Originally Posted by C.Jackson
Better compared to the G92 8800GTS rather than the GTX. It's essentially an overclocked 8800GTS with a bit more voltage and faster memory. I wish nVidia would have wowed us like they've done in the past but I guess it's not really necessary at this point. The GX2 will fill the gap the X2 has on nVidia and the GTX will go up against the 3870.
<THIS IS NOT A FANBOY COMMENT> The 8 series was enough to fend against ATi so no real need in changing the architecture too much. That's in a company's eyes but from an enthusiast's view, we always want more performance than is actually even necessary. The G92 core should have been used for the 9 series and the 9 series alone, if they would have done it that way they wouldn't have everyone complaining about lack of change.
Couldn't agree more. The G80 is 90nm, the G92 is 65nm. Thats enough innovation right there.
Nvidia shot themselves in the foot when releasing the 8800GT and 8800GTS. They had been on top for months with the G80, but when the 3870's rolled out they needed something a bit more powerful. Rather than waiting until now to roll out the 9 series, they decided to push out the two G92 8 series cards early to compete and keep themselves on top for an extra few months. I think what they didn't expect was for the G92 cards to perform so well, (anyone remeber the SP boost on the original GTS?) or they would have gone right ahead and dubbed them the 9 series.
I don't care what anyone says, nVidia is on top of their game and on top of the market. I don't need crysis at 100FPS to prove it either.
Originally Posted by The Viper
that may not be correct. It was reported that the 9800GTX uses a slightly higher core voltage as well as faster memory.
From one article I read, it uses lower
voltage on the core, which in my opinion makes much more sense.