So I ould just buy two 8800GT cards?

Bet it still can't handle Crysis at it's full potential...

since i paid 200 dollars for 1 8800gt last month all i can say now is that it will be fun to wait this 9800gx2 out until the end of the year when i will be able to buy it. i bet it will go nice with the diy lcd projector im going to make.

I'll take 8! Who is going to SLI 2 of these now?

@Delano_J: But if you buy two 9800 GX2s it'd be twice as fast as two 8800GTs!

Just on the planet?
Damn. Those Venusians just don't know when to quit, do they? That's it.
Prepare my jet. And don't forget the games and kittens this time.

That's no card...

Sexy

Didn't early benchmarks show it to be all over the board vs other cards? [www.tweaktown.com]

@ErskinPig: ...it's a space station.

lol. Dont get why anyone would buy one of these over SLIing 2 8800s. I have 2 Palit 8800 1 gigs, they run beautifully for less than this thing costs and twice the video ram, grated the ram doesnt do too much, still.
(won the cards, didnt buy em >.> jsut before people ask...)

Orly.

From the reviews I have seen, my 8800GTS 512's in SLI still have it beat by a smidge.

I'm happy with my 8800 GTS 512's.

Hey Kotaku team! X-reference this with the post on gizmodo! The Giz team stated something to the effect of "not any better than a dual 8800 setup".

Well, most games will be happy with a Nvidia GeForce 8800 GT OC...

Probably less power hungry & runs cooler than two 8800s though. There is something to be said for that.

Read the review on Hard OCP, no idea why hardware crap gets posted on this blog.

i thought 1 fast card will always be faster than 2 half as fast cards in SLI/ati crossfire. and the early benchmarks were gimped by using drivers meant for older cards, as all the reviews stated.

@MrSoursop: Depends on the game.

@Erwin: War Kittens!?! O_o

YEAH BUT WILL IT PLAY CRYSIS!?!?!? BLAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA IM SOO ORIGINAL AND FUNNYZORZ!

Actually its two underclocked 8800GTS's slapped together. Totally not worth it.

@B33: Maybe if you have 2 of them setup w/SLI.

There is always something to be said for one package, but is it worth $200?

For some people, it may be.

So what happens if you dont run it in a PCI Express 2.0 slot? You can probably still use it but will its performance be effected?

BLING BLING!

The 9950 wil ownz everything! Equipped with a built-in Cell C/GPU, this thing will run and play WoW for you!

Does it really matter? You get what you pay for.. and it is only another 2 months before it will get outdated... not to mention.. WAIT FOR THE BENCHMARKS FOR THE REAL FACTS!

Proceed to have a FBI agent knocking on your door asking why your electric bill just skyrocketed.

Pretty beastly.

Wait am I reading this wrong? It's the fastest card and only 200 dollars??

You'd think that something which can calculate millions of polygons could be made to look a little more attractive than a six sided rectangular block.

you want seven sides?

@Fyren: Real men tap right into the power grid!

Yes, but will it blend?

Man, $600 for a graphics card. I don't understand how people are willing to fork that over. Bioshock and other games will run on a 7600Gt, for under $100. And while there's a difference in HD, it's not significant enough in my mind to warrant a purchase like that.

@Ejvid04: Oh please, I built my computer in May of 2007 for $1154.. It still maxes out every single game I throw at it to this day, except Crysis.. But, Crysis doesn't count.. Sure, you can upgrade every month to be on top, but you don't have to. Contrary to popular belief, you still can max games without the newest stuff for a decent amount of time..

In terms of defending buying the 9800, there are some good reasons. One, it has HDMI ports (shouldn't be a big reason), takes up one PCI-E 16x slot, and less consumption of power.. 2 8800GTs sli would probably need a 800watt PSU, which may cost a decent amount more than a 500-600watt required for a 9800...

So, is this what people should be spending the whole of their tax cuts on?

It's really just like you duct taped 3000 gamecube gpus together and shrunk them down.

@Delano_J: No, you should get two 9600's in SLI. Most bang for your buck. Barely beaten out by the 9800GX2, but hundreds of dollars cheaper.

If I am not mistaken, the 9800GX2 is equivalent to two 8800GTS's with 512mb in SLI, these selling for approximately $300. Two 8800GT's with 512MBs have a slightly attenuated performance compared to either of the two prenominate setups. The price difference, however, is not commensurate to the performance difference; you'd have to be colossally stupid to buy either the 9800GX2 or 2 GTS's over 2 GT's.

@SimpleLife: Why would you think that? That would just increase the price. No one's looking at the thing the majority of the time, anyways. It's sitting inside your computer ideally. Besides, I find it to be rather attractive (at least it's more attractive that most other graphics cards).

@drweazel:
The 9800 GX2 is $600.
The 8800 GT is $200.
The 9800 GX2 has the same performance as 2 x 8800 GTs ($400).
Thus, Luke is saying that the 9800 GX2 is an utter waste of $200.

;)

I really wish the rich PC Gamers would stop forking over RIDICULOUS amounts of money for video cards so all of this crap could get under control.

You do not, I repeat DO NOT need to spend over $200 for a video card. EVER. With the current landscape of video cards, any card in that price range will get you acceptable frame rates/resolutions/effects for any game on the market. And YES, I'm including Crysis in that. 1920 x 1200 @ 60fps w/ 4x AA/8x AF? No. But the damn game will run, and it'll do a serviceable job.

The ridiculous landscape of hardware in the PC industry is hurting it almost as much as piracy. And all you need to do is go online and read the ENDLESS amounts of people who believe you need to spend over 2 grand to be able to play games on the PC. It's way, way out of hand and something needs to change.

@drweazel:

$600. $200 more than 2 8800GT's (which will perform around the same as the 9800GX2).

@shikaningen: 9600s in SLI is never a good idea, it's a waste of money.. Keep in mind sli does not mean, "zomg double the powah".. It means a 10-30% increase in performance, and that's for games/applications that ACTUALLY support SLI well enough.. SLI also consumes more energy than one single card... I'm not exactly saying go out and buy a 9800 right now, I myself don't plan to upgrade till games actually slow down for me, but look at both sides.. If you're looking to SLI 8800's, etc.. You will probably need a more powerful, expensive PSU, two open PCI-E 16x slots.. And, games that can take advantage of SLI.. My recommendation for building a computer right now is get one 8800, because that is all you will really need..

Take that PS3 and 360, this i real powa¡¡¡ , XD just kidding

Oh and this supports Quad SLI apparently.

*droools*

@mva5580: Its a matter of the cosumer itself, ive been playing gh3 in my pc and its looks as good as the 360, and im using an old single core processor and a very cheap GPU, of course im playing at 800x600 but its playable, i find best to buy middle range GPUs that dont need a expensive special power source, if you play at 800x600 or 1024x768 it will look great and you dont invest loads of cash...

Must...buy...

wa hoshii!

"Not all applications require a high end... GeForce GPU can run these applications perfectly while saving power and therefore the ENVIRONMENT".

Did anyone else smirk?

"saving power and therefore the environment" YES! >_>;

Something that huge won't come to mobile... =/ My laptop will be missing you 9800GX2

@Fyren: damnit beat me too it.

@TemplaerDude: With current games and OS the ATI cards in CROSSFIRE X (4gb in video ram¡¡¡) it wasnt a great improvement over a starndar 2 SLI or CROSSFIRE interface...

@ph15h: Nvidia said that SLI IGP will be available next year, but they are way to expensive...

i got an 8800gtx by bfg.

@Katorok: Thanks for the straw-man fallacy and the condescension. I know that SLI doesn't double performance.

I have seen and compared benchmarks for the various graphics card setups. Two 9600's in SLI provides the best value by far, at only $360 (total. $180 for each card). The 9800GX2 is only marginally superior in performance to two 9600's, but has a significantly higher price.

By the way, you are a douche. Maybe you could consider keeping your trap closed more often.

I'm glad Nvidia has incorporated technology to turn off the GPU when not running games, to conserve power.

@Fyren: yes. yes i did.

I bought an 8800GTX not long ago for $550 and then the GT came out, less than half the price and almost as powerful, and a killer value in an SLI setup. I think I'll wait and see what they have up their sleeve next.

@mva5580: So, because Nvidia releases an ultra-expensive supercard, that means the 8800GT which is fine for 99% of everything ever is now useless?

Hardly anyone buys these things, and by and large developers do not make games that require them.

@Scazza: Wouldn't doubt it. Those clock speeds aren't amazing. I'd guess there's certain things it can't handle as well as the 8800GT or GTS, or won't handle as well until a few driver updates squeeze more out of it at least. Or perhaps they'll end up releasing the 9800GX3 or GXX or whatever with factory-OC'ed settings.

@shikaningen: SLI still will require a more powerful, expensive PSU.. SLI will still take two PCI-E 16x slots, which will require a pretty expensive motherboard that supports PCI-E 16x in SLI (some can only support 8x in SLI). SLI isn't always supported well by games, and actual applications either.. I never said buy a 9800GX2, I'm just not a fan of SLI. A better PSU and motherboard combination will run you $200+ more than a single card set-up..