Knowledge Base Wiki

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Video games Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

I think someone forgot to include the GeForce FX6800 GTO specifications.

Firefox: Yeah, sorry, forgot to add that when I added all the others. Also, it's not the GeForce FX 6 series, it's just 6 series, the FX was the last series.

Psxer, why'd you change all references of Megabyte to Mebibyte?

Of note is that the 6610 xl is between the 6600 and 6600gt in terms of performance and gaming power -Swinger222

a section needs to be added detailing nvidias new 6100 and 6150 intergrated solutions based on the 6000 series -Mirddes 04:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About the 6800 XT, what in the world is MiB? "(128MiB DDR, 256 MiB DDR, 128 MiB GDDR3, and 256 MiB GDDR3)"

• MiB means mebibyte, i.e. 1048576 bytes. 78.3.126.223 (talk) 13:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need to include the available memory configurations for all (ie. 6800 GT comes with 128MB or 256MB).

Need to add that there's a 6800 GT Overclocked (which isn't the GTO).

6800Ultra Extream edition costs 600USD?! 7800 GTx only costs about 500USD, 6800 ultra extraem is better than 7800GTX? -unsigned comment

Well, this brings up a good question, should we even bother listing MSRP on here? I don't really see a point, considering how volatile prices in this industry can be... something to think about. Themindset 02:01, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've heard, the 6800UE was a press edition, and was at the official lauch never an official Nvidia product. Some manufacturers did launch their own Ultra Extreme cards, but as far as I know they were never endorsed by nVidia themselves.

Should we list the MSRP of video cards? The comment above makes a good point: the price of video cards change so dramatically that it is difficult to give accurate figures. When the 6800 Ultra Extreme came out it cost over five hundred dollars; since then, I have seen it priced as low as 300 dollars.

• They have also been replaced by much more advanced cards now, for 300US you can get a 7900 GT which quite a ibt more powerful. Coldpower27 21:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did a major cleanup, now all the different chips are properly titled, and i've added info on the 6800GS and 6800XT, both due out on monday november 7 2005. This article needs more grammar/typo work, but I've done my bit for today. Themindset 01:58, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to figure out the specs for an XFX 6800XT card, which apparently only NewEgg is selling at the moment (item N82E16814150122). Despite what the article currently says, the 6800XT is definitely not an AGP card. Specs on NewEgg say 8 pipes, but no description of the core clock or RAM clock. XFX's site isn't much help. An article on The Register says that the 6800XT was intended mainly as an OEM part, but it's obviously hitting the mainstream market now. Someone should update/fix the 6800XT section. Dave 23:23, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have been hearing a lot of rumors about whether the geforce 6800 GS and apperently it is, but could someone clear this up for me. Heres the link where I heard the rumor: [1] ---- fatmcguire 20:26, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's best not to add anything to the article until something firm comes through. There is a 6800XT AGP card though. Also, could you please sign your comments with four tildes, like this: ~~~~ ? Themindset 03:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have a AGP 6800GS with 512Mb of Video memory, it doesn't have a Heatsink/fan at the moment, but I'll get a photo for you. (Pictures Here and here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.183.191 (talk) 07:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know everyone has their opinions, but I've consistently advocated WIKI should NOT be a technical specification database. There should be narrative and explanation i.e. something the casual viewer can read and understand, that illuminates the technology in some manner. I think the long chip lists should be consolidated into more space efficient, and enlightening, comparative tables, as already seen on GeForce_7_Series page. Timharwoodx 12:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enough of the subterfuge/suspicions. NVidia's website has a Purevideo Product Comparison table. It has been there for a while. It clearly shows the AGP6800 family does NOT have WMV9+H264 acceleration. No need to guess in the Purevideo+AGP6800 sub-header... March 06, 2006

I see here that the floating-point blending and filtering features (which enables users to have OpenEXR-based HDR effects) of the GeForce 6 series are not explained in this article. I am unable to provide information on this feature in simple words, so perhaps someone else can add it?

The Feature is called NVIDIA HPDR I believe. You can find the NVIDIA description of it here:

http://www.nvidia.com/object/feature_HPeffects.html

Thanks.

PureVideo isn't a GeForce 6 only option. GeForce 7 supports this feature, and it's likely that from here on out, nVidia cards will as well. It would kind of be like sticking the GeForce 6 redirect to say TurboCache and SLI, both born from GeForce 6. - [User:XenoL-Type|XenoL-Type] 14:43 1 September, 2006 (UTC)

The section on the 6500 is just a short spec list. Doesn't anyone know something else about it? Is there any potential to overclock it or unlock features?

   The 6500 as I understand it, is a PCIe NV44, thus its just a 6200 TC with a higher core clocks and comes with 128mb of ram onboard and uses a 64bit bus. I would assume it to be similiar to the ability of the PCIe 6200 in the way of features and Overclokcing Candle 86 00:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's worth a brief mention that nVidia drivers seem to have a semi-consistent instability and conflict with Windows, for some people on a regular basis. There are entire forums all over the net dedicated to working around, patching or defeating the nv4_disp.dll BSoD loop - Also simply to find the cause of the conflict, and why it doesn't affect everyone's systems all the time. In saying that, I don't think it should be written maliciously or anything, simply a statement of fact - I use an Albatron 6600GT myself and until recently have been dealing with the bluescreen loop. I don't know what fixed it, but now that it's fixed the card performs magnificently. So it's not an issue of manufacture or quality, just a strange idiosyncrasy that ATI cards don't seem to share.

Just my 2 cents. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.100.96.17 09:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

That error is caused by not cleaning out your old drivers first and by curruption of the drivers from fragmentation or a virus. The easist way is to boot in VGA mode and uninstall video drivers and reinstall, that fixes it, and its not worth mentioning here —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Candle 86 15:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

While I don't agree with the above as the definitive solution to the nv4_disp.dll issues, I do agree that this does not belong in the article. Such an article addition will be difficult to cite, will be full of speculation and difficult to write without weasel words. If a definite cause is discovered, something that we can consider peer-reviewed in it's level of merit, at that time it should be added. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 143.166.255.40 23:45, 19 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Candle 86, please don't make up facts. While reinstalling the driver may have helped you personally, many people have these problems from the second they install XP and GeForce 6's driver. Also, I'd like to stress the problem is not just with nv4_disp.dll but with nv4_mini.sys. But many times XP tends to get stuck without even bothering to register the error in the event manager at all.

I do think it belongs in the article because forums everywhere (including Nvidia's own) are full with unanswered cries for help (solved cases like Candle 86's are the exception). -Lwc4life 10:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's not even exclusive to GeForce 6. Meanwhile, a solution that worked for me was a patch that's spread around forums. It was made by VIA Technologies. I've put it all down in the general GeForce entry and tried my best not to use "weasel words". I hope it's ok. -Lwc4life 14:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone answer me this?I am having a problem with my 6600 gt in some games I can see some red spots or even the effects get invisible whole parts of buildings get red.I konow this is not site for my problems but please answer it. 82.114.81.149 14:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If random spots keep appearing (flickering) in the screen, it is possible the GPU is overheating and can't function properly. Either improve cooling, or play until the spots start appearing, then Alt-Tab and wait until the card cools down (about a minute depending on how far it was heated). EVEREST is good for watching temperature.--89.147.67.118 (talk) 17:36, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

more to the point posssibly rewriting of the sepcs sheets on the geforce articles to be a bit more like the radeon related articles; they have a clear concise table showing all card and chip revisions in a single table and differences between them - it makes comparison - comparitively easy compared to the broken up nature of the geforce articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.136.106.38 (talk) 12:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

What does LE stand for? I heard it stands for "Less Expensive" which means Craigs is better than Michaels.

Regarding the statement, "however, there are still reports of people successfully unlocking pipelines and overclocking the newest 6200A NV44A chip ranges, using older Geforce drivers." I would love to have an information source (for me personally, as well as other Wikipedia readers). Modul8r 21:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PureVideo#PureVideo

Where is it

The OpenGL specification that it supports should be more clear and presented on the first table with the primary information, currently it only shows the DirectX version, doesnt help very many people who use other platforms now does it. I felt that I had to dig to get to the OpenGL spec.

Maddog392 02:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beosmrx 02:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC) This wiki article is really good! Thank you to contributers, you rock :)[reply]

You guys really need to think about what you are trying to convey with this article. I see regurgitated specs. Who cares? There is a whole page of tables about the specs. (Comparison of NVIDIA Graphics Processing Units) You should go look at the GeForce 256, 2, 3, 4, FX, and 8 articles. There already is some good architectural content here, but it seems that everyone just wants to post a section about their favorite variant. They are all the same architecture. Leave the specs of each of NV's price segment releases for the specs page. --Swaaye 20:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Geforce6800logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

An interesting data: it seems that the AGP version of the 6600GT is capable of rendering High Dynamic Range without any performance loss. Which means it is capable of running, for example, Half-Life 2 Episode One at maximum graphic quality except AA, which is known to slow the card down considerably. However, C&C3: Tiberium Wars is unable to run at even medium graphic quality, since the card overheats way too fast (in a matter of minutes), resulting in flickering black artifacts increasing in number as the card's temperature is rising. The same is observed in Half-Life 2, but as missing textures and Z-buffer errors. EVEREST confirms that the card is running 43°C and 100% fan speed at idle. Under severe load, the temperature can climb as high as 90°C (artifacts appear at about 65°C). Sometimes, the card is a little cooler at idle and doesn't overheat at all, most of the time it is. I mean, what's going on? Why does the artifacts appear if these cards are designed to run stable at temperature as high as 80-100°C ? Maybe the fact that the fan is running at full load all the time means it is starting to die? --89.147.67.118 (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The CPU FSB is upped by 25% (685 MHz), and the overheating issue is all but gone. It still overheats, but it reaches a thermal equilibrium at 71°C, resulting in artifacts still coming up in C&C3, but with reduced severity and no FPS drop (turning on Write Combining and forcing AA off produces a major FPS hit, instead of the other way around). Additionally, the card refuses to load drivers other than the default Windows ones. If I install other drivers, the card turns off: XP says everything's right, but I'm stuck with 8bit colors and 800x600 at best, as well as high CPU usage (which is a telltale sign of XP using software rendering). Setting anything higher resets the setting to 640x480, and refresh rate is locked to "hardware default". --89.147.67.118 (talk) 16:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The listing for the NV44a2 says that only 128-bit memory interfaces exist, but I have a 6200 card with those specifications with a 64-bit interface. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.62.142 (talk) 05:46, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GeForce 6 series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111120234511/http://support.euro.dell.com/support/edocs/systems/dimc521/en/SM_EN/specs.htm to http://support.euro.dell.com/support/edocs/systems/dimc521/en/SM_EN/specs.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=663517&starttime=0&endtime=0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]