Which desktop card is similar to the 9800M GTX 1gb?

because im thinking about getting it. but im wondering if its worth it and a significant increase from the 9800M GTS, the cheapest laptop with this video card is $2k+ so i really want to make sure, thanks.

 

9800M GTX is a Nvidia G92 card.

it will perform slightly slower (about 5-7%) than a desktop 8800M GT (G92)

 

do you mean the 8800 GT 512 mb? if so, thats pretty fast, do you know if theres stats on this? or did you just personally experience it?

 

The desktop equivalent would be the 8800 GT , a tad stronger unless the 9800M GTX is OCed a bit.

Check out 3dmark scores on futuremark and you`ll see that they share the same score , paired with the a quad at 3.0 Ghz-> 14k.

 

does anybody know if laptop companies test these video cards to see if it runs cool enough? i hear there is a lot of overheating with the 9800m cards.

 

It's based on both the GPU's respective specs.

To answer your question, I wouldn't bother upgrading. The 9800M GTS is ~5% behind the 980M GT which at the best(or worst) performs 10-15% behind the 9800M GTX.

The upgrade is noticeable, but it is scarcely worth more than 100$+.

 

We already went over this I believe a few times in this forum.

the 9800M GTX:
- G92
- 112 shader processors
- 1024MB GDDR3

the desktop 8800M GT
- G92
- 128 shader processors
- 512MB GDDR3

both cards are very comparable... other than the slight shaders difference... which translate to a very slight 5-7% performance difference.

the video memory does not mean much to the performance... at all really.

1024MB is quite overkill for video memory since the card wont even utilize that much.... its just a gimmick usually.

the GPU will be the most important factor in performance over the video memory size.

_____________________________

^^ like said above, the 9800M GTX is quite overpriced as compared to the 9800M GTS in performance/price ratios.

its mainly for bragging rights and having the best.

 

The cards don`t have overheating issues, it`s the systems they`re built in that might have.
However, the 9th series are doing good on heat, meaning that you rarely hear of issues with them.
Not a lot of systems have 98xx.x cards, and those that do are well engineered to make sure they withstands heat issues.

 

The 88xx series had heat issues on a lot of cards, and that was simply due to firmware problems in regards to the fan speeds. I haven't heard of these problems happening with the 98xx cards.

 

I will pay $100+ for the 43% increase in stream processors any day.

 

8800GT is 112SP
8800GTS 512MB is 128SP

 

G92 8800 GTX has clock speeds of 600/900, 9800M GTX is 500/800.

All in all if you look at benchmarks it's closer to a 9600 GSO than an 8800 / 9800 GT, let alone a 9800 GTX.

 

so the fastest laptop card is as fast as the 9600 GS desktop video card? if so, how are all these guys playing crysis smoothly on high settings?

 

Yes. Optimistically, maybe a desktop 9600GT.

 

thats kinda bleak. is the 9600 gs slower than a 8800 GTS 320 mb?

 

the desktop 9600 GT is quite powerful since it has a 256-bit mem interface and has the same core as the 8800 GT.

 

It's close, but I would expect the 8800GTS 320 to do better in higher resolution since it doesn't have a crippled memory bus (320 bit vs. 192bit).

 

IIRC the 9600 GSO is a rebranded G92 8800 GS. It's all messed up what NVidia did with the naming.

 

Desktop 9800 GT:
Processor Cores 112
Graphics Clock (MHz) 600 MHz
Processor Clock (MHz) 1500 MHz
Memory Clock (MHz) 900 MHz
Memory Interface Width 256-bit

9800M GTX:
Processor Cores 112
Graphics Clock (MHz) 500 MHz
Processor Clock (MHz) 1250 MHz
Memory Clock (MHz) 800 MHz
Memory Interface Width 256-bit

One card is $700 and the other is under $150...

 

forget this, ill just wait for the next gen of cards to be released and buy a gaming lappy with the 9800m when it gets dirt cheap

 

to clear things up

card sp count
8800 gt 112
9600 gt 64
9600 gso 96(192bit bus)
9800m gt 96
9800m gts 64
9800m gtx 112

9800m gts is comparable to 9600 gt, 9800m gtx is comparable to the 8800 gt, but the mobile cards are slower than the desktop ones because they are clocked much lower.

 

Why is this? Is it just that the games aren't going to load that many textures/models into video memory, or is there some hardware problem preventing them from using it (ie they can't address 1GB or something).

Am I incorrect in assuming that if I'm coding my own programs the memory would be useable?

 

The 9600 GT/9800M GTS use the G94 core, wich has:

• 64 shader processors
• 32 texture units
• 500 million transistors in the die

The 8800 GT/9800M GTX use the G92 core, wich has:

• 128 shader processors(wich in the case of 8800 GT, 16 of them are laser cutted, so only 112 are usable)
• 64 texture units
• 750 million transistor in the die

 

12 SP does not make up for 100 MHz lower clocks, so again, if you look at gaming benchmarks, the 9600 GSO is closer in performance than the 8800 GT.

 

This is why I stick to desktop's for gaming. Man the GTX 295 looks so appealing right now.

Must.. resist!

 

what is a gtx 295

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_geforce_gtx_295_us.html

and don't forget ATI's counterpart (for now):

http://game.amd.com/us-en/unlock_radeonhd4870x2.aspx?p=1

 

Holy cow, lifetime warranty for that GPU ?