NVIDIA GeForce 8800GS 192-bit 384MB and 768MB First Look

[Assimilator]

Weer, don't forget that the 8800 GS has 4 less ROPs than the GT as well.

That said, given the higher clocks of the 768MB GS model, I'd agree that the number of SPs is probably a typo - especially given that the core clock is 50MHz higher than on the 8800 GT, and nVidia cards have traditionally seen greater performance from higher core speeds as opposed to higher memory clocks.

Still, it'll be interesting to see exactly what effect - if any - the 192-bit bus has on performance. Given that 128-bit cards have generally been poor performers and 256-bit cards the opposite, it might be the case that a 192-bit bus is just a little too restrictive for the G92 core. Time will tell...

 

[trog100]

I think this product is directed at oem vendors wanting a cheap 8800 to beef up the specs of their retail systems.

i think u are right.. they simply claim their box has the 8800 card in the specs.. the name has some value even if the card carrying it dosnt..

and saving even a few pence makes sense to the oem box makers..

trog

 

[btarunr]

Yup Trog, me agrees. Not only OEMs but....read #9

 

[1c3d0g]

Weer: at higher resolutions I'm afraid your theory will not hold water. The superior memory bandwidth of the 8800GT will prove to be beneficial for enabling 4xAA, for instance.

 

[largon]

(...)
I still say it's a type-o, and I say that you are condesending. If you really thought I'd be stupid enough not to notice the difference in memory bus, you'd have to be pretty pathetic to call me out on it.

WTF is your problem?

And please get your facts right:
5% higher mem freq does nothing for GS as 192bit bus eats away a quarter of it's memory bandwidth compared to GT.

GT:
256bit @ 900MHz (DDR1800)
= 57.6GB/s

GS:
192bit @ 950MHz (DDR1900)
= 45.6GB/s (-26.3%)

On top of that we got the 25% lower ROP count for GS - which devastates pixel fillrate:

GT:
16ROPs @ 600MHz
= 9.6GPixels/s

GS:
12ROPs @ 650MHz
= 7.8GPixels/s (-23.1%)

 

[musek]

Pretty nice score if You ask me!
IMO, 768MB version can be real hottie...

One thing that brings me down - ATI. Damn, they really have to do SOMETHING. We do not want nVidia to be 'the one and only'... :/

 

[btarunr]

8800 - GTS (G80 320M), 8800 GTS (G80 640M), 8800 GTS (G92 512M), 8800 GT (G92 256M), 8800 GT (G92 512M), 8800 GS (G92 384M), 8800 GS (G92 768M), 8800 GTX, 8800 Ultra....

Where's this going to stop? So many variants definitely are diluting the brand value of the 8800 series. I think NVidia is just trying to make a quick buck before the GeForce 9 series and so...we have this. Consumers are bamboozled with so much variations, they just look at the price ant make a pick. A smart ploy actually to attract people to buying a $200 Geforce 8800

 

[tvdang7]

watch theres gonna be a shortage on these too.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

Makes no differance really,just like the 8800gt,they will be like rocking horse poo in the uk.

 

[Rizzy2DarQ]

I just feel sorry for those who buy the old 8800 GTS 640mb for Uk prices.. (£200+)

 

[Solaris17]

Looks like a bargain card, get em while they're HOT

i think i will im running 128bit with 256mb vidram and 32shaders...eaither way i see an ipgrade in even bit interface.

 

[InfDamarvel]

I think they are trying to get rid of parts but ummm I have to say this will be a good competitor for the 3850. Cant wait to get pissed off if this things beats out my HD3850 that I just brought.

 

[Black Panther]

No, the GT does not "win".

The 64 extra bit on the memory bus aren't going to make much difference in performance.
Where as the extra 100Mhz memory clock on the GS and the extra 50Mhz core clock will.

Performance should be on-par if not superior.

I still say it's a type-o, and I say that you are condesending. If you really thought I'd be stupid enough not to notice the difference in memory bus, you'd have to be pretty pathetic to call me out on it.

Chris

The 'parking space' is bigger, but the 'roads connecting them' are narrower....

Guess we won't be knowing where it places until we see actual benchmarks.

Edit: Largon's post makes sense - I wish I was capable of making those calculations myself...

 

[TheGuruStud]

ROFLCOPTERING at all the noobs

 

[Weer]

WTF is your problem?

And please get your facts right:
5% higher mem freq does nothing for GS as 192bit bus eats away a quarter of it's memory bandwidth compared to GT.

GT:
256bit @ 900MHz (DDR1800)
= 57.6GB/s

GS:
192bit @ 950MHz (DDR1900)
= 45.6GB/s (-26.3%)

On top of that we got the 25% lower ROP count for GS - which devastates pixel fillrate:

GT:
16ROPs @ 600MHz
= 9.6GPixels/s

GS:
12ROPs @ 650MHz
= 7.8GPixels/s (-23.1%)

I explained what my problem with you is. Read between the lines.

The difference in ROP and memory bandwidth strength will be nothing compared to the extra 50Mhz on the 112 SPs.

The GS should be minimally inferior and a much better buy with 768MB.

 

[btarunr]

A deficiency of 4 ROPs does make a huge impact, Weer. 768MB of memory on a 192-bit bus hardly amounts to anything despite a 50 MHz increment. The bandwidth would still remain lower than that of a 8800 GT. Among mid-range cards, the Radeon HD3870 has the best memory sub-system with 512 MB on a 256-bit GDDR4 memory bus.

 

[hat]

192-bit? :/

 

[largon]

The difference in ROP and memory bandwidth strength will be nothing compared to the extra 50Mhz on the 112 SPs.

You mean the extra 125MHz (1625MHz vs 1500MHz)? That's a mere 8.3% advantage for GS in shader core throughput. I'd bet that's not enough to be anywhere near to compensate 25% inferior fillrate AND memory bandwidth.
But ofcourse, I could be wrong...

largon's post makes sense - I wish I was capable of making those calculations myself...

It's really very simple, just multiply the operating frequency by amount of buswidth/shaders/TMUs/ROPs or whatever you're calculating.
Here's an example how to convert buswidth and frequency to bandwidth (GB/s):
256bit @ 900MHz (DDR1800)
= 256bit × 1800MHz
= 460800Mbit/s
Divide this by 8 and to get MB/s (8bits = 1byte):
= 57600MB/s
= 57.6GB/s

 

[v-zero]

I explained what my problem with you is. Read between the lines.

The difference in ROP and memory bandwidth strength will be nothing compared to the extra 50Mhz on the 112 SPs.

The GS should be minimally inferior and a much better buy with 768MB.

It will of course be slower. Lack of ROPs and memory starvation will do that to a card. That 125mhz on the shaders will be pissed into the wind...

 

[AddSub]

It will of course be slower. Lack of ROPs and memory starvation will do that to a card. That 125mhz on the shaders will be pissed into the wind...

Yeah, pretty much. This is just an attempt by nvidia to cover the midrange GPU market in which ATI is currently performing pretty well with their 2900GT, 2900PRO, and HD3850 cards which are getting cheaper by the day. For instance, a 2900PRO with 512MB of VRAM, with a 512bit bus can be had on Newegg for like $169.99. Free s&h. Not a bad deal, since these can be overclocked severely to 2900XT speeds or more. I mean, 8800GT is nice, but since it is obvious nvidia is having problems with supply on their end, and ATI probably ships 4-5 or more HD3850 cards for every 8800GT nvidia does, I am pretty sure nvidia is scrambling to cover their ass somehow. 8800GS is a feeble attempt at it. What did they think? They could coast on 8800GTS 92sp popularity and reputation forever?

 

[Deleted member 24505]

If they dont have enuff 8800gt's to supply,how the hell will they have enuff of these?

 

[btarunr]

I could be wrong but the 8800GT was prematurely launched to retaliate to the HD3000 series launch. They'd made them in limited quantities back then, just to tell people "hey we've a better product for this price." It kind of backfired when they couldn't keep upto the demand and ATI made merry selling the HD3000 to X-Mas shoppers who couldn't wait for NVidia to bring in fresh stock.

 

[DarkMatter]

8800 - GTS (G80 320M), 8800 GTS (G80 640M), 8800 GTS (G92 512M), 8800 GT (G92 256M), 8800 GT (G92 512M), 8800 GS (G92 384M), 8800 GS (G92 768M), 8800 GTX, 8800 Ultra....

Where's this going to stop? So many variants definitely are diluting the brand value of the 8800 series. I think NVidia is just trying to make a quick buck before the GeForce 9 series and so...we have this. Consumers are bamboozled with so much variations, they just look at the price ant make a pick. A smart ploy actually to attract people to buying a $200 Geforce 8800

Although there's clearly an issue with the naming, there's not such a big flooding as you point out. Not bigger than in previous generations at least.

Nvidia - 7800GS (G70 256MB), 7800GT (G70 256MB),7800GTX (G70 256MB), 7800GTX 512 (G70 512MB), 7900GS (G71 256MB), 7900GT (G71 256MB) , 7900GTO (G71 512MB), 7900GTX (G71 512MB), 7900GX2 (G71 1024MB), 7950GT (G71 256MB), 7950GT (G71 512MB), 7950GX2 (G71 1024MB).

Ati - X1800 GTO (R520 256MB), X1800 GTO Rev. 2 (R520 256MB), X1800 XL (R520 256MB), AIW X1800 XL (R520 256MB), X1800 XT (R520 256MB), X1800 XT (R520 512MB), X1900 GT (R580 256MB), X1900 GT Rev. 2 (R580 256MB), AIW X1900 (R580 256MB), X1900 Crossfire Edition (R580 512MB), X1900 XT (R580 256MB), X1900 XT (R580 512MB), X1900 XTX (R580 512MB), X1950 XT (R580 256MB), X1950 XT (R580 512MB), X1950 XTX (R580+ 512MB), X1900 GT (RV570 256MB), X1900 GT (RV570 512MB), X1900 Pro (RV570 256MB), X1900 Pro (RV570 512MB).

As you can see, they have a long way to cach up to the previous generation. They should have named G92 with something like 8900 or 8850, there's no doubt about that, but this is something that has been discussed a lot too.

 

[DarkMatter]

If they dont have enuff 8800gt's to supply,how the hell will they have enuff of these?

Probably they have "optimized" the process to make G92. To optimize the fabrication process means that they have found a way to make them faster and cheaper, but at the same time it is probable that they have encountered a higher number of chips that don't qualify as 8800GT or GTS (lower yields). That is, they have lower yields for the GT and GTS, but at the same time, a large number of the "failing" chips are similar enough to make a GS line.

This doesn't mean they are going to have less GT's or GTS's, because, as I said, they have found a way to make them faster, i.e:

Before - They are able to make 100 G92 chips/hour. 40 of them are GTS, 50 GT and 10 are "failing" chips. Some of those failing could qualify as GS chips, but they are really scarce so they can't justify the creation of a new card. They probably store them somewhere.

After optimization - They are able to make 200 chips/hour. 55 are GTS, 75 are GT. Out of the remaining 70 most of them qualify as what the GS is and now there are enough of them to justify a new card in the line.

These numbers are false and exagerated, but I think they represent very well how it works.

 

[musek]

In addition - G80 chips are EOL from January 2008 - almost all facturing forces from G80 will be producing G92 now.