XFX 9800 GTX Black Edition 512mb

Test Setup

Test Setup
To test all of our GPU's, we use a system that bottlenecks them as little as possible. Here's the trusty test rig:
Please note that we have set the overclock on the Q6600 to be able to keep our test setup fairly consistent as the speeds of CPU's increase in the near future. 
Benchmarks Used
Again, Overclock3D has revised its benchmark setup to really test the new DX10 GPU's, while still including some old favourites in there:
games tested
Synthetic Benchmarks
Please note all Synthetic benchmarks were run at stock settings; just as the free ones would be, as well as 1920 x 1200, with 4 x AA added. All benchmarks are repeated three times for consistency.
FutureMark 3DMark03
FutureMark 3DMark05
FutureMark 3DMark06
Gaming Benchmarks
All gaming benchmarks are run through at a demanding stage of the game with no savepoints to affect FPS. These are manual run-through's approximating 3 minutes and all gaming benchmarks are run three times through the same points for consistency. We hope that this gives an accurate and interesting depiction of "real-life" gaming situations. Note the resolutions and AA each game was run at.
All gaming tests were performed in Windows Vista Ultimate, under DX10 if available.
Call of Duty 4 - 1920 x 1200, 4 x AA set in-game
Oblivion - 1920 x 1200, 4 x AA set in drivers and HDR set on in-game. Settings on "Ultra"
F.E.A.R. - 1920 x 1200, 4 x AA set in game, soft shadows enabled
Bioshock - 1920 x 1200, all settings to maximum in-game
Unreal Tournament 3 - all settings set to maximum in-game
Company of Heroes - DirectX10 patch. 1920 x 1200 with in game settings set to maximum.
Crysis - 1680 x 1050, all in-game settings set to "High"
Again, all game run-through's are repeated three times for consistency and accuracy.
We hope that this represents a good band of games and benchmarks for people wanting a performance overview of gaming at this current time.
Cards tested
Here are the cards tested in the benchmarking:
Note that the 9800 GTX Black Edition was running the latest 174.74 Nvidia drivers.
Overclocking of all of the Nvidia cards tested was performed in the Nvidia drivers using the Ntune add-on.
The 9800 GX2 was tested with the 174.53 Vista drivers.
«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next»

Most Recent Comments

12-05-2008, 13:27:03

We check out something a little special from XFX



12-05-2008, 14:46:19

good review

and nice card

summet that the people with the money, and wanting performance must have then...Quote

12-05-2008, 14:58:37

And the people wanting to have overclocked, hand picked GPU's backed up by an excellent warranty and support packageQuote

12-05-2008, 15:23:13

Originally Posted by name='Kempez'
And the people wanting to have overclocked, hand picked GPU's backed up by an excellent warranty and support package
Yeah I`d go along with that tbh.

It`s a great review, and I have to be honest with ya`ll, my experiences of oc`ing the 8800GT alpha weren`t the best - and I don`t really put it down totally to the hardware, more the tools required to do it also.

I`d probably be more inclined, in the current climate (things can change of course) to get something above the reference clock and see what minimal % I can go higher than that.

Looking at the price, I don`t think it`s too bad. I can remember my card be around £225 on release.

Good stuff. Good single card imo.Quote

13-05-2008, 02:33:47

Nice in depth review Kempez. Strange results in FEAR Max fps lol.

Cue Hudson with his Alien motion tracker : 'It's reading right man look'...

Hicks : 'Well you're not reading it right!'


13-05-2008, 06:14:36

The COD4 results seem strange to me i get basicly the same if not better results on my 320mb 8800 GTS!Quote

13-05-2008, 06:21:23

Alot can depend on the config settings, not just the res and AA/AF which affects fps..Quote

13-05-2008, 07:58:45

Agreed, but all cards were tested using the exact same hardware and tested three times so it's hard to argue with what I got. I did also re-test several games again to ensure accuracy

Sometimes you just get one or two results that seem a little odd, but I think generally the results show how fast the card is Quote

13-05-2008, 08:06:11

What weirds me out is when u goto the nVidia driver download thing and there`s a new one - and top of the list of fixes will be something like "9800 cards will now work better with Crysis" - wtf ?!?!Quote

13-05-2008, 08:29:38

It's not uncommon for developers and manufacturers to work together to improve game performance, that's what Nvidia pay all their coders for Quote

14-05-2008, 04:31:51

Originally Posted by name='webbo'
Alot can depend on the config settings, not just the res and AA/AF which affects fps..
Very true but my guess was that they used stock menu options and stuck on 4xAA via COD menu.

My point still stands that the card does not seem to perform very well from what i can see when compared to the lowest 88xx series card.Quote

14-05-2008, 04:45:21

I think you'll find that the cards held back a little in CoD 4 by the fact that the engine's not exactly a toughie. Gameplay was smooth and silky throughout, but then it will be on all 88XX and 98XX seriesQuote

14-05-2008, 04:49:34

Originally Posted by name='Kempez'
I think you'll find that the cards held back a little in CoD 4 by the fact that the engine's not exactly a toughie. Gameplay was smooth and silky throughout, but then it will be on all 88XX and 98XX series
Indeed the engine is a bit strange i just would have expected to see some form of improvement.

Maybe this is as im hunting for the ability to get 125fps constant at 1920x1200 with AA which atm just aint possible.Quote

14-05-2008, 05:21:55

Well you see an improvement in the graph from my own benchmarks over the 8800's, just not much

The engine is good which is why so many cards can cope, but no your not going to get that level of FPS, although I would possibly attribute that to CPU/Memory as wellQuote

14-05-2008, 05:25:48

Originally Posted by name='Kempez'
I would possibly attribute that to CPU/Memory as well
I'd agree if the engine took advantage of Quad's! But my port Q6600@3.3ghz cant even start to sweat with this and yet cant handle the FPS

The COD/Quake III Engine has a bug in it that lets you jump further depending on FPS you see and 125fps is the sweet spot.

I'll just keep running at 800x600@4AA on my 24" TFT :S dont actually look that bad!Quote

14-05-2008, 06:02:44

Strange - in the 780a chipset review I did cod4 managed to run on the onboard 8400gs/8500 chip @ 1024x768 with 40fps+ albeit without AA. Testiment to Kempez's view that the engine allows most GPU's to run it ok.I'm surprised you're finding it hard to get a decent fps with the GTS.

76fps and 125fps are as you say the 'sweet spots' so with your screen you would perhaps be better upping the res and lowering the AA and setting the max fps to 76. I have found that on my 3007WFP-HC the AA is barely noticeble at 2560x1600 and certainly not noticble enough that it would warrant me dropping the res.Quote

14-05-2008, 06:07:25

I have a 8800GTS and was running at 125fps more of less constant at 1920x1200 without AA and with some basic tweaks to remove un-needed rubble.

When playing at a high level the slightest FPS drop does become annoying so although i limit at 125FPS really im after 250FPS constant to make sure theres not drops at all.

My system can more than handly it, just inital was stating that im shocked at the lack of improvment from my low end 8800 to this 9800Quote

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.