why do people think that the older 8xxx series are not worth buying?

I saw that the 9800 gtx gets about 10k in 3dmark 06 while the 8700 sli gets over 10k.

but people go around telling people dont buy old stuff. , sure looks like the old stuff is better and faster.

i guess i can say my old m1730 still is better than the newer laptops.

i guess you dont need to build on perfection

 

The 8xxx series is known to have severe thermal flaws, if given the choice to pick up a newer model, yes, they should.

 

That SLI system is going to suck up a lot of power and heat...not to mention that not every game supports SLI.

 

not too sure why you would get a gaming notebook with 8700's though..

 

Actually the 3D Mark score of the 8700m GT´s does not reflect it´s real in game performance. Remember these GPU´s are limited by it´s 128 bit bus. I owned two of these myself and I were not overly impressed with the performance of them.

These beating a 9800m GTX is not true. Remember these are 32 SP´s, we could say 64 when in SLI. 9800m GTX is 112 SP´s and 256-bit.

 

no offense but the 8700 SLI is quite bad, the cards r also full of bugs

 

I have the 8800's Sli. Fair call with some games not supporting Sli. I originally owned the 8700's, ended up returning the machine and waiting for the 8800's to be released.

Overall I've been very happy with the performance of my machine. Still runs all games I've played on High settings. One thing to remember is these cards are not DX10 capable? Someone correct me if Im wrong.

 

I will correct u, The cards r DX10 capable, The 7 series r not.

 

I think the design flaw would be your greatest concern.
And also a reason not to buy a laptop with an 8 series NVidia GPU - unless its a dual graphics card like the SZ and you know that you'll use the Intel Chipset 90% of the time.

 

Well 8800m GTX SLI is another story, these are really fast even today.

 

yes 8800m GTX and 8800 GTX is legendary.

 

I don’t quite understand your logic. You are comparing two 8700M cards to a single 9800M GTX and saying old stuff is better

Besides, what about the price ? Cheapest DELL M1730 configuration with dual 8700M s cost around $2300, You can buy a sager NP5797 with a Centrino 2 platform and DDR3 system RAM with a 9800M GTX 1GB for the same price; OR a slightly slower 9800M GTS based 15.4” notebook (again with Centrino 2) for around $1500!!.

Given all the drawbacks mentioned above (i.e : power requirements, [EDIT]potential failures due to not being able to withstand temperature fluctuations [/EDIT] , number of shaders/memory bandwidth, SLI compatibility etc..) buying a 8700M SLI notebook based on an old platform over a new 9800M is pointless.

 

There was a very informed and extensive discussion on the NVidia issue in the Sony forum.

It is not per se an overheating problem.

The problem is that "connectors" break due to the change in temperture - basically the design isn't able to withstand the stress its under. This stress is caused by heat.

 

It's just a question of choice. Older technology is being phased out slowly so if given the chance, why not buy newer if it yields the same performance or above? Price is really the only thing the older technology would have(ex: a 8600M GT notebook might be cheaper then one with a 9600M GT).

And it also depends what you're comparing from each generation. The highest end cards from the older technology will obviously still be better than most of the newer generation not including the higher end stuff of the newer generation.

 

Ok, ok... I know... I have already replaced my motherboard once, and I've read everything there is to read about this issue.... Let me rephrase...

( source). sorry for incorectly using the term overheating ...

 

Thanks

One problem with not being accurate is that some "newbie" who hasn't read about the issue comes along and doesn't understand the problem, or, say you phone your manufacturer - he says its overheating -well overheating due to dust for example is your fault...

Being accurate solves a lot of problems
(PS: Better formulated than I did can't give you rep )

 

I read somewhere that the card architecture on the 8800 is terrible compared to the 9 series.

 

I'm pretty sure the OP is just trying to reassure himself that his laptop wasn't a waste of money.

 

Bah, as long as your laptop fits your needs, it doesn't matter whether or not it isn't the newest or baddest stuff. We're just conditioned as consumers(and by our own personal greed lol ) to want the new shiny things and it goes as far as some consumers regretting something they buy 5 minutes later because something "newer" came out.

You can't have the newest technology, the computer world moves too fast. At best you'll keep it for a few months, but that's about it. That's why you should just get whatever fits your needs best for your price range.

Anyways, I agree that older technology isn't necessarily bad. I mean, the older generation high end GPUs still do beat the newer generation mid-range ones. That much doesn't change. A mid range 128bit bus interface GPU will lose to a 256bit bus interface regardless of it being newer generation at this point.

 

Provided it doesn't have the manufacturing flaw, there is nothing wrong with an 8xxx series card.

Indeed even a 128-bus memory interface card is fine provided you have proper expectations for it. (keep it under 1280x1024 and turn down the AA)

The 8700m GT actually did just fine and even almost 2 years later OC'd held pace with even the likes of the 9600 and 9700... pretty good...

The 8800m series is holding strong as the 9xxx series is not that much better really.

The thing which is burying the 8xxx series is price/performance.

Since the 8xxx series are not that much lesser in performance, they aren't that much lesser in price either.

Asus, Gateway, and Toshiba have been shipping "value" gaming laptops with 256-bit 9700m GTS and above. Even with s decent as the 8700m still is... Why would you want to buy an 8700m-equipped laptop when you can have a all-around superior 9700m GTS, 8800m GTS, or 9800m GS or GTS for around the same or LESS?

 

The primary argument against the 8xxx series of cards is the higher possibility for premature dying.
If newer tech (if available at the same or lower price) provides same or better performance without the potential problems, I'd say go with the new tech and better not take the chance of getting a problematic card.

On the other hand, I don't think high end gpu's of previous generation were reported as being too problematic.
Generally the low/mid range gpu's were the ones with highest rate of problems in terms of heat issues and dying prematurely.

I agree the performance difference between the high end 8xxx series and high end 9xxx series is not that big though ... so if the older high end gpu's are more affordable ... going with them might be a prudent course of action.

 

The 8000s are the SAME as the 9800s, with the exception of the 9800M GTX being 10% better than the 8800M GTS (renamed to 9800M GT). There isn't much difference because nVidia just did their stupid renaming.

People always want new technology. Usually, they offer better price/performance. For example, a Core 2 Quad is much better than a Core 2 Duo for maybe 40% more in price.

 

Well some of the 9 series offer a die shrink architecture over the 8 series. While it does not yield a significant boost in performance, it makes the overall GPU more efficient.

The biggest flunk from Nvidia was re-branding the 8800M GTX as the 9800M GT >.>

 

Then rebranding that the GTX 170M.

 

Is the 1-Series naming out now? Any purely new card?

 

You are essentially saying that two 8700m in SLI perform similar to one 9800m. Doesnt that tell you that it is indeed better to avoid old stuff, if you are going for a gaming notebook? If you are going to compare the two, compare the 8800m's performance to the 9800m instead of something random.

Not to mention the difficulties some consumers experience from using an SLI setup, and the fact that SLI is put into high-end gaming notebooks. What point is there in buying a dated high-end gaming notebook? which will probably be overpriced anyway because it was a niche product in its day.

That said, you still have a really nice system there, that can hold its own against the newer cards out today. However, given the products that are out today, would it be a good decision to choose an "old" SLI setup instead of a newer single card if you had to buy a notebook now?

 

i havent really checked out the 9xxx series so im still out for info

 

While you are correct that 8700GT SLI is not a match for 9800m GTX, there are some problems with your reasoning.

128-bit vs 256-bit refers to the memory architecture.
This is not a direct link to the performance you will see unless we are talking a resolution or detail level that floods the memory bandwidth of a particular card. Note that because we are talking about TWO 8700m GTs with TWO 128-bit chunks, that it actually has about the same bandwidth as one 256-bit memory architecture.

3dmark06 is just one DX9 benchmark and is just as valid as any other benchmark in reference to another game or application. (unless the game or application IS the one you ran it on)

Thus if you are wondering how well your computer will run GTA7 (dx9), 3dmark06 is just as good (and in some cases better because 3dmark06 is the same test for everyone) than a crysis benchmark trial.

Honestly, because 3dmark06 actually runs itself in the same method as any game benchmark would run, it isn't really any more sythetic than ANY benchmark you would run in reference to an outsde application.

(for example, running crysis benchmarks and getting 30fps at 1280x800, does not guaranteee any more in GTA4 than running 3dmark06 at 1280x1024 and getting 7000 3dmarks)


Since the 9xxxm and 8xxxm series have similar architecture, they can be reasonably compared by their statistics.

one 9800m GTX has the following stats:
112 unified shaders at 500MHz core 1250MHz shader
512MB-1024MB of 256-bit memory at 800MHz

one 8800m GTX (9800m GT) has the folowing stats:
96 unified shaders at 500MHz core 1250MHz shader
512MB of 256-bit memory at 800MHz

one 8700m GT has the following stats:
32 unified shaders at 625MHz core, 1250Hz shader
256MB of 128-bit memory at 800MHz

Because we are talking about TWO 8700m GTs, we actually have similar memory bandwidth. However, because two 8700ms only have 64 unified shaders, and because these are similar in design and clock speed, its a pretty good bet they are NOT keeping up with 96 shaders of the single 8800m GTX or anywhere near the 112 shaders of the 9800m GTX.

The two high-end cards quite simply have more raw power than the two 8700m GTs could bring to the table even IF there as no overhead and the program used SLI perfectly.

 

A single 8800gtx/9800gt >>> SLI 8700s

gg no rematch

 

just about the 8700gt SLI thing, if those cards had a 256bit interface, then they will be an equal to a 8800GTX, its not about the SPs here, we can say 32+32 < 96 (in case of a 8800GTX)

well my cards are considered to be 32SP.. and if they hadnt the high fillrate, Memory Bandwidth and a 256bit , then i couldnt be up to par with an 8800GTX with Newer Games (SLI games to be precise)


and as Magnus said. 8800GTX SLI is completely another story, its the 2nd Best Laptop Setup till date ( and its not falling behind the 9800GTX SLI by much in most titles.)