PDA

View Full Version : GTX 285 To GTX 480 Upgrade Performance Problems


walterman
05-10-11, 01:52 PM
Hello guys,

I have been disconnected for a long time, and i just a GTX 480 as upgrade for my old GTX 285.

I just installed the card, and i must say that i'm seriously disappointed with the performance of this 480 compared to my old 285.

I barely see any difference in Crysis 2 (still at 40-60 fps), little changes in mmos like AoC (30-40 fps), and with my BR2 patch, the performance is total crap compared to my old card (from 95 fps to 60 fps).

I must be doing something really wrong, but i dunno where to start to check.

Help ! :(

bob saget
05-10-11, 03:09 PM
i think it might depend what resolution you play at. usually more expensive cards are much better at higher resolutions, but if you play at lower resolutions, it would be more similar.

Yaboze
05-10-11, 03:12 PM
It's either the resolution or processor that's holding you back.

walterman
05-10-11, 07:02 PM
Well, i do not understand it, but i have returned to my old 285, and the frame rates are better now.

I play at 1920x1200 with high level of AA/AF.

I have been reading the technical details of the 480 vs the 285:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/video/geforce-gtx-480/table.png

Maybe the higuer number of texture units in the 285 could explain the performance drop with the settings that i use.

I really dunno how to explain this.

WeReWoLf
05-10-11, 07:32 PM
That is a bit odd, when I replaced my 2x 280's with the single 480 I got almost the same performance, with the advantage of higher minimum frames.

Delbert
05-11-11, 03:52 AM
Replaced my 280 with a 480. Frame rates increased a lot on some game, but only slightly on a few. But everything is very smooth now. And i was able to bump up the quality settings to max ( 16xQ, 16xAF no optimisations etc ). My Q6600 is definetly hold back my card.
Do not know if triple buffering will help though.

walterman
05-14-11, 01:36 PM
I installed the 480 again today, to do some tests, and the results are a bit random, in some games, i see slightly better fps, but in others, i see the opposite, a drop in the fps.

I'll be testing the 480 the rest of the weekend, but, i do not have high hopes.

Maybe my CPU is holding the card, but, a 3.6 GHz Yorkfield isn't so bad even nowadays.

Intel17
05-14-11, 10:02 PM
Something is not right here. According to anandtech bench, http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/317?vs=309
the GTX 480 is WAY faster.

Somehow I doubt it's your CPU since, again, according to anadtech bench, a Q9650 holds its own against an i7 860. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/49?vs=108

Try a fresh reinstall of Windows.

Sean_W
05-15-11, 10:55 AM
What where you expecting though? I mean if your 285 was giving you a smooth 40-60 fps when a 480 won't seem much difference.

Crysis 2 is hardly good games to test. Try Crysis 1 maxed out 16xQAA with Super sampling.

MUYA
05-15-11, 09:43 PM
I went from a 295 to 580 (heat issues) and was surprised to find even better performances in certain circumstances. I was actually expecting the same performance etc

The 580 performed better in benching with Crysis actually. Also it was better in F1 2010. It was better in Age of Conan in DX10 mode in certain maps/areas.

grey_1
05-16-11, 11:01 AM
I'd bet your cpu is fine walterman. My 480 did just fine on a stock clocked 955BE.

Make sure you're doing a clean driver install, including cleaning left over registry bits etc.

Also check your temps/fan speed and make sure the 480 isn't throttling on you.

@Intel17 - you should never have to reinstall windows to swap a video card. I've swapped ATI and Nvidia on the same install with no problems.

Happy Life
05-27-11, 05:56 PM
Tessellation, DX11, try it...

DarkOneX
05-28-11, 02:47 PM
I went from a 285 to a 570 and was blown away, so something doesn't seem right here. Could just be vsync though, just a thought.

john19055
06-01-11, 04:12 AM
Something is just not right because the 480 is a lot faster card and if you play at 1920x1200 ,you should see a big increase.I had three 280 and went to three 470's and seen a big increase .I ran just one card for a while and it was faster then my 280 which was a BFG OCX so it came overclocked,and a default 470 was faster.Sounds like that 480 is;nt running to it's potenial.But there are some older games that the 470 was just around 10fps faster,but I could turn the FSAA to max and the aniso to 16x and those games looked great and ran smooth.

Eltigre88
06-10-11, 01:12 PM
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/317?vs=309

Something is defenitly not right.....

walterman
06-19-11, 11:40 AM
Well, i have been doing more tests during the last weeks, swapping in & out the cards, and i found the 480 to be faster in some scenarios, but slower on others. Overall, the 480 might be faster, but, i'm not happy with a card that is faster only sometimes.

According to my custom tests, my 285 is around a 15-25% faster when the application is bound by the texture sampling units, and the 480 is around a 40% faster than the 285 when the application is bound by shading power.

So, this is complicated because, to run 1920x1200 with high level of AF, you really need a lot of texture power, because you need to filter more texture samples, but also, you need the shading power, so, the decision is not easy.

I have been reading about the differences between the 480 & the 580, and it seems that i might be right, because nVidia increased the texture filtering performance in the 580, as i can read @ anand or xbit:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/geforce-gtx-580_2.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4008/nvidias-geforce-gtx-580

Personally, i'm going to keep using my 285, and i'm going to consider this 480 as my little mistake.

And if somebody wants a cheap 480, it's on sale :D