Ge Force 6800 Ultra

[DozerLYP]

this card should be out today...

the chip which can do 16 pixels per clock Color & Z or 32 pixels per clock Z-only, 64-bit FP Frame Buffer Blending & Display, Lossless Color & Z-Compression and a new Antialiasing approach called High Quality AA - Rotated Grid full MTR (multi target rendering I guess), and accelerated shadow rendering.

Geforce 6800 Ultra has two power connectors and is, surprisingly a one slot card for its reference card.

It uses GDDR3 memory clocked at 550MHz but some partners might go even higher.

And as a dual DVI connection....
my monitor is a AVG... is there a special connetor that do DVI to AVG?
and why is there DVI on video cards now?
i never seen a monitor that take DVI. or it's just me.
i payd $1200 for my monitor and it dos'nt take DVI...

can't wait to get one of those card though.

[Vitalka]

ViewSonic is going to release new monitor that takes DVI and soon many of them will take DVI. It's cheapier to make 2 DVI connectors on video bord than VGA and DVI. And as far as i understand DVi is better in some ways, don't know which ways though. Oh and those cards that have only DVI will have DVI-VGA connector with them

[Someone Stupid]

I'm not getting "excited" about any card as I've done it before to only be extremely dissapointed. I'll wait for side by side comparisions and a few generations of drivers before making any purchase. Ati's card could be horrible, as could nvidia's, then there could be driver or power issues with each. Just too many variables to pick one without seeing raw performance, IQ, and driver sets.

[Yoshi]

Sohow can buy one

[RamonGTP]

I haven't seen DVI on CRT monitors, but most mid and every high end LCD monitor i've seen has DVI. But to answer your question, yes the card should come with an adapter.

[DozerLYP]

so anybody as any result on this card?

[cusimar9]

The inquirer has found some leaked pictures from a review that should be out later today:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15325

[cusimar9]

i've just noticed I was looking at the benchmarks wrong!

It looks like typically the 6800 Ultra at 1280 x 1024 and 8 x AF runs at about the same framerate as both the FX5950 Ultra and Radeon 9800XT at 1024 x 768 and 0 x AF.

Would that be a fair assessment to make?

Lets wait till the reviews come out.

[DozerLYP]

this start to look pretty good

but i guess it wont hit the shelves till May...

[cusimar9]

OMG Toms Hardware have done themselves proud with the most in-depth review I've seen in ages!

I'm still reading it... 20+ minutes later...

OMG This thing is amazing! Literally faster in every single test and up to 3+ times faster in some cases!

This is what the industry needs - to be shaken up a bit.

Come on ATi, lets see some competition

[Bigjakkstaffa]

While the FX6800 does look impressive, i wouldnt bothe rbuying one yet, as the R420 will be being released in gradual stages over the next three months, as will the other NV40 cards. One thing i have noticed in the 6800 benches is that in some of the non-syntehetic tests (i.e. games) at certain resolutions it was not THAT much faster than the 9800XT, which makes me thnk that it might be worth waiting to see what the more powerful cards to be released in forthcoming months have to offer

--Jakk

[Vampiel]

The results are in!

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/...e_6800-29.html

Very nice!

However in FarCry the difference wasnt as big but still impressive.

[Bigjakkstaffa]

I've been pokign around [H] again on my daily rounds and they benched both cards using Far Cry, UT2004, CoD, SC:PT, FS2004, BF:Vietnam, in all but for CoD (in which the 6800 enjoyed a good 40FPS lead) the 6800 was only really marginally faster (nothing a bit of overclocking couldnt overturn on the behalf of the 9800XT), indeed in SC:PT and Far Cry the 9800XT was even marginally faster on average.

As such, while the synthetic benches may look impressive and there is no doubt the 6800U is the fastest card money can but at this moment in time, im not sure the 6800U, in the context of 'next gen' cards is much of a step forward, indeed it seems to be to the 9800Xt as the 9800XT is to the FX5950U in terms of speed.

That said its nice to see Nvidia finally tackling the image quality issue.

--Jakk

[causticVapor]

The thing that's incredible is it's MASSIVE scaleability at high res and high AA/AF. The IQ is theoretically better than ATi's current r3xx implementation as well. At low resolutions, its low clock speed keeps it only slightly ahead of the rest but at high ones....the 16pipes really start flexing their muscle.

Note that performance gains exponentially drop with exponential increases in parallelization. So not seeing 200% performance increase in all modes is fine.

This is a beta card with beta drivers and the very first core stepping AND at running at a low clock speed. The only real disappointment so far IMHO is the cooler - perhaps forthcoming steppings will run cooler and allow the single-slot design to be used.

[bob05]

Wow, I'm glancing at the Tom's article Vampiel showed, and boy, they show the NV40 doing very well! I will read it more in depth when I come back from track practice.