9800M-GTS beats 8800-GTX reality or bollocks talk?

Hi Anyone,

I wonder about the rumours on the 9800M-GTS graphics. Most times better than the a wee bit older 8800-GTX card? I found this chart on the web.

Wha me wonder is, that this gpu comes in a 15 inch Clevo chassis. And there's only a singe device, the Alienware Area51 m15x that had equally much of power. Thoug, is here somebody kicking Alienware's ***?

cheerio sebastian

 

Hey Crazy Horse

Thanks for the post.

Wondering if you know of any vendors who are selling these configurations?
Been looking but have so far been unsuccsessful.

Cheers

 

There are some vedors (Europe, USA, UK) who sell typically loads of Clevo barebones. To make that correct, Clevo builts the barebones and the vendors cofigure them to their customers needs.

Europe
MySN / Schenker
Nexoc
Cyber System

USA / UK
Sager
Eurocom
...

the guys from MySN / Schenker just have started shipping out that XMG5 machine with nvidua 9800M-GTS graphics. There's review - but only in german language: http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/640

Eurocoms modell is named M860TU Montebello, Sagers is NP8660

 

thats not true mate. the first thing wrong there is... with the same resolution and 4xaa , all Ultra i get nothing less than 55 FPS with my rig. so it doesnt sound fair for the 8800GTX to have such FPS

 

9800mGT = 8800mGTX so yeah a 8800mGTX will beat a 9800mGTS.

 

Not true at all. 88mGTX > 98mGTS

 

8800m GTX is better then the 9800m GTS. the 9800m GTS just has an OCed core from an 8800m GTS, from 500 to 600.

 

He has spoken

 

See this is what makes me angry at ATi and Nvidia. Back in the 7 series/x1k series and before a change like this wouldnt warrant a new generation of cards, rather it would either add 100 or 50 to the card level it was improving upon. Now a slight overclock means BAM new generation, lets market these "newer and better chips". Makes me pretty mad.

 

Nvidia is alot of money trouble with the defective chips, and the class action lawsuit against them. so they are trying to squeeze as much out of the 8 series as possible.

 

whatever it is...I love my 98m gts

 

yep, this makes the nvidia 9 series a complete marketing gimmick. Performance wise, i think the 9 series is only 10% faster than its 8 series counter part. Its funny that the 9000s came out right after ati hd 3870 came out. We can really tell that the 9800s is only intended to battle ati's 3870. And the 9600m gt pits itself against the 3670 with slightly better performance. Why else this half assed generation jump that doesnt account for performance jumps.

 

hi to the crowd,

ok, you all are saying, "8800m GTX is better then the 9800m GTS" But why the heck got the editors from this review a different opinion? Are they going banana with their tests?

Here's that gaming part of the review 9800m GTS
http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/640/2

see that, the 9800m GTS beats the **** out of the 8800M-GTX: See attached Call of Duty 4 and Crysis CPU / GPU Bench.

 

All these graphs are a little suspicious to me.

 

Notebookjournal makes excellent notebook reviews in my opinion. Together with Notebookcheck they're the only site that measures brightness, blacklevels and contrast of screens with professional equipment.

In most of the in-gmae benchmarks they posted the ' MySN' with 9800M GTS beats the 8800GTX of the Alienware.

The comparison may be a bit influenced by the fact that the MySN comes with faster CPU, faster hard drive, more memory and a higher FSB.

 

yeah they are banana. look, in Both games benchmarked, the game is bound by CPU at that resolution.so it seems that the other notebook is having better CPU , and thats why its getting better FPS, otherwise, if you give the same notebook the same CPU as the m15x, the 8800GTX will obviously win. the AVerage FPS is boosted by the way higher max FPS provided by faster CPU. which means nothing gaming wise, no one games at that resolution anymore

 

yep. 9500m gs, 9600m gs, 9600m gt, 9650m gs, 9650m gt, 9700m gt.
6 cards, same old 8600 gt BS with different voltages and clocks.

the only 'new' card in the entire 9000 series might be 9700m gts, with 48 SPs.

EDIT: btw, 9800m gts IS weaker than 8800m gtx, and is ALOT weaker than 8800 gtx.

 

woah, grammer confusion much?

 

yup. i check the other notebook. it has 3ghz CPU, which could really do the difference in all tests at that low resolution.

 

It has actually 2.8GHz vs 2.6GHz in the Alienware.
3GB DDR3 RAM vs. 2GB DDR2.
1066 MHz FSB vs. 800MHz.

 

is it that second 'is'? can u be clearer. cheers.

 

its still 200mhz, but still the DDR3 ram wont do a difference at all, it must be the CPU for sure.

 

Yep its all a marketing gimmick to fool the public into thinking they are buying a newer faster product when in reality its old technology with a slight clock change. Its sad to put it lightly.

 

8 series was a revolution over 7 series because of newer tech, but all past cards arent anything new, same tech. DX10.1 is nothing to talk about.

 

I know this, but when the 7 series was still mainstream if they came out with a slightly overclocked card it added 50 or 100 to the series number and didn't create a whole new generation. I 100% agree that the 8 series deserved a new gen designation, but the 9 series should be 8450, 8650, 8750, and 8850; not 9XXX.

Think back on the 1900/1950 vs 1800 or the 7900/7950 vs 7800.

 

Hi everyone,

just wanted to correct something: the 9800m GTS also has its shaders clocked faster than the 8800m gtx : 1500 vs. 1250. So that makes two improvements besides the g94 chip.

(see GPU-Z analysis of both cards there : http://portables4gamers.com/?p=3243 and http://portables4gamers.com/?p=2923 )
- sorry for those french links by the way, but clicking GPU-Z screens is pretty straightforward !

I agree with the fact that most test differences should come from the faster CPU on the 9800m gts notebook's side, but still, can a 8800m GTX (or a "hide-and-seek" 9800m GT, see screens) be o/c to the GTS frequencies easily (dunno about this, never done it on a notebook) ?

I read somewhere that the 9800m GT is used to empty nvidia's 8800m GTX stocks, but the 9800m GT model was supposed to be clocked faster : see second link's third green screen : we're far from the advertized memory and shader clocks... Will it receive an update ? I.E. get the same clockspeeds than the GTS ? or stick to that like the 9800m GTX ?

 

That's more than enough.Pair that with higher frequencies and the lack of SP need,and voila.

Indeed. It might miss a few SPs , but it's higher clocked.

 

Well, I've already raised my shader clock to 1500Mhz using ntune 6.02, matching the GTS. Is it safe to go higher?

 

Part of the article is translated has been translated in english:

9800 GTS beats the 8800 GTX

Our Gaming Editor responded to this result with and equal dose of sheer pleasure and pure astonishment. The Clevo 15" mySN XMG5 with an Nvidia GeForce 9800 GTS proved it´s superiority over the Alienware Area 51 m15x by kicking dirt in it´s face in the 3D benchmarks. The XMG is priced at 2000 Euros.
http://www.notebookjournal.de/news/1094/1

 

Another member in the Clevo/Sager forum and I have identical notebooks (processor, ram, OS, HDD...etc.), except for the gpu; he has the GTS, to my GT. We're going to run a series of in-game benchmarks, to finally deliver some even ground comparisons of these cards.

I'll compile all of the data into a topic for this forum when we're done. No ETA yet.

 

the only thing to decide right now and remove all the fog, is 2 users to do Benchmarks. 1 with a 8800GTX and other with 9800GTS...

these 3 cards: 9800GTS , 9800GT , 8800GTX will be VERY CLOSE in performance, the thing that will show who is the dominator here is a better CPU (which will boost MAX fps therefor increasing the average FPS) or the type of the game. Because i can say that the 8800GTX and 9800gt will beat in games like lets say Crysis on very High, Because of the Huge shading power required.

 

That should be a pretty interesting match-up. I find it kinda funny that the day I thought of getting GTS that they turn out to be the better card, supposedly.

If true, ALOT of M860TU owners will be rampaging, or at least asking for a refund/swap of sorts.

EDIT

I still wouldn't say beat it, only the desktop 9800M upwards have proven to be really Crysis beaters in tests so far. But what is interesting is just how close they are in performance. Even if the 9800M GT/ 8800M GTX wins will it be by an amount worthy of the, sometimes £80 increase in price its worth to upgrade it over a 9800M GTS.

My money says the GT will win but by a very small and definitely not plus price-worthy margin.

 

It's not the better card.
OC the GT or the GTX at the same frequency values and they will totaly destroy the 9800M GTS.
It's as simple as that, the GTS has less SPs, so more room for heat from the higher frequencies.

 

It is exactly as eleron said, depends on the game. If the shader processors are not an asset, higher clocks will yield betetr results, as the only difference between the two cards is the amount of SP's.

 

if thats so. a 8800GTX will be more future proof

 

Try saying that to M860TU owners or even worse, M15X owners. Overclocking those cards 96 SP cards, by a worthy degree, will melt or set fire to their notebooks.

 

no it wont. I read chaz's review, he showed how cool it was after gaming. even the upper 70 and 80's are ok for these cards, 90 and above is something to worry about though. this is for the Clevo anyways, the alienware does not have very effective cooling from what I hear so that does not suprise me.

 

It's good to hear that GTS frequencies can be matched without melting those poor notebooks with a 8800m GTX/9800m GT ! I'm looking forward to seeing benchmarks on more similar laptops...

 

Clevo, mayhap but it's not something you'd want to run forever on there. As for the M15X, they break-up without the overclocking so what's going to happen when you do?

 

All I know is the 8800m GTX will never clock as high as my 9800m GTS. Not a chance. And even though it does have more shader processors, which means it has the *ability* to transfer more data.. if the clocks aren't maximizing the potential of the SPs..then it's a waste. Find me a GTX non-sli benchmark that touches this GTS.

 

E-wrecked, what are your SM2.0 and SM3.0 scores?

Edit: at stock and with OC plz.

 

just ran stock.. 9558 total. 4245 sm 2.0/3923 sm 3.0/2806 CPU

OC'd 11166 @ 5247/4873/2682.

 

Well we can overclock our 8800m GTX´s to 700 Core too without any problem and without any large degree in heat increase. There is some guys on the M1730 forum who has done that.

As eleron said where SP´s doesn´t count much a higher overclocked 9800m GTS would beat a single 8800m GTX. But in shader heavy intense games, i.e Lost Planet, Crysis etc etc those 96 SP´s of the 8800m GTX beats your 9800m GTS.

Also isn´t the 9800m GTS clocked at 600 Core standard? So according to your overclock on the 9800m GTS you can´t run the card at 725 Core? Comparing your overclock to my overclock I run my 8800m GTX at 625 on the Core, 950 on the memory and 1550 on the shaders without a sweat. That is a 125 MHz + overclock on the core alone, 150´MHz + on the memory alone and 250MHz + on the SP´s yep I have even two 8800m GTX in SLI still Crysis only maxes out at 78 degrees and this with SLI running.

The XPS M1730 has better cooling than the gateway, even with two 8800m GTX you can overclock like crazy if you just want to overvolt the GPU with 0.5v. This is all artifact free in ATI tool and in games. And without any problem with the heat hindering your overclock

This is the XPS M1730 of course, due to SLI it of course has better cooling than the Gateway, no doubt about it.

 

Really? Let's see you OC your core to 700 and run thru 30 minutes of crysis. Heck, I'd like to see ya make it through the benchmark on high settings and a decent resolution.

As I said, there's not a 8800m GTX that can outperform my system unless it's in SLI. Crysis, CoD 4, etc.

3dmark06; 9558 ; SM2.0 4245 - SM3.0 3923 - CPU 2806 @ 3.06 GHz
Stock clocks - 600/799/1500
GPU Peaks @ 66c and CPU @ 75c

3dmark06; 11166 ; SM2.0 5247 - SM3.0 4873 - CPU 2682 @ 2.98 GHz
Overclocked GPU and UV'd CPU - 745/1003/1940
GPU Peaks @ 70c and CPU @ 73c

Personally, I prefer not to overvolt and overclock the GPU at the same time.. and there's not many GPUs that you *have* to overvolt to gain performance. Except of course, the 8800m GTX, and the 9800m GTX(over rated!)..both of which are underpowered stock, otherwise you wouldn't have to add power to gain performance..right? The 8800m GTX is a great card, yes. It is an even better card in SLI, of course. However, you aren't going to find a GTX that outperforms the GTS running similar or identical hardware. And just because people complain about the 7811FX cooling, it's because they aren't educated with how to keep it cool, without any accessories to assist. TZS0 is my only complaint..but that's neither here nor there.

 

I don´t need to overclock my 8800m GTX´s. They run games beautifully. I run Crysis at 1920x1200 DX10 High without a sweat, 33 fps average here. My tweaked config with all Very High looking better than DX10 High I average 35 fps instead. I would get even higher fps if I had an extreme CPU. Now my T7700 2.4GHz is doing great as it is.

I overclock because it is a habit. I always want to push to see how far I can push them and usually stay there unless there is too much heat. Though I don´t have any heat problems with my 8800m GTX´s that´s why I run them at 625/1550/950. Now why do you need to overclock your´s then? Same thing right you are maybe not happy with stock performance when you can get more performance for free.

Cooling I meant that my XPS M1730 has some really great cooling and that is no wonder since it is an SLI laptop. SLI in this laptop is something, Dell has made a very nice GPU here that is actually a sort of GX2. There is not two separate GPU´s but they are on the same PCB. Dell has made a great SLI solution that is why SLI works so great for me with every single game I run.

9800m GTX overrated, well it is no large increase compared to a 8800m GTX. But it is still the fastest GPU out there, 112 SP´s.

If I am to push my 8800m GTX´s to 700 Core I have to overvolt it. I don´t want to do that since these 8800m GTX´s can run every single game I throw at it at 1920x1200 maxed out. They even beat my 8800GTX desktop in raw performance when running SLI.

They even beat a desktop 4870 when I compared benchmarks to a guy on another forum. We ran the same games and I had higher FPS than his 4870 when SLI was working and I have yet to hit a game that doesn´t run great with SLI. Some people have problem with SLI but usually they just don´t know how to get it running properly

I don´t consider your overclocking that impressive to be honest. 98 MHz on the Core, what hinders you to go to 725 MHz on the Core? Heat? Voltage?

Let´s see your Core starts at 600 MHz that is 100MHz over mine 8800m GTX´s stock. Still I push mine easily to 625 MHz on the Core alone. If I had my stock core clock to 600MHz I would easily break your Core clock and can easily do so by flashing, though nothing I want to do or have to do right now since performance isn´t an issue for me. For me a faster CPU would benefit me more than pushing my GPU to 700 MHz Core.

 

Very nice.. I considered the m1730. It really is a nice rig. The SLI is the only thing that steered me away, but like you said..some people just dont know how to get it running properly. Im still tossin around the idea. But I tell ya what.. IKAS just posted his benchies on his 9800GT SLI and it looks very strong.
Check this out http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=298886&page=2#13
I almost began to drool.

 

E-wrecked what I wrote with not impressive I take that back. You have some really decent overclock on that 9800m GTS. If I hadn´t got me an XPS I actually leaned towards the former Gateway with 8800m GTS before I bought this XPS. For the Price/Performance ratio that Gateway is a better buy than an XPS M1730 in my opinion

 

That's why I ended up with it..bang for the buck, and simplicity of not dealing with SLI drivers. Im happy with my purchase..but buyers remorse just wants a 9800m GTX even if they are over rated And thanks for the compliment..I appreciate it. Look, take care.. Have a good night. Im out

 

gotta back my man E on the 9800m gts tip...


http://service.futuremark.com/resultAnalyzer.action?resultId=8346787&resultType=14
make sure to click the view more link to see just what speed that score is running at.

7811fx 720/core-990/memory-1900/shader cpu/2.8 ghz

9/28/2008 11:16:22 PM - Vista
Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1280x1024, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=1, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: High
==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 75.10s, Average FPS: 26.63
Min FPS: 16.00 at frame 153, Max FPS: 31.32 at frame 1734
Average Tri/Sec: 27909512, Tri/Frame: 1048063
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: 0.87
TimeDemo Play Ended, (1 Runs Performed)
==============================================================

Beginning Run #2 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1400x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=1, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: High
==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 76.22s, Average FPS: 26.24
Min FPS: 17.28 at frame 152, Max FPS: 31.57 at frame 1763
Average Tri/Sec: 27137172, Tri/Frame: 1034223
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: 0.89
TimeDemo Play Ended, (1 Runs Performed)
==============================================================

Beginning Run #3 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1680x1050, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=1, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: High
==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 76.35s, Average FPS: 26.19
Min FPS: 16.65 at frame 153, Max FPS: 31.32 at frame 1764
Average Tri/Sec: 27098788, Tri/Frame: 1034527
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: 0.89
TimeDemo Play Ended, (1 Runs Performed)
==============================================================

Beginning Run #4 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1900x1200, AA=No AA, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=1, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: High
==============================================================
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 82.76s, Average FPS: 24.17
Min FPS: 15.68 at frame 1944, Max FPS: 29.02 at frame 1747
Average Tri/Sec: 23331692, Tri/Frame: 965473
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: 0.95
TimeDemo Play Ended, (1 Runs Performed)
==============================================================

Completed All Tests

<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>

9/28/2008 11:16:22 PM - Vista

Run #1- DX10 1280x1024 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 26.63

Run #2- DX10 1400x1050 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 26.24

Run #3- DX10 1680x1050 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 26.19

Run #4- DX10 1900x1200 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 24.17

 

Let the fun begin, shall we? We won’t get into the 3dmark06 scores, since I doubt anyone here with a single anything card can touch 11647. So let’s do Crisis, shall we? I’ll do Crisis at with GPU no overclock and GPU overclocked. Seeing that your GTS can overclock like crazy, this should be no problem, right? I’ll leave my CPU at default; I doubt if I’ll need it higher than the 2.5GHz it is running at. I could have used a memory bump seeing you have a much faster FSB, but it is ok.

The max I see is 1280x1040, so let us start with that? If I’m not invited, then just say so I’m sure I can find other things to do.