GTX295 vs 4870X2

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
Step up? I don't think Galaxy offers that option.

That, and I just read your other post regarding 40nm...

 

[SSChevy2001]

Originally posted by: nRollo
Stay tuned SS, good news for all gamers coming soon!

I hope you mean 8xAA reviews are coming. I seriously wouldn't buy a multigpu setup just to use 4xAA.

I don't know why you'd say that when the review says the cores are 240SPs.

As far as "fitting nicely on a PCB" goes:
If the performance numbers are true, why would anyone care about that??????

If this card outperforms the 4870X2, runs cooler, uses less power, has more flexible drivers, and offers Physx, CUDA, and stereo, do you really think single PCB and DX10.1 will tip things in ATi's favor?

It's still has the c216 stock clocks and memory interface.

I'm sure the numbers are true, but nvidia's only showing the numbers they want you to see. These are hand picked titles and settings that they know ATi still isn't optimized for driver wise.

Idle power and cooling are a design choice on ATi part, but both can be changed via ATT or bios editing if the end users wants.

GPU PhysX only has a handful of titles, and is still limited to eye candy.
CUDA is going to be countered with Stream
Stereo requires new LCDs and very high frame rates. Tell me when I can run crysis @ 120FPS.

Again it's just a sandwich card that even your GTX280 SLI setup could beat many months ago, why should we be impressed? Also who wants 55nm GPUs, when 40nm GPUs will be out about a month later.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001

Again it's just a sandwich card that even your GTX280 SLI setup could beat many months ago, why should we be impressed? Also who wants 55nm GPUs, when 40nm GPUs will be out about a month later.

Why was anyone impressed with a 4870 when a 9800GX2 smoked it? Why was anyone impressed with a 4870x2 when 2 X 260 was already available? Why would anyone buy a card right now if 55nm is just around the corner? Shit, why buy a 45nm AMD or Intel when 32nm is just around the corner?


I'll be impressed because everyone said it couldnt be done. I could go back and find at least 10 people who said even with a shrink, there could be no GT200 sandwich. They are adding shaders AND doing an x2, and it will most likely be the most powerful card (for a short time only, i'm sure).

We should all point and laugh at anyone who posts an Inq link, even more than before:



Nvidia 270/290 in deep trouble
GT200 based GX2 dead as well
By Charlie Demerjian
Tuesday, 4 November 2008, 06:21 IT LOOKS LIKE Nvidia's run of bad luck is continuing. The latest word is that the GT200b is in for another respin, that would be the third. This means the 270 and 290 are effectively delayed until February, and the GX2 part is quite dead.

If you recall, the original plan was to have them out for the Nehalem launch on the 17th, an ambitious goal considering the timing on the last respin. Since that spin failed, it is a moot point, but word is that NV will put something out on the market.

Since this is (was?) a simple optical shrink, there are going to be no new features, so that leaves better power, higher clocks, and lower prices as an option. Since most if not all GT200 based parts are selling at little if any profit ? we hear 260s are under water, 280s barely above ? don't look for price being the point the wheel-o-semicoductor-planning stops on.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inq...a-270-290-deep-trouble

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001
Again it's just a sandwich card that even your GTX280 SLI setup could beat many months ago, why should we be impressed?

What's nice is that you can have near (or so I hear ) the performance without needing an SLI motherboard, more powerful power supply and even an ATX case.

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
I'll be impressed because everyone said it couldnt be done.
...
We should all point and laugh at anyone who posts an Inq link, even more than before:

Nvidia 270/290 in deep trouble
GT200 based GX2 dead as well
By Charlie Demerjian

LOL, just in the part I quoted, there are THREE things wrong. Well known that Charlie has an axe to grind. Funny thing is that some people believe everything he writes. C'mon people! Have some skepticism! TheInq is like one part Tom's Hardware, one part The Onion and a dash of Fox News. Sometimes some good information, oftentimes entertaining to read, but don't believe everything they say.

 

[SSChevy2001]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Why was anyone impressed with a 4870 when a 9800GX2 smoked it?

Maybe because SLI and CF isn't for everyone. It was so hot that it caused Nvidia to drop prices very fast, that's impressive!

Why was anyone impressed with a 4870x2 when 2 X 260 was already available?

Some people prefer the intel chipset, and they don't need a dual PCI-E graphic slots. Also it is the fastest single card you can get, and when it scaled it would smoke the GTX280. This card doesn't really smoke nothing, unless it's with deadspace or PhysX. More than likely it's going to come very close in many titles.

Why would anyone buy a card right now if 55nm is just around the corner? Shit, why buy a 45nm AMD or Intel when 32nm is just around the corner?

ATi surprised Nvidia this year big time. I most certainly want to wait to see what they have to offer next year before I make any new choices. Some people can't wait though and having a stepup option isn't a bad choice with this card coming out soon.

 

[SSChevy2001]

Originally posted by: Zap
What's nice is that you can have near (or so I hear ) the performance without needing an SLI motherboard, more powerful power supply and even an ATX case.

It's just going to be a slight advantage in some titles against the 4870x2. Also it sill looks like it's draws very similar power under full load. Overall though both will be very close in performance.

If the price is right I'll be impressed. ( price war anyone )

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001

Originally posted by: Zap
What's nice is that you can have near (or so I hear ) the performance without needing an SLI motherboard, more powerful power supply and even an ATX case.

It's just going to be a slight advantage in some titles against the 4870x2. Also it sill looks like it's draws very similar power under full load. Overall though both will be very close in performance.

If the price is right I'll be impressed. ( price war anyone )

Sounds like you're assuming that the 5 titles shown are the only titles that the 295 will have any advantage over the 4870X2. Is this the case? If it is, I would advise you to take a look at the most recent GTX260 vs. 4870 1GB reviews. When you do, you'll realize that it's not just these 5 titles.

Question to all: Is it possible to look at things for what they really are? Without looking for silver linings or excuses? Things are what they are. 4870X2 held the title for a while, now that will change, as things always change. And change again. No big deal.

 

[arghssr]

I agree with zerocool!

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001

Originally posted by: nRollo
Stay tuned SS, good news for all gamers coming soon!

I hope you mean 8xAA reviews are coming. I seriously wouldn't buy a multigpu setup just to use 4xAA.

I don't know why you'd say that when the review says the cores are 240SPs.

As far as "fitting nicely on a PCB" goes:
If the performance numbers are true, why would anyone care about that??????

If this card outperforms the 4870X2, runs cooler, uses less power, has more flexible drivers, and offers Physx, CUDA, and stereo, do you really think single PCB and DX10.1 will tip things in ATi's favor?

It's still has the c216 stock clocks and memory interface.

I'm sure the numbers are true, but nvidia's only showing the numbers they want you to see. These are hand picked titles and settings that they know ATi still isn't optimized for driver wise.

Idle power and cooling are a design choice on ATi part, but both can be changed via ATT or bios editing if the end users wants.

GPU PhysX only has a handful of titles, and is still limited to eye candy.
CUDA is going to be countered with Stream
Stereo requires new LCDs and very high frame rates. Tell me when I can run crysis @ 120FPS.

Again it's just a sandwich card that even your GTX280 SLI setup could beat many months ago, why should we be impressed? Also who wants 55nm GPUs, when 40nm GPUs will be out about a month later.

On AA:
1. 180 series drivers brought more 8X MSAA parity for NVIDIA cards
2. Even if they wouldn't have, 8X CSAA brings most of the incremental IQ increase 8X MSAA brings, and offers superior performance. (without the highly variable parformance Edge Detect has shown)
3. NVIDIA's transparency modes beat ATi's, so 8X MSAA isn't the end of the AA question you seem to be implying.


On PhysX:
More titles on the way with Mirrors Edge next month and Cryostasis the month after. Video cards are about eye candy, more is better by defintion. (although I disagree that's all it is because it affects gameplay as well)

On sandwich:
Yep I wouldn't upgrade GTX280 SLi to this card based on what we've seen, but I don't think GTX280 SLI owners are it's target market. (unless they want quad)

 

[RealGun]

So this new card from Nvidia's gonna run my chess game how much faster?

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001

I hope you mean 8xAA reviews are coming. I seriously wouldn't buy a multigpu setup just to use 4xAA.

I agree completely; it's absolutely laughable that 8xAA is dismissed when discussing these kinds of cards. It?s also laughable that PhysX is being pimped on account of a handful of tech demos when 8xMSAA provides a tangible benefit in thousands of real games without any developer effort whatsoever.

Can I enable PhysX in non-supported titles? Nope.
Can I enable 8xMSAA in 99% of 3D games ever made? Yep.

Originally posted by: nRollo

1. 180 series drivers brought more 8X MSAA parity for NVIDIA cards

If by parity you mean ?in the few cherry-picked cases nVidia optimized for?, then yeah. Otherwise, nope.

I tested dozens of games with 8xMSAA + Big Bang (including modern titles) and 8xMSAA performance generally did not budge in the vast majority of cases. In newish OpenGL titles my Radeon 4850 is still faster than my GTX260+ in many cases when running 8xMSAA.

Originally posted by: nRollo

2. Even if they wouldn't have, 8X CSAA brings most of the incremental IQ increase 8X MSAA brings

This is just plain false. You keep repeating this, but it remains false.

Originally posted by: nRollo

3. NVIDIA's transparency modes beat ATi's,

Does nVidia support them in OpenGL yet? If not they don't beat them there.

Oh but wait, this is the part where you tell me no-one play OpenGL games anymore, at which point I respond that I?ll bet there are more OpenGL users out there than there are PhysX users.

 

[ArchAngel777]

^

BFG makes some excellent points.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001

I hope you mean 8xAA reviews are coming. I seriously wouldn't buy a multigpu setup just to use 4xAA.

I agree completely; it's absolutely laughable that 8xAA is dismissed when discussing these kinds of cards. It?s also laughable that PhysX is being pimped on account of a handful of tech demos when 8xMSAA provides a tangible benefit in thousands of real games without any developer effort whatsoever.

I would like every one who thinks 8X AA performance is a huge selling point for a card to load the screenshots on this page for the 4X and 8X MSAA, then click back and forth to compare

If you can find a difference without zooming in, please circle it and post, or send to me and I will.

PhysX games are easy to spot the difference in gameplay and image quality, because details that make the environment more realistic have been added.

Originally posted by: BFG10K
Can I enable PhysX in non-supported titles? Nope.
Can I enable 8xMSAA in 99% of 3D games ever made? Yep.

Can you link us to screenshots that show differences that make it worth even close to the importance attached to it on any game at resolutions of 16X10 and above? Nope.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: nRollo

1. 180 series drivers brought more 8X MSAA parity for NVIDIA cards

If by parity you mean ?in the few cherry-picked cases nVidia optimized for?, then yeah. Otherwise, nope.

I tested dozens of games with 8xMSAA + Big Bang (including modern titles) and 8xMSAA performance generally did not budge in the vast majority of cases. In newish OpenGL titles my Radeon 4850 is still faster than my GTX260+ in many cases when running 8xMSAA.

I have no doubt 8X AA might not have improved in the 5 year old titles you consider "newish" BFG. I also have no doubt that that number of people playing games drops dramatically with each year that goes by on all but a few games.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: nRollo

2. Even if they wouldn't have, 8X CSAA brings most of the incremental IQ increase 8X MSAA brings

This is just plain false. You keep repeating this, but it remains false.

How about I re-phrase it then? I've never seen evidence personally that 8XMSAA brings a large difference in image quality over 4X AA at the resolutions people buy cards like the 4870X2 and GTX 295 to run. 8X CSAA does provide some improvement over 4X MSAA, and some of a small amount or the whole small amount = who cares? in my book. Not to mention 8X AA performance is highly dependent on the game, and I've seen very few examples where 8X AA was playable on one solution and not on another.

In a nutshell, I don't think the advantages ATi 8XAA offers over 8X CSAA justify buying a card when coupled with the disadvantages in transparency AA.

I guess you agree, as I've seen you post in the last month that NVIDIA's AA>ATi AA, and I note your last two high end cards are NVIDIA.

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: nRollo

3. NVIDIA's transparency modes beat ATi's,

Does nVidia support them in OpenGL yet? If not they don't beat them there.

Oh but wait, this is the part where you tell me no-one play OpenGL games anymore, at which point I respond that I?ll bet there are more OpenGL users out there than there are PhysX users.

It's interesting you care a lot about the number of Physx games so much but use the opposite logic with transparency anti aliasing.

How many Open GL games launched this year BFG? I can't think of one.

In the last five years, what would you say is the ratio of D3d to openGL? 99:1 on D3D side?

Pointing out the exception doesn't break the rule. If it did, I could just start posting "NVIDIA cards have superior drivers and performance across the board!" because they do in Linux.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Tomorrow 18 December ...

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: nRollo


Stay tuned SS, good news for all gamers coming soon!

Reminds me of the ati web site. You just need to add a countdown.

 

[acidk]

there's one thing i still don't get it, some told that was a "mix" of two GTX280 GPUs, then with this "leak", it seems to be two similar GTX260 GPUs, but yet with 55nm? nvidia promisses 55nm for 2009 but it seens sooner to believe..


still, the 4870X2 kicks asses!

 

[Tempered81]

yes, x2 kicks asses... hehehe

the gtx295 is two 55nm gtx260 PCBs with all 240 GT200b shader units fully operational, and running a little slower.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: acidk
still, the 4870X2 kicks asses!

If "ass kicking" is defined by being second, sure!

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: acidk
still, the 4870X2 kicks asses!

If "ass kicking" is defined by being second, sure!

well Nv's kicked ass from August 08 to Jan 09 then

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: SSChevy2001

I hope you mean 8xAA reviews are coming. I seriously wouldn't buy a multigpu setup just to use 4xAA.

I agree completely; it's absolutely laughable that 8xAA is dismissed when discussing these kinds of cards. It?s also laughable that PhysX is being pimped on account of a handful of tech demos when 8xMSAA provides a tangible benefit in thousands of real games without any developer effort whatsoever.

Rage3d, the ATi fansite, agrees with me about 8X CSAA

Moving up the scale a bit to the 8x and 8xQ modes you?ll notice that some of the edges are ever so slightly cleaner with the 8xQ mode, a testament to the technology behind NVIDIA?s CSAA.

There's a great tool on that page to see the difference in AA modes, so people can see for themselves.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: jaredpace

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: acidk
still, the 4870X2 kicks asses!

If "ass kicking" is defined by being second, sure!

well Nv's kicked ass from August 08 to Jan 09 then

Heh, at single slot, I have to give it to them.

 

[deputc26]

No one seems to appreciate how significant this re-spin is for the gtx 280/285. 183w/236w = 22.5% power reduction that goes with a ~10% performance increase meaning nvidia has increased the power to performance ratio by ~35%! (don't add percentages, multiply 1.225x1.1) going from 65nm to 55nm. This is similar to (or even greater than) the bump intel got going from 65nm to High-k 45nm.

I suspect core voltages were dropped meaning OC potential may not have increased, though if you bumped vCore up to gtx280 levels I'll bet you could get 800mhz consistently (and a lot of heat)

_ NdP

 

[n7]

No doubt that this will be a monster for those who like SLI sandwiches.

But i find it kinda funny that with the exception of Fallout 3, those games all just "happen" to be stong titles for nV.


This HWC review shows how AMD seems to be weak in 4 of those titles (though again, not in Fallout 3) due to either driver issues or perhaps just the 4870s just do poorly at them.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com...formance-part-1-a.html

Yet the 4870s are very good at a bunch of the other new games, which leads me to believe the lead in those won't be very impressive, if there is much of one at all.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: n7
No doubt that this will be a monster for those who like SLI sandwiches.

But i find it kinda funny that with the exception of Fallout 3, those games all just "happen" to be stong titles for nV.


This HWC review shows how AMD seems to be weak in 4 of those titles (though again, not in Fallout 3) due to either driver issues or perhaps just the 4870s just do poorly at them.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com...formance-part-1-a.html

Yet the 4870s are very good at a bunch of the other new games, which leads me to believe the lead in those won't be very impressive, if there is much of one at all.

Aye...but anyway I don't think a current GTX280 is weak and adding more is well...not necessary IMO. Again, it depends on the actual scores we see.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: nRollo

If you can find a difference without zooming in, please circle it and post, or send to me and I will.

Can you link us to screenshots that show differences that make it worth even close to the importance attached to it on any game at resolutions of 16X10 and above? Nope.

Why screenshots? Anyone that actually uses AA knows the real benefit comes in actual gameplay during moving scenes.

I mean if we?re going off screenshots, can we compare ATi?s AF to nVidia?s AF with screenshots and conclude the cards are equal? Of course not. In fact (and rather ironically) ATi?s AF often looks ?better? in screenshots but in actual gameplay that isn?t the case at all.

There are visible and clear improvements in actual gameplay when going from 4xMSAA to 8xMSAA. That is a fact.

PhysX games are easy to spot the difference in gameplay and image quality, because details that make the environment more realistic have been added.

Right, but how many nVidia hardware accelerated PhysX games are there? UT3?s five maps that nobody plays don?t count, and neither do tech demos, nor do games that will never be released to the public.

Now compare your list to the thousands of 3D games that can have 8xMSAA enabled.

I have about 80-85 games installed right now where I can enable 8xMSAA. I have two PhysX titles and neither of them support hardware acceleration, so hardware PhysX makes no difference to them. So remind me again, why should I be excited about hardware PhysX?

Show me the majority of new games (not tech demos) shipping with hardware PhysX support and then I?ll get excited enough to install the PhysX driver. Until then it?s a niche at best, like DX10.1.

I have no doubt 8X AA might not have improved in the 5 year old titles you consider "newish" BFG. I also have no doubt that that number of people playing games drops dramatically with each year that goes by on all but a few games.

Eh? Since when are Call of Duty 4 or Bioshock five year old games?

How about I re-phrase it then? I've never seen evidence personally that 8XMSAA brings a large difference in image quality over 4X AA at the resolutions people buy cards like the 4870X2 and GTX 295 to run. 8X CSAA does provide some improvement over 4X MSAA, and some of a small amount or the whole small amount = who cares?

So let me see if I read this correctly: you?re saying 8xMSAA doesn?t make much difference but 8xCSAA does, even though it?s objectively and mathematically provable that 8xCSAA is inferior to 8xMSAA?

That simply doesn?t fly. If 8xMSAA provides no benefit then neither does 8xCSAA, making it a useless feature. But if 8xCSAA provides a benefit then 8xMSAA must also provide one because it?s objectively provable that it?s better.

I guess you agree, as I've seen you post in the last month that NVIDIA's AA>ATi AA, and I note your last two high end cards are NVIDIA.

I have no trouble acknowledging the strengths of either vendor which is why I don?t make ridiculous flip-flop arguments depending on which IHV is currently leading or what is the current ?in? thing. I?ve extolled the virtues of nVidia?s combined AA modes for years despite the fact that basically no-one uses them.

It's interesting you care a lot about the number of Physx games so much but use the opposite logic with transparency anti aliasing.

How many Open GL games launched this year BFG? I can't think of one.

OpenGL games don?t need to launch; there?s already an installed base going back over ten years to GLQuake. Additionally there are large community followings of source ports such as Doom, Quake, Quake 2 and Descent 1/2. Additionally, many popular legacy games like UT99 have updated renderers that run best on OpenGL.

PhysX needs launches because it needs games for it?s almost non-existant market base, namely titles supporting hardware acceleration on nVidia GPUs.

So count the number of OpenGL games and then count the number of games (not tech demos) using hardware PhysX, and compare them.

Rage3d, the ATi fansite, agrees with me about 8X CSAA

Again with the still screenshots which are generally useless for showing IQ differences unless they?re zoomed. Anyone that uses AA in gaming knows that.

8xCSAA?s effectiveness diminishes on polygon intersections and it?ll also fall back to the base 4xMSAA on stencil shadows, when running TRAA, and also anywhere where coverage sampling may fail for a given pixel.

8xCSAA is definitely better than 4xMSAA but 8xMSAA is even better. The only place where 8xCSAA may rival 8xMSAA is on first-class polygon edges and only if all pixels succeed in their coverage tests.