ASUS GeForce 9800 GTX review

Julio Franco

Posts: 9,092   +2,043
Staff member
Today will see the official launch of the GeForce 9800 GTX as the third member of the GeForce 9 series. Already we have seen the GeForce 9600 GT performing in the mainstream sector, the 9800 GX2 aimed at the high-end $500+ market, and now the 9800 GTX which may sit right in-between.

Based on the infamous G92 architecture that we have seen used time and time again, the GeForce 9800 GTX shares very similar specifications to that of the GeForce 8800 GTS 512 graphics card. By now, the G92 has been used on numerous Nvidia graphics cards including the GeForce 8800 GS, 8800 GT, 8800 GTS 512, and the 9800 GX2. Keeping this in mind, it will be interesting to see what makes the new GeForce 9800 GX2 special.

The GeForce 9800 GTX is meant to replace the old 8800 GTX, which is no longer in production as it was rendered impractical by the 8800 GTS 512, which offers similar performance at a fraction of the cost. The new 9800 GTX is said to begin retailing in the $300 to $349 price range, which would place it in a league of its own as there are currently no ATI or Nvidia graphics cards competing there.

https://www.techspot.com/review/92-asus-geforce-9800-gtx/

Please leave your feedback here. Thanks!
 
nice review, but I would like to see two of 'em in SLi and placed against the GX2 (they should cost a little bit more)

also, i didn't see any OC tests in the article (perhaps I'm blind?)
 
Captain828 said:
nice review, but I would like to see two of 'em in SLi and placed against the GX2 (they should cost a little bit more)

also, i didn't see any OC tests in the article (perhaps I'm blind?)

Our card was a very poor overclocker so rather than post bad results I am waiting to get another card and see how that fairs. If it is just as bad I will not hesitate to post the results.
 
Good review,
a quick suggestion!

when you put up the benchmarks, try to order them by the best to lowest performer...
i didn't notice you didn't up until just now so I always thought those more on the bottom got lower FPS, but like here in Prey, the 8800GTX passes a few cards yet its still below a couple.
 
Thanks for the feedback Nirkon. I understand where you are coming from with your request about the graphs. However I did deliberately leave them in the same order in each graph to avoid any confusion as they all have very similar names. I tried to list them in order of how they should perform.

Often we will highlight the results of the product being reviewed and really should have with this review but because of the limited time we had to get the review online this feature of the review was left out. I will look at adding this to the review asap!
 
[-Steve-] said:
Our card was a very poor overclocker so rather than post bad results I am waiting to get another card and see how that fairs. If it is just as bad I will not hesitate to post the results.

that explains it... I'm just curious why the hell nVidia put a truck-load more capacitors at the back of the card; hope other 9800GTXs OC better, otherwise the 8800GTS G92 is a better pick imo

edit1: I hope you'll be doing a SLi test w/ 2 9800GTXs

edit2: Guru3D have a SLi review + they OCed a POV 9800GTX

We overclocked it (easily) towards 770 / 1925 / 2520 (core / shaders / memory).

they also added that it locked up at 800Mhz (core)
 
I could care less about overclocking, but I would really have liked to see at least a few benchmarks of a pair of these SLI. Considering they're on Newegg for 329 now you can have a pair for 660 - right around the price of a GX2.
 
that's the whole point... OC + SLi > GX2
if not then trust me it makes little sense to buy 2 GTXs over a GX2
 
Even if those two match or the performance difference is small, I would always pick the single card unless I don't have all the money at once. But that's just me, of course.
 
Julio said:
Even if those two match or the performance difference is small, I would always pick the single card unless I don't have all the money at once. But that's just me, of course.

I agree and this is why I believe it is NOT the "whole point" at all. Of course the GX2 is a single SLI card but I would still prefer it.
 
[-Steve-] said:
I agree and this is why I believe it is NOT the "whole point" at all. Of course the GX2 is a single SLI card but I would still prefer it.
I TOTALLY agree with the fact that 2 GTXs = GX2, so it makes little sense to buy 2 cards (especially if you have an X38 board, for eg), but for those how have a SLi board, I'd say it's better to pick 2 cards. Why?
  1. They run cooler than a GX2 and are easier to cool (each GPU has a cooler, where the GX2 has only one)
  2. OCing them to at least where Guru3D got will get you a lot more bang (they got in average an extra 8FPS)
Sure, you need a stronger PSU, but then again you need one for a GX2 as well
 
[-Steve-] said:
Thanks for the feedback Nirkon. I understand where you are coming from with your request about the graphs. However I did deliberately leave them in the same order in each graph to avoid any confusion as they all have very similar names. I tried to list them in order of how they should perform.

Often we will highlight the results of the product being reviewed and really should have with this review but because of the limited time we had to get the review online this feature of the review was left out. I will look at adding this to the review asap!

No problem, any time :)

on topic:

I don't change cards very often, im still very happy with my GTS 320!
It's actually playing Assassin's Creeds maxed out and running very smoothly,
so I cant complain! :)

IMO its not worth spending over 400 bucks on a graphics card
 
I agree Nirkon, I've got a GTS320 and its still doing well. I don't play all that many games, but all that I do I can run maxed out except Crysis. And I can get by on it at 1680x1050 by dropping most things to medium, post processing to low, and a couple things at high.

Looking at these benchmarks though, I'm not seeing anything that convinces me I really need a 9800GTX. The 8800GTS 512 is pretty close to it, and the GT not too far behind. And unless you are at higher than 1680 all those framerates are still playable. A 10-20 fps difference at 100fps is not worth spending all that cash.

I think that nvidia screwed up here. Why did they jump to the 9 series? These same cards could be released as versions of an 8900 right? Why didn't they do that? There is no revolutionary change between them and the late 8800s right? They don't even support DX 10.1
 
As we wrote in the review, the name scheme is deceiving, but that doesn't make this a bad videocard at all, it performs very well and at prices that make it attractive enough compared to what was available a few months ago.
 
Can't wait for next year for the 10800 GX2!

I guess I've just been looking for benchmarks as well. I mean I can play almost every game I have with a 8400 GS! Most of them have the higher settings, and my frame rate is descent enough to have fun. Sure I would like to play Crysis on high, but so far thats one of the only games that makes computers struggle. I would say that the 9800 GTX is a great card, It's able to play almost everything at top settings with good frame rates. So I guess most of us are looking at it compared to the other 8800 cards and its true that it is basically a slightly better version of the 8800 GTX but do we really need much more than that right now? Just let them milk that cash cow for awhile and they will eventually develop a better GPU.
 
I think hardocp summed it up pretty well;

The "New" 9800 GTX?
Is this a joke? Don't think so, but the launch day is fitting.

If you are a gamer and were hoping to upgrade, today is not the day if you already own pretty much any 8800 series card.
 
I think that when NVIDIA moves onto the 10000's they'll name it things like 11000GTX or 19000GTS or something stupid like that.
 
Back