PDA

View Full Version : Official GeForce GTX 280 and GTX 260 reviews thread!


Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11

K007
06-16-08, 05:03 PM
If anything..i think the GTX260 might be the best card to go for, rather than go for the GX2..for those who prefer not go SLI features...

I wonder what micro stutters are like...i have a GX2 and i am not sure if i have seen this issue before...but i own a 7950GX2 not a 9800GX2..

spajdr
06-16-08, 05:22 PM
If anything..i think the GTX260 might be the best card to go for, rather than go for the GX2..for those who prefer not go SLI features...

I wonder what micro stutters are like...i have a GX2 and i am not sure if i have seen this issue before...but i own a 7950GX2 not a 9800GX2..

I didnt seen anything like that, but suddenly when someone mention it i sometimes see it, but then its been always like that with Crossfire and SLI and i never find it disturbing or annoying.

tijean
06-16-08, 05:40 PM
Because he's the only one to tell the truth ??

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-gtx-280,1953.html


This card is very noisy.... My 8800GTX fan turn at 1600rpm and it's silent !! On the GTX 280 it must turn to 500 rpm to be silent and at 1250 it's like a washing machine !

During Windows startup, the GT200 fan was quiet (running at 516 rpm, or 30% of its maximum rate). Then, once a game was started, it suddenly turned into a washing machine, reaching a noise level that was frankly unbearable – especially the GTX 280. The GTX 260 did slightly better, but also became noisy at 1250 rpm (the noise of the air flow, not of the fan itself). We should tell you, however, that our at-idle readings are taken after all our benchmarks have been run, after just a few minutes at idle. The problem is that the GTX 280 never really goes back to its minimum level, and the GTX 260’s fan, while it does better, still runs at 700 rpm – though that’s relatively quiet.

Still, the fans are a big disappointment with these cards, especially when you consider that they blow part of the hot air back into the case and so contribute to heating it, which in turn causes the GPU fan to crank up, not to mention the other components.


Hoping evga will redo the heatsink...

Waiting for ATI or GTX 260 @ .55 + with better heatsink-fan

spajdr
06-16-08, 05:58 PM
Our huge test at EXTRAHARDWARE :)
http://www.extrahardware.cz/geforce-gtx-280-gt200-kompromisy-stranou?page=0,0

page 29 have table with min.fps for all cards

Eliminator
06-16-08, 06:14 PM
Our huge test at EXTRAHARDWARE :)
http://www.extrahardware.cz/geforce-gtx-280-gt200-kompromisy-stranou?page=0,0

page 29 have table with min.fps for all cards
nice review... looks like gtx 280 is about 50% faster give or take on average than the 8800GTX... considering the steep price and the fact that it offers no new technological features... should be well worth it to wait for next gen

Destroy
06-16-08, 07:03 PM
Forget Crysis, Oblivion with Qarl's is where this card should be tested!

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/1862/oblivion2jw1.png (http://imageshack.us)

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/7843/oblivion4pd0.png (http://imageshack.us)


Glad you asked. How about at 16xQ AA :)

http://www.nvnews.net/reviews/geforce_gtx_280/images/1680_1050_16xq_aa.png

MrHydes
06-16-08, 09:13 PM
GeForce GTX 280 with QX9650 at 4GHz

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/6600/gtx2804ghzg02ly7.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/78/gtx2804ghzg01fz3.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/4687/gtx2804ghzg03iy1.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/2708/gtx2804ghzg04sv8.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/429/gtx2804ghzg05ed4.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/7575/gtx2804ghzg06nm1.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/4066/gtx2804ghzg07wa2.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/4488/gtx2804ghzg09ja1.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1253/gtx2804ghzg10uh4.gif (http://imageshack.us)

http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4291/gtx2804ghzg08oq3.gif (http://imageshack.us)


It was good to take the time to go visit IBuyPower Australia and see what
the GTX 280 was capable of when placed in a higher clocked environment.
For the most part the overclocked QX9650 processor used here did manage
to breathe a bit more life into the card.


Itís nice to see the card get a significant boost in some situations, but as
you can see some games arenít always a matter of simply adding more CPU
power. Itís clear that some games want more graphics card power, and for
that reason we will be diving into SLI multi GPU setups later on tonight, so
keep an eye out for some 4GHz SLI love.


Has my opinion changed on the GTX 280 from earlier in the night? Ė No, not
really; it still feels a bit lack luster and flat. What we hope to see though is
that the GTX 280 really begins to shine in an SLI environment. The only
problem I can see is that if the card begins to really shine in SLI, weíre
looking at $1200+ USD or $1500+ AUD setup costs, which is far from cheap.


There is no doubt that the GTX 280 does love the extra GHz that is on offer
from the IBP system, and for the most part we do see some excellent gains
in applications. We can see that when running PT Boats at 2560 x 1600, the
difference between the two setups was that the game would be playable at
2560 on the IBP system while you would probably be a bit disappointed
plodding along on the 3GHz system.


Source: tweaktown (http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1465/2/page_2_test_system_setup_and_3dmark06/index.html)


getting better and better :p

Roliath
06-16-08, 11:28 PM
Forget Crysis, Oblivion with Qarl's is where this card should be tested!
http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/1862/oblivion2jw1.png (http://imageshack.us)


Link to original source for Qarl's benches?

SH64
06-17-08, 12:09 AM
Not doing so good in Crysis except for the DH review.

jimmyjames123
06-17-08, 12:22 AM
Yup, that was the biggest difference I noti, honostly, the difference I cannot explain in FPS or graphs, overall the GTX 280's just feel much smoother.

Actually you can explain it with graphs. Take a look at [H]OCP's review where they show the huge fluctuations in the framerate of the 9800 GX2 card (and SLI and Crossfire systems in general). The amazing thing is how consistent and stable are the framerates on the GTX 280 and GTX 260 throughout the game.

Most reviews which claimed the 9800 GX2 is faster than the new GTX 280/260 cards only looked at average framerates, not at minimum framerates and not at lack of fluctuation in framerate during gameplay. Also, very few reviews looked at 8xAA or 16xAA CSAA.

Even the guys at Anandtech got it wrong. But [H]OCP, NV News, Rage3d (Chris Ray's review), PC Perspective, and some other places got it right. The GTX 280 and GTX 260 are definitely a nice improvement over the 9800 GX2 and the rest of the bunch in terms of real world performance/power consumption.

NVIDIA marketing did not do a good job this time. They missed out on two key opportunities:

1) They should have instructed reviewers to focus on smooth gameplay, consistency of framerates, and image quality (through 8xAA or 16xAA CSAA) compared to the current cards on the market. If NVIDIA lets reviewers go unchecked and test for pure framerate with no regards to smooth gameplay and high levels of AA, they are going to get hammered in many benchmarks against other dual-GPU solutions (from both NV and AMD).

2) They should never have priced GTX 280 at $649 with GTX 260 at $399 to create such a huge gap in price/performance ratio between the two cards. 60% more money for 10-20% more performance doesn't make a whole lot of sense. This made the GTX 280 look like a really poor value in reviews. The more sensible thing would be $429 for GTX 260, and $569 for the GTX 280. This way the GTX 260 is close enough to HD 4870 to be a competitor in price/performance ratio, and the GTX 280 is close enough in price to the GTX 260 to be a viable higher performance alternative without breaking the bank and without being a very poor value in comparison. And to generate the highest profit margins, it is always beneficial to push the most expensive and highest margin products. So discouraging people to buy the GTX 280 by creating such a big pricing differential between the 260 and 280 only hurts profit margins.

Lfctony
06-17-08, 12:29 AM
Not doing so good in Crysis except for the DH review.

Well, what we have to see here is the whole picture I believe. If we look at this from a performance improvement standpoint, the GTX 280 offers 60-80% improvements (sometimes more) over last generation's preferred supercard, the 8800GTX. We've had new cards that offered much less over the last few years (7800GTX -> 7900GTX, 1900XT -> 2900XT) or even offered less performance in some situations (8800GTX -> 9800GTX, 2900XT -> HD3870). Strictly speaking, the jump offered here is massive. But, this doesn't have much of an impact due to multi-GPU/card solutions. If there were only single cards now in the market, we'd all be very impressed right now. But Nvidia has already released the 9800GX2, which under certain conditions, outperforms the GTX 280.

In conclusion, if Nvidia decide to slap 2 GTX 280s on one PCB or 2 together at one point, then Nvidia's next single card will receive the same response. Because now we have the new single cards trying to improve on the last generation's single cards AND the last generations multi-cards as well. Not an easy task at all...

SH64
06-17-08, 12:35 AM
Hmm yeah i guess you have a point there. however i'm more biased towards Crysis performance .. Crysis @very high seems (for me at least) to be the "gauge" of the performance of any new GPU coming to market currently .. its one of the rare times where i dont check the whole review/benchmarks but rather focus on the game that matters to me the most. many might disagree with me on that though.

the way i see it : if the gfx card can play Crysis @VH smoothly then i'll be safe with any other upcoming big title (Alan Wake , Project Offset , FarCry2 ..) , if not then i have to worry.

ChrisRay
06-17-08, 12:58 AM
I personally dont understand alot of the Crysis results on the web. In my experience. And my GTX 280/260 SLIPreview (http://www.rage3d.com/previews/video/nvg2xx/index.php?p=1) the 9800GX2 ran out of memory at post 1600x1200 with AA enabled which severely hampered its performance in Crysis. I wonder if some time demos dont tell the whole story or what their timedemos are actually doing. At very high you cant even turn on AA at 1920x1080 with the 9800GX2 without it dropping to 3 FPS.

SH64
06-17-08, 01:05 AM
I personally dont understand alot of the Crysis results on the web. In my experience. And my GTX 280/260 SLIPreview (http://www.rage3d.com/previews/video/nvg2xx/index.php?p=1) the 9800GX2 ran out of memory at post 1600x1200 with AA enabled which severely hampered its performance in Crysis. I wonder if some time demos dont tell the whole story or what their timedemos are actually doing. At very high you cant even turn on AA at 1920x1080 with the 9800GX2 without it dropping to 3 FPS.
Unfortunately not all reviewers know what are they doing .. actually most of them! :thumbdwn:
i was surprised myself to see how some reviewers went on to tell how the 9800GX2 is "better" than the GTX280 disragarding all the advantages of the increased framebuffer size , SLI issues of the GX2 & many other points.
thanks for the note Chris.

Blacklash
06-17-08, 01:27 AM
I personally dont understand alot of the Crysis results on the web. In my experience. And my GTX 280/260 SLIPreview (http://www.rage3d.com/previews/video/nvg2xx/index.php?p=1) the 9800GX2 ran out of memory at post 1600x1200 with AA enabled which severely hampered its performance in Crysis. I wonder if some time demos dont tell the whole story or what their timedemos are actually doing. At very high you cant even turn on AA at 1920x1080 with the 9800GX2 without it dropping to 3 FPS.

Chris, is that what is happening here to the GX2 vs the GTX 280 in WiC with AA @ 2560x?

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=577&type=expert&pid=13

Pic for the lazy-
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/5241/wic2560barfy9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

ChrisRay
06-17-08, 01:45 AM
Yes most likely.

Chris

Mr_LoL
06-17-08, 02:11 AM
Quite fancy the GTX 260. Wonder if it will be a worthwhile upgrade from my 8800.

MUYA
06-17-08, 02:18 AM
Quite fancy the GTX 260. Wonder if it will be a worthwhile upgrade from my 8800.

More than likely!

Lfctony
06-17-08, 02:35 AM
Hmm yeah i guess you have a point there. however i'm more biased towards Crysis performance .. Crysis @very high seems (for me at least) to be the "gauge" of the performance of any new GPU coming to market currently .. its one of the rare times where i dont check the whole review/benchmarks but rather focus on the game that matters to me the most. many might disagree with me on that though.

the way i see it : if the gfx card can play Crysis @VH smoothly then i'll be safe with any other upcoming big title (Alan Wake , Project Offset , FarCry2 ..) , if not then i have to worry.

The fact that Crysis is a bitch to run at very high in the first place doesn't help at all either. We're talking a jump 80-90% on VH Crysis, but because the performance was so low in the first place, it's still unplayable. It's like comparing 4 -> 8fps and 18 -> 36fps. Both are 100% improvements, but only one is playable... :(

Mr_LoL
06-17-08, 02:49 AM
Edit

K007
06-17-08, 06:37 AM
hardocp is a good read. min fps comparisons show a complete different story, especially on cod4 min fps and age of conan...but i have to wonder if the 9800 gtx was 1gb....would it pull ahead...

Uberpwnage
06-17-08, 06:59 AM
vr-zone (http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/NVIDIA_GT200%3A_NVIDIA_GeForce_GTX_280_1GB_Review/5881-1.html)

The 280 wins every benchmark at every resolution vs the GX2, only review so far with such results...

K007
06-17-08, 07:09 AM
Need all review sites to show min fps as well.

nekrosoft13
06-17-08, 08:05 AM
I personally dont understand alot of the Crysis results on the web. In my experience. And my GTX 280/260 SLIPreview (http://www.rage3d.com/previews/video/nvg2xx/index.php?p=1) the 9800GX2 ran out of memory at post 1600x1200 with AA enabled which severely hampered its performance in Crysis. I wonder if some time demos dont tell the whole story or what their timedemos are actually doing. At very high you cant even turn on AA at 1920x1080 with the 9800GX2 without it dropping to 3 FPS.

speaking of Rage3d review, they said this

Nvidia's recent buyout of Ageia puts them in an interesting position. Subsequent to the buyout, the Ageia API has been converted over to CUDA in a matter of months, versus the year and half Ageia took to write it all in Assembly. All Geforce cards since the 8 series include PhysX support. While no PhysX supported games are currently available, Nvidia demos presented many PhysX enabled software that should hit the scene in the coming year. Some of it looked very interesting and some impacted game play in such manner that the game just wouldn't have been the same without it. The PhysX API is compatible with XBox360, PS3, and the PC and it looks to ultimately have a positive influence on the gaming industry.

there are plenty of PhysX games on the market that worked with old Ageia cards. Does this mean that this new nvidia PhysX will only work with new games? no support for all the older games?

ChrisRay
06-17-08, 11:12 AM
That was a mistake on my part. I have to go through my editor to get it fixed and we havent had a chance. Currently. I'm not entirely sure. Nvidia owns the API for PhysX. But I only know of the demo'd games Nvidia showed at editors day running PhysX. None of the older PhysX supporting titles were included or Demo'd except an UT3 Mod which may also be exclusive to GPU physX. So those are the only games I am willing to comment on specifically. All of which were titles Nvidia was heavily influencing the introduction of GPU PhysX into. I have been trying to find out the answer to that very question but Nvidia has been slower than usual with responses due to how busy this launch has made them.


Chris