GeForce GTS 240 Reference PCB Schematics Surface

[btarunr]

In the weeks to come, NVIDIA will release yet another graphics card based on the G92 graphics processor: the GeForce GTS 240, which bears resemblance with the 8800 GT and 9800 GT. The G92 GPU has near-identical specifications to the said graphics cards, except for that the 55 nm G92b GPU will be used, and with higher reference clock speeds of 675/1674/975 MHz (core/shader/memory). To seat the new GPU, NVIDIA has designed a new reference PCB, the P361 internally called D10P2. The schematic drawings of this has been sourced by VR-Zone.

The P361 PCB covers the basics of accommodating the G92b and eight GDDR3 memory chips connected to the GPU across a 256-bit wide bus. The distinct features of the PCB lie with its VRM area, with a 3+1 phase design. The PCB draws power from a 6-pin PCI-Express power connector. Over to the connectors department, the usual two arrangement of two DVI and one composite is present. There is a single SLI bridge connector for 2-way SLI. With the 55 nm GPU being arguably as cool or cooler than the 65 nm G92 with lower reference clock speeds, one can expect a single slot cooler design to be employed.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[iamverysmart]

I remember hearing about the single phase power circuits, guess it's not happening.

 

[ShadowFold]

What's the thing hanging off of it on the right side of the first pic?

 

[btarunr]

What's the thing hanging off of it on the right side of the first pic?

Just a spacer, helps stacking-up/holding the board when components are being laid on it. They cut that, and the small bit attached to the PCI-E retention latch off when they're almost done with the manufacturing. Take a look at your card (that part of it). Chances are you'll see the spots where spacers once hung off.

 

[hat]

oh look an 8800gt

 

[driver66]

I thought it was a 9800gt?

 

[ShadowFold]

I thought it was a 9800gt?

8800GT = 9800GT = GTS 240 - Same card, different names

 

[Selene]

its a cap on the SLI finger.

 

[btarunr]

its a cap on the SLI finger.

These?

 

[newtekie1]

So it will be different than the 8800GT/9800GTs, good. Nice to see this isn't just a rebranded 9800GT/8800GT. They will move to the 55nm cores, and redesign the PCB, which should make them cheaper.

oh look an 8800gt

Really? There were 55nm 8800GTs?

 

[Cheeseball]

Well, it's not just a re-brand then, more like a refresh with a slightly newer G92b (55nm) GPU and a slightly more efficient PCB layout.

Hopefully, if it would be like the 9800GT re-brand/refresh, it will have a slightly less price.

 

[Selene]

These?

oh i was looking at the wrong thing i guess.

 

[..'Ant'..]

8800GT = 9800GT = GTS 240 - Same card, different names

Yep! Imagine someone actually buys it over a 8800GT or 9800GT and thinks that its actually better but its the same as a 8800GT = 9800GT.

 

[phanbuey]

Yep! Imagine someone actually buys it over a 8800GT or 9800GT and thinks that its actually better but its the same as a 8800GT = 9800GT.

LOL. shhhhhhhHHH! be vewy vewy quiet... we don't want the others to catch on.

 

[newtekie1]

Yep! Imagine someone actually buys it over a 8800GT or 9800GT and thinks that its actually better but its the same as a 8800GT = 9800GT.

LOL. shhhhhhhHHH! be vewy vewy quiet... we don't want the others to catch on.

Would they get anything better if they got a completely new card named GTS240? More than likely, No.

1.) Buying a card based on name alone doesn't work. It is the buyers obligation to research what they are buying.
2.) Upgrading from last generations high-end to the current generations mid-range often yields no real benefit.

 

[phanbuey]

Would they get anything better if they got a completely new card named GTS240? More than likely, No.

1.) Buying a card based on name alone doesn't work. It is the buyers obligation to research what they are buying.
2.) Upgrading from last generations high-end to the current generations mid-range often yields no real benefit.

1) Exaclty. Which is why renaming it is pointless and misleading.
2) Also true. But has nothing to do with renaming an old product and passing it off as new.

redesign the box, whatever rename it to 8850... but passing it off as a completely "new" SKU and charging more for it than it is worth is detestable. It is a blatant attempt to confuse people and then say that it is their "responsibility" to do the research. For alot of people these numbers are not arbitrary - they represent model numbers, and different model numbers are assumed to be different cards.

Its not a jugg of milk where no one cares if it says "moo cow" or "happy cow" on the label.

 

[newtekie1]

1) Exaclty. Which is why renaming it is pointless and misleading.
2) Also true. But has nothing to do with renaming an old product and passing it off as new.

1.) Re-naming isn't pointless, in this case it brings the card into the same naming scheme as the current generation cards, this does make it easier to see where the card performs in the current generation, but obviously shouldn't be the only thing you look at.
2.) Sure it does. Poeple say renaming the product is trying to trick the consumer into thinking they are getting something better, but would they wouldn't be getting something better if they actually came out with a new GPU core for this card? No, so even if they did release a new GPU core for the GTS 240, the consumer would be in the same situation.

redesign the box, whatever rename it to 8850... but passing it off as a completely "new" SKU and charging more for it than it is worth is detestable. It is a blatant attempt to confuse people and then say that it is their "responsibility" to do the research. For alot of people these numbers are not arbitrary - they represent model numbers, and different models are assumed to be different cards.

First of all, the redesign means they will likely not be charging more for it, I'd like to know where you are even getting that they will be charging more from it. Now you are just trying to make the situation seem worse to try and make your argument look better than it really is. You might as well make up some more bad stuff and throw that in too. I know, how about saying they are going to slash your tires if you buy the card too...that would be really detestable.

As for a blatent attempt at confusing people, I don't think so. It is an attempt to bring all the cards into one unified naming scheme. If anything it is an attempt to make things less confusing. NVidia was catching a lot of flak for their confusing naming scheme, renaming all the cards to follow one naming scheme is their answer to these complaints.

You talk about most people, well most people don't give a crap about what the model number is, and what is under the heatsink, they only care about performance and price. They are not going to care that the core under the heatsink is the same as what is on the 8800GT or 9800GT(even if it actually isn't which makes your argument even worse, but we'll ignore that detail).

 

[phanbuey]

1.) Re-naming isn't pointless, in this case it brings the card into the same naming scheme as the current generation cards, this does make it easier to see where the card performs in the current generation, but obviously shouldn't be the only thing you look at.
2.) Sure it does. Poeple say renaming the product is trying to trick the consumer into thinking they are getting something better, but would they wouldn't be getting something better if they actually came out with a new GPU core for this card? No, so even if they did release a new GPU core for the GTS 240, the consumer would be in the same situation.
....

the 8800GT tends to retail for $115 (if you can find it) and the 9800GT for $129... but we'll forget that detail.

I guarantee you that the GTS 240 will retail for $129 and that 9800GT price will drop (like its supposed to), and the price of the GTS 240 will drop slower. Basic marketing. Just like and the 9800GT and the 8800GT - their prices were not the same and still aren't, but again, forget about it.

Its not that people dont care about the gpu under the heatsink - its that they dont know. There is a big difference. YOU don't care bc you know, they dont know. When they see a product that says 9800GT and one that says 8800GT and the 9800GT is $15 bucks more... guess which one theyre gonna get?

Im not making up "bad stuff" to support my argument lol... I just say it how i see it. Many people feel the way I do (go look at the poll), and for a good reason.

We get your point - "the GT200 version would be the same as the G92 version performance-wise..." yeah we get it. It's not a valid point. There was no middle card when the 8800GTX and 8800GTS cards came out untill the 8600GTX (which came out ALOT later) - Which performed like a ... wait... 7800GTX - or the 7600GT which performed like a 6800... or the 6600 which performed alot like a 5900 despite being different technologies. See? just because its the same performance, the model number DOESNT CHANGE. (This is the difference between marketing people and tech people).

 

[newtekie1]

the 8800GT tends to retail for $115 (if you can find it) and the 9800GT for $129... but we'll forget that detail.

The 9800GT came out at the same MSRP as the 8800GT, and tended to actually cost a little less. Now that the 8800GT has pretty much disappeared from the market, the prices have crepts up on the 9800GT.

I guarantee you that the GTS 240 will retail for $129 and that 9800GT price will drop (like its supposed to), and the price of the GTS 240 will drop slower. Basic marketing. Just like and the 9800GT and the 8800GT - their prices were not the same and still aren't, but again, forget about it.

The fact that the GTS240 is cheaper to manufacture, means it will likely enter the market at a lower price than the 9800GT.

Its not that people dont care about the gpu under the heatsink - its that they dont know. There is a big difference. YOU don't care bc you know, they dont know. When they see a product that says 9800GT and one that says 8800GT and the 9800GT is $15 bucks more... guess which one theyre gonna get?

Again, back to people buying cards based on name with no research. People don't do that, and if they do, they are idiots. Lets assume people do buy cards simply based on name and which is more expensive, I'll do it just to play a little devil's advocate. Now, they see a HD4670 for $75 and an HD3870 for $70, guess which one they are going to get then guess which one is the better card.:shadedshu

See, your logic doesn't work. Name and Price don't matter when purchasing video cards, you have to do research, regardless of rebranded cards or not.

Im not making up "bad stuff" to support my argument lol... I just say it how i see it. Many people feel the way I do (go look at the poll), and for a good reason.

Pulling random prices out of your ass is making up bad stuff to support your argument. Sorry, I call it like I see it. How can you say a product is going to cost more when released without any pricing info released, and then say you aren't making stuff up. Please...

We get your point - "the GT200 version would be the same as the G92 version performance-wise..." yeah we get it. It's not a valid point. There was no middle card when the 8800GTX and 8800GTS cards came out untill the 8600GTX (which came out ALOT later) - Which performed like a ... wait... 7800GTX - or the 7600GT which performed like a 6800... OMFG... See? just because its the same performance, the model number DOESNT CHANGE. (This is the difference between marketing people and tech people).

5 months is "ALOT later"? GT200 has been out for nearly a year now. There is a big difference there. And as for performance, the G84 cards were very similar to the G71/G70, but the highest end G71 cards outperformed the 8600GT, it simply wasn't worth it to upgrade from a 7900GTX to a 8600GT, wouldn't you agree? And the G74 was very similar to the NV45, but the 6800Ultra still outperformed the 7600GT, it defintately wasn't worth upgrading from an 6800Ultra(or even GT) to a 7600GT, wouldn't you agree. So regradless of what core is used on the GTS240, it isn't going to be worth upgraded to from an 8800/9800 card.

These are MODEL numbers, not product names. The reason nvidia gets flak is because, lately, they treat model numbers like names. Either you do not understand the concept of model numbers and why they should remain the same throughout the life of a tech product (in which case, go look at the poll and think about it) - or you work for nvidia.

It seems you don't understand that in this cases the Model number and Product name is the same. There is no reason a model number should remain the same thorughout the life.

As a poll or enthusiasts has little interest to me, and has no real bearing on the average consumer.

 

[phanbuey]

"If you want to take advantage of the new features, the 9800GT is better value, but for gaming performance and price, the 8800GT presents a slightly better value at this time."
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/gigabyte_9800gt/15.htm

"The GeForce 9800 GT will play in the price niche up to $299."
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-4298-view-GeForce-9800-GT-price-and-release-date.html

... etc etc

It cost more in reality... But honestly, that really isnt the point. I dont know what the price will be at launch, but judging from the past it will be higher - even if MSRP is the same, the retail price at launch is higher. It COULD be lower, but that's unlikely given past trends.

Look this is a completely pointless argument.

To many, model numbers and product labels are not the same. Clearly this creates confusion and causes frustration. To those who don't care, this move makes sense. To those who rely on the name to discern a product's generation and performance, it doesn't.

 

[newtekie1]

To those who rely on the name to discern a product's generation and performance, it doesn't.

This is my point, no one should be doing it this way, and regardless of rebrands they will get screwed doing it this way. These type of people will always assume the GTS240 is better than the 9800GT, even if nVidia uses a new core based off the GT200 that is actually worse. Just like they will assume the HD4670 is better than the HD3870, even though it isn't. These are also the same type of people that will just buy a card, and be happy(or in some cases unhappy) with it no matter what though.

What generation a card is in shouldn't matter to anyone, performance is what should matter. I'd gladdly take an older generation card if the performance was right. Really, it is hard for me to even see the GT200 core as a new generation. It doesn't really add anything, it is just a beefed up G92, more shaders and a bigger memory bus, it doesn't even bring in DX10.1 or a die shrink. The only new thing it brings is a dedicated section for running CUDA. Though I've voiced my opinion on this a lot in the past already, the GT200 should have just been an extension of the 9 series, not a whole new series.

 

[PCpraiser100]

But hang on a sec, are we even sure that it will just be the same card? Release schematics, millions spent, names, could the 9000 series not only be renamed but reintroduced with new stuff thtats worth spending? Otherwise, why put this up? I think it could be one of those surprises again.

 

[tkpenalty]

Damn... why couldnt they make the card smaller?

 

[wolf]

to phanbuey and newtekie1, i understand completely both of your points of view, as you have both explained them well.

maybe a agree to disagree? i mean i agree that we SHOULD all be doing our research first, and know what it is we are buying, not based only off the name.

but there really ARE loads and loads of morons in the world, and i bet there's a market of people who wont know any better (lets hope they dont upgrade from a 8800GT/9800GT)

really an argument exists for both sides but i doubt you'll see eye to eye on it.