Which card wins?

Which card is the best?

New Nvidia GeForce 8700M GT 512MB (DX10)


NVIDIA GeForce 7950 Go GTX 512MB

Thanks,

Steve

 

*Sigh* This has been covered many times. The 7950GTX beats the 8700M GT in every DX9 Game. The only downside is that it isn't DX10 Compatible.

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=137521

 

I think the nvidia 8700. But after a few months, they'll bring the new geforce. Its called geforce 9.

 

Here...

Nope, the 7950gtx is better. Geforce 9 is just the name for the series, not the video card itself.

 

Ya, I know. but forgot the exact name of the video card model.

 

For me 8700m GT is getting closer to the 7950 GTX. I would consider it if it was cheaper and if/when 8800m GT comes out, watch out 7950 GTX I think the ride is over.

 

The Nvidia 9800?

 

Radeon 9800 was the secks.

 

ya, that's it. I have bad memory.

 

actually its more than a few months, more like another year

no such thingas the 8800 mobile, its now the 8700 ultra GTX

 

Has the 8700GTX been confirmed to be the 8800m Crimsonman?

 

nope, the first geforce 9 series models should be available starting November.

 

Yeah, im pretty sure, unless they pull a houdini or something a fake us out with another. but im still curious about ATI, there's something up.

OT: your signature is cute

But this is a notebook forum talking about notebooks, not desktops, but in the case of desktops, your right, it is november

 

Yeah the 9800 is a desktop card. Hmm maybe time to upgrade my 8800GTX

Oh and the 7950GTX definitely beats the 8700. See where the 8700 fails short it is at higher resolutions.

 

FYI, that comparison is old.

The 8700 has scored 5194 at 1280x1024.
(OC'd to 775/938 using Toshiba drivers)

I am not quite sure how it could possibly get a 4200 or so unless the DX9 drivers were not very mature at that point.

granted, thats compared in a clevo... but the clevo 8700 shouldn't be inferior to the one in the toshiba.

For comparison, the compariatively tweaked 7950GTX scores 5500 or so...
Thats a massive 5.9% advantage at 1280x1024.


In games, you are looking at a 5-10% advantage in DX9 titles for the 7950GTX up to 1280x1024 provided you are a reasonably intelligent user who can reasonably OC and do something like update drivers.

The 8700 provides DX10 support and 94+% of the DX9 performance of the 7950GTX with considerably less heat.

I think it comes down to:

Is your screen 1920x1200 and you NEED to game at that resolution?
Then get the 7950GTX.
(yes the 128-bit memeory interface is hurting it)

In all other situations, the 8700 is nearly equal or superior.

Indeed, if you want to play bioshock without the horrid hitching...
Get the 8700.

 

How many game at 1280x800 or such low resolutions anyway. The 8700 is a DX10 card which is the positive side of it. but if you want to game at even 1680x1050 or 1440x900 the 7950 is still the faster card but only supports DX9.

Oh and speaking of clocking you can clock the 7950GTX too, very easy to do so.

Here´s a good page you can look at

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=535&card2=465#

Even overclocked to the above 775 core 938 memory which is a very high clock in the first place. I wouldn´t play any demanding games with such a high overclock 138 MhZ on memory alone??? not to speak about the core 150MhZ overclock. That must be for purely benchmarking in 3D Mark, talk about wanting to fry your card with those clocks and I assume Toshiba doesn´t have any killer cooling in the first place for those clocks.

It is in real game performance that counts, I would like to see somebody play with those clocks and see how long the card would last playing say Bioshock or World in Conflict at native

 

The 7950GTX is indeed the faster DX9 card...
by a whopping 5.9% at 1280x1024 in 3dmark06...

1440x900 is 1,296,000 pixels
1280x1024 is 1,310,720 pixels

Thus results at 1440x900 will actually be slightly better than the 1280x1024 numbers I gave as the 8700's largest limitation is its 128-bit memory bus. The 8700 has the technology advantage in most other cases except memory bandwidth where it trails.


1280x1024 is pretty much the standard.

1680x1050 and above I do not even have a screen with which to make a comparison.
Perhaps we can get some real numbers from the x205-S9359 and clevo owners.
Until then, I'd say the listing given earlier in the thread is pretty much too old to matter.

I am not sure, but I thought the 5500 number was an OC'd 7950GTX as well as all the comparisons I have for 7950GTX at 1280x1024 are in the 5000 range. we would need to ask Gophn for the clocks/machine specs of that benchmark.

The link is bad but I can go to the site and find the two cards. Then again I was comparing performance and not stats, user popularity votes, and advertisements of where to buy.
I think you will find more real info and less ads looking up an nvidia comparison at wikipedia.

The 8700 in the x205s does not exceed 68C under that clock rating. (775/938)
The outside of the x205's case is warmer to the touch than usual but not even close to uncomfortable, the cooling fans don't even kick up to high. After 5+ hours at that clock you can still truly game on your lap at that clock!

Note that the 8700 actually runs games at 800/1000, but either crashes or creates slight graphical flaws in 3dmark06 until you clock it down to 775/938 in my case. Strangely enough, you seem to think 3dmark allows more... my experience says the exact opposite.

The number was taken from the MAX temp after 5+ hours of heavy benchmarking and framerate tests... You quite obviously don't know what you are talking about here.

The 8700 is a massively good overclocker... and the machines it goes in are shipping with insanely good cooling for a very cool-running GPU.

If I could OC for Bioshock, I would... Unfortunately the 163.44 required to play the game prevent OC, and I have had no luck in getting a BIOS OC to even grab a valid BIOS to edit.
(Not even from a bootable/non-vista disk)

As it stands, at default clocks (625/700) the 8700 is frankly winning the "real game performance" crown for Bioshock as it can play the DX10 version (with DX10 textures off) at 1440x900 at 90% of the frame rate of the 7950GTX, but with none of the horrible hitching of the DX9 mode. (I'd love more data on 7950GTX performance in bioshock if you have it, including resolution and frame rates.)

The 7950GTX is stuck with DX9 mode and thus the "hitches" until drivers or game code fixes some of the bugs.

DX10 mode is hitch-free and smooth to the nakid eye despite fraps reporting minimum frame rates of 21fps in places. (low point is almost always when you to the "float-by" of the bathesphere and the underwater city and the whale comes into view)

Nevermind that the DX10 mode seems to be providing antialiasing the DX9 mode is not...
(DX9 mode is jagged at 1440x900... DX10 mode is not)

If we assume "real" performance includes minimum frame rate, quality and actual playability... the 8700 is the better card in at least this one game even before OC.


Note this does not mean the 7950GTX is a bad card... in fact, quite the opposite.
Its venerable as far as GPUs go and still holding advantages especially in 1920x1200 where the 128-bit memory interface of the 8700GT will truly hurt it.

The 8700GT is being massively underestimated, and I hope to correct that misconception.

 

Why grab a bios? Why not make your own with Nibitor the easiest thing in the world. Yeah no wonder the 8700 is underestimated, but now with "news" about the upcoming 8800m I´m really excited. I would never buy a 8700GT but and I really hope at least a 256bit bus with the 8800m then I will get my new laptop soon

I can´t buy anything inferior to my 8800GTX, I at least want the same in the notebook though of course severely underclocked which it probably will be. Nevermind that since I will overclock the beast. This card will probably have more shaders too than the 8700GT no doubt about that.

I would say with the 8800m the days of the 7950 is numbered.

 

I'd like a link to the 8800m news.

 

Thread:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=2394432#post2394432
^News links inside.

 

Nibitor edits existing BIOS that it can scan.
Vista prevents access to BIOS, and I have has no luck reading the BIOS I saved from booting to another OS and backing video bios up.
Odds are Nibitor (3.4a) does not support the 8700 yet as its too new.

If it was easy, I'd have done it already.
If anyone has hints or tips, I am all ears.

I too hope the 8800m will have a real 256-bit bus... but we have yet to define "soon".

Frankly, the 7950GTX will be fine... the 8800m will either be severley nerfed to actually have a shot at fitting the MXM-IV specification or they will have to bypass MXM altogether or write an MXM-V spec for it.

That isn't saying the 8800m won't surpass it, but let's face it, the question is "by how much". if the 8800m is 5% better than the 7950GTX, and thus 15% better than the 8700m, I am not going to be impressed as my OC'd (hopefully by then) 8700 will likely perform pretty closely as long as we are talking 1280x1024 or lower.


To fit in a laptop, a graphics card must have lower power and physical size requirements and lower heat output... the 8800GTX desktop card is massive, power hungry and runs hot.

You are going to be be severly disappointed if you cannot accept that a laptop's portability brings limitations.
ANYTHING that fits in a laptop within the next year or so will be inferior to the 8800GTX unless technology levels skyrocket in the next few months.

I'm hoping they deliver... I am hoping the 8800m buries the needle when it comes to mobile chipsets... as a betting man I wouldn't put my money on that option though.

 

Nah my 8800GTX doesn´t run hot, it doesn´t even hit 70c under heavy load, but then I have a hell of a chassi too for my computer

The fan on the 8800GTX is amazing, you only need to run it at 70% of it´s capacity and the card never exceeds 75c in full load

Well we can only hope, but as you said the card will probably be severely nerfed and the 8800GTX is a huge monster card not to talk about the amazing performance of it.

 

The 8800m if it ever exists, will definitely not be on par with the 8800GTX as stated for obvious reasons. If it requires over 150W and and an insanely big cooler to run one of those desktop cards, I can't see a similar performance GPU solution in a laptop for over a year when die sizes reduce.

 

http://www.dailytech.com/NVIDIA+Announces+Enthusiast+Mobile+GPU/article7686.htm

"The new GeForce 8700M GT replaces the existing GeForce Go 7950 GTX as the top dog of NVIDIA’s notebook lineup. NVIDIA claims 3DMark05 scores of 10,371 with the GeForce 8700M GT on default settings. A comparable GeForce Go 7950 GTX scores 9,395 in 3DMark05. The GeForce 8700M GT is also 27-34% faster than the GeForce Go 7950 GTX in Half Life 2: Lost Coast and Far Cry...."

 

haha lies..they shuld use 3d mark 06 first of all, second it doesnt state what resolution the games are at...