# Palit GeForce GT 220 Sonic 512 MB



## W1zzard (Oct 6, 2009)

NVIDIA's new GeForce GT 220 is built around the new GT216 graphics processor, which is NVIDIA's first chip to be made in a 40 nm process. Another novelty is support for DirectX 10.1. Palit's Sonic Edition comes with higher clocks out of the box and an extremely well optimized low-noise fan.

*Show full review*


----------



## newtekie1 (Oct 12, 2009)

Very nice review.  Looks like this card would make a great HTPC card.  

Glad to see nVidia finally getting rid of the need for an external SPDIF connection.  I always thought ATi's solution was as good as it could get, but I actually think I like nVidia's better, assuming it works as they say it does without hassle.  No more need to switch between audio output devices every time I want to watch a movie on my TV...

Just one question, not really specifically about this card or the review, but about the GT220 in general.  What the heck is SDDR3?  I've seen a few of these for sale and they say they have SDDR3...is that just standard DDR3, like what you put in a motherboard, and not GDDR3?  Or is it something else, maybe just a typo?


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 12, 2009)

afaik it's just normal DDR3


----------



## wolf (Oct 12, 2009)

price it lower and they could do ok, maybe a fair few in OEM builds, who knows.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Oct 12, 2009)

Dug!


----------



## [Ion] (Oct 12, 2009)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> Dug!



Same here.  I'm on Digg under R4SSIANH4XX0R (didn't like the brackets in my normal username)


----------



## Izliecies (Oct 12, 2009)

Review said:
			
		

> and as NVIDIA told us for years, DirectX 10.1 is useless anyway.


I like this part!


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 12, 2009)

wolf said:


> price it lower and they could do ok, maybe a fair few in OEM builds, who knows.



I first encountered the cards (last month) in a new Dell and new HP PCs released over here. The HPs (P6155D and P6190D) have G 210 and GT 220 respectively. The Dell one had a GT 220.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 12, 2009)

yea a lot of oems used those cards ... but i'm sure they didnt pay 70 bucks for it


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Oct 12, 2009)

I wouldnt ....


----------



## niko084 (Oct 13, 2009)

Hm, doesn't look like Nvidia did much here....

I hope they have it together for the higher series cards... I want to see some competition.


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 13, 2009)

W1zzard said:


> yea a lot of oems used those cards ... but i'm sure they didnt pay 70 bucks for it



Yeah they must have paid $69.


----------



## newtekie1 (Oct 13, 2009)

niko084 said:


> Hm, doesn't look like Nvidia did much here....
> 
> I hope they have it together for the higher series cards... I want to see some competition.



These are their 40nm test cards.  Nothing ground breaking, just testing the 40nm process.  Just like ATi did with the HD4770.


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 13, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> These are their 40nm test cards.  Nothing ground breaking, just testing the 40nm process.  Just like ATi did with the HD4770.



Only difference is that the 4770 ate the 4830 and chomped the 4850 and massacred the 9800GT and 9600GT, and can sometimes match the 9800GTX as well. Nvidia took it too safe with the G 210 and GT 220. Good news for OEM builds though, I guess.


----------



## mR Yellow (Oct 13, 2009)

Would this card be enough for a dedicated PhysX card?


----------

