ITS OFFICIAL 8700m GT ON THE WAY!

Yup folks its true though quite not the 8800m nevertheless still great news. '

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,121497.shtml

ALSO! From nvidia site 8700 listed under enthusiast:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_m_series.html

Here are some specs:
http://translate.google.com/transla...-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=hTy&sa=G

 

Some Clevo resellers have already included it in the specs to purchase:
here it is on the upcoming Clevo M570RU
http://www.rockdirect.com/viewNotebook.php?pName=XTREME%20770

And Nvidia has officially listed the 8700M GT on their site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_m_series.html

 

no specs?!?!?

 

I believe that there was a leak that the 8700M GT got a score over 10000 in 3DMark05.

NVIDIA 8700M GT Specs (preliminary)
512MB DDR3
80nm
TDP = 35W
128-bit memory interface (from what was leaked)




Pretty much a good DX10 alternative to the mobile 7950GTX.

 

when are we finally be able to see some news on the 570ru? or when will it be available in the US? anyone knows?

 

I believe that it was said to be out near mid-July

 

MXMII by any chance??

 

^ Hmmm you wouldn't happen to have the asus c90 in mind would you?

 

read the Sager 9260 (Clevo D900C) Review by Justin@XoticPC

its got pics of the MXM module of the 7950GTX for this notebook.


... looks extremely like a standard MXM Type-III (...maybe even the supposed MXM-IV)

Waiting on Ice-Tea's input....

 

Specs: http://translate.google.com/transla...-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=hTy&sa=G

This thing is significantly faster then the 7900gtx and even tops the 7950 gtx in the spec comparison sheet.

 

Yep, 8700m might be a great sweat spot from the super high premium that your sure to pay for the top dog (8800m) and the not so great 8600m.

Guess we have to wait for benches and cost to be released.

 

Benches are released sorta look at my previous post. Sorry but this is the official first post about benches and performance tho its in japanese so had to use Google translator so some of the stuff is kind of hard to understand. Though in reference to the dual rank 128 I think they are trying to say it expands to 256 bit when it is required to? I'm not expert about this but would keeping it at 128 bit until it is necessary to jump to 256 bit save energy?

I have no idea what the mxm part is trying to say. Anyone who understands who reads japanese a translation would be very welcome.

 

I guess the 8700M GT is just an overclocked 8600M. Based on the clocked speeds, it's still slower than the desktop 8600GTS while the 8600M GT was slower than the desktop 8600GT. Being slower than the desktop 8600GTS, I don't think the 8700M GT will be able to truly replace the Go 7950GTX, unless the latter was truly that slow. It'll probably be a match for the Go 7900GTX though.

 

I speak japanese lol, let me go take a look.

 

Its about on par with the 7950 gtx or even faster if you look at the benches and specs. Yes it seems it is 35 tdp which means no mxm2.

 

It does look like a G84 core with higher clocks. still no 256 bit bus. I have no idea what the dual link means. That makes me wonder, is this any better than the 8600GT?

 

Eh its not impessive at all,

It is just an overclocked 8600gt really.

Still 128bit just running dual channel for more memory bandwidth.

35w aswell it says wich means its not going in a C90 it must be MXMIII

Scores will be quite abit higher than 8600m stock, but anybody that doesnt mind overclocking there 8600 can probably get very close to the 8700 scores.

 

Yeah well hopefully the 8800ms later this summer will be mxmII since it is 22 watts and is a 65nm die shrink instead of 80nm like the 8700.

 

Yeah thats what its going to be about is the 65nm process. AMD already has 65nm cards the 2600 and 2400 versions of the 2900xt. They may get a moble card out first with those specs.

Id love the 2900xt for my desktop if it wasnt such a power hog and runs so hot. For now the 8800gtx wins that market.

 

I'd personally wait for the 8800m, but either way, those chipsets alone would cost more than my computer now.

 

The benches don't really mean that much to me. 3DMark does not seem to provide strong correlation of the relative performance of the G80 series GPUs with previous generation chips.

http://www.google.ca/translate?u=ht...vidia&rid=774620&langpair=zh|en&hl=en&ie=UTF8

For example, looking at page 8, comparing the 8600GTS, the 7900GS, and the X1950Pro, all of which are officially priced around $199, you see the 8600GTS scoring 46% higher in 3DMark05 than the 7900GS, and 31% higher in 3DMark06, yet in real gaming performance the 2 actually trade blows. Likewise the 8600GTS is 7% faster than the X1950Pro in 3DMark05 and 13% faster in 3DMark06, yet the X1950Pro walks all over the 8600GTS.

Clearly, 3DMark isn't a very good indicator of relative performance with previous generation GPUs. If nothing else, the G80 series seems to have been designed to excel in 3DMark (and hopefully DX10).

So ignoring nVidia's 3DMark marketing numbers to truly judge the performance of the 8700M GT we need to compare to it's direct desktop cousin.

8700M GT
625MHz Core
1250MHz Shaders
800MHz Memory

8600GTS
675MHz Core
1450MHz Shaders
1GHz Memory

So the 8700M GT is slower than the desktop 8600GTS. Now we have already established that the 8600GTS is competitive with the 7900GS, and hopefully a little faster with newer drivers. With the 8700M GT being slower than the 8600GTS, then it's performance is slower than the desktop 7900GS. A desktop 7900GS is obiously faster than the Go 7900GS and presumably faster than the Go 7800GTX, so I would put the 8700M GT's performance between the Go 7800GTX and Go 7900GTX but certainly slower than the Go 7950GTX. I find it curious that nVidia would use 3DMark05 scores to compare anyways, when they were the ones saying SM3.0 and 3DMark06 was a better indicator for the future.

In the case of dual rank, all it technically means is that the RAM is divided into two rows. I don't think that increases performance. In fact, it might decrease it since only 1 rank can be open at any one time and needs to be closed to access the other one. Perhaps they have some good algorithm going, but it certainly isn't the same as dual channel. It just means they didn't bother putting in higher density RAM, probably for cost and heat reasons.

 

Dual-rank 128-bit?
WTF?
Sounds intresting. I image, if it's listed on the NVIDIA page, we'll get an official announcement soon. As of me typing this, http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_8m.html is blank. That's where you'd normally find the 8M specs, so we'll get the official NVIDIA specs soon.

God, I hope it's available real soon in US.

Edit: They also advertise a "TOSHIBA SATELLITE x205" on the NVIDIA website that isn't on the Toshiba website yet. I hope it has specs/price comparable to M570RU.

 

Like I said in my previous post, dual rank just means the RAM is organized as two rows.

The definition from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR_SDRAM

Dual rank is not the same as dual channel and likely is a performance decreaser.

 

Where's the 256-bit bus?

The 8700's memory bandwidth is only 25.6 GB/s (compared to the Go 7950 GTX's 44.8 GB/s). That's going to kill it at high resolutions/AA.

 

I hope that's wrong, because for an enthusiast card that's pretty disappointing, unless it somehow won't really be as big a factor in real performance. I hope some benchmarks come out soon so we can see what it really does.

 

8700M GT = 8600M GT overclocked? 8700M GT < Go 7950GTX?

If that's the case then this news is really disapointing. And now there's no garantee an 8800M will come out this summer, so what do we notebook enthusiasts really have to look forward to?

Somebody tell me it isn't so...

 

17", no thanx, i ll go for the 8800M.

 

Why is Nvidia releasing next gen cards that are weaker than dx9 cards? Just because they are dx10 capable? Or because ATI isn't much of a player right now? Why would I want to spend hundreds of dollars extra for dx10 at this point in time on a card that's slower than a 7900/7950 dx9 cards? The cards could be clocked too slow to even handle next year's games

 

What it really is is marketing the 8600 gt for the 17 inch dtr machines.

Theres a whole market and class of machine that needs to be better than anything you can get in a regular laptop. But it doesnt have anything to sell atm

 

This 8700M is actually on par [or slightly faster] to the mobile 7950GTX from what I was told.... even if its only a dual-channel 128-bit mem interface.

This is the middle ground from mid-range 8600's to the high-end 8800's I guess.

 

That is what I am hoping and so far all of the specs and early benchmarks point to it being on par with the 7950GTX, but I'm not going to put money down on it til I see some in game performance numbers.

 

So what does this means? Put off pressure on Nvidia for the 8800M for the time being, or is it that the 8800M will not come at all? Where does this leave the gaming laptops, hanging somewhere? The 8700M GT is somewhat disappointing and what about DAAMIT, anyone got news, any laptop x2900 or that's just a dream?

 

I think we will only see a mobility HD2900 (not x2900) when it goes 65nm, which might be 6 months from now or even longer.

This sux, if Nvidia brought out the 8800M instead of this, i ll buy those right away.

 

Isnt ATI/AMD already producing the HD2X00 series in 65nm? I thought the HD2600 when it comes, if it ever comes, will be 65nm from the start. Only Nvidia will switch from 80 to 65nm in a few month time.

 

The HD2400 and HD 2600 are 65nm and the HD2900 is 80nm. nVidia similarly have the high-end a process generation behind, with the 8800 on 90nm and everything else on 80nm.

 

Yes well the 8800ms are also supposed to come out this summer too. I dunno call me an optimist but this was my point about mxmII regarding the c90. This card is a 35tdp meaning mxmIII and nvidia obviously was not focusing greatly on energy efficiency. So if the speculation about the 8800m (gs and gt at least) being a 22-25 watt card is true they probably will have it be mxmII. We are going to have to pay a hefty premium though if that is true since it will be more powerful then this 8700m but will only take about 2/3 of the power.

 

8700m GT. Wow... I was not expecting this. But could it be something similar to the 7700? The 7700 had only a minor improvement over the 7600.

 

These cards aren't necessarily weaker. Alot of people imagine the 8 series of cards, to perform very well, and clearly, the performance has been somewhat dull. The fastest mid range card that nVidia had was the 8600M GT, and it performed almost as fast as the Go 7900 GS. Now, thats good for the mid range, because before that, there fastest card was the Go 7700. An 8600M GT is quite a bit faster.

The 8700M GT comes in to at least offer something to the entusiast market. Clevo and other high end notebook manufacturers always use their graphics options to attract customers, and since they base most of their systems on gaming, nVidia had to release something faster to that particular market. Basically, the 8700M GT has been released to allow nVdia some more time, before they can release a truly powerful card. In every generation, their fastest mobile graphics card has had a 256-bit memory bus. nVidia simply isn't going to abandon that, and they will release another high end graphics card. The thing is it will take time. As ltcommander_data mentioned, nVidia is already a whole process behind ATI, and its costing them, because they can't get that 8800M varient to market.

ATI needs to really power optimise the HD 2900 XT, before it can be implemented into mobile form. lunateck is correct in saying that ATI will have to make the move to 65nm for the core. ATI is in a similar position to nVidia in developing a high end mobile grapphics card, except ATI are a good 6 months behind nVidia already.

ATI also hasn't had a giant pressence in the high end graphics card market as of the last few generations. Their products have been late to market, and have not performed the best, in comparison to nVidia's. They largely care about the mid range section, where alot more money is to be made, and thats why they have their mid range cards ready to roll of the production line.

 

Eh, I wasn't all that impressed. If they put it into a 15.4" I will be.

 

I'll wait and see benchmarks. Until then, I'm not holding my breath. It would be AMAZING if it were in a 15'' notebook, especially C90. I think we're not going to ever see 8800Ms. For it to be an 8800, it needs the power-hungry burning core of G80. It'll be more possible with G81, i.e. 8900M.

I'm hoping for three things now.
1) I hope we get an enthusiest DX10 notebook card, from NVIDIA or AMD.
2) I hope the ASUS C80, an X38 Conroe DDR3 notebook, comes out by then as well.
3) If there is awsome AMD chip by then, but NVIDIA instead, that the C80 supports SLI. We already know it supports Crossfire.

Knowing ASUS, though, we won't see anything higher than 8700M there. I doubt they'll even have that. But if they're giving it an X38 chipset, they must mean business.

 

jbizzler there will be no G81 , they are skipping right to G90.

At least thats where most indications point to.

 

Who is saying that the 8800Go will never show up? Tech news showed us that there will be 3 versions of it. With one version that runs at 22 Watt!

I think the 8700Go is made the way the 8800Go is made (low consumption) but that the 8800Go is delayed to made some improvements to kill the HD2900 Mobility, if it will ever show up in notebooks.

 

Inquirer which has a history of not being the most reliable source said the 8700m was on the way and sure enough here it is. Now inquirer and a few other sources are claiming the 8800m will be released this summer including people who went to computex and saw the card in the notebooks first hand tho it was under the codename "NB8E". Some people even stated that on the info cards it said that 8800m will be released late july.

 

I did read somewhere that the XPS m1720 coming out in July would contain a 8800M GTX, now where's that link again.....

 

well this is a kick in the balls, I was waiting for this card for so long and all it is a overclocked 8600M, not to mention 128bit? I hope these specs are fake.

 

I will reserve my judgment of this card until we have some official game benchmarks. 3DMark is very misleading, especially when comparing 7- and 8-series cards.

 

Well i'm glad i've bought last year for first time this first notebook. I'm having this notebook longer than 1 year and it still is one of the fastest gamenotebook that does exist. So you wont hear me complaining.

 

I read similar stuff only I think i read m1710?

 

Yeah, I wish I had just plunked the cash down last year. This year's developments so far are all disappointing.

8600GS is just too weak to be even called an upgrade.
The new processors are no better than the old ones.
Turbomemory seems to be totally useless.
Those were the things I was waiting for .. for so long.

 

Think of it this way: Now you can buy the same ones from last year on the cheap!