92.
Additional transistors were also required for PCIe 2.0, integrated HDMI support, and the additional texture address units we mentioned earlier. It’s important to note that while GeForce 8800 GT offers native support of HDMI, it’s up to NVIDIA’s board partners to actually utilize this feature. We wouldn’t be surprised to see some of NVIDIA’s board partners provide a line of HDMI Edition 8800 GT cards separate from the standard gaming boards. In the past ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, and XFX have really been pushing their line of silent cards for the HTPC crowd.
| The GeForce 8800 GT cards | Page:: ( 3 / 19 ) |
We’ve gone over some of the key differences between the GeForce 8800 GT and the 8800 GTS/GTX on the previous page, but we’ve prepared the following table to help sum things up:
| GeForce 8800 Features Comparison | |||
| GeForce 8800 GTX | GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | GeForce 8800 GT | |
| # of Transistors | 681M | 681M | 754M |
| Core Clock (including dispatch, texture units, ROPs) | 575MHz | 500MHz | 600MHz |
| Shader Clock (Stream Processors) | 1350MHz | 1200MHz | 1500MHz |
| # of Shaders (Stream Processors) | 128 | 96 | 112 |
| Memory Clock | 900MHz (1.8GHz effective) | 800MHz (1.6GHz effective) | 900MHz (1.8GHz effective) |
| Memory Interface | 384-bit | 320-bit | 256-bit |
| Memory Bandwidth (GB/s) | 86.4GB/sec | 64GB/sec | 57.6GB/sec |
| # of ROPs | 6 (24 effective) | 5 (20 effective) | 4 (16 effective) |
| Memory Size | 768MB | 640MB | 512MB |
| |||
Not depicted in the table above is the GeForce 8800 GT 256MB. This is the $199 SKU we alluded to earlier. We’ve been told that this board will be launching in a few weeks and that “add-in card partners are free to set their own core and memory clocks.”. If you happen to be shopping for one of these cards, buyer beware, as you may not be getting a board that runs at 600MHz core/900MHz memory. AMD’s board partners have played it loose with the clock speeds of the 2600 XT GDDR3 in the past, so this move was likely made to give NVIDIA’s board partners some room to compete more aggressively on price when RV670 arrives next month.
Fortunately, the base clock speeds for the GeForce 8800 GT 512MB are set in stone and most of the initial boards will run at stock clock speeds, although some manufacturers will also be offering factory overclocked cards as well. In fact, we happened to include one such card from MSI in this article.
Basic GeForce 8800 GT cards will start at $249 and go up in price from there depending on features.
New reference board design
If you’re already pretty familiar with the reference board design of the GeForce 8800 GTS, you won’t even recognize the GeForce 8800 GT!
[image]
| <% print_image("10"); %> | <% print_image("11"); %> |
As you can see, the GPU is cooled by a single-slot heatsink/fan unit, allowing the card to fit more easily in small form factor cases and other cramped environments. The PCB measures approximately 9” in length, which is the same length as the GeForce 8800 GTS. At the end of the card you can also see the 6-pin power connector. We’ve been told that the maximum power draw of the card is 105 watts and officially NVIDIA’s system requirements call for a 400W power supply with 26 amps on the 12V rail for single-card operation.
[image]
| <% print_image("12"); %> |
The cooling unit itself is quite long. At the heart of the cooler is a copper heat pipe, which is then surrounded by a long aluminum heatsink that stretches 7” in length. This heatsink is not only responsible for helping to keep the GPU cool, but also the memory modules and other board-level components. The heatsink is then shrouded by a metal faceplate which helps to spread air from the card’s fan across both the left and right sides of the board. You can spot vents on both ends of the faceplate.
NVIDIA continues to mount the fan offset of the graphics core to increase the effectiveness of the fan, and to help prevent it from dying a premature death (besides dust, the number one enemy to a fan’s motor is heat and the area directly above the GPU is one of the hottest spots on a board). The fan itself runs very quiet, quieter in fact than a GeForce 8600 GTS and like a GeForce 8800 GTS or GTX the fan is barely audible even under load. The 8800 GT fan will generate quite a bit of noise when you first boot up your PC from a cold boot, but the fan’s RPMs quickly settle down after a few seconds.
One additional benefit of enclosing the majority of the card in a shroud is that it protects the board’s components from being damaged. We have a feeling there are some awfully interesting horror stories behind this, and can imagine that UPS’ claims department in particular is glad to see this.
Rather than review the GeForce 8800 GT reference board we’ll be taking a look at shipping, retail GeForce 8800 GT cards. Already we’ve received boards from MSI and XFX, and once our FedEx driver arrives in the next few hours, we expect to also have cards from EVGA and Leadtek. This is clearly a hard launch with immediate availability.
[image]
| <% print_image("13"); %> | <% print_image("14"); %> |
MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC
As far as we can tell, MSI is first out of the gates with a factory overclocked GeForce 8800 GT card, the NX8800GT-T2D512E OC. The NX8800GT-T2D512E OC relies entirely on the NVIDIA reference board design with the obvious addition being that it’s overclocked out-of-the-box, running at 660MHz core, 1650MHz on the shaders, and 950MHz memory (1.9GHz effective). These speeds are 9% faster than the stock 8800 GT on the graphics core and shaders, and 5% faster memory.
[image]
| <% print_image("15"); %> | <% print_image("16"); %> |
In order to keep price down, MSI skips including a game bundle. As a result we’ve been told that the board has an MSRP of $249. If this price holds true at retail, this card is certainly priced to move. Strangely enough, the board only shipped with one DVI adapter (perhaps to further help keep price down?). MSI also includes a power adapter, S-Video cable, and component video output cable for hooking the card up to an HDTV.
[image]
| <% print_image("17"); %> | <% print_image("18"); %> |
XFX GeForce 8800 GT Alpha Dog Edition
Arriving right around the same time as the MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC was the XFX GeForce 8800 GT Alpha Dog Edition. The Alpha Dog Edition is XFX’s entry level GeForce 8800 GT 512MB SKU and relies on the standard 8800 GT reference board design and stock clock speeds.
Inside the card’s packaging were quite a few accessories beyond the graphics card. For starters XFX includes a copy of Company of Heroes on DVD-ROM. Also included with the copy of Company of Heroes is a CD containing the latest patch you’ll need to play the game with DirectX 10. While this is a very neat tie-in idea, Company of Heroes is a year old now. XFX also offers a newer DX10 game as a bundle, Lost Planet, but apparently this didn’t make it over to the Alpha Dog Edition. Funnily enough, XFX also includes a tag you can hang on your door that reads “I’m gaming, Do Not Disturb”.
Here’s a word of advice though, use the tag on your significant other at your own peril.
[image]
| <% print_image("19"); %> | <% print_image("20"); %> |
To finish the Alpha Dog package off, XFX also includes two DVI adapters, an S-Video cable, and a component video output block. The XFX GeForce 8600 GT Alpha Dog Edition carries a $249 MSRP.
If the stock speeds aren’t good enough and you want a little more performance, XFX will continue to provide their Extreme and XXX Edition SKUs. The XFX GeForce 8800 GT Extreme will run 40MHz faster than the Alpha Dog Edition at 640MHz. XFX’s product literature for the 8800 GT lists a “TBD” for the Extreme, but unless XFX has tinkered with the speeds in the board’s BIOS, the stream processors on the 8800 GT normally run 2.5 times faster than the graphics core, yielding a clock speed of 1600MHz (640MHz core x 2.5) for the stream processors. We did get a confirmed speed of 950MHz (1.9GHz effective) for the memory. Extreme boards will sell for an MSRP of $279.
At the top of the heap for XFX is the GeForce 8800 GT XXX Edition. The XXX board runs at even higher speeds, XFX’s specs list a 670MHz graphics core and 975MHz memory (1.95GHz effective). Again, XFX lists a TBD for the shader speed, but we’re going to assume that XFX is sticking to the 2.5 ratio and that the shaders will therefore run at 1675MHz. If these speeds pan out, this would make the XFX GeForce 8800 GT XXX one of the fastest 8800 GT boards on the market. Getting your hands on all this performance will set you back $299.
[image]
| <% print_image("21"); %> |
Over the coming weeks we’ll be gathering as many additional GeForce 880 GT cards as we can for a good old-fashioned roundup FiringSquad style. Keep your eyes peeled for it.
| Test Systems | Page:: ( 4 / 19 ) |
System Setup
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6800
EVGA nForce 680i SLI motherboard
2GB Corsair TWIN2X2048-6400C4
ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT
ATI Radeon X1950 Pro
ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB
ATI Radeon HD 2900 GT 256MB
PowerColor Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB
Catalyst 7.10
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX
NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS
NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT
ForceWare 169.01
300GB Western Digital Caviar SE
Windows Vista 64-bit
Benchmarks
Company of Heroes 1.71 (running DX9)
F.E.A.R. 1.08
Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars
Call of Duty 4 Demo
Half-Life 2 Episode Two
Lost Planet DX9
World in Conflict
Unreal Tournament 3 Demo
Crysis Demo
| F.E.A.R. Performance | Page:: ( 5 / 19 ) |
| F.E.A.R. Performance 1600x1200x32 | ||
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 33 | 145 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 31 | 134 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 18 | 82 |
| GeForce 7900 GT | 20 | 80 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 17 | 104 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 21 | 133 |
| Radeon HD 2600 XT | 6 | 43 |
| Radeon X1950 Pro | 19 | 85 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 49 | 215 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT | 35 | 166 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT SLI | 68 | 385 |
| Radeon HD 2900 GT | 14 | 78 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 39 | 185 |
| ||
| Company Of Heroes DX9 | Page:: ( 6 / 19 ) |
| Company of Heroes 1600x1200x32 | ||
| Card | Min FPS | Max FPS |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 41.7 | 177.1 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 35.2 | 167 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 15.1 | 80.5 |
| GeForce 7900 GT | 15.4 | 77 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 12.7 | 116.8 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 13.6 | 152 |
| Radeon HD 2600 XT | 13.2 | 45 |
| Radeon X1950 Pro | 19.3 | 98.8 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 55.3 | 264.1 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT | 48.1 | 205.7 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT SLI | 45.9 | 277.7 |
| Radeon HD 2900 GT | 22.5 | 82.7 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 49.5 | 245 |
| ||
| Oblivion | Page:: ( 7 / 19 ) |
| Oblivion Performance 1600x1200x32 | ||
| Card | Min FPS | Max FPS |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 30 | 43 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 28 | 40 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 14 | 22 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 23 | 35 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 28 | 42 |
| Radeon HD 2600 XT | 10 | 17 |
| Radeon X1950 Pro | 16 | 24 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 39 | 55 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT | 36 | 51 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT SLI | 57 | 70 |
| Radeon HD 2900 GT | 16 | 25 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 39 | 53 |
| ||
| World In Conflict | Page:: ( 8 / 19 ) |
| World In Conflict Performance 1600x1200x32 | ||
| Card | Min FPS | Max FPS |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 15 | 49 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 6 | 41 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 3 | 23 |
| GeForce 7900 GT | 5 | 24 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 12 | 36 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 14 | 42 |
| Radeon HD 2600 XT | 2 | 15 |
| Radeon X1950 Pro | 2 | 21 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 24 | 78 |
| XFX GeForce 8600 GT | 19 | 58 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT SLI | 25 | 100 |
| Radeon HD 2900 GT | 6 | 25 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 20 | 62 |
| ||
| HL2 Episode 2 | Page:: ( 9 / 19 ) |
| Unreal Tournament 3 | Page:: ( 10 / 19 ) |
| UT3 4xAA/16xAF | Page:: ( 11 / 19 ) |
Notes
The Radeon HD 2000 series cards aren't capable of running Unreal Tournament 3 with AA (and other games like UT3 based on the Unreal Engine 3 game engine), so we've excluded them from these graphs, focusing on the GeForce cards instead, which are fully capable of running these games with AA thanks to a clever workaround in the ForceWare driver.| Enemy Territory: Quake Wars | Page:: ( 12 / 19 ) |
| Lost Planet DX9 | Page:: ( 13 / 19 ) |
| Call Of Duty 4 | Page:: ( 14 / 19 ) |
| Call of Duty 4 Performance 1600x1200x32 | ||
| Card | Min FPS | Max FPS |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 35 | 71 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 28 | 67 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 16 | 33 |
| GeForce 7900 GT | 12 | 22 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 25 | 46 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 29 | 53 |
| Radeon HD 2600 XT | 8 | 15 |
| Radeon X1950 Pro | 15 | 26 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 43 | 97 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT | 36 | 75 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT SLI | 56 | 134 |
| Radeon HD 2900 GT | 16 | 31 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 38 | 85 |
| ||
| BioShock DX9 4xAA/16xAF | Page:: ( 15 / 19 ) |
| BioShock Performance 1600x1200x32 | ||
| Card | Min FPS | Max FPS |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 28 | 70 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 26 | 64 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 11 | 31 |
| XFX GeForce 8600 GT | 32 | 79 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 41 | 95 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT SLI | 56 | 123 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 30 | 74 |
| ||
| Crysis DX9 0xAA/0xAF | Page:: ( 16 / 19 ) |
Crysis – Direct3D
| Crysis Performance 1600x1200x32 | ||
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 16.9 | 34.6 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 4.5 | 23.4 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | 2.3 | 9.4 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 5.9 | 19.1 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 7.1 | 22.9 |
| Radeon X1950 Pro | 0 | 8.9 |
| XFX GeForce 8600 GT | 17 | 31.9 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 16.6 | 36.6 |
| ||
| Crysis DX9 2xAA/8xAF | Page:: ( 17 / 19 ) |
Crysis – Direct3D
| Crysis Performance 1280x1024 | ||
| Card | Min FPS | Max FPS |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | 17.3 | 29.4 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB | 4.7 | 19.8 |
| Radeon HD 2900 Pro 512MB | 5.3 | 21.7 |
| Radeon HD 2900 XT 512MB | 8.5 | 25.5 |
| XFX GeForce 8800 GT | 16.3 | 35 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 23.8 | 40.9 |
| MSI NX8800GT-T2D512E OC | 19.4 | 37.6 |
| ||
| Overclocking and Power Consumption | Page:: ( 18 / 19 ) |
Power Consumption
| Conclusion | Page:: ( 19 / 19 ) |
With its high clock speeds and 112 stream processors we naturally expected the GeForce 8800 GT to do well in situations without AA/AF, particularly at lower resolutions like 1280x1024, but it never dawned on us that the GeForce 8800 GT had the potential to score a clean sweep over the GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB.
“A-M-A-Z-I-N-G!”
NVIDIA tells us that they have seen some cases where the wider memory interface and extra memory allows the GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB to outperform the GeForce 8800 GT, but we certainly couldn’t find them. Perhaps they’ve got a super secret build of Crysis or an upcoming title like Gears of War PC or Alan Wake that we haven’t seen, or perhaps we would have seen this had we run some DX10 benchmarks. For the sake of simplicity all the benchmarks presented in today’s article were run under DX9, and besides, we’ve been hard-pressed to find a compelling DX10 title that also delivers good performance, including the recently Crysis demo. Perhaps this is something we’ll have to explore in a future article as we certainly haven’t had a whole lot of time to properly test the GeForce 8800 GT.
Despite the GeForce 8800 GT’s astounding performance, NVIDIA obviously must feel that there’s still room for the GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB, as this is their official lineup as of today:
| GeForce lineup as of 10/07 | |
| Card | MSRP |
| GeForce 8800 Ultra | $699 |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | $499-$599 |
| GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB | $349-$399 |
| GeForce 8800 GT | $199-$249 |
| GeForce 8600 GTS | $149 |
| GeForce 8600 GT | $109 |
| GeForce 8500 GT | $69-$89 |
| GeForce 7300 GT 512MB | $59-$69 |
| GeForce 8400 GS | $49-$59 |
| GeForce 8300 GS | OEM Only |
| GeForce 7300 GS | $39-$49 |
| GeForce 7200 GS | <$39 |
| |
As you can see, the GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB is listed prominently above the GeForce 8800 GT in NVIDIA’s lineup despite the fact that the 8800 GT consistently delivers more performance than the GTS under most conditions. Perhaps if you cranked the AA up to 8xMSAA, or game at 2560x1600 with AA the GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB performs faster, but at that point you really should step up to a GeForce 8800 GTX or Ultra. The 8800 GTS 640MB just doesn’t have the horsepower to run under these conditions with adequate performance.
The bottom line is whether you’ve got $250 to spend on a new graphics card or $350, the GeForce 8800 GT is the best GPU on the market right now. The price/performance ratio simply can’t be beat. The icing on the cake is that the card ships in a single-slot package and with an incredibly quiet cooler.
As giddy as we are about the GeForce 8800 GT’s performance though, we can’t help but feel that NVIDIA’s holding back on us. With 754 million transistors and 112 stream processors, we can only wonder how many functional units in the GeForce 8800 GT’s G92 graphics core have been deactivated. It certainly feels as if NVIDIA was originally planning to introduce two SKUs based on the G92 GPU similar to the 7900 GTX and 7900 GT launch a few years back. Today we’re getting the “GT” part, but we have a strong suspicion that there’s still a higher-end part floating around out there that’s lying in wait until AMD releases their high-end successor to the R600 GPU codenamed R680.
Until AMD has a part that rivals the GeForce 8800 GTX/Ultra, NVIDIA will keep this GPU under wraps and focus instead on the 8800 GT.
In a matter of weeks, AMD’s going to be setting their sights on the mainstream segment that the GeForce 8800 GT competes in. AMD’s upcoming mainstream part codenamed RV670 is expected to deliver performance rivaling the Radeon HD 2900 XT, but at a much lower $200-$300 price point. The chip will also offer support for features like quad CrossFire and DirectX 10.1; these are both features the 8800 GT won’t have.
At the same time though, the GeForce 8800 GT is already here and outperforms the Radeon HD 2900 XT, so simply matching the 2900 XT’s performance will no longer be good enough for RV670. AMD may have to whip out an eraser and pencil in higher clock speeds in order for RV670 to be competitive with GeForce 8800 GT. All the rumors indicate that the board will be clocked at 600MHz core/900MHz memory.
We’re not going to spoil NVIDIA’s GeForce 8800 GT launch with speculation though. Clearly the GeForce 8800 GT is the best GPU in the mainstream segment right now, and may even tempt a few prospective GeForce 8800 GTX buyers. NVIDIA really has outdone themselves with this GPU…