View Single Post
Old 07-27-09, 05:52 PM   #12
pakotlar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Justifying A GeForce GTX 275

Quote:
Originally Posted by zingzong View Post
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.
  Reply With Quote