nVidia GT200 Series Review Thread

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: JPB

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: LightningRider
For those of you bickering about Radeon 4000 VS GT200... I don't know if you guys have seen this but here's what an article on IGN said:

In a question-and-answer session, Bergman said that the R700 will turn the tables in AMD's battle with Nvidia. He cited the chip's high performance, low power, and wealth of features. For example, he said the R700 supports Microsoft's new DirectX 10.1 API, whereas the new Nvidia chip only supports DirectX 10. Also, the Radeon 4000 series will use new GDDR5 memory, whereas the new Nvidia chip still uses GDDR3. And by engineering a small but efficient chip, AMD has the advantages of lower costs. "Our die is about the same area as a dime. [Nvidia's] is about the same area of a quarter. Despite that, we're going to be 80 to 90-percent of their performance," Bergman said.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/882/882097p1.html

In that last section, "80-90% of their performance" leaves me to believe that the cards will be competitive because of their features and the nice price point but won't quite match the performance. He also said in the same article that the card will be able to have single slot cooling solutions, which is something I like... As far as I'm concerned though, I think if I wasn't getting an eVGA GTX 260 for $60, I might have gone with an ATi card for the first time since the Radeon 9700 Pro.

I think ATi will be a great choice this round of GPU wars.

He's talking about RV770, not R700 when he says 80-90%. He says that RV770 is significantly smaller but will provide 80-90% of the performance. He is probably talking about the HD 4870 model, which is what I have been speculating. 80-90% of GTX 280 performance, half the price, less than half the die size.

So based on 80%-90% performance of the GTX 280.

Would this be right ?

GTX 280 = 100fps
HD 4870 = 80-90fps
HD 4870X2 = 140-180 fps ( depending on how the game scales )

Nah, I'd just be badass and put 2 GTX 280 in SLI. Oh wait. First. Do you know where I can get a 1000w power supply from?

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: kreacher
For $400 it would be a pretty good card but certainly not for $650. Unless SLI scaling goes over 90% I don't consider it a viable option (plus it limits your motherboard choices).

I would get it for $400 too, Its a good card that actually gives playable frame rate with 8xAA in high res on new games. If you checked computerbase.de benchmarking.

I'd get it for $400 also. I hope they change MSRP to $500 and street price falls to around $420. I'd get it for that. Otherwise I'd have to experiment with crossfire down the road.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
to Extelleron you are such a ATI fanTard..
just have to say that... or are you getting paid by AMD

in every post, EVERY post, you make assumption that 4850/70 is going to be faster than 280 without any prove what so ever.... just makes me sick..

to Ocguy31

G280 sucks hard price/performance/heat/environmentally friendliness. G260 is definately a good value, consider that it is a single card without limitation of SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah but it still sucks. I can't even hope to play Crysis on very high on a 1920x1200 monitor with any AA or AF on it. 2 years after the 8800GTX and we get this turd? Wow. Just wow.

crysis is the turd, not the card.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
to Extelleron you are such a ATI fanTard..
just have to say that... or are you getting paid by AMD

in every post, EVERY post, you make assumption that 4850/70 is going to be faster than 280 without any prove what so ever.... just makes me sick..

to Ocguy31

G280 sucks hard price/performance/heat/environmentally friendliness. G260 is definately a good value, consider that it is a single card without limitation of SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah but it still sucks. I can't even hope to play Crysis on very high on a 1920x1200 monitor with any AA or AF on it. 2 years after the 8800GTX and we get this turd? Wow. Just wow.

Speaking of turd, the 4850 is benching right around a 8800GT, sometimes less. How long ago was that card put out??? I guess it must be "turd season".

 

[chewietobbacca]

I hope you arent talking about 3dMark benching cause that's just plain useless

 

[Aberforth]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
to Extelleron you are such a ATI fanTard..
just have to say that... or are you getting paid by AMD

in every post, EVERY post, you make assumption that 4850/70 is going to be faster than 280 without any prove what so ever.... just makes me sick..

to Ocguy31

G280 sucks hard price/performance/heat/environmentally friendliness. G260 is definately a good value, consider that it is a single card without limitation of SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah but it still sucks. I can't even hope to play Crysis on very high on a 1920x1200 monitor with any AA or AF on it. 2 years after the 8800GTX and we get this turd? Wow. Just wow.

crysis is the turd, not the card.

Cryengine 2 is the best optimized engine ever made, just because this crate cannot run it properly doesn't mean Crysis is poorly optimized. If you have worked with cryengine, you will know how much processing it requires to render a frame. Also it is the best proper DX10 implementation I've seen so far using all of its features. Resources are dynamically unloaded when not in the point of view, even the shaders are so balanced for each quality setting.

So you can expect all the future games run the same way.

How do you make such pathetic claims anyway? No doubt all this fanboyism will deplete the quality of mind.

 

[taltamir]

I can tell you that crysis @ settings I get xFPS for, it looks levels below what I get x FPS with other games. It might be opimized for some future high end hardware, but it is horribly optimized for today's hardware.

 

[Kuzi]

Originally posted by: Aberforth

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
to Extelleron you are such a ATI fanTard..
just have to say that... or are you getting paid by AMD

in every post, EVERY post, you make assumption that 4850/70 is going to be faster than 280 without any prove what so ever.... just makes me sick..

to Ocguy31

G280 sucks hard price/performance/heat/environmentally friendliness. G260 is definately a good value, consider that it is a single card without limitation of SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah but it still sucks. I can't even hope to play Crysis on very high on a 1920x1200 monitor with any AA or AF on it. 2 years after the 8800GTX and we get this turd? Wow. Just wow.

crysis is the turd, not the card.

Cryengine 2 is the best optimized engine ever made, just because this crate cannot run it properly doesn't mean Crysis is poorly optimized. If you have worked with cryengine, you will know how much processing it requires to render a frame. Also it is the best proper DX10 implementation I've seen so far using all of its features. Resources are dynamically unloaded when not in the point of view, even the shaders are so balanced for each quality setting.

So you can expect all the future games run the same way.

How do you make such pathetic claims anyway? No doubt all this fanboyism will deplete the quality of mind.

If a next gen 1.4 billion transistor GPU still has problems running the game at higher quality/resolution settings, I'd say the game code could use more optimization for higher performance.

 

[Darklife]

I originally meant to ask this in the GT200 thread, but it probably would have gotten buried under the barrage of posts there. Anyways my question concerns the 6 and 8 pin connectors on the gtx280. On my PSU I have a 6pin and a 6+2/8pin. Seeing as the second connector wasn't working with the 9800 GX2 I'm wondering how it looks this round. I hoped that one of the manufacturers included an adapter in their package, but that's nowhere to be seen in the shops in my area.

 

[BFG10K]

I think reviewers stick to 4x AA because the differences between it and higher levels are extremely minute. Going from 0 to 2 to 4 comes with big improvements, but past that it's a sharp dropoff in perceived improvement, especially on high-DPI monitors like 20"/24"/30". I think most members in this forum would be challenged to play a game at 4x and 8x and be able to point out the differences.

The returns are diminishing but still very visible, especially during movement.

In any case whether or not people claim to see a difference isn't the issue given some claim to not need more than X FPS or Y resolution, which would therefore mean all video cards are equal provided they reach that goal according to their reasoning..

No, the issue here is to provide GPU limited tests using the highest common denominator among tested cards which is 8xMSAA on modern parts. Sticking to 4xAA only is irresponsible reviewing practice as they?ll hit CPU limitations more and more as GPUs get faster which in turn paints an increasingly inaccurate picture.

Just look at the comments now: ?the GTX 280 isn?t much faster than the last gen?. Well yeah, given most the tests are being run at low detail CPU bottlenecked tests. If they tested the 9800 GX2 at 8xQ or 16xQ it would likely fall over compared to the GTX280. The whole point of getting high-end cards is to crank the AA levels whenever possible.

BTW does anyone know if the new gen cards are going to remove the limitation for 4x4 SSAA < 1024x768?

That limitation has removed with the G80 series as its maximum render target was raised to 8192x8192, up from 4096x4096 on the G7x series. In theory you should be able to go as high as 2048x1536 though I've personally only tested up to 1920x1440.

Keep in mind this mode is extremely taxing on VRAM so you?ll need lots of it with a lot of bandwidth (the GTX280 would be right at home here).

 

[happy medium]

After reading all the reviews and speculation I'd assume.........

The 4850 is around the speed of a 8800gt? and more exspensive?
The 4870 is around the speed of a overclocked 9800gtx? and more exspensive?
The 4850x2 should be a little faster then the gtx260? and more exspensive?
The 4870x2 should be a little faster then the gtx280? price =
The gtx260/280 at 55nm should clock faster and be faster then both the 4850/70 x2?

I'm guessing the price of the gtx 260/280 will fall to 350.00$/550.00$ by the time the 4850/70 x2 are released.

Am I close? Any thoughts?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
to Extelleron you are such a ATI fanTard..
just have to say that... or are you getting paid by AMD

in every post, EVERY post, you make assumption that 4850/70 is going to be faster than 280 without any prove what so ever.... just makes me sick..

to Ocguy31

G280 sucks hard price/performance/heat/environmentally friendliness. G260 is definately a good value, consider that it is a single card without limitation of SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah but it still sucks. I can't even hope to play Crysis on very high on a 1920x1200 monitor with any AA or AF on it. 2 years after the 8800GTX and we get this turd? Wow. Just wow.

You cant?
Chris Ray's Rage3d GT200 article.
And he did this on a Phenom system.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: happy medium
After reading all the reviews and speculation I'd assume.........

The 4850 is around the speed of a 8800gt? and more exspensive?
The 4870 is around the speed of a overclocked 9800gtx? and more exspensive?
The 4850x2 should be a little faster then the gtx260? and more exspensive?
The 4870x2 should be a little faster then the gtx280? price =
The gtx260/280 at 55nm should clock faster and be faster then both the 4850/70 x2?

Am I close? Any thoughts?

Not really, your post is way too Nvidia optimistic.. AMD prices will be lower and performance will be higher, not the other way around.. Specially in the high end

Nvidia would have to pull a rabbit out of their hats to match a well scaling 4870 X2 with just a shrink

 

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: happy medium
After reading all the reviews and speculation I'd assume.........

The 4850 is around the speed of a 8800gt? and more exspensive?
The 4870 is around the speed of a overclocked 9800gtx? and more exspensive?
The 4850x2 should be a little faster then the gtx260? and more exspensive?
The 4870x2 should be a little faster then the gtx280? price =
The gtx260/280 at 55nm should clock faster and be faster then both the 4850/70 x2?

Am I close? Any thoughts?

Not really, your post is way too Nvidia optimistic.. AMD prices will be lower and performance will be higher, not the other way around.. Specially in the high end

Nvidia would have to pull a rabbit out of their hats to match a well scaling 4870 X2 with just a shrink

I got the prices from the 4850/70 thread.
I'd assume if the 4870 is = 9800gtx and the 9800gtx in sli is slightly faster then the gtx280 then a 4870x2 will be only slightly faster then a gtx280 and = or slower then the refresh model gtx280? correct? gtx280 with gddr5 correct?

 

[Keysplayr]

So, I was taking a look at the AT Crysis benches. And then looked at mine.

AT bench had a 3.2GHz Intel quad core. Mine was a 2.4GHz Intel quad core
AT bench had Forceware 177.34's. Mine had 177.26's.

So, I decided to o/c my CPU to 3150MHz and update to 177.34's.

This is what I got:

Crysis 1920x1200 0xAA 0xAF All settings High on GTX280


Previous scores with 2.4GHz Q6600 & 177.26's 1920x1200 All Settings High
Min. 25 Avg. 34.49 Max. 49

Updated scores with 3.15GHz Q6600 & 177.34's 1920x1200 All Settings High
Min. 26 Avg. 39.19 Max. 51

Anandtechs score with 3.2GHz QX9770 and 177.34's 1920x1200 Settings Unknown
Min. Unknown Avg.? 34.3 Max. Unknown

AT score (if average is shown) appears to be lower than what my system did with
similar CPU clock speed and identical driver.

P.S. Not sure if this matters, but my system also runs 2GB less memory than AT's test rig.

P.S.S. Also tried World In Conflict at these system settings.
1920x1200 4xAA 16xAF Every conceivable setting on and/or maxxed.
Min. 18 Avg. 37.26 Max. 132

P.S.S.^2 Also tried Call of Duty 4 at 1920x1200 4xAA Full AF.

My score: Min. 52 Avg. 105.33 Max. 227.00
AT score: 90.9

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: happy medium

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: happy medium
After reading all the reviews and speculation I'd assume.........

The 4850 is around the speed of a 8800gt? and more exspensive?
The 4870 is around the speed of a overclocked 9800gtx? and more exspensive?
The 4850x2 should be a little faster then the gtx260? and more exspensive?
The 4870x2 should be a little faster then the gtx280? price =
The gtx260/280 at 55nm should clock faster and be faster then both the 4850/70 x2?

Am I close? Any thoughts?

Not really, your post is way too Nvidia optimistic.. AMD prices will be lower and performance will be higher, not the other way around.. Specially in the high end

Nvidia would have to pull a rabbit out of their hats to match a well scaling 4870 X2 with just a shrink

I got the prices from the 4850/70 thread.
I'd assume if the 4870 is = 9800gtx and the 9800gtx in sli is slightly faster then the gtx280 then a 4870x2 will be only slightly faster then a gtx280 and = or slower then the refresh model gtx280? correct? gtx280 with gddr5 correct?

while the pricing information might be correct, the performance of the 4xxx series should be faster than similar priced g92 cards. (I know it's AMD slides, so until we see real benches we can only guess and use whatever they choose to release)
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html

 

[stepone]

You USA types think the price of the GTX 280 is too expensive over their then you should try UK prices!

The stock EVGA GTX 280 is selling for £470! That's $920!!!

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: stepone
You USA types think the price of the GTX 280 is too expensive over their then you should try UK prices!

The stock EVGA GTX 280 is selling for £470! That's $920!!!

I guess that's the price you UK types pay for health care and education. It's a trade off to be sure.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: sxr7171

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
to Extelleron you are such a ATI fanTard..
just have to say that... or are you getting paid by AMD

in every post, EVERY post, you make assumption that 4850/70 is going to be faster than 280 without any prove what so ever.... just makes me sick..

to Ocguy31

G280 sucks hard price/performance/heat/environmentally friendliness. G260 is definately a good value, consider that it is a single card without limitation of SLI/Crossfire.

Yeah but it still sucks. I can't even hope to play Crysis on very high on a 1920x1200 monitor with any AA or AF on it. 2 years after the 8800GTX and we get this turd? Wow. Just wow.

You cant?
Chris Ray's Rage3d GT200 article.
And he did this on a Phenom system.

That is pretty interesting and shoots holes in the theory that the 9800GX2 is just as fast in the latest games. Sure older games, but Crysis is leading edge and the GT200 whips it pretty handily. Even the 260 version.

 

[Keysplayr]

Pretty much. There is so much garbage on the web that it's very difficult to wade through and come away with a good understanding of a product under review.

 

[sourthings]

The large majority of the reviews available show the gx2 beating the new 280 at 1920x1200, particularly in crysis. That rage3d review is so far off the rest of the field it should be discounted as total bunk. Anyone who takes the time to look at all the reviews as of yet can see that.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: stepone
You USA types think the price of the GTX 280 is too expensive over their then you should try UK prices!

The stock EVGA GTX 280 is selling for £470! That's $920!!!

I guess that's the price you UK types pay for health care and education. It's a trade off to be sure.

Theres no trade off mate we in the UK are getting ripped off big time with everything from Fuel to food so make some room over there wont you because i think we'll be moving in.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: sourthings
The large majority of the reviews available show the gx2 beating the new 280 at 1920x1200, particularly in crysis. That rage3d review is so far off the rest of the field it should be discounted as total bunk. Anyone who takes the time to look at all the reviews as of yet can see that.

I took the time. And like any intelligent lad, I questioned them. I'm sure you've heard the term, "Question Everything". And that is a good approach no matter what the review states.

One good thing about being able to conduct your own benches, is you can directly compare your scores to all others on the web. Like i did with AT benches and my own. I saw differences.
That is what is important. I'm not here to convince you of anything. Only to share what I see.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: sourthings
The large majority of the reviews available show the gx2 beating the new 280 at 1920x1200, particularly in crysis. That rage3d review is so far off the rest of the field it should be discounted as total bunk. Anyone who takes the time to look at all the reviews as of yet can see that.

err... lol, go read a little about rage3d and they theory will be bunked. Anyways, their finding is same as computerbase.de. The problem is that not many website actually do detail and proper review. Anyways , if you had $1900 for GPU + $250 for 1.2W PSU + $250 for 3 way SLI mobo obtain the fastest gaming machine. GT2XX has good 3way SLI profiling.

 

[mmnno]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: sourthings
The large majority of the reviews available show the gx2 beating the new 280 at 1920x1200, particularly in crysis. That rage3d review is so far off the rest of the field it should be discounted as total bunk. Anyone who takes the time to look at all the reviews as of yet can see that.

err... lol, go read a little about rage3d and they theory will be bunked. Anyways, their finding is same as computerbase.de. The problem is that not many website actually do detail and proper review. Anyways , if you had $1900 for GPU + $250 for 1.2W PSU + $250 for 3 way SLI mobo obtain the fastest gaming machine. GT2XX has good 3way SLI profiling.

Tweaktown got pretty bad results with Tri SLI, and even 2 SLI was bad. But they were using 177.34. I'm afraid we're going to have to wait for another round of reviews, which will most likely come when the ATI cards hit.