The Holiday Stop Gap: GeForce 6800 GS
by Derek Wilson on November 7, 2005 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The Card, The Test and Power
The 6800 GS cards will all sport NVIDIA's NV42 core. Previously, NV41 and NV42 cores were used on vanilla 6800 boards. The main difference between the two parts is that the NV41 is run on IBM's 130nm process (and was NVIDIA's first native PCIe part), while NV42 uses TSMC's 110nm process. And where there is a process shrink with no other major changes, higher clock speeds are more accessible.
Thus, the 6800 GS is physically the same as a vanilla 6800 with a higher core clock speed (425) and paired with GDDR3 at a 1000MHz data rate. From the 6800 GT, we see a decrease of 25% in pixel pipeline, but a ~21.4% increase in core clock speed. The net result is a theoretical core performance decrease of only 9%, but since NV42 doesn't require a bridge chip the results may be even closer than that. This puts the 6800 GS in the same class as the 6800 GT (but at a much lower cost).
The main reason this card will cost less than the 6800 GT is die size. Being manufactured as a 12 pipe / 110nm chip, NV42 will definitely be smaller and more cost efficient than the chip powering the 6800 GT. As far as we know, 6800 GT still uses the NV45 which features 16 pipes and is manufactured on a 130nm process. Combine this with the fact that NV45 is bridged from AGP to PCIe on package, and there is no question about the cost difference between silicon solutions.
What remains to be seen is how the current market will react. Our initial probes indicate that the 6800 GS will be a very limited offering with its cycle ending in Q1 06. With the potential to perform as well as a 6800 GT for the price of a vanilla 6800, the 6800 GS seems to warrant a longer shelf life than our sources indicate. Either way, the 6800 GS and ATI's X800 GTO parts point to limited run cards with excellent value growing in popularity. As with any good part, we would like to see the products linger a little longer, but the introduction of these late blooming parts is good for consumers in the market for a midrange card no matter why NVIDIA and ATI created them.
For our performance tests, we used this system:
Test Hardware
We measured power draw at the wall for each card as well. Load was generated by running our Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory benchmark and observing the maximum power draw. The 6800 GS falls somewhere in the middle of the pack in terms of power draw.
The 6800 GS cards will all sport NVIDIA's NV42 core. Previously, NV41 and NV42 cores were used on vanilla 6800 boards. The main difference between the two parts is that the NV41 is run on IBM's 130nm process (and was NVIDIA's first native PCIe part), while NV42 uses TSMC's 110nm process. And where there is a process shrink with no other major changes, higher clock speeds are more accessible.
Thus, the 6800 GS is physically the same as a vanilla 6800 with a higher core clock speed (425) and paired with GDDR3 at a 1000MHz data rate. From the 6800 GT, we see a decrease of 25% in pixel pipeline, but a ~21.4% increase in core clock speed. The net result is a theoretical core performance decrease of only 9%, but since NV42 doesn't require a bridge chip the results may be even closer than that. This puts the 6800 GS in the same class as the 6800 GT (but at a much lower cost).
The main reason this card will cost less than the 6800 GT is die size. Being manufactured as a 12 pipe / 110nm chip, NV42 will definitely be smaller and more cost efficient than the chip powering the 6800 GT. As far as we know, 6800 GT still uses the NV45 which features 16 pipes and is manufactured on a 130nm process. Combine this with the fact that NV45 is bridged from AGP to PCIe on package, and there is no question about the cost difference between silicon solutions.
What remains to be seen is how the current market will react. Our initial probes indicate that the 6800 GS will be a very limited offering with its cycle ending in Q1 06. With the potential to perform as well as a 6800 GT for the price of a vanilla 6800, the 6800 GS seems to warrant a longer shelf life than our sources indicate. Either way, the 6800 GS and ATI's X800 GTO parts point to limited run cards with excellent value growing in popularity. As with any good part, we would like to see the products linger a little longer, but the introduction of these late blooming parts is good for consumers in the market for a midrange card no matter why NVIDIA and ATI created them.
For our performance tests, we used this system:
Test Hardware
| CPU: | AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 (2.6GHz) |
| Motherboard: | EPOX NF4 SLI |
| Chipset: | NVIDIA nForce4 SLI |
| Chipset Drivers: | nForce4 6.70 |
| Memory: | OCZ PC3500 DDR 2-2-2-7 |
| Video Card: | ATI Radeon X800 XL ATI Radeon X800 GTO NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GS NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 5.10a NVIDIA ForceWare 81.87 |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1280x960 - 32-bit @ 60Hz |
| OS: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
We measured power draw at the wall for each card as well. Load was generated by running our Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory benchmark and observing the maximum power draw. The 6800 GS falls somewhere in the middle of the pack in terms of power draw.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
rqle - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
it not lack of information, it's helping us fight company from paper launches etc. To me having a great tech website stands behind us is much better then us doing it alone.But if you like you can check out the x1000 series review and compare it to the 6600GT/6800GT if like as well. So really no harm done to you or other as well.
rqle - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
it not lack of information, it's helping us fight company from paper launches etc. To me having a great tech website stands behind us is much better then us doing it alone.But if you like you can check out the x1000 series review and compare it to the 6600GT/6800GT if like as well. So really no harm done to you or other as well.
hoppa - Tuesday, November 8, 2005 - link
I come here so I can get all my tech information in one place, not so I can get it in two.hectorsm - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
Bias implies that you ignores the facts for the purpose of justiying your point of view. Not sure how your comments apply to this article regarding the lack of X1600 parts. Are you suggesting the lack of X1600 is a lie?Anyway the whole pupose of these type of articles is to show both the good and the bad of these products regardless of who's feelings get hurt.
bob661 - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
What did they leave out?ElJefe - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
I never see anything about image clarity, 2d clarity, analog and digital text differences, color rendition etc.i could give a rat's ass if it has 10 frames difference for this or that, however, if the card doesnt look good visually for people who like detail and their eyes, what's the point?
i am critizing the general trend for video card reviews. The only mention of image quality even in a 3d game was with the Crossfire review compared to SLI done this past month. It said that the sli looked fuzzier. How can everyone be happy with nice frames when the thing looks fuzziER and i put a stress on ER because even this ati all in wonder 9800 pro has fuzziness in it compared to the matrox 550 pci card that is along side it for 2d production type of work (and for writing papers/book).
Just had to vent. I doubt it will be responded to though as to add this would require a lot more work. People say sometimes: it should be the same with dvi to an lcd... i dont use lcd, because it is inferior still to my thousand dollar Mitsubishi 22 inch monitor for gaming and for 2d stuff. So... yeah. thats about it. at .21-.24 dot pitch (center measurement to outer measurement) you see the difference with graphic cards. LCD's dont have the dot pitch yet it seems, so maybe that is why it isnt noticed as much.
just some thoughts.
the card looks nice though. I just havent trusted Nvidia for 2d graphics cards ever.
Hercules versions of cards had the best 2d I have seen, too bad they got swallowed up.
NFS4 - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=14-...">In stock RIGHT NOW SHIPPING TODAY from NewEgg for $209ViRGE - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
$209? That's a bit nuts, this may very well be a sub-$200 card by Christmas time.deathwalker - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
Nuts? Wait..did we read the same review? This card performs nearly identical to the 6800gt priced at near $300 at most places. I would say $209 plus $5 shipping is a pretty decent deal for this kind of performance compared to other cards on the market.ViRGE - Monday, November 7, 2005 - link
No, I mean nuts in that they could have easily sold it for near the $250 MSRP. It's nuts that all of a sudden today 6800GT performance can be had for a hair over $200.