What happened to the 280gtx???

I was going to build a new M17x online a few days ago but I stopped when there was no 280 option for the M17x. What happened to them? Was there an issue???

Granted I wasnt going to buy one anyway as I love my Area 51 M17x 9800 SLI (other than me frying a card for leaving it on carpet while playing a Blu Ray ato my TV)

Anyway just wondering. Thanks for lookin'

 

the nviadia card were causing alot of problems on the R-1 mostly audio and video latency. so they took out that option.

 

So someday when I get a gen 3 or 4 M17x I should not try to put atleast one 280gtx in my 1st Gen m17x (and last all AW LAPPY!!!!!)??

 

seem to only be a major issue with the quad cores only, so i think you will be fine if you choose to do it.

 

nah, go with the ATI's or wait for the 5700 or 5800 ATI cards

 

We need to wait for the 4xx GTX series to do well in the dekstop market and see what's going to happen and if they're going to release it in laptops. Currently, the 9 and 2xx series have just been revisions on the original 8 series. Meaning they just over-clocked and added more power, thus eventually falling behind to ATI their competitor. They'll get it together, we'll just have to wait and see. Right now the 5870 is the card to go with, or the 4870 is what I've heard. And that's pretty nuts considering the ongoing driver issues that there currently are. But ATI's on their game and producing cards that don't give off Immense amounts of heat.

It won't be for another 2 years Minimum till I get another nvidia card me thinks. Went from 8800m to 9800m to 4870 to 5870 soon. In my opinion the NVidia 260 is the only card that's running stable, in terms of heat and performance but that card is pretty much a 9800........

 

...thats what I figure I dont see the new 260s or 280s realy scoring higher than the 9800, in fact ive seen some tests where the 260 scored lower on 3dmark. Yes I know that isnt always an accurate inidication of gaming performance.

 

From Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia

"the GTX 280 and GTX 260. The cards used the same basic Unified Architecture deployed in the previous 8 and 9 series cards, but with an upgrade in power. Both of the cards use the GT200 GPU as a basis for their design. This GPU contains 1.4 billion transistors on a 65 nm fabrication process."


That's a pretty minor architecture change and that's why they fell behind to ATI, and that's why everyone in the room is saying go ATI. If you want to move up. Nothing is wrong with the 9800, I still use one it's a great card, I call it the cooler version of the 8800 in both ways.

 

...yeah I dont plan on upgrading now, someday when I cant crank up the settings on high in native res I might. But I can still play games maxed out with out stutter. Crysis is gorgeous, The new need for speed is crazy, and Mass Effect 2 looks great!!!!!!!!

 

Yeah I'm scared to play need for speed on my Dual 470 because everyone says there are driver issues. I wonder if it'll handle well on my single 9800m. I would definitely say keep your system USMC the current gains are insignificant, and if you need speed get an SSD.

 

The GT200 is a drastic improvement over the G92 in DX10 performance, they are not that similar at all.

The desktop GTX cards are based off the GT200. The laptop ones are the G92 - like the 8800 GT and the 9000 series of cards based off that same core. For the most part the 8000 series was based off the G80, not the G92 of the 8800 GT and 8800 GTS 512.

I am pretty sure that Dell is giving nvidia a wide berth after the repeated DPC issues and the G84/G86 fiasco a few summers back. Intel chipsets tend to run better though and ATI graphics are currently much better than Nvidia (especially for the price) so this is not the end of the world.

And currently ATI drivers have been outstanding