Last year Logitech released their innovative "Wave" keyboard design and although our editorial staff was skeptical at first, the Wave keyboard quickly became the favorite keyboard for two of our editors. How does Logitech plan to follow the success of the Cordless Desktop Wave this year? By releasing the same keyboard (with a few minor changes) and a much better wireless mouse ... and calling it the Cordless Desktop Wave Pro. Is this minor update worth your hard-earned cash? Let's take a look.
Build and Design
As mentioned in the introduction, the Logitech Cordless Desktop Wave Pro is an update to last year's release of the Cordelss Desktop Wave. The truth is that the new keyboard and mouse set looks as much like the old one as it sounds. While there are some sublte differences to the paint scheme used on this year's keyboard, the only major difference is the mouse.
Old Cordless Desktop Wave
New Cordless Desktop Wave Pro
As with the previous keyboard, the biggest challenge new users face with any ergonomic keyboard is the learning curve. The split key design that was popular years ago required users to re-learn how to type. The "Wave" does take a couple days to get used to, but after that, you'll wonder why all keyboards don't feel this good. Once your brain and fingers get used to the different depth of keys and smile-like curve of the keyboard you'll be typing at full speed.
The Wave's design is largely dictated by finger length. To account for certain fingers being longer, or shorter, than others, Logitech designed the contour of the keyboard to fit each finger appropriately. The keys are the highest at the A and Enter keys, which are hit by the shortest fingers. Moving inward, the D and K keys represent a valley as they are typed with the longest middle fingers. The keyboard rises again in the middle to accommodate the pointer fingers. The theory is, since this keyboard is optimized for the fingers, you'll use less awkward positions to reach them.
Aside from key height, the keyboard also features what Logitech calls a U-shape, or what we call the smile design. Either way, it's a five degree curve that nets a more comfortable wrist position. The wrists also receive a padded palm rest, which gives a little more comfort and encourages better hand positioning. I will note that the palm rest will wear quickly, and you may beable to notice the wrist sweat marks in our photos.
Standard on keyboards in this class, the Wave also features several media and programmable hot keys. The keyboard is powered by 2 AA batteries and battery life is expected to be an impressive 3 years! (We obviously couldn't put that claim to the test in time to publish this review.) There is a low-battery warning light underneath the down arrow key that glows when it's time to replace the batteries.
Better Mouse, Worse Mouse Traps
While the keyboard is the main attraction here, the new Wave desktop set also includes the all-new MX 1100 cordless laser mouse. Although this contoured mouse isn't designed to be ambidextrous, right-handed users should find this mouse to be extremely comfortable. Sure, the MX 1100 seems to have a weird shape the first time you look at it, but it's also exceptionally well designed, matching the keyboard and including rubber grips on the sides, along with a "Microgear" precision scroll wheel, scroll toggle, on-the-fly adjustable dpi, as well as front and back buttons.
I particularly enjoyed the adjustable dpi capability for working with multiple monitors set to different resolutions, as well as playing games set to different screen resolutions. The only thing that I didn't like about this mouse is one of the "features" I neglected to mention: the "stealth thumb button." The stealth button is a hidden button located beneath the thumb rest area on the mouse that allows for application switching using the "Window Switcher" in Windows Vista. At least, that's what it does if you install Logitech's bloated SetPoint software included with the keyboard and mouse. If you don't install SetPoint then the stealth button doesn't work. Honestly, there's no practical reason why you should "need" SetPoint for this particular button to work, so I can only assume a product engineer at Logitech was feeling lazy or Logitech wanted to give you a reason to install their software.
The mouse is powered by a single rechargeable AA battery and Logitech was kind enough to include a pre-charged Sanyo Eneloop brand battery in the box. Battery life is expected to be 6 weeks, and after 3 weeks of daily use (usually at least 6-9 hours daily) the battery in our review unit is still going strong. There is also a light on the mouse to indicate low battery levels. Logitech includes both a USB charging cable as well as a USB-to-power outlet adapter so that you can charge the mouse battery without connecting it to your computer
Conclusion
Once again, all of Logitech's promises have lived up to the marketing hype with their latest Wave keyboard and mouse. As I said previously, two of our editorial staff members (including yours truly) have been using Logitech Wave keyboards since last year and I'm a big believer in this ergonomic design. While the keyboard itself hasn't really changed in the last year, everything works as it should. The new MX 1100 cordless laser mouse is the main reason the new Cordless Desktop Wave Pro is so appealing over last year's model. Again, the new mouse is exceptional and nearly perfect ... as long as you're willing to install SetPoint and you aren't a southpaw.
Overall, I doubt there's a more comfortable cordless keyboard and mouse set on the market. However, for the full MSRP of $129, this wireless bundle might give you sticker shock since it costs $50 more than last year's Wave keyboard and mouse set.
Pros:
* Ergonomic keyboard design is extremely comfortable and easy to use
* Great mouse (for right-handed users)
* Fantastic advertised battery life
Cons:
* "Stealth" thumb button completely useless without installing bloated SetPoint software
* USB receiver is a little large, but not too bad
* Palm rest shows wear almost instantly
* More expensive than last year's model
Pricing and availability
The Logitech Cordless Desktop Wave Pro keyboard and mouse set will be available soon in retail stores everywhere and has an MSRP of $129. Visit the Logitech website for more information about features and availability.
Showing posts with label Hardware. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hardware. Show all posts
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Monday, June 30, 2008
Western Digital My Book Mirror Edition Review
Few external hard drives have been more popular over the years than the Western Digital "My Book" series. The attractive casing, solid build quality, good performance, and tons of storage space continue to make these USB hard drives a common site on desks across the globe. The all new Western Digital My Book Mirror Edition offers more than just huge storage capacities. The Mirror Edition gives you the security of RAID 1 or the massive storage of RAID 0 with just a click of your mouse. Keep reading and you may discover your next "must have" computer accessory.
Anyone looking at my home office will see a desk littered with an almost obscene number of external hard disk drives (HDDs). I own five 3.5" hard drives in external USB enclosures and two 2.5" notebook hard drives in external USB enclosures for a total of almost three terabytes (3TB) of external storage. As a technology website editor, photographer, and avid PC gamer I require as much storage space as possible. Not only do I need to save all my files and install all my games and applications, but I need to make backups of my important files in case something happens to one of my hard drives. In short, I'm exactly the type of consumer that Western Digital had in mind when they created the My Book Mirror Edition.
(view large image)
This attractive dual hard drive external storage solution is offered in either a 1TB (two 500GB HDDs) or 2TB (two 1TB HDDs) capacities ... but that's not what makes this drive so special. The "Mirror" part of the name indicates that this dual-drive storage system automatically mirrors (duplicates) your valuable data using RAID 1 mirroring technology for extra protection. In short, if one of the two hard drives inside the My Book Mirror Edition ever fails the second drive still has a copy of all your files. You may never lose an important file or family photo ever again.
Build and Design
In terms of the basic external shape and dimensions the My Book Mirror Edition is almost identical to the older My Book series ... just wider so it can hold two drives.
- Height: 6.54 in (166 mm)
- Depth: 6.06 in (154 mm)
- Width: 3.87 in (98 mm)
- Weight: 5.2 lb (2.63 kg)
While the size and shape are reasonably compact, it's clear that the My Book Mirror Edition is designed to be a "desktop" storage solution that doesn't travel everywhere with you like the My Passport series of external notebook drives. You're meant to leave this brick on your desk at home or the office and only use the massive storage when you need it.
One change I noticed with the My Book Mirror Edition is that the old blue LED circle on the front of the old My Book drives has been replaced with a blue LED vertical line that "pulses" up and down when the drive is active. The effect is sort of like a blue Knight Rider eye from the campy 1980s TV show ... but not nearly as annoying.
(view large image)
Of course, there's more to this external drive than just pretty blue LEDs.
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
The enclosure is very sleek and stylish with a minimalistic design and a subtle Western Digital "WD" logo on the sides. The top, bottom and back of the dual hard drive enclosure features a perforated surface designed to help air flow around the drives and keep the HDDs cool. The only thing to see on the bottom of the My Book Mirror Edition is a small sticker containing the product information, such as the serial number, model number, and country of manufacture.
To get to the point, this is one of the best looking external dual hard drives I've seen. It's simple, functional, and doesn't stand out like a sore thumb on your desk ... unless you hate the pulsing blue LED. The only thing I don't love about the enclosure design is the security lock slot is "hidden" on the back of the enclosure. In fact, the first day I was using the drive I was absolutely certain that Western Digital forgot to include a security lock slot for connecting a security cable. I eventually found the slot next to the power button on the back of the drive, but IT team members (or security-conscious consumers) might find it frustrating when they try to connect a security cable to the enclosure and can't find the lock slot.
One of my favorite features of the design of the My Book Mirror Edition's enclosure is the easy-access top panel for simple servicing of the drives. As seen in the images below, if you ever need to replace one of the two drives inside the My Book Mirror Edition all you have to do is press firmly on the top panel until it springs open. Next, unscrew the thumb screw holding the metal drive plate and remove the drive plate. Now you have open access to both drives ... they're even labeled "A" and "B" to help you identify which drive needs to be replaced. This is simply a fabulous enclosure design.
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
Features
Western Digital also includes their standard suite of software:
- WD Anywhere Backup is a simple yet effective backup and recovery application that provides around-the-clock data protection. It features automatic backup to multiple destinations and synchronization of working files to keep them current.
- Google software (Windows only) allows you to search your drive, manage your photos, and simplify Web searches with included Google software
- WD Drive Manager/RAID Manager allows for quick and easy RAID configuration changes.
In my opinion, the single best application that comes with the My Book Mirror Edition is the RAID Manager application. By double clicking on the RAID Manager application you can check the status of you RAID setup, which is RAID 1 (mirrored mode) by default. Of course, if you don't care about having a backup of all your files and you just want as much storage space as possible you can easily change the RAID configuration to RAID 0 mode.
A nice feature here is that when you select the option to change the RAID setting you are prompted to type in a unique confirmation code before the RAID Manager resets the RAID configuration and formats the drives. This is a great way to prevent accidental data loss due to user error.
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
 (view large image) |
Performance and Benchmarks
As previously mentioned, the My Book Mirror Edition drives are available in two capacities: 1TB and 2TB. With the maximum capacity 2TB drive, that translates to just under 600,000 high resolution digital photos (saved as compressed JPEGs), 500,000 MP3 files, or roughly 880 hours of DVD quality video. Bottom line, that's a lot of storage space.
In terms of speed, the My Book Mirror Edition is rated at a "theoretical" maximum transfer rate of 480Mb (megabits) per second based on USB 2.0 transfer rates. That would translate to 60MB (megabytes) per second.
What these figures suggest is that the My Book Mirror Edition is roughly half as fast in transfer rates as an average 5400 rpm SATA internal notebook hard drive. That's just a side effect of using USB 2.0 rather than a SATA/150 or eSATA interface.
The HDTune benchmark measures the overall performance of a drive both in terms of transfer speeds (read/write), "access time" (the amount of time spent searching for data on the disk) and CPU usage (how hard your computer has to work in order to use the drive). The HDTune benchmark indicates that the My Book Mirror Edition provides an average data transfer rate similar to most external USB drives ... though not quite as fast as we might have liked to see. Below you can see the speeds of a typical Seagate 5400 rpm internal SATA notebook hard drive, a WD Passport Elite external hard drive and the speeds of the My Book Mirror Edition in both RAID 0 and RAID 1 modes.
 Internal Seagate 5400 rpm SATA hard drive (view large image) |  WD My Passport Elite external hard drive (view large image) |
 WD My Book Mirror Edition running in RAID 1 (view large image) |  WD My Book Mirror Edition running in RAID 0 (view large image) |
Atto is another synthetic benchmark we use to test the performance of a storage drive. Below you can see the average read and write times for the My Book Mirror Edition in both RAID 0 and RAID 1 configurations. We've also included the benchmark for a typical Seagate SATA desktop HDD in case desktop users want to compare the speed of this external drive to a typical desktop internal drive.
 WD My Book Mirror Edition in RAID 1 (view large image) |  WD My Book Mirror Edition in RAID 0 (view large image) |
 Internal Seagate 400GB desktop HDD (view large image) |
Clearly, the USB interface is limiting the performance of the My Book Mirror Edition. If Western Digital had included an eSATA connection they could have raised the theoretical transfer rate of the Mirror Edition from 60MB/sec to 384MB/sec! In fact, the new My Book Studio Edition II (designed for Mac users) is basically the same design as the Mirror Edition but it includes an eSATA port.
Still, even with the slower USB connection the most important performance factor in my mind is that I don't notice the difference between the speed of my notebook's internal hard drive and the WD My Book Mirror Edition in "real world" use. Both drives are fast and the minor differences in transfer speeds between an internal notebook drive and the My Book are so insignificant that most consumers will never notice a difference. By comparison, I have two old external USB 2.0 IDE hard drives that only perform at 8.9MB/sec (compared to 20MB/sec with the My Book Mirror Edition) and those old drives are still perfectly fine for storing old files.
Heat and Noise
The My Book Mirror Edition runs quiet and cool. There isn't much more to say in this section of the review. The drives get "warm" after hours of serious use, but never get hot. In terms of noise, even when transferring files, the drives make only the softest audible noise. Of course, when the drives aren't accessing any files it's completely silent.
Conclusion
The Western Digital My Book Mirror Edition is a wonderful update to the My Book family and offers consumers the option of extreme storage capacity or extreme data protection in one easy-to-use solution. The fact that average consumers now have a way to instantly backup their files without even thinking about it practically makes the My Book Mirror Edition a "must have" accessory for the home or office. The ability to shift between RAID 0 and RAID 1 with just a few clicks of a mouse is simply wonderful. Users and IT staff will appreciate the ease of service, and the performance of this dual-drive enclosure is more than enough for most people.
Although an eSATA connection would have made the My Book Mirror Edition even more attractive, the reality is that most people don't have eSATA ports on their notebooks or desktops. Heck, I'll bet many people reading this review have never even seen an eSATA port.
Bottom line, the My Book Mirror Edition is the best dual hard drive external storage solution currently on the market for consumers and small businesses.
Pros:
- Absolutely fantastic RAID Manager software
- Easiest external RAID solution we've seen
- Your choice of tons of secure backup or tons of storage
- Simple USB interface ideal for consumers who need more storage
- Relatively quiet
- Easy-to-open enclosure makes service fast and simple
Cons:
- No eSATA connection
- Fast, but not as fast as it could be
- Security lock slot "hidden" on back of the enclosure
Pricing and Availability
The Western Digital My Book Mirror Edition ($289.99 for 1TB, $549.99 for 2TB) is available for purchase on the Western Digital website or at many retail and online stores.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Kingston DataTraveler Secure-Privacy Edition Review
If you work for the FBI or have some ultra secret files, the Kingston DataTraveler Secure Privacy Edition USB flash drive, might just be perfect for you. It is an enterprise-grade USB Flash drive with 256-bit hardware-based, on-the-fly encryption. The stored data is 100 percent secure, with no public area to expose files. It might even be good for college students in need of a very secure flash drive to hold their personal information like tax returns, bills or school stuff.
The DataTraveler Secure Privacy Edition (DTSP) is secure, waterproof and fast. Well I will be the judge of that. It offers unique protection to safeguard critical data even if the drive is lost or stolen. Kingston has set strong password rules and lock-down control to protect against attacks.
These advanced security features make DTSP flash drive ideal for corporations and service organizations that require employees to transport large digital files consisting of confidential documents. The DTSP can help companies avoid the financial and legal consequences of lost or stolen data.
(view large image)
Specifications:
- Dimensions: 3.06" x 0.9" x 0.47" (77.9 mm x 22 mm x 12.05 mm)
- Capacities: 1GB, 2GB, 4GB, 8GB
- Compatibility: designed to USB 2.0 specifications
- Operating temperatures: 32º F to 140º F (0º C to 60º C)
- Storage temperatures: -4º F to 185º F (-20º C to 85º C)
- Minimum System Requirements: Pentium III processor, USB 2.0 compliant and 1.1 compatible, Two free consecutive drive letters required for installation
Compatibility table:
| Operating System | File Transfer | Password Protection/ Data Encryption |
| Windows Vista | Yes | Yes |
| Windows 2000 (SP3 and above), Windows XP (SP1 and above) | Yes | Yes |
Build and Design
The DataTraveler Secure Privacy Edition flash drive comes in a titanium color and has a rugged feel. To maintain it's rugged design Kingston made the DTSP with a titanium-coated stainless steel casing. It has a rubberized feel, which gives it a good grip.
It also is waterproof, so if you get caught in the rain, no worries. Kingston claims it can be submerged in water, so I dropped it in the sink while doing dishes and amazingly it was fine. Not a scratch on the drive and it functioned just as before. This USB flash drive is ready for war.
(view large image)
The lid pops off with ease and can connect to the other end of the drive, this way you don't loose it. I like this design better then the slide-stick type USB drives. It makes the DTSP feel more secure. The DTSP is backed by a five-year warranty and Kingston's reliable service and support.
In Use
The DTSP drive is very easy to use. No admin rights or application installation is required, you just plug the drive in and go. When you insert the DTSP into a USB port Windows loads two drives: the main storage drive and a "CD Drive" that contains the password authentication application.
The first time you use the DataTraveler Secure Privacy drive you are prompted to provide some identifying information (such as your name and contact info) and then it will ask you to provide a password and a "hint" in case you ever forget.
The DTSP has complex password protection by requiring passwords with at least three minimum characteristics (upper case, lower case, numbers, and/or special characters) to prevent unauthorized access. The drive locks down and reformats after 10 unsuccessful intrusion attempts ... making it impossible to recover the data.
Once you type in the correct password the DTSP operates exactly like a regular flash drive, but with the added security of 256-bit Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) encryption working in the background.
Performance
The speed of file transfers is the one area where the DTSP fails to exceed expectations. Since the built-in encryption co-processor protects 100 percent of stored data while files are being dragged and dropped to and from the drive, the DTSP isn't as fast as some of the latest USB drives available.
Kingston claims the DTSP is "fast" with "data transfer rates of up to 24 MB/sec. read and up to 10 MB/sec. write." When we ran our own tests on the DTSP we found its real world performance to match these figures. Quite impressive!
The screenshots above are from our standard storage drive benchmarks (HDTune and Atto). As you can see in the image, read speeds exceeded 20MB per second and write speeds always stayed below 15MB per second. You start to understand the sacrifice of on-the-fly encryption when you compare these numbers to non-encrypted flash drives that often reach write speeds of more than 20MB/sec and read speeds of more than 30MB/sec. Overall though, the DTSP met the standards that Kingston promised.
Conclusion The DataTraveler Secure Privacy Edition performs at the top of its class, and is offered in capacities up to 8GB to give users plenty of room to store critical business data. The 2GB model I reviewed could hold plenty of data, way more then enough for my needs. I don't think $115 is too pricey considering the security it offers. Regardless of whether you need to secure your company's important financial documents or protect your private personal information, the DTSP provides extreme security and ruggedness in one easy-to-use package. The only minor issue with the DTSP is the on-the-fly encryption, which makes data transfers a little slower than expected. It still performs quite fast though and is very secure. Pros Cons
Sunday, May 18, 2008
3DConnexion Space Navigator for Notebooks Review
The 3DConnexion Space Navigator for Notebooks is a 3D environment manipulation tool for graphics or CAD designers, or those who just want to have some fun. It is a 3D mouse that works almost like a stumpy joystick, but instead of gripping it with your entire hand, you use you the tips of your fingers. While we don't have any licenses for SolidWorks around the office, we will demonstrate its use with Google Earth. Read on to see just how much fun this device can bring to the entire workplace.
Specifications
- Advanced six degrees-of-freedom optical sensor
- Speed adjustable to preference
- Two programmable function keys
- Weight: .55 lb.
- Length: 2.5 in.
- Height: 1.7 in.
- Width: 2.5 in.
- Two-year warranty
- Made by 3DConnexion, a Logitech Company
(view large image)
Setup
Installation of the included software is a must to operate the Space Navigator, but once installed it works with most applications. The main control utility for the device allows you to control movement sensitivity for the entire range of movement, as well as individual programs. You can also change the function of the two buttons located on the device, to open applications or run additional functions.
(view large image)
Build quality
This thing in is a league of its own in terms of build quality. The base is stainless steel, and for a device of its small size it is incredibly heavy. Build quality is excellent, and I wouldn't be surprised if it outlasted my ThinkPad.
(view large image)
In Use
For this review we will cover its use using Google Earth, since movement will be quite similar no matter what application you are using it with. Normally with Google Earth if you are using a standard mouse, you have to click and drag to move the surface around, use the scroll wheel modify other areas, and overall move your arm all around your desk to navigate the planet. All of that changes with the 3DConnexion Space Navigator.
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
You move around, you tweak the spring loaded control with your fingertips and move in any direction. You can move forward, zoom in, rotate upside-down, and twist to the side all in the same fluid motion. Try doing that with your mouse. Below is a YouTube video showing this control in action to give you an idea of just how fun this is.
As you can see, it is almost effortless to move around in a 3D environment with the Space Navigator, where a mouse and keyboard would never come close.
Addiction
Combining the 3DConnexion Space Navigator with Google Earth is a surefire way to kill many hours in an office setting, sometimes double or triple depending on how many coworkers also take part in the fun. I spent hours the first day I received the controller zooming in on my house, friend's houses, parent's house, grandparent's house, work, and any other location I could think of. It turned into a game of how fast I could target an area and zoom in from way up in space.
Buying Choices for the 3Dconnexion SpaceNavigator for Notebooks - 3D motion controller
view detailed pricing from 10 stores starting at $102.00 |
Conclusion
CAD or Graphics designers who need a 3D manipulation tool will love the 3DConnexion Space Navigator for use with their notebook on the road. Heck even people who just want a cool controller to play around with Google Earth will love it.
If we gave out editor's choice awards for accessories, this thing would definitely rank up as the coolest gadget of the year on NBR. No other product has wasted as many combined hours of many employees as this controller has in the time I have worked here.
Pros
- Very easy to use
- High build quality
- Cool blue LED trim
Cons
- Easily distracting in our office environment
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Kensington Ci70 Keyboard with USB Ports Review
Kensington has an updated version of the Ci70 keyboard: the Ci70 Keyboard with USB Ports. This new keyboard has a mini-USB connector that will allow the user to attach smaller gadgets and download files without the hassle of searching through a pile of cords or worrying about forgetting your cords at work and home.
The Ci70 Specifications
- Keyboard dimensions: approx. 16.0"L x 7.0"W x 0.25"-1" H
- PC and Mac compatible
- 3 USB 2.0 ports (2 regular, 1 mini)
- Five keyboard hot keys
- 5-year warranty
(view large image)
Design and Aesthetics
The Ci70 keyboard with USB ports is extremely light and thin; most of the keyboard is only a .25" thick. It's black, which I like, with off white accents.
The keyboard features Kensington's soft-touch keys- which like the name indicates- that need only a light touch unlike some keyboards.
(view large image)
At the top of the keyboard- the only section that is an inch thick- are five hot keys, the built-in mini USB connector and a regular USB port. The hot keys are easy to figure out, there is an eject key (only works with Mac), a search key, e-mail key, internet key and music key.
(view large image)
Above the number pad, there are five media keys that will control your default media player: volume up, volume down, play/pause, skip forward, skip backward.
(view large image)
There is also an Apple key and a Windows key.
Using the Ci70
Installation was a snap. There was no software to load. Just plug in the keyboard into any USB port and it works almost immediately.
Like the Ci70 wireless keyboard I reviewed awhile back, I had a problem with the ultra thin design. I can't type comfortably with a flat, super thin keyboard and for whatever reason the feet are designed to give the user less than a half inch of lift. For me, that's not enough.
(view large image)
All the hot keys and media keys worked well, and the keys themselves were responsive. The USB ports all worked fine, including the mini USB connector. I didn't have a camera I could test out the connector with because all the ones we had in the office were micro USB. I did plug in a Motorola Q and a MP3 player and my computer recognized the new hardware, etc. I couldn't get the Q to charge through the keyboard though (Kensington doesn't claim that it would, just that it will download files from devices that have mini USB).
ConclusionThe Ci70 Keyboard with USB Ports is definitely a useful product for people with extra gadgets. I love the idea of not having to drag out five different cords to plug in my MP3, camera and phone. It does stink that USB devices are not standardized; maybe in the future Kensington can look into adding a micro USB port/connector as well.
Pros
- Light weight
- 5-year warranty
- Flexible- can use if right or left handed
- Compatible with a Mac and PC
Cons
- Small kickstand
- Comes in only one color
- Sort of expensive
Pricing and Availability
The Ci70 Keyboard with USB Ports can be purchased on the Kensington website for $49.99 plus shipping.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Targus Bluetooth Laser Mouse Review
The Targus Rechargeable Bluetooth Laser Notebook Mouse is an innovative travel mouse designed to connect via Bluetooth to your laptop without the need for a USB receiver. Targus boasts about how this mouse can switch from 800 to 1,600 dpi on the fly for improved gaming and other activities, but is this lightweight wireless mouse as good as it sounds? We put it to the test to find out.
(view large image)
Targus is known for making a wide range of affordable notebook cases and accessories, but I've never found their mice to be overwhelmingly impressive. When I saw a press release for their new Bluetooth travel mouse I realized this mouse has a lot of potential. First, by using Bluetooth the mouse is able to avoid the need for a USB receiver ... which saves a precious USB port on your notebook. Second, Targus clearly gave a lot of thought to the design of this mouse (more on that later). Lastly, the price is right for a Bluetooth travel mouse: the MSRP is $69.99 and most retail stores sell this mouse for even less.
Technical Specs
- Color: Black/Blue
- Exterior Dimensions: 4.1" x 2.1" x 1.4"
- System Requirements: Windows 2000, XP, Vista or MAC OS X (10.4 or higher)
- Warranty: Limited One Year Warranty
- Weight: 2.04 oz
- Package includes: Mouse, rechargeable NiMH batteries, USB charging cable, and travel pouch
- MSRP: $69.99
(view large image)
Build and Design
I tend to be something of a snob when it comes to mouse design. Even if a mouse has the best features and performance, if the mouse doesn't look and feel good then I don't want it. For the most part, the design of the Targus Rechargeable Bluetooth Laser Notebook Mouse is both stylish and functional. The grip is neither too rounded nor too flat and the overall size is just right (not too large for travel and not too small for everyday use).
I particularly like the ambidextrous design since this not only allows left-handed users to enjoy the mouse but it allows right-handed users to switch the mouse to their left hand to avoid repetitive stress injuries. The rubberized texture also makes the mouse quite comfortable to use. The only thing I don't particularly like about the design is the giant blue circle.
The bottom of the mouse has a simple on/off switch, a recessed Bluetooth connect button, four glide pads/feet, and the battery cover release.
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
There are only three buttons on this mouse: left click, right click, and middle click/scroll wheel. This keeps the mouse simple so that anyone can use it, but some people will find the lack of dedicated forward/back buttons a little annoying.
The front of the mouse features a USB port for connecting a supplied USB cable to the mouse so that the batteries can be recharged. Targus includes two AAA rechargeable NiMH batteries with the mouse. The battery compartment cover is a little difficult to remove, but this isn't a major concern since most people will just leave the supplied batteries inside the mouse all the time and use the USB cable to charge them.
 (view large image) |  (view large image) |
In Use
As I mentioned previously, the Targus Rechargeable Bluetooth Laser Notebook Mouse is designed to work with Bluetooth enabled PC and Mac computers without the need for a USB receiver. Targus claims this mouse works up to 33 ft away and I was able to maintain an accurate and stable connection at least 25 feet away from my notebook. The laser sensor has the ability to switch from 800 to 1,600 dots per inch (dpi) on-the-fly for heightened sensitivity during gaming, but it's not entirely easy.
In order to switch the mouse from 800 dpi to 1600 dpi you must press both the scroll and right key when the mouse is on. A red LED in the scroll wheel will light up for around three seconds to indicate the resolution is switching. When the LED is off, it indicates the resolution switching is successful.
In terms of Bluetooth connectivity, the Targus mouse performed quite well and I was never able to attribute a lost Bluetooth connection to the mouse. Connecting the mouse to a computer via Bluetooth was simple and straightforward, but the "connect" button on the base of the mouse was too small to be practical. I had to use the head of a pen or pencil every time I needed to reset the connection on the mouse. It would have been nice if the button was just a little larger so I could press it with my fingernail.
The only other minor annoyance I experienced during several weeks of testing this mouse was the momentary lag that occurs after leaving the mouse unused for several minutes. The mouse automatically goes into a power-saving mode after not being used for several minutes. If you move the mouse again it takes several seconds for movement to register on screen.
This power-saving mode delay became really annoying when I was typing lengthy articles or emails because I wouldn't use the mouse for several minutes and when I needed to use the mouse again there was a momentary lag. This won't be a problem if you constantly move the mouse around.
While we're on the topic of battery saving modes, let's discuss battery life. Since I was using the Targus Bluetooth mouse as a travel mouse and I have a dedicated mouse at work and home I wasn't using it every day. However, I only charged the batteries once at the beginning of the review period and the charge lasted the entire review period (almost three weeks) without needing to be recharged. I still haven't recharged the mouse but I assume the batteries will have to die sometime.
Buying Choices for the Targus Bluetooth Laser Mouse - mouse
view detailed pricing from 13 stores starting at $34.00 |
Conclusion
The Targus Rechargeable Bluetooth Laser Notebook Mouse is an excellent travel mouse for anyone who needs a compact Bluetooth mouse with easy USB recharging capability. I would have liked to see dedicated forward and back buttons for easy web browser navigation but that is a minor issue. The momentary lag from the battery saving mode and the tiny Bluetooth connect button on the base of the mouse are a little more difficult to live with.
Overall, I really liked the Targus mouse and I've decided to replace my old wireless USB travel mouse with this mouse. The mouse might not be perfect, but it still does a lot of things right.
Pros
- Comfortable, compact shape and ambidextrous design
- Good Bluetooth connection
- Long-lasting rechargeable batteries that can recharge via USB
- Rubberized texture feels very nice
- Low price
Cons
- Why the giant blue circle? Yes, we understand it's Bluetooth.
- Battery saving function causes lag after several minutes of non use.
- Tiny recessed "connect" button needs to be easier to press.
- Dedicated forward/back buttons would be nice for web browsing
Sunday, April 20, 2008
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Review and Performance Test
NVIDIA updated his offer of top-end-range graphics chip with the arrival of GeForce 8800. from the start to video card go in parallel with Windows Vista since that this GeForce 8800 is the first graphics chip compatible with DirectX 10 and such support is native, which falls rather well since Windows Vista will be the only operating system to benefit from DirectX 10. GeForce 8800 represents a true image from NVIDIA where last major architecture 3D goes back in GeForce 6800 i.e. semi-2004. Whereas GeForce 7 essentially took again the architecture of the NV40 with several improvements, GeForce 8 New Year\'s gift for its part a very new architecture.
As result of almost four years of development, G80, alias GeForce 8800, will have cost some 400 million dollars in search and development . As much to say that NVIDIA plays large role on this new chip whose architecture is contrary to what could have been indicated in the past, completely unified. Among the objectives by NVIDIA when designing its G80, there are of course the assumption of support for DirectX 10, the new 3D API from Microsoft, but also the performances in DirectX 9.0 and finally the image quality , this last point being likely in the side of ati those last time with its last Radeon X1900. Before presenting the architecture GeForce 8800 to you, we will reconsider the new functions of DirectX 10 then we will discover together the card and finally we will get the benchmarks.
Attention, the pages which follow are relatively technical and although the presentation of DirectX 10 is essential for including/understanding well the operation and the architecture G80, just like the presentation of the aforesaid architecture, we invite our readers to pass directly to b.
DirectX 10: Only available under Windows Vista 
Example provided by Microsoft using Geometry Shaders to increase the detail of a figure 
the new Direct pipeline 3D DirectX 10 
The reduced processor load of DirectX 10 makes possible to return a greater number of objects 
Two new formats HDR with DirectX 10 
Example of game using Instancing to multiply the number of character 
DirectX 10 and Coverage Alpha 
As much to warn you immediately, it is better to forget all that you know of GeForce 6 and GeForce 7 to approach G80. On the architectural level it is the great revolution, NVIDIA adopting, with the general surprise, a unified architecture. It should be said that DirectX 10 did not require unified architecture for the graphics processor, which everyone had interpreted as a sign which G80 would in the final analysis be a kind of hybrid chip .It is not the case. At this stage we should recall that ATI was the first manufacturer of graphics chips to propose an architecture completely unified with the chip XBox 360.
But before continuing, it is necessary for us to clarify exactly the mean of unified architecture. Until now the operation of the great majority of the graphics processors depends on pipeline. The data arrive of the main frame and are examined stage by stage progressively with their progression in various levels of the pipeline. Since DirectX 8, the first stage consists in treating the vertex Shaders , before formatting the primitives like lines, points, or triangles,Then our primitives, these outlines of geometrical figures, pass by the pixel pipeline to undergo the operations of shading before arriving in the ROP (Raster Operations). At this stage, our embryos of pixels must still undergo a whole heap of operations like test Z or antialiasing before being regarded as true pixels once they will be stored in the video memory.
Classical architecture of GPU 
Why unify architecture… according to NVIDIA 
Sight of the architecture G80 GeForce 8800 
Outline of an operation and arithmetic unit of G80 uncoupled from the units of texture 
Anisotropic quality filtering 8x, from left to right: GeForce 7900, Radeon X1950 then GeForce 8800 
Tests of antialiasing with GeForce 8800, from left to right: no antialiasing, antialiasing standard 4x, antialiasing CSAA 16x
Difficult to propose a real quality difference between the made traditional in type antialiasing 4x and the CSAA 16x on the same game (Half-Life 2 Lost Coast). Side control, the implementation of the CSAA requires a light parameter . It is enough to select the option “ improve the parameter of application†or further going and choosing one of the four new antialiasing available: 8x, 8xQ, 16x and 16xQ. The good news being that according to NVIDIA technology is compatible with all the game t. We express however serious doubts with our made screen shot :-).
Activation of the CSAA on the level of the pilots of GeForce 8800 
The architecture of GeForce 8800 when CUDA is implemented 
NVIDIA GeForce 8800: the chip here in version GTS
GeForce 8800 presente for the first time what NVIDIA calls the NV I/O 1. It is about an additional chip on which NVIDIA gives few details and which integrates a good part of the logic display 2D into knowing the RAMDAC, the TMDS and other transcoders in load of the final display. It will be noted that the Dual-Link DVI is always the part like doubles it RAMDAC 400 MHz. To note that HDCP are stored via external CryptoROM and not directly in the NV I/O.
Chip NVIO accompanying GeForce 8800
MSI GeForce 8800 GTS 
Sparkle GeForce 8800 GTX 
Some captures of the technological demonstrations of G80
With 681 million transistors the chip requires a system a rather massive cooling and a power supply which holds strong load. If for a top-end-range card these two parameters are less important than for a solution with a medium range, the more so as cooling remains fortunately quiet, the size of the card is simply impressive! Thus, GeForce 8800 GTX is 27 centimetres long and it is clear that such card will enter in all cases… And even if it enters, it will block all ports Serial-ATA or the hard disk. Side price this oen also hurt, because NVIDIA announces an advised public price of 649 euros including all taxes! And whereas the availability of GeForce 8800 GTX was announced already particularly tended, NVIDIA must face a problem of last minute with a defective resistance on the first samples of GeForce 8800 GTX having involved a systematic recall of the defective units. ! More reasonable e plan oand price come with version GTS which is less powerful, up to 30% of performances vs version GTX.
As result of almost four years of development, G80, alias GeForce 8800, will have cost some 400 million dollars in search and development . As much to say that NVIDIA plays large role on this new chip whose architecture is contrary to what could have been indicated in the past, completely unified. Among the objectives by NVIDIA when designing its G80, there are of course the assumption of support for DirectX 10, the new 3D API from Microsoft, but also the performances in DirectX 9.0 and finally the image quality , this last point being likely in the side of ati those last time with its last Radeon X1900. Before presenting the architecture GeForce 8800 to you, we will reconsider the new functions of DirectX 10 then we will discover together the card and finally we will get the benchmarks.
Attention, the pages which follow are relatively technical and although the presentation of DirectX 10 is essential for including/understanding well the operation and the architecture G80, just like the presentation of the aforesaid architecture, we invite our readers to pass directly to b.
DirectX 10: 3D unified!
The new major version of the operating system general public from Microsoft, named Windows Vista, integrates a very new interface of programming 3D. This one, which almost bore all the names of creation (Windows Graphic Fundation, DirectX Next, etc) names finally DirectX 10 and is exclusively reserved for Windows Vista, Microsoft is not intending to add support under Windows XP. Although DirectX 10 succeeds DirectX 9.0, all the part concerning made graphic was completely re-examined and reconsidered. DirectX 10 indeed gives up all the fixed functions inherited preceding grindings the API one and is thus compatible only with the graphics chips DirectX 10. It is precisely for this reason that Windows Vista also integrates an adapted version of DirectX 9.0 named Direct 3D 9Ex to allow the correct operation of the current game on this new system.
While setting out again on new bases, Microsoft aims as before to making its API lighter so that this one spends less time in the processor. the support of the fixed functions is not the only reason explaining the reduction in processor consumption of DirectX 10.For example, when DirectX 9.0 do a systematic validation of resources to each use, DirectX 10 do only once creation, reducing the processor cycles . It is of course not the only change since DirectX 10 proposes a very new pipeline 3D as well as a very new model of programming. The engineers of Microsoft indeed maked the unification of the instructions that it is for the programming of pixels shaders or vertexes shaders always with an aim of facilitating the life of programmers. Remain that this does not mean that graphics chip DirectX 10 must have a unified architecture. Who says new version of DirectX, known as generally new version of model Shaders and with DirectX 10 Microsoft added support for Shader Model 4.0.
DirectX 10: Only available under Windows Vista
Geometry with DirectX 10!
Among the update of Shader Model 4.0, we of course notes the appearance of Geometry Shaders .It is a question here of making possible to the GPU to generate geometry and either only to handle it (itis for what are used the Vertexes Shaders ). Geometry Shaders are used for of the primitives (points, lines or triangles) to generate in fine creation of whole forms, a task formerly reserved for the CPU. If Geometry Shader cannot generate types of primitives different from those on which it works, it can on the other hand reach information of the adjacent forms, which will be useful for for example calculating the edges. Being based on the data provided by the Vertexes Shaders, moreover located immediately in front the new pipeline 3D of DirectX, the uses of Geometry Shaders will increase the geometrical details of the 3D objects for more realism. It is a question of adding polygons with an existing model, thing which one cannot make with the Vertexes Shaders . Despite everything, Geometry Shaders should allow other uses as the system generation of particles or of effects of type fur . NVIDIA also evokes effects of hair simulation. Remain that the power required for the processing of Geometry Shaders is such as the first generations of GPU DirectX 10 should not be able to make an intensive use of it.
Example provided by Microsoft using Geometry Shaders to increase the detail of a figure
The passage to Shader Model 4.0 is accompanied by many other update as Stream Output which makes possible to write in memory the data resulting from a treatment of the level Vertexes Shaders or Geometry Shaders and this before processing the Pixels Shaders . This should be particularly useful if a calculation requires several master keys , the GPU couldd write in memory only pixels. In addition to the unification of the instructions on the hardware level , the limitations was imposed on the software level with the programming of the vertexes or pixels shaders are now unified. As with each new version of DirectX, the maximum number of instructions increases by 512 to 65536 whereas the number of instructions maked reached the infinite one and the number of temporary registers was also re-examined with the rise, since it passes from 32 to 4096. Of course, the manufacturers of graphics processors will not have to integrate such number of registers in their chips, but on the other hand their driver must manage them.
the new Direct pipeline 3D DirectX 10
Other Update of DirectX 10:
Always with an aim of reducing the processor load generated by its API, Microsoft implements with DirectX 10 a new management of the states and generalizes the use of the constants buffers . These two functions should make possible to return on one of the gaps of DirectX 9.0, impossibility to do repetitive operations by batch.To this limitation, the developers were forced to send a succession of commands to done such task . With DirectX 10, the programmers thus have access to five new states of objects which capture the main properties part of the graphic pipeline. The constants which are preset values used as parameters by the programs , benefit from a memory buffer which can accommodate a total of 4096 constants. DirectX10 more precisely comprises 16 memory constants buffer each one able to accommodate 4096 constants. All the constants contained in the buffer can in addition be updated via a simple command, t.
The reduced processor load of DirectX 10 makes possible to return a greater number of objects
Update on the level of textures management are also to announce ,since Microsoft makesmove the number of managed textures and their access mode. we passes thus from 16 to 128 textures and this also applies to the Vertexes Shaders which were satisfied before with a maximum of 4 textures like in new Geometry Shaders. The resolution of textures was also improved and DirectX 10 manages textures with resolution of 8192x8192 pixels. This figure is to be put in connection with the resolution of maximum texture dealt with the graphics chips DirectX 9.0: 4096x4096 pixels. Always in the chapter of textures, Microsoft introduces the tables of textures to simplify their management. Bound to Shader Model 4.0, this function makes possible to use several textures shader and either a small handle as it in case with DirectX 9.0. Under DirectX 9.0 the developers had to create f textures with an only aim of circumventing the important latency times induced by the change of textures.
Illustration of the tables use for texture increased details
Microsoft also benefits from DirectX 10 to just like return the assumption of responsibility of obligatory filtering FP16 the access and the filtering of the shadow map. And as happiness generally does not arrive , the developers of Microsoft propose a new type of access to textures. this new instruction allows the recovery of a quite precise pixel by using standardized co-ordinates. That should make possible besides to use textures to store another thing that data while making possible to the GPU to reach the data with the same manner as a CPU. Function MRT from DirectX 9.0 or Multiple Render Target, is improved with DirectX 10 since the number of targets passes from four to eight. Let us recall on this subject that function MRT makes possible on the only one way to generate several different one .
The other notable evolution brought by the API of Microsoft relates to the calculation precision . Although this one remains fixed at format FP32, Microsoft imposes new constraints to the manufacturers of GPU by preventing that those do not manage the special numbers or the precision of the round-offs by their own way as it is the case with the generations GeForce 6/7 and Radeon X1000. Microsoft thus tries to bring the GPU closer to the standard IEEE 754 which is common for the CPU, even if currently DirectX 10 is not completely in conformity with IEEE 754. To this rather significant change, the total management of the entireties is added 32 bits, in addition to the assumption of responsibility of floating the 32 bits which one already finds in DirectX 9.0c. Side HDR (High Dynamic Arranges), DirectX 10 introduced two new formats HDR close to the FP16 but requiring less memory. The first format R11G11B10 is optimized for the texture memory in floating point with as its name suggests it 11 bits for the components red and green and 10 bits for blue. The second format of HDR is conceived to be used with Render Target and as each color is stored on a number even more restricted of bit, it also takes part to reduce the costs of usually high band-width generated by the HDR.
Two new formats HDR with DirectX 10
With regard to Instancing,, i.e. the possibility of drawing several part of the same object on the only one way (concretely the GPU calculates teh texture of a soldier and post about fifteen in the screen), DirectX 10 makes possible to raise certain limitations. For example, it is not more necessary that the objects in question use same texture thanks to the table of textures which we evoke before. the objects benefitting from Instancing can use different shaders. In practice Instancing version 2.0, as certain developers enjoy to describe it, should make possible to avoid waiting for a clones multiplication in the screen to benefit from each part
Example of game using Instancing to multiply the number of character
Let us finish by evoking the antialiasing in DirectX 10 and the fact that the multisampling type is always optional. While waiting for DirectX 10.1, which should reconsider this point, Microsoft introduces a new method Alpha to Coverage aiming at solving the problems of crenellation on polygons containing the transparent portions: this kind of problem particularly affects scenes of outside . In practice, Alpha Coverage excute the returned polygons containing of the fairly transparent values with an antialiasing of the multisample type. It is here about a functionality rather close to Transparency Antialiasing which ATI and NVIDIA with Radeon X1000 and other GeForce 7 propose.
DirectX 10 and Coverage Alpha
NVIDIA G80: unified architecture!
But before continuing, it is necessary for us to clarify exactly the mean of unified architecture. Until now the operation of the great majority of the graphics processors depends on pipeline. The data arrive of the main frame and are examined stage by stage progressively with their progression in various levels of the pipeline. Since DirectX 8, the first stage consists in treating the vertex Shaders , before formatting the primitives like lines, points, or triangles,Then our primitives, these outlines of geometrical figures, pass by the pixel pipeline to undergo the operations of shading before arriving in the ROP (Raster Operations). At this stage, our embryos of pixels must still undergo a whole heap of operations like test Z or antialiasing before being regarded as true pixels once they will be stored in the video memory.
Classical architecture of GPU
With unified architecture, it is not any more question of partitioning the graphics chip with specific calculating units which would be dedicated to such or such task and would generate a linear advance of pixels. Not, all the calculating units of GeForce 8800 are polyvalent and thus capable to treat any type of data (vertices, pixels, geometry, etc). The advantage number one of this architecture being of allowing the dynamic distribution of tasks between the various calculating units, and this according to the needs for the application. Whereas the classical architectures have a fixed number of units dedicated to the processing of vertexes, just like besides the number of stages of pipeline to processe the pixels, the architecture G80 is programmable and can always according to the application see its rather affected units with the processing of the pixels shaders or rather with that the vertexes shaders or to both at the same time. Currently the majority 3d programs require a more important computing power on the pixels shaders than on the vertexes shaders, which explains the passing to a greater number of units pixels shaders than vertex units in the traditional graphics chips. NVIDIA estimates that the applications generally have different needs and that certain scenes of the same game can be limited by the computing power in vertex (for example). Also the unification of architecture makes possible to allocate the maximum of resources necessary to the operation in calculation on a given moment during the execution of any application 3D.
Why unify architecture… according to NVIDIA
NVIDIA : the pipeline Exit, welcome to the Streaming Processor
In its version GTX GeForce 8800 comprises 128 calculating units to do everything Streaming Processors. Very different from the current units, these Streaming Processors are of type scalars and nonvectorial. With the image instructions SE from INTEL the concept of the vector calculus is to be able to work into simultaneous on a table of values. Typically for a GPU it is about the same component treatment various (coordinated X, Y, Z vertex or values of colors RGBA in pixel). The concept of a scalar unit is to work only on one of its data. Indeed, the vectorial operations are overall majority, however 3D programs also have recourse to scalar calculations and in this precise case, the vectorial units are unsuited. According to analyzes done by NVIDIA, which says to have considered several hundreds of shading programs , those are increasingly numerous to scalar calculations resort in particular when the shaders implemented are long and complex, which would justify the passage to a scalar architecture.
Sight of the architecture G80 GeForce 8800
In architecture GeForce 8, NVIDIA group Streaming Processor per pair of 8 and one arithmetic unit includes a total of 16 of these data processors . Each processor supports the standard IEEE 754 for the precision of floating point and can simultaneously excute two instructions (dual-exit) scalar of type MAD (to multiply and add) and MUL.
If we want to make a parallel with existing architectures, we would be tempted to say that GeForce 8800 is equivalent to a graphics chip having 32 pipelines. It would not be completely exact at the time of the vectorial operations GeForce 8800 is like a chip with 32 pipelines, it does not go from there in the same way when the scalar operations are considered. While summarizing, G80 thus brings much greater flexibility in the execution of shaders. It is all the more true as the frequency of operation for the Streaming Processor is different from that of the chip: when the whole chip work at 575 MHz, Streaming Processor operate at 1,35 GHz (at least on the model 8800 GTX).
Improvements and Early-Z
With GeForce 8, NVIDIA returns also on one of the major problems of its GeForce 7: power as regards branches. Since with the Shader Model 3.0 programmers can add in their shaders conditions (what is called branches) in order to jump a whole part of instructions. All the GPU break up the scene into several packages of pixels and each unit excute the shaders on the pixels in question. The problem of the branches comes to the fact that if all the pixels do not answer at the same conditions it is necessary to excute the program, or all at least part of the program, on several occasions. Blow, the size of the packages of pixels (also called granularity) is critical to obtain good performances. With GeForce 7 the pipelines worked on blocks of 1024 pixels making null and void the concept of branch. In order to allow a real support of Shader Model 3.0, ATI had introduced a granularity of 16 pixels on its X1800 (before totaling 48 pixels on X1900). GeForce 8800 fact a step in the good direction by proposing to him also a lower granularity ranging between 16 (4x4) and 32 (8x8) pixels according to cases\'.
Always with an aim of improving the effectiveness of its chip, NVIDIA introduces Early-Z. It is a question of eliminating as soon as possible the pixels which we knows that will not be visible in the screen. Without being completely new, the approach of NVIDIA with Early-Z consists in excuting the useless pixels upstream in the pipeline (what is called Z-Bottom), history to avoid an useless wasting of resources. Each GPU has supposed techniques on the matter to solve the problem such as for example Hyper-Z at ATI.
Diagram of operation of Early-Z
NVIDIA G80: Beyond Streaming Processors…
Of course the architecture of G80 is not summarized in only Streaming Processors, each block gathering “Streaming Processor†also comprising four units of texture. Completely alone from the data processors , and functioning at 575 MHz on GeForce 8800 GTX, the units of bilinear texture are with the total number of 64 and are actually grouped two by two. This number of impressing texture units makes possible to NVIDIA to assert the possibility of treating 64 pixels per cycle of clock for the filtering of textures or 32 pixels per cycle of clock for the addressing of textures. These figures are to be put in connection with the capacity of GeForce 7900 to treat 24 pixels by clock for simple filtering. We mention it before, the units of textures are alone from the data processors This detail is important since it makes possible to back up GPU cycles at the time of the operations addressing of textures or at the time of filtering operations , for example. With a traditional graphics chip like GeForce 7, a calculation to address texture was intercalated in general with the operations of arithmetic processing of the shaders thus preventing the use of shader processor before textures are not repatriated. Thanks to the operation alone from the units of texture and “Streaming Processsorâ€, GeForce 8 can mask in a rather effective way the latency times induced by the access to textures.
Outline of an operation and arithmetic unit of G80 uncoupled from the units of texture
Let us continue our architecture G80 review by evoking the ROP. Separated from the arithmetic units comprising the famous data processors , partitions ROP (Raster Operation) are six and their role always consists in writing the pixels in memory, in other words the last necessary operation to generate an image. Side characteristics, NVIDIA indicates that six units ROP of G80 can treat 4 pixels each one for a total of 24 pixels per cycle of clock during the processing of complete pixels (colors and Z). If only processing Z is applied, the ROP of GeForce 8800 can reflect 192 pixels per cycle of clock with a sample pixel. Let us recall that vs the 24 ROP of GeForce 8, GeForce 7 had 16 units.
In addition to Early-Z previously evoked, NVIDIA also made improvements to traditional Z-Culling which remains of topicality, since none of the two methods can determine all the situations on the level of an individual pixel. Nvidia asserts the speed of processing four times higher vs GeForce 7900 GTX to test the visibility of the pixels. The goal being always to check if a pixel is not hidden by another in order to avoiding wasting unnecessarily resources of GPU for the display of a pixel which will be finally invisible for our eyes. Subsystem ROP of G80 naturally manages the functions of antialiasing in multi-sampling (MSAA) or super-sampling (SSAA) without forgetting the antialiasing transparency. For the HDR, the mixtures of the render targets in FP16 and FP32 are logically taken charges some by the ROP and as the specifications DirectX 10 impose it, 8 targets of returned (MRT or Multiple Render Targets) can be used.
Lastly, the concept of controller report also moves with GeForce 8, since the chip, in its version GTX, contain six partitions memory in correlation with six partitions ROP. Each partition lays out of an interface 64 bits making GeForce 8800 GTX a chip whose controller report is finally interfaced on 384 bits. , that makes possible to nvidia to equip the top-end-range card with 768 Mb of memory GDDR3. NVIDIA did not jump step towards with the GDDR4 .
The Lumenex engine: anisotropic filtering, antialiasing and HDR with the menu!
Behind name Lumenex marketing, name which succeeds for the small history CineFX introduced with disastrous GeForce FX, NVIDIA proposes significant improvements as regards of the image quality . One of the most outstanding update relates to the quality of textures filtering . We evoked above the power of the texture units in G80 vs its predecessors, it makes possible to avoid the recourse to optimizations of filtering often too aggressive. we remembers that architecture GeForce 7 was regularly pointed finger for the poor quality of its filtering. at least with GeForce 8 since NVIDIA proposes finally an anisotropic filtering worthy of this name as we can see it on the screen shot below! Note that by default, the driver now use the mode of high quality; !
Anisotropic quality filtering 8x, from left to right: GeForce 7900, Radeon X1950 then GeForce 8800
But this is not the only outstanding update of Lumenex that NVIDIA presents besides the new standard as regards to the quality of image (...) the firm proposes improvements on the level of antialiasing. Thus technology CSAA or Coverage Sampling Anti-Aliasing makes its appearance. The objectives is always the same one to reduce to the maximum the effects of staircase which appear on the objects composing a scene 3D while trying not to hurt the performances too much,! Traditionally, antialiasing is needed a particularly heavy technique which weighs severely on the performances of the graphics chip. Using multiple samples under pixels to calculate the color of our objects, antialiasing requires always more samples to provide an optimal quality. But with more samples to be stored and calculated in the memory, an increase proportional in the resources is necessary to maintain a decent performance level .
Also NVIDIA introduces it the CSAA which is based on a new algorithm in an intelligent way, information of cover in order to avoid the clogging of the bus report by the multiplication of samples. mesuring the details on the exact operation of its technology CSAA, NVIDIA indicates that it makes possible to offer the quality of an antialiasing 16x with performances which would not be cut down more than when traditional antialiasing 4x is activated. Concretely, the CSAA acts as an antialiasing type multi-sampling (MSAA) whose mask of cover is programmable: in light, only certain zones of the image benefit from the processing AA. In the long term with DirectX the 10.1 programmer will be able to define the zones of the image requiring more antialiasing. Today and fault of being able to let the developers doing it, it is the driver who determines these zones, which largely reduces the interest of this function. In practice, the contribution of the CSAA does not seem obvious in the graphic quality if we believes thsoe screen shot under Half-Life 2: Lost Coast in 1600x1200:
Tests of antialiasing with GeForce 8800, from left to right: no antialiasing, antialiasing standard 4x, antialiasing CSAA 16x
Difficult to propose a real quality difference between the made traditional in type antialiasing 4x and the CSAA 16x on the same game (Half-Life 2 Lost Coast). Side control, the implementation of the CSAA requires a light parameter . It is enough to select the option “ improve the parameter of application†or further going and choosing one of the four new antialiasing available: 8x, 8xQ, 16x and 16xQ. The good news being that according to NVIDIA technology is compatible with all the game t. We express however serious doubts with our made screen shot :-).
Activation of the CSAA on the level of the pilots of GeForce 8800
But Lumenex does not stop there, since NVIDIA proposes for the first time the use of antialiasing with the effects HDR! Let us remember that ATI proposed an exclusiveness with its Radeon X1000 the capability to use borth HDR and antialiasing. NVIDIA thus goes back on level on this precise point what should satisfy most users. And since we speak about HDR it should be known that NVIDIA introduced with the Lumenex engine an assumption of responsibility of one HDR improved. Let us recall that the HDR, or High Dynamic Range, makes possible to display scenes with a very strong variation of clearness to reproduce with more close the natural effects the back-light or reflection of the light. According to the recommendations of Microsoft for DirectX 10, NVIDIA offers one HDR in conformity with the OpenEXR specifications with a precision in floating point 32 bits per component one HDR of type 128 bits. Compared so that with GeForce 7, NVIDIA offers here twice more precision, the graphics chips of the G7x generation being limited to a precision in floating point of 16 bits per component.
Let us finish finally by the display engine which as that of Radeon X1000 is of type 10 bits. Whereas traditionally a graphics chip integrates an engine of display 8 bits for a total number of displayable colors reaching 16,7 million, GeForce 8 benefits from an engine 10 bits which can display nearly a billion different colors. NVIDIA runs up however against the same problem as ATI with knowing the lack of contents 10 bits and the scarcity of the screens 10 bits: the majority of the flat-faced screens are indeed of type 8 bits.
NVIDIA cuda– Unified Device Structures
With its GeForce 8800, NVIDIA takes a step in direction with developers wishing to use the graphics processor like a kind of coprocessor which can relieve the main frame or CPU of certain calculations.The goal is to transform the graphics chip into a general calculating unit and the architecture massively parallel of G80 make benefit from it. here is needed to only replace the work of G80, named by pixels to threads, in other words processes. But before going further, let us recall that ATI was the first to take a step in this direction with its support for project GPGPU (General Purpose Graphics Processor Unit) during launching of its Radeon X1800 then with the arrival of version adapted to its chips Radeon X1900 with Folding@Home . At ATI it is called Stream Computing, but at NVIDIA we talk about Thread Computing.
Why Thread Computing? Quite simply bus contrary to Stream Computing of ATI, the solution of NVIDIA would allow various processes to be treated and communicate between them. Other favors proposed by CUDA: the use of programming language cannot be standard any more. Consequently, it is possible to program G80 as one program like any processor x86. . Of course, CUDA is based on an additional instruction set, but NVIDIA shown particularly discrete about it. it does not wish to reveal in public the instruction set CUDA, reserving it for some tests.
The architecture of GeForce 8800 when CUDA is implemented
NVIDIA announces that its technology CUDA can benefit from the passage in SLI whereas it is possible simultaneously to use the same graphics chip for a processing CUDA and one for 3D. For the moment CUDA remains altogether rather theoretical , no concrete application still benfit from it, we will return more in the details later.
NVIDIA PureVideo
Introduced with GeForce 6200 several months ago, PureVideo technology had made smile to its beginnings with many application . However, it should be well be recognized that with the new driver and generations of graphics chips, this one was largely improved. Today, the number one of use of PureVideo is its capacity to relieve the main frame at the time when decoding video file to the H.264 formats, VC-1, WMV, WMV HD and MPEG 2 HD.
With this intention, GeForce 8800 integrates a block of transistors exclusively dedicated to the processing of the video. However, the amateurs will be probably disappointed to learn that NVIDIA did not bring any change to PureVideo logic. The same capacities are thus found as with GeForce 7 with precedes them two new functions suggested on the driver level : the PureVideo filters with reduction of noise and improvement area are now able to function on high definition video. The possibility to use the power of chip to contribute with decoding .
NVIDIA G80: A standard ....chip!
Technically, GeForce 8800 can be a standard graphic chips, but its the most impressive ever that i have seen . Its size is simply enormous, since it is nearly 681 million transistors which animate it! It is more than 2 times the number of transistors in GeForce 7900 GTX (278 million) and in Core 2 Duo (291 million). Probably because of the particularly high number of transistors, NVIDIA did not want to take the risk of launching the production of this big chip with a new 0.08m process. G80 thus remains in 90 Nm by TSMC just like the GeForce 7 serie. The packaging of the chip was updated since the die is covered with a very imposing metal from the same quality as that which equips the Athlon64 processors.
NVIDIA GeForce 8800: the chip here in version GTS
GeForce 8800 presente for the first time what NVIDIA calls the NV I/O 1. It is about an additional chip on which NVIDIA gives few details and which integrates a good part of the logic display 2D into knowing the RAMDAC, the TMDS and other transcoders in load of the final display. It will be noted that the Dual-Link DVI is always the part like doubles it RAMDAC 400 MHz. To note that HDCP are stored via external CryptoROM and not directly in the NV I/O.
Chip NVIO accompanying GeForce 8800
Electric consumption in question, and in spite of fears which one could have, NVIDIA finally remained almost measured. Thus, according to our recordings power consumption , GeForce 8800 GTS consumes slightly less than one GeForce 7950 GX2 whereas model GTX is far from . NVIDIA recommends the power of 450 Watts with a line 12 volts of 30A for GeForce 8800 GTX. More modest, GeForce 8800 GTS will be satisfied with a power of 400 Watts with a line 12 volts and 26 amps. Side thermal pwoer,nvidia indicates a maximum TDP of 147 Watts for GeForce 8800 GTS against 177 Watts for GeForce 8800 GTX. Here on the other hand, it is almost a doubling of the TDP, which is never was a good sign, since GeForce 7900 GTX displayed a TDP of 90 Watts…
| Electric consumption [total] (General) | |
| GeForce 7900 GTX | 256 Watts |
| GeForce 7950 GX2 | 277 Watts |
| GeForce 8800 GTS | 273 Watts |
| GeForce 8800 GTX | 308 Watts |
| Radeon X1950 XTX | 280 Watts |
GeForce 8800 GTS and GTX: specifications
The arrival of G80 is the occasion for NVIDIA to introduce the new GTS version …And contrary to the generation of preceding chips where GeForce 7900 gt shared with model GTX same architecture, there are serious differences between the two alternatives of our new model GeForce 8800. Thus GeForce 8800 GTS counts 96 Streaming Processor, 20 units ROP and lays out in an interface memory 320 bits. Its frequencies are 500 MHz for the chip, 1,2 GHzfor the shaders processors and 800 MHz for the memory . On its side, GeForce 8800 GTX comprises 128 Streaming Processor, 24 units ROP and benefits from an interface memory 384 bits. Its frequencies are 575 MHz for the chip, 1,35 GHz for Streaming Processor and 900 MHz for the memory. When GeForce 8800 GTS contain 640 Mb of memory, model GTX has 768 Mb. Lastly, side band-width theoretical memory, GeForce 8800 GTS asserts 64 Gig/S against 86,4 Gig/S for his/her big brother model GTX.
With such specification you will have to understood that the GeForce 8800 GTX has an installed memory 33% higher than the model GTS. It will be necessary to see in the pages which follow how that is translated in practice.
| GeForce 8800 GTS | GeForce 8800 GTX | |
| Interface | NCV-express train 16x | NCV-express train 16x |
| Engraving | 0,09µ | 0,09µ |
| Transistors | 681 Million | 681 Million |
| RAMDAC | 2 X.400 MHz | 2 X.400 MHz |
| T&L | DirectX 10 | DirectX 10 |
| Stream Processors | 96 | 128 |
| Units ROP | 24 | 20 |
| Embarked memory | 640 Mo | 768 Mo |
| Interface memory | 320 Bits | 384 Bits |
| Band-width | 64 Go/S | 86 Go/S |
| Frequency GPU | 500 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Frequency Stream Processors | 1200 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Frequency memory | 800 MHz | 900 MHz |
GeForce cards 8800 GTS MSI, GeForce 8800 GTX Sparkle
MSI and Sparkle are among the first manufacturers to have been able to forward to us the cards based on GeForce 8800. It is thus quite naturally that we will use their cards for this test. To note that like very often with rising generation top-end-range, all manufacturers are placed with the same sign since Asus has the exclusiveness in the manufacture of cards containing G80. ! Also note that the PCB employed is different between GeForce 8800 GTS and GeForce 8800 GTX. Proposed exclusively with the format PCI-Express 16x, the cards GeForce 8 will not be born with format AGP, the chip being incompatible with bridge HSI developped by NVIDIA a few years ago.
MSI signs with its GeForce 8800 GTS a card not very common with a black pcb! Measuring in the 23 centimetres, the card adopts a new kind of cooling system which proves to be rather monstrous. The cooler is composed of thick copper base which rests on the graphics chip and then connect a large metal radiator via a heat-pipe. The whole is covred by a plastic at the end. It is about the model CoolerMaster TM63. Heat is thus ejected outside the card via the openings place on the higher part of the video card. with such cooling we could legitimately fear that the card will be particularly noisy, which is fortunately not the case, the noise of the cooler being very often less than that of GeForce 7950 GX2.
MSI GeForce 8800 GTS
With only one power connector pci-Express , the card has a connector SLI and uses the chip NV I/O for the management of video out. On this subject, we finds of course two Dual-Link ports DVI as well as a video out . Provided with 640 Mb of video memory, the card uses ten Samsung chips in certified GDDR3 with 1,2 NS and its frequencies respect those recommended by NVIDIA, 500 MHz for the chip and 800 MHz for the memory.
Side of sparkle, GeForce 8800 GTX proves to be much larger than his/her small sister GeForce 8800 GTS. If the PCB remains black, it is 27 centimetres long! As comparison, GeForce 7950 GX2 measure 23 centimetres. Result, the card will have to be placed in the big cases . Another notable difference with GeForce 8800 GTS, model GTX contain two power connectors PCI-Express ! . they is two connectors SLI which are present on the card. The cooling system is identical in its design to that of GeForce 8800 GTS although slightly larger. The fan is always signed CoolerMaster a model TM61.
Sparkle GeForce 8800 GTX
so our 8800gtx card come with 768 Mb of video memory, the card uses 12 chips memories GDDR3 Samsung and certified to 1,2 NS. The chip NV I/O is of course a part, and the frequencies of the card are in conformity with those recomended by NVIDIA the 575 MHz for the graphics chip and 900 MHz for the memory. GeForce 8800 GTX of Sparkle offers two Dual-Link connectors DVI . Sparkle having forwarded to us a commercial version of its card we are able to quickly evoke the contents of the box, which is rather summary.we finds a short handbook, Driver CD , only one adapter DVI/VGA, a cable S-Video, a cable with out component, and two adapateurs electric Molex towards PCI-Express . The manufacturer does not forget the software aspect and delivers the game Call of Duty 2 in complete version like PowerDVD 6.
To evaluate the performances of the new GeForce 8800 GTS and GeForce 8800 GTX we had recourse to the following configuration:
We will compare here GeForce 8800 GTS MSI and GeForce 8800 GTX from Sparkle with GeForce 7900 GTX, GeForce 7950 GX2 but also with SLIGeForce 7900 GTX. For the graphics card containing GeForce 7 we used the driver ForceWare 96.94 whereas we had recourse to ForceWare 96.97 for the cards GeForce 8. We will of course not fail to oppose GeForce 7/8 to their competitors ATI and for this reason we used the following configuration:
we starts like before with 3DMark 06 and from the start, GeForce 8800 GTX show pretty strong result similar to our CrossFire Radeon X1950 XTX in 2560x1600! Vs SLI GeForce 7900 GTX, the last-born from NVIDIA are faster 31%! And if we compares the score of GeForce 8800 GTX with that of GeForce 7900 GTX alone, the variation reaches 137% in 2560x1600! As much to say that Radeon X1950 XTX of ATI is unable to face, since even GeForce 8800 GTS is shown faster. The card of MSI is here 31% superior than the Radeon X1950 XTX in 1920x1200.
GeForce 8800 GTX of Sparkle is found invariably at the head, and this same in 2560x1600 where it does better than the systems SLI and CrossFire. However the advantage of GeForce 8800 GTX on the configurations multi-GPU is much more restricted here. Vs GeForce 7950 GX2, the GeForce 8800 GTS is equal, model GTX is 35% faster in 2560x1600. And compared with GeForce 7900 GTX and Radeon X1950 XTX, these two cards being with equality in 2560x1600, GeForce 8800 GTX displays higher performances with about 93%.
For the most known agent of the NSA, our friend Sam Fisher, GeForce 8800 is a blessing. At least in 1600x1200 where the card from Sparkle is shown to be incredibly fast. However we excuted this test several time and the result is the same in this resolution , result pretty strange thus. In higher resolutions, the card has much lower performance and its even give place to the SLI of GeForce 7900 GTX which lead then. In 1920x1200, GeForce 8800 GTS is as fast as Radeon X1950 XTX whereas it precedes GeForce 7900 GTX by 15%. But nothing vs GeForce 8800 GTX which shows 62% faster than the old top-end-range GeForce 7, GeForce 7900 GTX. Here the variation of performances between GeForce 8800 GTS and GeForce 8800 GTX reaches 42%.
- INTEL Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93 GHz,
- Motherboard eVGA nForce 680i SLI,
- 2x1 Gig Corsair Twin2X 6400C3,
- Hard disk Western DIGITAL Raptor 150 - Serial-ATA 150
We will compare here GeForce 8800 GTS MSI and GeForce 8800 GTX from Sparkle with GeForce 7900 GTX, GeForce 7950 GX2 but also with SLIGeForce 7900 GTX. For the graphics card containing GeForce 7 we used the driver ForceWare 96.94 whereas we had recourse to ForceWare 96.97 for the cards GeForce 8. We will of course not fail to oppose GeForce 7/8 to their competitors ATI and for this reason we used the following configuration:
- INTEL Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93 GHz,
- MotherboardAsus P5W-DH Deluxe (BIOS 1601),
- 2x1 GIG Corsair Twin2X 6400C3,
- Hard disk Western DIGITAL Raptor 150 - Serial-ATA 150
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts 3DMark 06
we starts like before with 3DMark 06 and from the start, GeForce 8800 GTX show pretty strong result similar to our CrossFire Radeon X1950 XTX in 2560x1600! Vs SLI GeForce 7900 GTX, the last-born from NVIDIA are faster 31%! And if we compares the score of GeForce 8800 GTX with that of GeForce 7900 GTX alone, the variation reaches 137% in 2560x1600! As much to say that Radeon X1950 XTX of ATI is unable to face, since even GeForce 8800 GTS is shown faster. The card of MSI is here 31% superior than the Radeon X1950 XTX in 1920x1200.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Half-Life 2 - Lost Coast - HDR
GeForce 8800 GTX of Sparkle is found invariably at the head, and this same in 2560x1600 where it does better than the systems SLI and CrossFire. However the advantage of GeForce 8800 GTX on the configurations multi-GPU is much more restricted here. Vs GeForce 7950 GX2, the GeForce 8800 GTS is equal, model GTX is 35% faster in 2560x1600. And compared with GeForce 7900 GTX and Radeon X1950 XTX, these two cards being with equality in 2560x1600, GeForce 8800 GTX displays higher performances with about 93%.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Splinter Concealment Theory Chaos - 1.05
For the most known agent of the NSA, our friend Sam Fisher, GeForce 8800 is a blessing. At least in 1600x1200 where the card from Sparkle is shown to be incredibly fast. However we excuted this test several time and the result is the same in this resolution , result pretty strange thus. In higher resolutions, the card has much lower performance and its even give place to the SLI of GeForce 7900 GTX which lead then. In 1920x1200, GeForce 8800 GTS is as fast as Radeon X1950 XTX whereas it precedes GeForce 7900 GTX by 15%. But nothing vs GeForce 8800 GTX which shows 62% faster than the old top-end-range GeForce 7, GeForce 7900 GTX. Here the variation of performances between GeForce 8800 GTS and GeForce 8800 GTX reaches 42%.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Quake 4 - v1.2
One connects with Quake 4 which remains based on the graphic engine of Doom 3. Here GeForce 8800 GTX is at the head and exceeds our CrossFire configuration slightly containing Radeon X1950 XTX as well as the SLI GeForce 7900 GTX. Compared with only one Radeon X1950 XTX, GeForce 8800 GTX are faster by 15% in 1920x1200 and this variation grows to reach 31% in 2560x1600. GeForce 7900 GTX takes some here for its grade, since it is largely outdistanced: GeForce 8800 GTS from MSI is already 35% faster whereas GeForce 8800 GTX from show 70% higher framerate , always in 2560x1600!
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Call Of Duty 2 - v1.3
Whereas the version 1.3 of Call Of Duty gives lead to the G80 a. GeForce 8800 GTX from Sparkle dominates the test whereas model GTS from MSI is very slightly classified third in withdrawal with the SLI of GeForce 7900 GTX. In 1600x1200 the difference between the two GeForce 8 is 24% and climbs to 34% in 2560x1600. In 1920x1200, resolution of the 24 inches wide screens , GeForce 8800 GTX is 57% more powerful than GeForce 7900 GTX.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts F.E.A.R. Extraction Not
Based on the graphic engine of F.E.A.R., this last game is particularly favorable for GeForce 8800 GTX , this last makes equal performance with the SLI GeForce 7900 GTX in 1600x1200 and 1920x1200, takes again the advantage in 2560x1600. Vs the CrossFire of Radeon X1950 XTX, the small last of NVIDIA is faster 46%! But let us specify that we have to re-elect executable F.E.A.R. in Extraction the CrossFire accelerations are not operational. By default driver CATALYST 6.10 do not propose any acceleration for this extension. More modest GeForce 8800 GTS remains 60% faster than GeForce 7900 GTX and thus that Radeon X1950 XTX which makes here equal performance with the last one representing of GeForce 7.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Company Of Heroes - v1.2
Very recent, Company Of Heroes is a game of type RTS in other words a real strategy game time .Result, GeForce 8800 GTX get some honors being nearly 138% more faster than Radeon X1950 XTX in 1920x1200! But this enormous figure is also valid vs GeForce 7900 GTX the two cards being with equality. GeForce 8800 GTS from MSI displays good performances, and the card is classified third behind the SLIGeForce 7900 GTX. This test also clarifies the uselessness of CrossFire and we will underline the very unpleasant bug which affects GeForce 7950 GX2 with an absolutely unbearable flickering of texture (NVIDIA indicates that this bug will be corrected by the patch 1.3 of the game).
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Tomb Raider Legends - v1.2
Lara Croft does not contradict our preceding tests and place our two GeForce 8 at the head . In 1600x1200, GeForce 8800 GTX displays higher performances 37%. Compared with GeForce 7900 GTX, the card from Sparkle is practically three times faster in 2560x1600. And vs Radeon X1950 XTX from ATI the variation reaches the 130% in 2560x1600! Enormous, quite simply.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Far Cry v1.4 - HDR 7
Not frankly new, Far Cry followed enough close the graphic evolutions by supporting in turn the geometrical instantiation, Shader Model 3.0 or HDR.More probleme here you will note the absence of result CrossFire Radeon X1950 XTX in 2560x1600: alas the game did not start out in this resolution. Far Cry is very favorable to GeForce 8800 GTX whichh remains fastest in all the resolutions even if the SLI GeForce 7900 GTX is not very far. In 1600x1200, GeForce 8800 GTX is 84% faster than Radeon X1950 XTX. This variation is higher vs only one GeForce 7900 GTX whereas GeForce 8800 GTX asserts performances 35% higher than model GTS. This last is slightly better than GeForce 7950 GX2 in all resolutions.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Need For Speed Most Wanted - v1.3
The balance always also clearly get in favor of GeForce 8800 GTX but the surprise comes from CrossFire Radeon X1950 XTX which is shown here a quite powerful. vs a single Radeon X1950 XTX, the GeForce 8800 GTX is 86% faster! GeForce 8800 GTS does a little better than the model 7950 GX2 with better performances 20% in 2560x1600.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts F.E.A.R. Extraction Not - FSAA 4x - Anisotropic Filtering 16x
By activating the functions of filtering under F.E.A.R., CrossFire takes again his rights and precedes GeForce 8800 GTX. This last remains however the fastest chip with performances 36% higher than Radeon X1950 XTX in 1920x1200 but this advantage falls down to 14% in 2560x1600. we will note that the weak performances of GeForce 8800 GTS since here model GTX is shown all the same up to 94% faster in 2560x1600! Curious, can be a diver problem ?
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Quake 4 - v1.2 - FSAA 4x
Return under Quake 4 by activating this time antialiasing 4x. At the head: GeForce 8800 followed GTX, in 2560x1600, Radeon X1950 XTX. GeForce 8800 GTX from Sparkle shows 15% faster result than the top-end-range from ATI, and vs model GTS from MSI the advantage climbs to 55% in 2560x1600. By comparing GeForce 8800 GTX with GeForce 7900 GTX we note that the small new one is 54% faster in 1920x1200, whereas in 2560x1600 the advantage for GeForce 8 reached 110%!
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Call Of Duty 2 - v1.3 - FSAA 4x - Filtering Anisotropic
always in call of dutty , but this time by activating the functions of filtering directly in the game. Without much surprise, GeForce 8800 GTX remains largely at the head, in front of the SLI GeForce 7900 GTX. And the difference between the two solutions is far from being large! In 1920x1200, GeForce 8800 GTX is 26% faster and this figure climbs to 35% in 2560x1600. GeForce 8800 GTS is shown here particularly convincing while being as fast as the SLI GeForce 7900 GTX. Vs Radeon X1950 XTX, GeForce 8800 GTS from MSI is 13% faster in 1600x1200 whereas the advantage of the last chip from NVIDIA does not cease growing more the resolution increases. Thus in 2560x1600, GeForce 8800 GTS is 28% faster than the last ATI chip.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Half-Life 2 - Lost Coast - FSAA 4x - AF 8x
With Half-Life 2, the activation of the functions of filtering always makes the balance in favor of GeForce 8800 GTX. This one dominates its candidates in 2560x1600 where it makes equal performance with CrossFireRadeon X1950 XTX. In 1600x1200, GeForce 8800 GTX is 33% more powerful than GeForce 7950 GX2 and 77% faster than GeForce 7900 GTX. Radeon X1950 XTX being with equality with GeForce 7900 GTX, the variation with GeForce 8800 GTX is thus identical.
nvidia 8800 gtx - 8800 gts Test CSAA - Half-Life 2 Lost Coast - GeForce 8800 GS
We finish our series of tests by an outline of the performances raised with GeForce 8800 GS by activating function CSAA under Half-Life 2 Lost Coast. We compare the performances raised with those obtained in antialiasing 4x and without antialiasing. Note that in all the cases anisotropic filtering 8x is active. As u can see the activation of the CSAA 16x is not completely without effect on the performances since those are approximately 30% lower than those obtained with the antialiasing 4x activated in the game.
Conclusion
Arrived at the end of this article, it is necessary for us to draw up a first assessment of G80, the new top-end-range graphics chip of NVIDIA. Surprising, here is the first word which comes to mind by considering GeForce 8800. Force is indeed to note that the chip is very different from what we expected, here being confined NVIDIA of a very new unified architecture of the type where each calculating unit is capable to treat standard data. success since the performances are present! with the applications DirectX 9.0c the performances are sometimes multiplied by two vs GeForce 7900 GTX or with the current offer from ATI! On the architectural level, the chip thus seems succeeded overall even if some will regret the number finally relatively low of units ROP.
As happiness never arrives , NVIDIA corrects the quality problems of which overpowered GeForce 7. With GeForce 8, the users benefit finally from a quality of anisotropic filtering worthy of this name . Better, it is even possible to benefit from antialiasing with effects of HDR! Two changes which are more than welcome and which are the fact of the principal defects of GeForce 7. NVIDIA benefits from it more to introduce a new type of antialiasing, the CSAA, but we here we was not able to see any real visual difference.
GeForce 8800 is displayed more like the first graphics chip DirectX 10. Available only under Windows Vista, DirectX 10 should be the base of a number of new game in the months which come. Crysis, the successor of Far Cry, should thus benefit from the additional functionalities offered by DirectX 10. However, difficult to come to a conclusion today about the behavior of GeForce 8800 with the DirectX 10 game. It is the great unknown factor because the effectiveness of the architecture of G80 will depend mainly on the choices which the developers will make.
Some captures of the technological demonstrations of G80
With 681 million transistors the chip requires a system a rather massive cooling and a power supply which holds strong load. If for a top-end-range card these two parameters are less important than for a solution with a medium range, the more so as cooling remains fortunately quiet, the size of the card is simply impressive! Thus, GeForce 8800 GTX is 27 centimetres long and it is clear that such card will enter in all cases… And even if it enters, it will block all ports Serial-ATA or the hard disk. Side price this oen also hurt, because NVIDIA announces an advised public price of 649 euros including all taxes! And whereas the availability of GeForce 8800 GTX was announced already particularly tended, NVIDIA must face a problem of last minute with a defective resistance on the first samples of GeForce 8800 GTX having involved a systematic recall of the defective units. ! More reasonable e plan oand price come with version GTS which is less powerful, up to 30% of performances vs version GTX.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)