nV News Forums

 
 

nV News Forums (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/index.php)
-   NVIDIA GeForce 200 Series (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=60)
-   -   Justifying A GeForce GTX 275 (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=136429)

seeker 07-26-09 11:58 PM

Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
I came across a TigerDirect ad offering a BFG GeForce GTX 275 OC Video Card - 896MB for $201.98 shipped after a $30 MIR. It's not that I really need a new video card, but this is so much lower than I had seen this card for recently, I'm tempted, but to decide, I need more than a cheap price. Since I have been having a problem operating my monitor on a HDMI cable with my current video card, and this card says that it is HDMI (with an adapter), I started wondering if not all PCIe video cards with DVI connectors wouldn't be HDMI also...with adapters?

I'm certain that this card will outperform what I have, but that really only comes into play on games, which isn't really a priority at the moment. Is there any other factor that I should consider before making a decision?

Bigbuck 07-27-09 12:23 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
The BFG 275's at Newegg are all around that price.

seeker 07-27-09 12:29 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
Thanks, but I wouldn't order from Newegg if they were giving them away free.

pakotlar 07-27-09 02:36 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
I would grab a 4890 easily over a 275, even a 285 if it is a 960 or 1000mhz version. Standard 4890's, which all OC past 900mhz can be found ~ 160 dollars.

4890's will certainly be more future proof than the GT200. For reference of how the last great ATI cards aged check this out:

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...eviews/?page=5

X1950XTX, and to a lesser extent X1900xtx KILL the 7900 series in quite a few scenarios today. Shader heavy games are murder for the G71 series. I believe that future games will show similar results on 4890 vs GT200b. I run a GTX 285, and still would rather go 4890.

ATI's technology since r300, with the noticeable exception of the r600 series, has absolutely murdered nvidia's in longevity. At the time they perform the same, but down the road, nVidia always loses out. It seems that nVidia develops for todays games, and usually wins or ties ATI (winning more often, at least this generation, and won in x1800 vs 7800 & 7900), but down the road, ATI's vision is proven to be the superior one.

zingzong 07-27-09 08:22 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by pakotlar (Post 2055390)
I would grab a 4890 easily over a 275, even a 285 if it is a 960 or 1000mhz version. Standard 4890's, which all OC past 900mhz can be found ~ 160 dollars. .

GTX 275>4890. Nvidia better driver support+physx. The 4890's are nice but has two major strikes against it, texture units and driver support.
Quote:

Originally Posted by pakotlar (Post 2055390)
4890's will certainly be more future proof than the GT200. For reference of how the last great ATI cards aged check this out:

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...eviews/?page=5.

ROTFCOPTER! This isnt the days of the X850XT vs the 6800Ultra, yes back then ATI was most definently better as I owned both a X850XT and a X1900XTX up until the arrival of the 8800GTX and these benches that you posted only prove how much better the 8800GTX aged compared to its direct competitor the 2900XT.
Quote:

Originally Posted by pakotlar (Post 2055390)
X1950XTX, and to a lesser extent X1900xtx KILL the 7900 series in quite a few scenarios today. Shader heavy games are murder for the G71 series.

Noooooo really! I bet no one was even aware of that! Once again, this isnt 2005 jack.:headexplode:

Quote:

Originally Posted by pakotlar (Post 2055390)
I run a GTX 285, and still would rather go 4890..

Then why dont you sell your lowley 285 and get one? :rolleyes2

Quote:

Originally Posted by pakotlar (Post 2055390)
ATI's technology since r300, with the noticeable exception of the r600 series, has absolutely murdered nvidia's in longevity.

ATI reigned in the R300 days, lost in the R600 days badly to Nvidia and now both are pretty much trading blows accross the board. Get your facts straight.

Bigbuck 07-27-09 10:19 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by zingzong (Post 2055493)
GTX 275>4890. Nvidia better driver support+physx. The 4890's are nice but has two major strikes against it, texture units and driver support.

This is pretty much personnel opinion. The 4890 either ties or beats the GTX 275 in every game AnandTech reviewed the cards with. Not to mention Phsyx is definitely not a selling point. It does absolutely nothing in games that do not use it and there are not many well known games that use it. Maybe it will be something work paying the extra money for in the future, but right not it is not worth it. I would rather put that extra $50-$100 on a nice CPU cooler or extra RAM. I cannot speak for driver support as I do not own an ATI card, but I know it is not as bad as it used to be. There are problems with drivers on both sides, its just that Nvidia decides to leak the majority of them.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3555&p=12
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3588
http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html

zingzong 07-27-09 10:57 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigbuck (Post 2055561)
Not to mention Phsyx is definitely not a selling point. It does absolutely nothing in games that do not use it and there are not many well known games that use it.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html

Your kidding right? that link you posted proves just how nice having physx capable hardware really is. That is a load of games and its only a partial list at that.

My latest experience with ATI vs Nvidia is that while the newer ATI cards can sometimes hold a fairly high framerate I find it isnt always consistent, for example when things heat up in a game aka explosions or a lot of characters running around the Nvidia cards seem to hold up much better in the min FPS department and I believe this is due to the higher texture and rops count of the GTX 275. This just makes for a much smoother gaming experience overall as I find the Frame rates to be more consistent with Nvidia's latest hardware.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3539

But yes, as you said overall the two cards are pretty close together for the most part. Either card is a good choice, I just prefer the 275 to the 4890 for the above mentioned reasons.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/sapp...mages/cod4.gif

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/sapp...s/fallout3.gif

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/sapp...mages/far2.gif

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/sapp...ges/crysis.gif

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/sapp...es/stalker.gif

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/sapp...images/l4d.gif

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/giga...s/arma1920.gif

BelligerentBill 07-27-09 11:56 AM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
I upgraded from an 8800GTS like you have to a GTX 275 and I think you'll be extremely happy if you do it.... I certainly am. I'm even using my 8800 GTS in the system as a dedicated Physx processor.

I used to be all about ATI but I never could stomach the shadow quality in almost every game out at the time of my last card. That was my deciding factor when I switched to Nvidia and I would be hard pressed to ever consider going back. I don't know if their shadow quality has been fixed or not, but I don't even care to find out. I've been nothing short of happy with every nVidia card I've had since then (2x 7800 GS AGP cards, 8800 GTS, GTX 275).

Go ahead and get yourself the card, you won't be disappointed.

bob saget 07-27-09 12:18 PM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
I made exactly the same change as you.
Do you find physx games run faster with the 8800GTS? I got a lower 3dvantage score with the 8800GTS, this is normal?
If you have tried it with games, which ones have you tried with?

BelligerentBill 07-27-09 01:30 PM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
It's slower in 3DMark Vantage because Vantage is testing ONLY Physx and not much on rendering. In an actual game the GPU is being taxed much more by rendering the graphics and has less overhead available to process Physx.

I did extensive testing with Cryostasis, Unreal Tournament 3, and Sacred 2 by logging 5 minutes of play using Fraps and every time my minimum FPS was higher by 5-10 fps while using the 8800 GTS as the Physx processor. My maximum FPS didn't really change but that's to be expected. While the GPU is being taxed the most by rendering having the Physx processing offloaded to another card helps immensly. I'm confident this will only improve over time as nVidia further optimizes their Physx drivers.

bob saget 07-27-09 03:03 PM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
I got you.

pakotlar 07-27-09 05:52 PM

Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by zingzong (Post 2055592)
Your kidding right? that link you posted proves just how nice having physx capable hardware really is. That is a load of games and its only a partial list at that.

My latest experience with ATI vs Nvidia is that while the newer ATI cards can sometimes hold a fairly high framerate I find it isnt always consistent, for example when things heat up in a game aka explosions or a lot of characters running around the Nvidia cards seem to hold up much better in the min FPS department and I believe this is due to the higher texture and rops count of the GTX 275. This just makes for a much smoother gaming experience overall as I find the Frame rates to be more consistent with Nvidia's latest hardware.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3539

But yes, as you said overall the two cards are pretty close together for the most part. Either card is a good choice, I just prefer the 275 to the 4890 for the above mentioned reasons.

The texturing units on the GT200 series run at pretty low utilization rates, and actually texturing performance between the two, especially in multi-texturing, is very similar. R790 has both greater ALU utilization, but also greater raw processing units. Unless you are using the extra MUL on GT200, you actually have quite a bit less processing power. Second of all, some of the big performance boosters in DX10.1 are carried over to DX11, so you can expect ATI to benefit from that (ex...fetch4, much faster multisampling coverage).

So, no I'm not joking. They perform similarly right now, but the 4890 OC (the xtx of today) at ~950mhz starts to beat the GTX285, or tie it, at a far lower cost. The anandtech benchies you linked show that. ATI seems to have a bigger drop off at 2560*1200, so if that's your res. I would stick with the GTX 275 or 285.

As for why I'm sticking with my GTX 285, 1) it's none of your business and 2) I'm not going to spend money on a slight downgrade/slight upgrade (depending on the scenario). I firmly believe that in 2011 the 4890 OC will prove to be the better performer, but by then obviously newer stuff will be out. Still, its a good upgrade path if you decide to go crossfire down the road.

As for texturing units:

Btw, the Fx5800 also excelled at texturing. Problem is that texturing is pretty much the least of your worries. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ra,600-13.html

The fact that the 4890 meets the GTX 285 with way less bandwidth, 1/2 the ROP's and texture units should indicate to you that the GTX 285 has a very poor balance of Texturing & Rasterization vs ALU/math processing. In future games 4890's advantages in the latter will show themselves even more than they do today, whereas today it already shows itself, and especially in dx10.1 cases.

Here is how "fast" GT200 textures: http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=53993

It's actually meeting very little of its actual "theoretical" performance. It seems that ATI actually has the advantage in texturing.

Here is the performance that a 250 dollar 1ghz 4890 gets you : http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3555&p=12

From personal experience, the GTX 285 overclocks nowhere nearly as far. Plus the added benefit that you buy these cards running at 1ghz stock.

Don't get me wrong; I love my GTX 285. But I'd never buy it if I didn't get it for roughly ~0.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.