nVidia GT200 Series Review Thread

[Wreckem]

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.

From what I can tell GX2 only beats the GTX 260 and 280 in Crysis at 1920x1200 when AA is turned off. The GTXs beat out everything once you start cranking up the AA.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

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.

From what I can tell GX2 only beats the GTX 260 and 280 in Crysis at 1920x1200 when AA is turned off. The GTXs beat out everything once you start cranking up the AA.

This has something to do with how much vram and bandwidth not because how powerful a chip is. Crysis in particular uses more than 512mb of vram in 1920x1200 especially with AA.

 

[OCGuy]

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

"Well scaling" ....we have yet to see one of those. So unless you are on the inside of AMD, I think your post is a little too ATI optimisitic.

Why are they coming out with a card that = 8800GT for more money? 8800GT are constantly on sale in the $1xx.

Im starting to think my highly overclocked 9800GTX could end up being a pretty good purchase compared to the 4870, but I will reserve judgement on that one until I see benchmarks. The 4850 looks like a lock to compete with the 8800GT though.

 

[sxr7171]

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.

I didn't see "very high" there. Even on just "high" we're looking at 27fps average on G280 with 4xAA. Wonder what the min framerate must be. Sounds unplayable at very high.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

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

"Well scaling" ....we have yet to see one of those. So unless you are on the inside of AMD, I think your post is a little too ATI optimisitic.

Why are they coming out with a card that = 8800GT for more money? 8800GT are constantly on sale in the $1xx.

Im starting to think my highly overclocked 9800GTX could end up being a pretty good purchase compared to the 4870, but I will reserve judgement on that one until I see benchmarks. The 4850 looks like a lock to compete with the 8800GT though.

This is not the place to discuss 4800 series performance, but I will refer you to the following slides:

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html

HD 4850 is much faster than 8800GT.

Prices on nVidia cards are beginning to drop already. If you noticed in the Hot Deals forums, a 9800GTX was recently available for $209.

I think you will see good competition between the HD 4850 in the <$200 market and the HD 4870 & GTX 260 in the $300-400 market.

 

[AzN]

I don't understand how Nvidia didn't up their texture address and filtering when they reworked their SP with GT200. The old G92 cores had 8 texture address/filter for every 16SP but GT200 has 8 texture address/filter for every 24SP. Those textures did a whole lot more for games than just higher SP clocks with G92 with modern games.

GT200 has the same 8 by 8 texturing ability just like G92 but only 10 clusters of SP which equals out to 80tmu. That was the biggest difference when comparing G92 vs G80 and why G92 was able to beat it in lower resolutions or get very close to high resolution with much lower memory bandwidth and less rop. If they did 12 by 12 which would be the exact same number as G92 SP/texture ratio it would have 120 tmu instead of 80. GT200 is inferior far as texturing ability and a step backwards when you compare ratio to G92. Let's just hope Nvidia's refresh would fix this issue.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

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

"Well scaling" ....we have yet to see one of those. So unless you are on the inside of AMD, I think your post is a little too ATI optimisitic.

Why are they coming out with a card that = 8800GT for more money? 8800GT are constantly on sale in the $1xx.

Im starting to think my highly overclocked 9800GTX could end up being a pretty good purchase compared to the 4870, but I will reserve judgement on that one until I see benchmarks. The 4850 looks like a lock to compete with the 8800GT though.

This is not the place to discuss 4800 series performance, but I will refer you to the following slides:

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html

HD 4850 is much faster than 8800GT.

Prices on nVidia cards are beginning to drop already. If you noticed in the Hot Deals forums, a 9800GTX was recently available for $209.

I think you will see good competition between the HD 4850 in the <$200 market and the HD 4870 & GTX 260 in the $300-400 market.

On one thread you say 4870 = GTX260, on the other you say 4870 > GTX280 (which you are the only one in the world claiming. I dont even think you are taking notes so you can keep your "facts" straight.

Back to the GTX280, I think NV is trying to squeeze $650 out of as many of the early adopters as possible. I will not be surprised when they are at $599 soon, at which time, Its mine. Seeing how fast GPU prices have dropped recently, I am just not inclined to pay launch price for any card.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

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

"Well scaling" ....we have yet to see one of those. So unless you are on the inside of AMD, I think your post is a little too ATI optimisitic.

Why are they coming out with a card that = 8800GT for more money? 8800GT are constantly on sale in the $1xx.

Im starting to think my highly overclocked 9800GTX could end up being a pretty good purchase compared to the 4870, but I will reserve judgement on that one until I see benchmarks. The 4850 looks like a lock to compete with the 8800GT though.

This is not the place to discuss 4800 series performance, but I will refer you to the following slides:

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html

HD 4850 is much faster than 8800GT.

Prices on nVidia cards are beginning to drop already. If you noticed in the Hot Deals forums, a 9800GTX was recently available for $209.

I think you will see good competition between the HD 4850 in the <$200 market and the HD 4870 & GTX 260 in the $300-400 market.

On one thread you say 4870 = GTX260, on the other you say 4870 > GTX280 (which you are the only one in the world claiming. I dont even think you are taking notes so you can keep your "facts" straight.

Back to the GTX280, I think NV is trying to squeeze $650 out of as many of the early adopters as possible. I will not be surprised when they are at $599 soon, at which time, Its mine. Seeing how fast GPU prices have dropped recently, I am just not inclined to pay launch price for any card.

In general HD 4870 will compete with the GTX 260. In certain situations it may be faster or slower. In a small number of situations, such as Crysis (which I was talking about in another thread) it will likely be about equal, or a bit faster, than the GTX 280. I'll refer you to these benchmarks: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html
GTX 280 > HD 3870 by 50%. The HD 4870 will be at least 50% faster than the 3870, that is for sure, and thus it will equal the GTX 280 (or likely beat it).

I'd prefer you add "in Crysis" to your sig quote. Never did I claim the 4870 will be faster than the 280 on average.

As for prices, that's exactly what is happening. nVidia is going to milk the people who will pay $649 for the GTX 280 before they lower the price to a more acceptable one. There are always going to be people who will buy a high-end product regardless of its performance. Those who want the ultimate graphics setup are going to buy 3x GTX 280 for Tri-SLI, and they'll be buying them now at $649. When the initial sales dry up and the HD 4800 series is released, nVidia will lower the price.

I would say that if you have a 9800 GX2 that you bought and you can step up, you should do it now, but otherwise you should wait for the GTX 280 to drop in price. I really think that a $499 GTX 280 in the near future is not out of the question. Unless you have money to blow or you are stepping up, it would be a very good idea to wait a month or two until ATI cards are released and the prices are dropped.

 

[OCGuy]

Well it is happening a little faster than I thought....PNY has one for $599 AMIR @ the Egg. Come on price drops!!!

Edit: Is it true that they have to say "Add to cart to see price" on the $599 because of Nvidias advertised pricing controls?

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/...OSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA

 

[CP5670]

I'm expecting to see them drop to at least $550 pretty soon, probably after a week or two. That is what happened with the 9800GX2 and that card was indisputably the fastest when it came out, unlike this one. Although I don't like rebates unless I am happy with the original price.

And yeah, I like how Nvidia ordered the "minimum price" to remain $650.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31


On one thread you say 4870 = GTX260, on the other you say 4870 > GTX280 (which you are the only one in the world claiming. I dont even think you are taking notes so you can keep your "facts" straight.

yet he has absolutely no prove nor any benchmarks... i wonder if Extelleron is getting paid for all those fud...

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

In general HD 4870 will compete with the GTX 260. In certain situations it may be faster or slower. In a small number of situations, such as Crysis (which I was talking about in another thread) it will likely be about equal, or a bit faster, than the GTX 280. I'll refer you to these benchmarks: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7854.html
GTX 280 > HD 3870 by 50%. The HD 4870 will be at least 50% faster than the 3870, that is for sure, and thus it will equal the GTX 280 (or likely beat it).

please indicate you are basing these observations on pure rumors..

to mod, can you please get Extelleron to stop baseless fud for godsake? with absolutely no benchmark nor data to back it up...

 

[taltamir]

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.

What are those "health cares" and "educations" you speak of? I have been living in the USA for 9 years and I have never seen either.

But yea, there are trade offs to having government support.

 

[AustinMatherne]

Is there a motherboard on the market that could run three of GTX 280s in SLI?

On BFG's website they say:

PCI Express® 2.0 Support
Designed for the new PCI Express 2.0 bus architecture offering the highest data transfer speeds for the most bandwidth-hungry games and 3D applications, while maintaining backwards compatibility with existing PCI Express motherboards for the broadest support.

Does that mean you could run three in SLI on a motherboad with two PCI Express 2.0 slots, and one normal PCI Express slot?

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: AustinMatherne
Is there a motherboard on the market that could run three of GTX 280s in SLI?

On BFG's website they say:

PCI Express® 2.0 Support
Designed for the new PCI Express 2.0 bus architecture offering the highest data transfer speeds for the most bandwidth-hungry games and 3D applications, while maintaining backwards compatibility with existing PCI Express motherboards for the broadest support.

Does that mean you could run three in SLI on a motherboad with two PCI Express 2.0 slots, and one normal PCI Express slot?

Any 780i or 790i motherboard will run 3 GTX 280's in SLI.

I suppose the third card runs @ PCI-e 1.0 speeds since the 790i/780i boards have two PCI-e x16 2.0 slots and one PCI-e x16 1.0 slot.

JACKDRUID, you are the one spreading "fud" and making senseless acquisitions. Everything I say is backed up by data, just because I don't provide a page of explanation everytime I say something does not mean it is "baseless." I'll send you a PM detailing what I was talking about. This conversation has no place on these forums, much less this topic.

 

[sourthings]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

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.

From what I can tell GX2 only beats the GTX 260 and 280 in Crysis at 1920x1200 when AA is turned off. The GTXs beat out everything once you start cranking up the AA.

Yes, so with the 280 you get a better framerate in crysis at 1920x1200 with 4xaa on, an average of 25, which is not even a comfortable or playable framerate. I haven't seen a bench of the 280 at 2560x1600 with 4xaa, but I think logic tells us it's completely unplayable.

So for a playable setting at 1920x1200 with high settings you have to turn aa off on the gtx280, which brings us full circle back to the gx2 being the better card.

If people want to buy the 280 go ahead, I just think you are better off really looking at what you are getting and not finding yourself shortchanged when another card comes out in a few months that performs better and costs less. Not a certainty, but it is shaping up to look quite likely. I was all set to get a 280, I even was considering actually going SLI as much as I didn't want to use a pos nvidia motherboard. But these cards are really a letdown, a lot like the gx2 was. I'll stick with my 8800gtx. There is no increase in high res playability for me here that is signifigant enough to pay $700 for, let alone $1800 or so for SLI, at all.

The 280 is non too impressive. Even if it is something in tri-sli, quad gx2 is still better again. It's a lame duck the 280 is....

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: Wreckem

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.

From what I can tell GX2 only beats the GTX 260 and 280 in Crysis at 1920x1200 when AA is turned off. The GTXs beat out everything once you start cranking up the AA.

This has something to do with how much vram and bandwidth not because how powerful a chip is. Crysis in particular uses more than 512mb of vram in 1920x1200 especially with AA.

You're right, but I don't really care what the reason is. I have a 1920x1200 LCD, and I like AA. I'm going to tend to go with the card(s) that gives me what I want.

 

[Foxery]

Heads up, the new Folding@Home client is out with nVidia support.
Official link (FoldingForum.org)

Mods: Worth a thread/announcement in this section? I didn't want to blatantly cross-post from the Distributed Computing forum, but it would be great to instill some interest for Team AnandTech (Team #198!) with all the new buyers.

Additional notes -
-This version runs on both ATI (2000, 3000 and 4000 series) and nVidia cards (8000, 9000, GT200 series)
-Newest official drivers are required.
-32-bit versions of WinXP and Vista are officially supported. 64-bit versions not guaranteed.

 

[LightningRider]

Personally I think the GTX 260 will be more than enough for 1920x1200 for a while to come. Saves yourself 300$ too. With that money saved I might buy myself a 2nd monitor.

 

[Cookie Monster]

PCGh - GT200 Review: Extreme FSAA benchmarks and overclocking

They used modes like 16xS. 32xS and 16xOGSSAA

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Let me start with detailing the specification overhauls seen in the HD 4870 when compared to the previous model, the 3870. The only specification that at this point is not confirmed is the number of texture units. It is either 40 or 32.

actually, nothing is confirmed until NDA is lefted and we have the actual card/spec.

The HD 4870 (clocked at 750/3600) will have 2.41x the shading power, 1.94x the texture power (or 2.41x if it has 40 TMUs), 60% more memory bandwidth, and 0.97x the pixel processing power when compared to the HD 3870 (clocked at 775/2250).

this is once again an assumption, no one knows for sure unless you are under NDA, which then you were not supposed to be talking about it....

additiionally, what is important is the bottleneck and real world performance. at this point, no one knows.

thank you for the informative pm backed up by tons of assumed specs/reasoning, unfortunately, derivatives of an assumption is still an assumption, you do not have facts of its performance, yet.

I, on the other hand, support wholeheartly on AMD to do well, but not blindly so. I would be surprised if 4870 is as just fast as 8800gts, which is already a 20-30% performance gain. if t sells for $199, it would be a better deal than 9800gtx.

So with 2.41x the shader, and 1.94/2.41x the texture performance of HD 3870, we can expect the HD 4870 to be very close to 2x faster than the 3870. Even if we seriously reduce this estimate, remember the 4870 only has to perform 50% faster than the 3870 to equal the GTX 280

all these 2.41x, 1.94x are NOT confirmed.
9800gtx is about 30% faster than 3870.
GTX280 is about 50% faster than 9800gtx.

so the calculation is actually

9800gtx = 1
3870 = .7
gtx280 = 1.5

aka gtx280 is more than twice as fast as 3870.

 

[footballrunner800]

well i just applied for a step-up to a gtx280 from my 9800gtx. Im still not sure if im going to keep it or not. It all depends on the 4870's performance

 

[pcgamer321]

Hmm, I'm a bit disappointed with these cards. I was looking forward to them, but now ATi is looking more appealing.

Need to find a replacement for my 2900xt. (and reason I got it is it kinda better than a 8800gts (older one) and that was my budget)

 

[JACKDRUID]

Originally posted by: pcgamer321
Hmm, I'm a bit disappointed with these cards. I was looking forward to them, but now ATi is looking more appealing.

Need to find a replacement for my 2900xt. (and reason I got it is it kinda better than a 8800gts (older one) and that was my budget)

definately, i won't tough GTX280 w. an 8ft pole... I might still burn myself...

price just doesn't align w. performance, heat, electrical cost, size...

 

[Denithor]

I don't think I'll be picking up either GTX 260 or 280. At $400 I can just as easily get a PS3 with a built-in BluRay player free.

Now, if the 4850 performs at the same level as the 9800GTX for $200...maybe.