G80 VS G92: Med to high end GeForce GFX cards round-up!
â—† 8800GTS 320MB: close to 8800GS 384MB
8800GTS 320MB VS 8800GS 384MB and 9600GT 256MB
Yes GeForce 8800GTS 320MB have a bigger memory interface, but because its low frequency, so the bandwidth is only few GB/s higher than 9600GT. But because of the memory size and the amount of SP, 8800GTS 320MB is a bit better than 9600GT. If the AA/AF setting raises, the gap widens (except WIC). filtering the data lower than 25FPS, 8800GTS 320MB only leads 9600GT 256MB about 4.7%.
8800GS 384MB have the same amount of SP with 8800GTS 320MB, but the memory interface is quite low. Thanks to the high clock and the bigger memory, it performs similar to 8800GTS 320MB, After filtering data lower than 25FPS,8800GT 320MB is 0.7% lower than 8800GS 384MB.
So it is pretty clear: in the performance 8800GTS is between 8800GS 384MB and 9600GT 512MB, similar to 8800GS 384MB. But its power consumption is higher than the other two cards, and the hardware decoding ability is also weaker, so a brand new 8800GTS 320MB’s price tag should be ten bucks lower than a 8800GS 384MB.
Page 1: Introduction
Page 2: G80: brand new architecture
Page 3: G80 products
Page 4: Difference between G8X and G9X
Page 5: Test bed and remarks
Page 6: HD video playback test
Page 7: Power consumption test
Page 8: Performance comparison
Page 9: 800GTS 320MB close to 8800GS 384MB
Page 10: 8800GTS 640MB = 9600GT 512MB
Page 11: 8800GTX≈8800GTS 512MB
Page 12: 8800Ultra: the king of single GPU
Page 13: Test data sum-up
Page 14: Final thought
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:48 pm
If i were to build a monster pc right now i’d much rather get three 9800 GTXs against two GX2s, and for about the same price.
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Why o dont you use any AMD cards scores in the table like this??? 3870 3850 anyone??
April 3rd, 2008 at 2:44 am
I hope you will do the comparison between : 9800GTX vs 8800GTX vs 8800GTS
April 3rd, 2008 at 3:06 am
Ajai, because it’s a G80 vs G92 article, and the ATI cards really suck wind when you enable AA/AF. Even the 3870X2 can’t stand up to G92 GTS. The HD3XXX series just cannot compete.
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:40 am
the only reason why the g80 gts 320mb did so bad was that it was not overclocked at all.
What a shame.
April 4th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
[…] The card’s performance and price are similar to 9600GT’s. (Related: G80 VS G92, med to high end GFX cards round-up). So NV is going to change the name of GeForce 8800GS to 9600GSO, in order to Classify the card […]
April 5th, 2008 at 7:13 am
[…] G80 VS G92: Med to high end GeForce GFX cards round-up! Interesante review. __________________ Arch Linux 2008.2 | CPU-Z ID 338618 […]
April 22nd, 2008 at 3:59 am
[…] the 8800GTS 320 since according to this uber-comparison, it wins in the games I play the most. G80 VS G92: Med to high end GeForce GFX cards round-up! - Expreview.com (9) But then there’s the ol 3850/3870 cards. I don’t know where they fit in to the whole equation. […]
May 26th, 2008 at 2:38 am
[…] http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/02/g…nd-up/?page=10 9600gt and the 8800gts will perform quite similarly tho 9600gt will consume much less power,but it is worth getting the 8800gt for 20-30$ more. __________________ I believe in Karma what you give is what you get returned I believe you can’t appreciate real love ’til you’ve been burned I believe the grass is no more greener on the other side I believe you don’t know what you’ve got until you say goodbye […]
June 5th, 2008 at 3:53 am
Please remember that three 9800 gtx’s only produces about 1.5 teraflops of possible performance where two 9800 gx2’s produce 2 teraflops of performance. So u cant really even compare the two.
Plus the possibility to add another 9800 gx2 for a total of 3Gb of frame buffer and 3 teraflops of performance.
Thats not even comparing the number of stream processors available.
The teraflops talk is directly correlated with the number of stream processors. Where each card has 128 stream processors, the gx2’s having 256 stream processor per card, 3*256 = 768 stream processors, where the 9800 gtx (three of them) would only be 384.
Obviously there is the added cost:-)
July 8th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Steven,
You obviously know absolutely nothing about this. Stop lying and making shit up and google the facts quickly. You are spreading incorrect information and probably confusing people like yourself who actually did take the time to google before posting.