The 8800 GTS with a die shrink, huh, well they're saying it's just an update to the G80 core used in the GTS, why not make a product to 'replace' the GTX?

If the G92 is the mid-range chipset, and the G98 is the entry level chipset, what is the high level chip-set? Also why is their numbering system going backwards?

They Wont Change The GTX because they dont need to, the 2900XT cant beat it yet so why bother?, they already should have something up their sleeves but they have all the time in the world to release it

I guess with no proper competition around all they want to do is do some dressing up of a midrange chip, and do some weird numbering scheme and then tout it as the greatest thing since bread came sliced, and then pocket a few dozen in millions as profit.......

When outrunning a bear you only have to run faster than the guy beside you...

With that in mind I think the reason that Nvidia hasn't really done anything too breathtaking in a while is that ATI has been pretty lax.

My theory is that Nvidia already has the next enthusiast card ready to go, but they're keeping it secret until ATI comes out with it's next best thing. Then a week or two after ATI announces it's best card then wham - Nvidia will release it's new juggernaught.

Until ATI does something new, there's no reason for Nvidia to.

I read an article well over a year ago that ATI and NVIDIA had entered in to a gentlemen's agreement to do completely new GPU's only once every 18 months because they'd gotten in to a oneupmanship battle that neither was enjoying due to high R&D vs. returns on that investment. I wouldn't be at all suprised if we don't see the next gen nvidia till mid next year at least.

... is more important at this stage of the GPU game right now. I would STILL like to see a high-end GPU that doesn't use 200 watts and hit 70C under load.

just a thought on my part. ati was 9800 as the high end so maybe nvidia is reversing the order so as to NOT name there high end chip 9800gtx but 9000gtx and so on. just my $.02

karl

This would make sense..it is very hard to get R&D costs back back when they were simply scrambling to one up each other..I remember wondering how they can profit on that.

More proof that greed wins out over technological advancement. IF (and I stress IF) they DO have the next best thing then why, oh why don't they release it? IF ATI doesn't have anything, then why do they care? ATI would just have that much more ground to catch up or (wait for it) god forbid they come up with something better. GF9 series (on the assumption that's what they'd call it) would be the new top tier, 8 series in the middle and low. They could dominate the market. But...yea for greed...and I digress.

Hahahaha you fan boys crack me up, I'm very sorry to break the news to you...

But all of the current cards today are shabby for future DX10 gaming. So unless you plan on upgrading in a year your bleeding edge money was wasted IMO.

The GTX does need to be updated. DX10 is lackluster and HD playback sucks (so does ATI). It taxes the system, Nvidia and ATI leave the top of the line a 'suckers stop gap card'. It doesn't have the best chips to perform the encoding and decoding. Shouldn't the top of the line have it all?

I would suggest you fan boys start reading article

"the ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT is capable of beating the Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTX, which is much more expensive"

"The ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT and HD 2400 XT are kind of DirectX 10 kings in their respective price categories."

"The ATI Radeon HD 2000 architecture features the most advanced implementation of DirectX 10 today."

www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/directx10-games_15.html#sect0

If DX10 is the future your GTX aint it despite being pushed and marketed as such.

I would suggest anyone that doesn't have to upgrade hold out another year. Or at the very least don't be suckered into the bleeding edge.

The quotes you provide from the article you referenced are shown without qualification or context. In fact, they're downright misleading.

If you wish to "Enlighten" people, make a clear point and back it up. It is common, and accurate, knowledge that the 8800GTX has no real rivals (as it pertains to performance or sales) -- if you want to point out particular circumstances where ATI's card is better, then do so, instead of trying the smoke and mirrors game.

Shouldn't the top of the line have it all?

should it? yes. Will it? no

Everyone is wating for the next High-End one, specially with the lunch of Crysis...
Everyone wants to get the new X38 chipset and Penryn CPU to play Crysis...
Everyone wants PCI-E 2.0, another reason to purchase an X38 mobo.
Some are also saving money to pair their X38 Motherboards with the very expensive DDR3.

In other words, people is saving big bucks right now, and many enthusiasts are willing to spend between $700 - $1000 for high-ends GPUs.

Nvidia could cash money right now!!

But OH F.... they had to release a replacement for a mid-range card... using PCI-2.0.

It's terrible. You are making me wait even longer for a high-end GPU, or forcing me to purchase the existent high-end (GTX Ultra) WHICH IS NOT EVEN COMPLIANT with PCI-2.0.

So now, why should I bother buying an X38 Motherboard if the avaliable card would be just a mid range?

Most of us are trying to build a High-End system before christmas. Are we are willing to pay...

Instead Nvidia is like the rabbit who thinks he won the race against the turtle (ATI). And drops the ball...

I think they should be careful, or they might find a surprise from ATI.

Instead they should have launched the High-End now, and finally win the complete market against ATI. And then make another flagship card by mid-2008.

NVIDIA could win and crush ATI right now. This was the chance... but it seems they are too stupid, and insecure, and are still basing their decisions on what the competitors are doing...

Stupid... too bad... I'm very dissapointed...

I cannot buy another die shrinked GTS.

Have you checked out the current benchmarks on bioshock, i guess you should before you start bleeding "Green". (http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/8)

Wow you really are dumb, helps if you read the article and look at the graphs lol. It beats the Nvidia card in 2 of the tests in lower resolutions on DirectX 9, Directx 10 is a different story, as are the higher resolution results.

I didn't mislead...

I pulled quotes from the article and posted the damn link for every one to read it.

How in the hell did I mislead, I said if DX10 is the future then according to them blah blah blah...

There are no words or mine nor any taking out of context. I even called both shabby and stop gap cards which is very true. I did make a point.

point out what I said and how I mislead instead of posting nonsense.

I also never said that a card GTX where people spent over $200 more was a direct competitor of ATI radeon.

Hell for 200 more the damn thing should not be beaten AT 'F'ing all...

Get a clue and get your head from out of your darkest and dirtiest area.

according to benchmarks of games being on DX10

the radeon hd line has been beating the geforce 8

but they're nothing spectacular really
all of the cards did horribly in those benchmarks

both ATI & Nvidia cards were put to shame

at the same time while being disappointed with ATI's DX10 performing, even while it beat the Nvidia cards, I was hoping that the 320 stream processors would really pull ahead
but it didn't pull ahead that much lolol
Nvidia cards did beat ATI's in some DX10 benchmarks though

I also remember reading somewhere that ATI is making like a dual core hd 2600?
might have misread that though
but seeing that the radeon hd line has a core that's just like a cpu
I'm sure it's possible
& if they can do that, imagine a dual core hd 2900?

640 stream processors

oh man, if only...

& I wonder if AMD would play dirty like Intel did with their quad cores (2x2dual cores)
& splice two barcelona cores in one chip
& then using two of those on Socket F (1207 FX) 4x4

that's 16 cores!

oh if only it were true
that would turn heads all around & then fanboys would storm in like sardines swimming in packs

is good. Many fanboys don't see this. I am kind of an Intel / nvidia fanboy. But I realize that the competition is important for us, the customers. Without competition - high prices and low development...

That's the truth.

Scott, where did you disappear too? any answers?

You state "make a clear point and back it up". So since you are having a hard time noticing clear points let me help you.

1) "I'm very sorry to break the news to you... But all of the current cards today are shabby for future DX10 gaming."

2) "The GTX does need to be updated. DX10 is lackluster and HD playback sucks (so does ATI)."

3) "Nvidia and ATI leave the top of the line a 'suckers stop gap card'."

4) "If DX10 is the future your GTX aint it despite being pushed and marketed as such." The Nvidia card was billed as the 'be the first ready for the new DX10 movement'. But look almost 10 months later $640 plus wasn't worth it because it stinks at DX10.

4) "I would suggest anyone that doesn't have to upgrade hold out another year. Or at the very least don't be suckered into the bleeding edge." - IMO skip BOTH offerings and hold out a little while longer. And if you simply can't wait then don't buy bleeding edge.

Wow I counted 5 'F'ing CLEAR POINTS that you couldn't see.

You also said "if you want to point out particular circumstances where ATI's card is better, then do so, instead of trying the smoke and mirrors game."

Actually that's what I did, you see young jedi
1) I First suggested everyone read the article and gave the link to read it yourself
2) I began the post stating it sucks for DX10 and HD playback and encoding
3) I picked out just three of the quotes and immediately followed that with a statement "If DX10 is the future your GTX aint it"

And just in case you couldn't comprehend or logically follow, my post was a direct RESPONSE to Ricardo who basically said Nvidia doesn't need advancements after the GTX card.

There is NO SMOKE AND MIRRORS, NO OUT OF CONTEXT... if so point it out...

DX10 is in it's infancy, its a new system completely revamped. It is the future and it is far more effecient, but current developers have been doing it one way so long it will take a bit to adapt.

this guy takes snippets, quotes from benchmarks where a 2900XT happens to win one or two low res benchmarks or odd games, against an 8800GTX or rare GTX Ultra and "suddenly" as if by magic it BEATS the 8800(period)..., that folks is called a FANBOY for ATI.

Get a life ATI boy. If the 2900XT was really the card to beat EVERYONE would already know about it and ATI would be trumpting that fact from the highest mountain., it aint happening. So you aint happening.

I'm assuming you're talking about spiritmenace. Because my quotes have nothing don't state 2900XT vs the GTX ultra.

But he didn't post any snippets, so I was confused.

paullubbock, please let me know who your comments are being directed too. Because if it was too me, I would ask the same of you that I asked the other guy that disappeared.

Yo, the list of comments here, is a joy to read. Let's all keep up, together, like this. A good bow, to lots of top (gtxers?), commentors. Hats off.

Having confusing nameing and number systems slows buyers down. What do I get? a 92 or a 98. Well higher number usually means better right? So I buy the 98 and wonder why nvidia made this suck a__ card. So I return it and waste a bunch of time. Not to mention the retailers time for having to restock it or whatever.