Final Words

Back when Sony announced the specifications of the PlayStation 3, everyone asked if it meant the end of PC gaming. After all Cell looked very strong and NVIDIA's RSX GPU had tremendous power. We asked NVIDIA how long it would take until we saw a GPU faster than the RSX. Their answer: by the time the PS3 ships. So congratulations to NVIDIA for making the PS3 obsolete before it ever shipped, as G80 is truly a beast.

A single GeForce 8800 GTX is more powerful overall than a 7900 GTX SLI configuration and even NVIDIA's mammoth Quad SLI. Although it's no longer a surprise to see a new generation of GPU outperform the previous generation in SLI, the sheer performance we're able to attain because of G80 is still breathtaking. Being able to run modern day games at 2560x1600 at the highest in-game detail settings completely changes the PC gaming experience. It's an expensive proposition, sure, but it's like no other; games just look so much better on a 30" display at 2560x1600 that it makes playing titles at 1600x1200 seem just "ok". We were less impressed by the hardware itself than by gaming at 2560x1600 with all the quality settings cranked all the way up in every game we tried, and that is saying quite a lot. And in reality, that's what it's all about anyway: delivering quality and performance at levels never before thought possible.

Architecturally, G80 is a gigantic leap from the previous generation of GPUs. It's the type of leap in performance that's akin to what we saw with the Radeon 9700 Pro, and given the number of 9700 Pro-like launches we've seen, they are rare. Like 9700 Pro, we are able to enable features that improve image quality well beyond the previous generation, and we are able to run games smoothly at resolutions higher than we could hope for. And, like 9700 Pro, the best is yet to come.

With developers much more acclimated to programmable shader hardware, we expect to see a faster ramp in the availability of advanced features enabled by DirectX 10 class hardware. This is more because of the performance improvements of DX10 than anything else: game developers can create just about the same effects in SM3.0 that they can with SM4.0. The difference is that DX9 performance would be so low that features won't be worth implementing. This is different from the DX8 to DX9 transition where fully programmable shaders enabled a new class of effects. This time, DX10 simply removes the speed limit and straps on afterburners. The only fly in the ointment for DirectX 10 is the requirement that users run Windows Vista. Unfortunately, that means developers are going to be stuck with supporting both DX9 and DX10 hardware in their titles for some time, unless they simply want to eliminate Windows XP users as a potential market.

Much of the feature set for G80 can be taken advantage of through OpenGL on Windows XP today. Unfortunately, OpenGL has fallen out of use in games these days, but there are still a few who cling to its clean interface and extensibility. The ability to make use of DX10 class features is here today for those who wish to do so.

That's not to say that DX9 games won't see benefits from NVIDIA's new powerhouse. Everything we've tested here today shows incredible scaling on G80 and proves that a unified architecture is the way to go forward in graphics. More complex SM3.0 code will be capable of running on G80 faster than we've been able to see on G70 and R580, and we certainly hope developers will take advantage of that and start releasing games with the option to enable unheard of detail.

The bottom line is that we've got an excellent new GPU that enables incredible levels of performance and quality. And NVIDIA is able to do this while using a reasonable amount of power for the performance gained (despite requiring two PCIe power connectors per 8800 GTX). The chip is huge in terms of transistor count, and in terms of die area. Our estimates based on the wafer shots NVIDIA provided us with indicate that the 681 million transistor G80 die is somewhere between 480 and 530 mm^2 at 90nm. This leaves NVIDIA with the possibility of a spring refresh part based on TSMC's 80nm half-node process that could enable not only better prices, but higher performance and lower power as well.

While we weren't able to overclock the shader core of our G80 parts, NVIDIA has stated that shader core overclocking is coming. While playing around with the new nTune, overclocking the core clock does impact performance, but we'll talk more about this in our retail product review to be posted in the coming days.

With G80, NVIDIA is solidly in a leadership position and now we play the waiting game for ATI's R600 to arrive. One thing is for sure, if you were thinking about building a high end gaming system this holiday season, you only need to consider one card.

Performance with AA Disabled
POST A COMMENT

111 Comments

View All Comments

  • haris - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    You must have missed the article they published the very next day http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35...">here. saying they goofed. Reply
  • Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    Yes I did - thanks.

    I wish they would have updated the original post to note the mistake, as it is still easily accessible via google. ;) (And the 'we goofed' post is only shown when you drill down for more results)
    Reply
  • Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    In all the AA comparison photos of the power lines, with the dome in the background - why does the dome look washed out in the G80 images? Is that a driver glitch? I'm only on page 12, so if you explain it after that.. well, I'll get it eventually.. ;) But is that just a driver glitch, or is it an IQ problem with the G80 implementation of AA? Reply
  • bobsmith1492 - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    Gamma-correcting AA sucks. Reply
  • Araemo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    That glitch still exists whether or not gamma-correcting AA is enabled or disabled, so that isn't it. Reply
  • iwodo - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    I want to know if these power hungry monster have any power saving features?
    I mean what happen if i am using Windows only most of the time? Afterall CPU have much better power management when they are idle or doing little work. Will i have to pay extra electricity bill simply becoz i am a cascual gamer with a power - hungry/ ful GPU ?

    Another question pop up my mind was with CUDA would it now be possible for thrid party to program a H.264 Decoder running on GPU? Sounds good to me:D
    Reply
  • DerekWilson - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    oh man ... I can't believe I didn't think about that ... video decoder would be very cool. Reply
  • Pirks - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link

    decoder is not interesting, but the mpeg4 asp/avc ENCODER on the G80 GPU... man I can't imagine AVC or ASP encoding IN REAL TIME... wow, just wooowww
    I'm holding my breath here
    Reply
  • Igi - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    Great article. The only thing I would like to see in a follow up article is performance comparison in CAD/CAM applications (Solidworks, ProEngineer,...).

    BTW, how noisy are new cards in comparison to 7900GTX and others (in idle and under load)?
    Reply
  • JarredWalton - Thursday, November 09, 2006 - link

    I thought it was stated somewhere that they are as loud (or quiet if you prefer) as the 7900 GTX. So really not bad at all, considering the performance offered. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now