New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Finally the 8800m GTX? - Page 6

post #101 of 126
11/14/07 at 9:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by diefool View Post
3dmark has little to nothing to do with preformance in real world.

look at turbos fraps thread.

the 8700s are crappy in highres cuz of restricted bus 128 bit.

not to mention the 256x2 paralell ram
Nice...you are learning. However, the 8700s are crappy period, due to both the bus and lack of shaders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lgrimal View Post
3DMark06 is an excellent predictor of our a system will perform AGAINST other systems. It doesn't tell you what absolute performance on specific games will be and mainly the drivers are the culprits here...not the chip.

I often read that the Dell 8700M SLI only uses 512KB RAM (2x256MB). This is wrong. Dell configured the SLI module so it fully uses the additional 768MB of shared memory from Vista. So from 2GB RAM onwards the GPU's can use well over 1GB of RAM.

The low added value of 2x512MB in actual performance was the reason that Dell opted for the 2x256MB option (also because of increased price, energy consumption and thermal development of the 2x512MB option).

Above 2GB or main DDRAM, the 2x512MB is just not worth it as it would bring the total to over 1,7GB and games are not optimzed to use that much.

My system has 4GB DDRAM, so my GPUs is never short of RAM.
Pretty much everything you just said is either wrong, or a worthless point to make.

3dmark06 sucks for anything other than seeing if your system is performing up to par by comparing it to a very similar system.

The 8700s in SLI only have 256mb of GPU memory available to them. Memory is mirrored in SLI, not striped. When this gets filled, your right, it reverts to system memory, but the system memory is way, way, way, way, way, way, etc...slower than GPU memory, and is more or less worthless for gaming.

There is hardly, if any extra 'thermal developement' for adding ram, but i think you made most of that part up anyway.

My system has 4GB DDRAM, so my GPUs is never short of RAM.

I almost want to sig quote you on that one.
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 126
11/14/07 at 9:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzpulp View Post
I have work soon and while I could waste my time and read these responses, I've already seen the mention of 3dmark way too much. Everyone knows how inflated the 8 series scores are...except you that is.

And 3dmark is even less useful when comparing out of brand. I could get 6700 with my 6800go ultra and thats higher than a stock 7900GS but that doesnt mean I got better in game performance.
sorry, what chip doesn't get hsi results inflated by 3DMark06? I think 3DMark07 can only fortify the 8xxx chips leadership as more directX10 elements are integrated.

Benchmarks are never perfect and comparing machines together is futile. I prefer to test my system on real games by using different drivers to a chip-oriented discussion. I think noone is really debating over the relative position of Nvidia chips between themselves or even compared to ATI. In many games Nvidia is the current winner.

I don't think I can do anything wrong with an 8800M SLI from Dell considering how superior the desktop version was to the competition. Of course, when AMD bring their next gen cards next year, I will reevaluate the situation. Until then I prefer to have fun than get my head banged over benchmarks.
Reply
Reply
post #103 of 126
11/14/07 at 9:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by nissanztt90 View Post
Nice...you are learning. However, the 8700s are crappy period, due to both the bus and lack of shaders.



Pretty much everything you just said is either wrong, or a worthless point to make.

3dmark06 sucks for anything other than seeing if your system is performing up to par by comparing it to a very similar system.

The 8700s in SLI only have 256mb of GPU memory available to them. Memory is mirrored in SLI, not striped. When this gets filled, your right, it reverts to system memory, but the system memory is way, way, way, way, way, way, etc...slower than GPU memory, and is more or less worthless for gaming.

There is hardly, if any extra 'thermal developement' for adding ram, but i think you made most of that part up anyway.

My system has 4GB DDRAM, so my GPUs is never short of RAM.

I almost want to sig quote you on that one.
If you can read German, then pm me an I can send you the link to the official Dell source.

You don't need to become disparaging or agressive or call people liars, just because someone quotes a valid source. Do you have an inferiority complex or why do you need to dominate people the way you do? Can you not discuss in a polite manner?

I see no point in continuing this discussion this forum as:
a- there are better forums out there, with a much more readable layout
b- people are increadibly primitive and agressive. I think I am not the first one to complain about this.
Reply
Reply
post #104 of 126
11/14/07 at 9:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgrimal View Post
If you can read German, then pm me an I can send you the link to the official Dell source.

You don't need to become disparaging or agressive or call people liars, just because someone quotes a valid source. Do you have an inferiority complex or why do you need to dominate people the way you do? Can you not discuss in a polite manner?

I see no point in continuing this discussion this forum as:
a- there are better forums out there, with a much more readable layout
b- people are increadibly primitive and agressive. I think I am not the first one to complain about this.
Okie dokie, cya.
Reply
Reply
post #105 of 126
11/14/07 at 9:42pm
OK let me break this down for those here who have a problem understanding what is going on.
First, 3dmark05/06 is only good at evaluating performance at their default resolution, i.e. 1024x768 (3dmark05) or 1280x1024 (3dmark06). That's it. The reason that isn't relevant around here is m1710/m1730/e1705 etc mostly run 1920x1200, so those 3dmark scores aren't very helpful.

Ok, now the 8700m gt. This thing has 32 shader units and 128bit memory, so its performance should be approximatly on par with the 8600gt/gts, probably the gt is more relevant though because of its lower clocks. Thus, do a google search for benchmarks of 8600gt/8600gt sli to get an idea of how they perform. Let me summarize: not so hot once you get above 1280x1024 due to lack of memory bandwidth and the relatively small number of shaders.

The 8800gtx-m on the other hand will have 96 shader units and 256-bit memory, making it slightly worse than a desktop 8800gts since it has slightly lower memory bandwidth (320bit vs 256bit).

Now, compare an 8800gts to an 8600gt sli setup and you will find your answer. Even better, compare the 8800gts sli vs 8600gt sli and you will see why everyone is so excited about the 8800gtx-m and why it WILL be a HUGE performance increase.

/thread
Reply
Reply
post #106 of 126
11/14/07 at 9:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by atwood7fan View Post
OK let me break this down for those here who have a problem understanding what is going on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atwood7fan View Post
First, 3dmark05/06 is only good at evaluating performance at their default resolution, i.e. 1024x768 (3dmark05) or 1280x1024 (3dmark06). That's it. The reason that isn't relevant around here is m1710/m1730/e1705 etc mostly run 1920x1200, so those 3dmark scores aren't very helpful.

Ok, now the 8700m gt. This thing has 32 shader units and 128bit memory, so its performance should be approximatly on par with the 8600gt/gts, probably the gt is more relevant though because of its lower clocks. Thus, do a google search for benchmarks of 8600gt/8600gt sli to get an idea of how they perform. Let me summarize: not so hot once you get above 1280x1024 due to lack of memory bandwidth and the relatively small number of shaders.

The 8800gtx-m on the other hand will have 96 shader units and 256-bit memory, making it slightly worse than a desktop 8800gts since it has slightly lower memory bandwidth (320bit vs 256bit).

Now, compare an 8800gts to an 8600gt sli setup and you will find your answer. Even better, compare the 8800gts sli vs 8600gt sli and you will see why everyone is so excited about the 8800gtx-m and why it WILL be a HUGE performance increase.

/thread
Finally a factual post not overbloated with condescending views. I totally agree with what you have said. I am highly anticipating the 8800M myself, and I am glad it finally ships on an XPS M1730 from December.

But since Dell have such a 14 days return policy in Germany I didn't want to wait and already ordered a system with the 8700 SLI (I had to sell my XPS M1710 on ebay soon enough to be able to sell it for over 2000 EUR).

I will return it as soon as the 8800M becomes available or get the upgrade in January.

My M1710 had 4GB or RAM and a single 7950 GTX, so I will see how the 8700M SLI fares compared to it. It will be very easy for me to do a back to back comparison...
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 126
11/14/07 at 10:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgrimal View Post

Finally a factual post not overbloated with condescending views. I totally agree with what you have said. I am highly anticipating the 8800M myself, and I am glad it finally ships on an XPS M1730 from December.

But since Dell have such a 14 days return policy in Germany I didn't want to wait and already ordered a system with the 8700 SLI (I had to sell my XPS M1710 on ebay soon enough to be able to sell it for over 2000 EUR).

I will return it as soon as the 8800M becomes available or get the upgrade in January.

My M1710 had 4GB or RAM and a single 7950 GTX, so I will see how the 8700M SLI fares compared to it. It will be very easy for me to do a back to back comparison...
Welcome back! Nice of you to completely change your tone to the correct one.
Reply
Reply
post #108 of 126
11/14/07 at 10:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgrimal View Post
YOu people are insane. Don't judge any laptop based on a semi-fonctional demo of ONE game!!! FFS!

The Crysis demo does not support SLI. The full game will and should offer significantly improved performance for all M1730 owners (and owners of other SLI-based gaming laptops)!

The M1730 reaches up to 1050 on 3D Mark06 with overcloked graphic cards and extreme CPU q 3,0Ghz, so the issue doesnt lie with the laptop but with the immature crysis demo.

By the way, those of you have performance issues under Vista should instal the following Vista Upgrades for Geforce, compatibility, performance, and SLI:
KB938979
KB938194
KB936710
KB940105


Sorry, but don't expect the 1730 to play it very well. Crysis (final) taxes my desktop (in sig) with an 8800 Ultra. On high settings ( with all the dx10 "tweaks" for DX9) on XP with 4xAA I pull around 30-35FPS. I hope I'm wrong, but I will not hold my breath on this one.
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 126
11/15/07 at 2:21am
Do you guys know if the m8800 will be DX10.1 compatable ?
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 126
11/15/07 at 2:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokecai View Post
Do you guys know if the m8800 will be DX10.1 compatable ?
whoops, n/m. forgot about the whole 10.1 thing
Reply
Reply
post #111 of 126
11/15/07 at 11:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokecai View Post
Do you guys know if the m8800 will be DX10.1 compatable ?
Just like the 8800 series already released, NO, it will not be dx 10.1

However, don't expect dx 10.1 to become an issue for several years tbh; even microsoft is downplaying its significance.
Reply
Reply
post #112 of 126
11/15/07 at 3:08pm
I'm not sure how anyone could know that. I think he was asking because the new 8800GT is 10.1 compliant. Either way, its not really that big of a deal.
Reply
Reply
post #113 of 126
11/15/07 at 3:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzpulp View Post
I'm not sure how anyone could know that. I think he was asking because the new 8800GT is 10.1 compliant. Either way, its not really that big of a deal.
I thought the 8800gt wasn't dx 10.1.
regardless, dx 10.1 isn't really important:
http://arstechnica.com/journals/hard...s-directx-10-1
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 126
11/15/07 at 4:26pm
strange that nVidia doesn't seem aware that the 8800gt has dx10.1

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce..._features.html

but what would they know about it?
Reply
Reply
post #115 of 126
11/15/07 at 4:28pm
Wait the 8800GT has DX 10.1 support? Are you guys sure?
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 126
11/15/07 at 4:29pm
it doesn't I'm 99.9% sure
Reply
Reply
post #117 of 126
11/15/07 at 4:32pm
Thats the impression I'm getting after googling about it. Afaik the only DX 10.1 cards out now are the ATI 3xxx series cards.
Reply
Reply
post #118 of 126
11/15/07 at 5:06pm
my post was sarcastic... I was poointing out that nVidia does NOT claim to have 10.1

There are not currently released nVidia cards with dx10.1

None.

If they had it, they would say so. If they had it, ATI (AMD) would not be using that as their competitive advantage.

In case it's still unclear:
The ATI(AMD) 38x0 series has dx10.1
The nVidia 8xxx series does NOT have dx10.1

AFAIK there are no games out or planned for release soon that use the dx10.1 api.

DX10.1 requires Vista SP1 which isn't even in open beta yet. DX10.1 is not something that's going to be a big deal any time soon. By the time it's useful, we'll be talking about the nVidia 9950 not the 8800....
Reply
Reply
post #119 of 126
11/15/07 at 5:30pm
Thread Starter 
Screw DX10.1, it's irrelevant, like a gimmick. There's no point to even consider it.
Reply
Reply
post #120 of 126
11/15/07 at 5:35pm
I had only seen something about the 8800 GT being DX 10.1 at one source that wasnt all that reliable. Guess it isn't but like I said, it doesnt matter anyway.

Sorry, but I dont typically read up on desktop GPUs
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home