Vvikoo 8800GT Max 1GB Review
Posted by EL1TE on 27 January 2008 - 11:04 · 13 comments & 14370 views
While it's always exciting to receive review samples from the big boys in the hardware world, it's also nice to take a look at something a little different and this almost always comes from the little guys. Now, Vvikoo are manufacturers of some top end nVidia and ATI based GPU solutions, so using the word "little" is probably a little harsh, but they are definitely the new kid on the block and have a lot to prove. What I have with me today is an 8800GT, but not just any GT... oh no. This one has 1gb of DDR3, a huge aftermarket Zalman cooler, and it's purple.

System Configuration Used:
    Test Setup
  • Power Supply: Spire Rocketeer 600w
  • Motherboard: Gigabyte P35T-DQ6 rev. 1.0
  • Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 @ 3.2 GHZ
  • Hard Drive: Maxtor DiamondMax 20 80GB SATA
  • Video: Vvikoo 8800GT Max 1GB, PNY 8800GTS 320MB, MSI 8800GT 512MB
  • Memory: Crucial DDR3 12800 2GB @ 1600 MHZ

    Software Configuration
  • Operating System: Windows XP Pro x86
  • Video Driver: NVIDIA ForceWare Version 169.21
Software Used:
  • 3DMark2006
  • Crysis
  • Lost Planet
  • Unreal Tournament 3
Vvikoo 8800GT Max 1GB Specifications:
  • Core Clock: 600MHz
  • Memory Clock: 1900MHz
  • Memory Type: GDDR3
  • Memory interface: 256Bit
  • Memory capacity: 1024MB
  • Manufacture Process: 65nm
  • Bandwidth (GB/s): 57.6
  • Standard Shader Model: 4.0 (Vista Only)
  • Standard DirectX Version: 10.0 (Vista Only)
  • OpenGLR2.0 support
  • 128-Bit HDR Lighting
  • HDCP Compliant
  • NVIDIA PureVideo HD Technology
  • NVIDIA SLI Technology ready
  • NVIDIA nViewer Multi-Display Technology
  • Interface: PCIe 2.0
  • Power Consumption (Watts): 138
Screenshot: 3DMark06 Test
Screenshot of Game Tests: Crysis | Lost Planet | Unreal Tournament 3
View: Full Story @ XSReviews


There are 13 additional comments
Advertisement
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #1 Posted by Crysis Addict on 27 Jan 2008 - 12:11
wtf? results must be wrong because no one can enable 16x aa in crysis and get 34 frames per second. not even with sli'd 8800 ultras could u do that. trusted review...i think not
(1 reply) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #2 Posted by nonick on 27 Jan 2008 - 13:00
So in one word.. useless?
Quote this comment #2.1 Posted by Esvandiary on 27 Jan 2008 - 13:37
Obviously... My 640MB (G80) 8800GTS gets 3DMark scores similar to that (just over 12k), and that's with DDR2 running at 800MHz not DDR3 at 1600 (the CPU and clock speed are identical).
Seriously, for a next-revision GPU that "high-end", that doesn't seem too pretty
(1 reply) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #3 Posted by OblivionStalker on 27 Jan 2008 - 15:00
The memory is the biggest in the industry, but the bandwidth (GB/s) and memory clock are not the best values.
Quote this comment #3.1 Posted by toadeater on 28 Jan 2008 - 05:29
(OblivionStalker said @ #3)
The memory is the biggest in the industry, but the bandwidth (GB/s) and memory clock are not the best values.


There are a couple other 1GB GTs. Asus makes one, and Palit used to. But it's kind of funny, because Palit stopped producing it and said 1GB didn't make enough of a performance difference to justify the cost. You're better off getting a G92 GTS if you're going to spend that much.

That cooler is great though. I hope they put it on more GTs.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #4 Posted by Lucas on 27 Jan 2008 - 17:19
This review seems pretty useless IMO. They did their own overclocking and stuff, not all cards can overclock the same, plus crysis with 16x AA is impossible to run.
(1 reply) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #5 Posted by Palin88 on 27 Jan 2008 - 18:41
Robbie Ferreira
and it's purple


That's an important consideration.
Quote this comment #5.1 Posted by EL1TE on 27 Jan 2008 - 22:27
(Palin88 said @ #1)
Robbie Ferreira
and it's purple


That's an important consideration.

Indeed it is, or not, in fact you should complain at the text source and not here, right?

But I don't care because i'm not planing buy a new card.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #6 Posted by :: Lyon :: on 28 Jan 2008 - 01:33
I'm planning to buy 8800GT..so this card is bad? (can't be bothered to read the benchmarking)
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #7 Posted by SorX on 28 Jan 2008 - 15:20
Hi guys, SorX from XSReviews.co.uk.... just found this link in our referals.

Appologies for the Crysis results, they are as you say, a load of crap It would appear that the CryMod benching tool does not initialise the in-game AI or physics, hence the results are inflated. The results are correct, but only show the run-through of the level from a purely graphical side. Obviously this won't compare to actual in-game performance when you are jumping around killing KPA. As a result, they are useless unless you are using the same benchmark on other cards.

I am now running our test rig with a new benchmark (the command prompt packaged with the game) to give you the correct results. As you pointed out (as you changed our methods as a result) the card does get 2-3FPS at best at 1600x1200.

You can read more about this here if you want: http://forums.xsreviews.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2999 This thread also explains the reason behind the 1GB of memory not boosting performance. In summary, DX9 does not register all of the available memory and hence doesn't use all of the provided chips. In DX10 the stakes change, but we have yet to test this.

It is never our intention to mislead anyone, but I fear thats what has happened, and I appologise sincerely for this. I don't expect you to trust our site again, but I feel you deserve an explanation.

The results themselves are correct in what they are, but were shown in a fashion to indicate in-game performance, rather than this half benchmark we were using.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #8 Posted by Huffdady on 28 Jan 2008 - 16:09
Here is what I don't get,

It says "Operating System: Windows XP Pro x86" at the top.
It says (Standard Shader Model: 4.0 (Vista Only) Standard DirectX Version: 10.0 (Vista Only)) near the bottom.

Does that mean this test was with Win XP minus those two items or is the OS used displayed wrong?
How much better would it have been if it would have been on Vista with DX 10 and the Standard Shader Model?

Thanks,
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #9 Posted by SorX on 28 Jan 2008 - 16:38
The test was run using Windows XP Pro x86 (32bit) due to our belief that most gamers are still running this OS rather than going to Vista.

Those two specification points are 'Vista only' as DX10 supports SM 4.0 while XP (DX9) doesn't. We are working on DX10 benchmarks, but as you can already tell we have enough trouble with DX9 before trying something else

As a point of reference, what game tests do you percieve as being useful in testing DX10 performance?

Thank you for your time, SorX
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #10 Posted by 1Way Jonny on 28 Feb 2008 - 15:27
can someone please tell me where to order this card, i have searched google for 30 minutes and all i find is review thats link back to 1-2 original reviews
[1]

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.


Scroll to the Top
....
My Preferences
....
Communicating with server
Loading
Please Wait...
....
Loading
 X 
....