Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 200 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-16-08, 03:14 PM   #25
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptNKILL View Post
Strange... 240 stream processors and 896Mb of memory. More SPs is good, but it seems odd that it'd have the same amount of memory as the GTX 260 with the same SPs as the 280.

Looks like another card I'll definitely be skipping though. GX2 for the lose.

*This is a speculative mode and not denying or confirming anything*

This has moreto do with GPU PCBS than actual chip yields. My guess is the GTX 295 cards have fully functional core units. But the ROP/Memory partitions are disabled for PCB costs due to the 260 PCB costing alot less to make. I dont honestly believe the GTX 260 or GTX 280 is all that bandwith limited. Most of its extra performance comes from higher clocks/extra ROPS.

Chris
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-08, 04:15 PM   #26
walterman
Rayne
 
walterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,525
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay View Post
... I dont honestly believe the GTX 260 or GTX 280 is all that bandwith limited...
If you run your fav games in low res & with low level of AA (or no AA), yes.
__________________
ASUS Rampage Formula X48 | Xeon 3350 @ 3.6 GHz (450x8/1.26v) | 4x1GB OCZ DDR2 PC2-6400 Reaper CL3 @ 900 MHz 3-4-4-15 | 1 x eVGA GTX 285 SSC | 1 x ASUS EN8800GTX (PhysX/CUDA -> Burnt by nVidia 196.75 driver) | X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty PCIe | 1 x Intel X25-M G2 80GB | 2 x 750GB WD RE2 7500AYYS SATA2 16MB | Samsung SH-B083L SATA | Enermax Revolution 1250W | Samsung SyncMaster 275T 27" 1920x1200 | Thermaltake Black Armor | BloodRayne 2 FSAA Patch
walterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-08, 05:17 PM   #27
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by walterman View Post
If you run your fav games in low res & with low level of AA (or no AA), yes.

Which I dont. Most of the disparities seen between the GTX 280/260 can be accounted for the additional pixel pipes and clocks. Bandwith does help a little. But I think you'd be surprised how much FPS bang you get per bandwith verses how much FPS bang you get with higher pixel fillrate. I do to this day believe the GTX 280 has more bandwith than it needs. This is why high core overclocks of the GTX 260 make it so easily caught up with the GTX 280.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-08, 05:52 PM   #28
CaptNKILL
CUBE
 
CaptNKILL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA, USA
Posts: 18,844
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay View Post
Which I dont. Most of the disparities seen between the GTX 280/260 can be accounted for the additional pixel pipes and clocks. Bandwith does help a little. But I think you'd be surprised how much FPS bang you get per bandwith verses how much FPS bang you get with higher pixel fillrate. I do to this day believe the GTX 280 has more bandwith than it needs. This is why high core overclocks of the GTX 260 make it so easily caught up with the GTX 280.
I agree. As I've said several times before, pixel fill rate (and even memory bandwidth to an extent) hasn't gotten much attention since we started seeing unified shaders. Everyone talks about the SPs and the shader clock but a ton of fillrate is still going to make for a faster graphics card where as 10 billion shader processors is only going to do as much shader processing as is required.

We haven't yet reached the point where everything can be done with shaders. 1920x1200 with 8xAA in a game with extremely high res textures, foliage and a huge draw distance is still going to bring a huge fill rate load on the GPU, no matter how many SPs it has.
__________________
---- Primary Rig ---- CoolerMaster 690 II Advance - Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P - Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 4.0Ghz + Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
6GB DDR2 @ 942Mhz 5-5-5-20 1.9v (2x1Gb Wintec AMPX PC2-8500 & 2x2Gb G.Skill PC2-6400) - EVGA Geforce GTX 470 @ 750/1500/1850 (1.050v)
Sparkle Geforce GTS 250 1Gb Low-Profile (Physx) - Crucial RealSSD C300 64Gb SSD - Seagate 7200.12 500Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA
ASUS VW266H 25.5" LCD - OCZ GameXStream 700W PSU - ASUS Xonar DX - Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Surround - Windows 7 Professional x64
---- HTPC ---- Asus M3A78-EM 780G - AMD Athlon X2 5050e 45W @ 2.6Ghz - 2x2GB Kingston PC2-6400 DDR2 - Sparkle 350W PSU
Seagate 7200.10 320Gb SATA - Seagate 7200.10 250Gb SATA - Athenatech A100BB.350 MicroATX Desktop - Creative X-Fi XtremeMusic
CaptNKILL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-08, 08:59 PM   #29
rage10
Registered User
 
rage10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the clouds!:)
Posts: 1,270
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonPC View Post
Just wondering but how so? That would be very interesting and enticing as multi monitor is one of SLI's biggest drawback.
but didnt 180.xx enable multi monitor?
rage10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-08, 11:06 PM   #30
Bman212121
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,726
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay View Post
Which I dont. Most of the disparities seen between the GTX 280/260 can be accounted for the additional pixel pipes and clocks. Bandwith does help a little. But I think you'd be surprised how much FPS bang you get per bandwith verses how much FPS bang you get with higher pixel fillrate. I do to this day believe the GTX 280 has more bandwith than it needs. This is why high core overclocks of the GTX 260 make it so easily caught up with the GTX 280.
Out of curiosity do you know how many layers the PCB is on the GTX 260 / 280?
Bman212121 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-08, 01:31 AM   #31
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bman212121 View Post
Out of curiosity do you know how many layers the PCB is on the GTX 260 / 280?


It depends on which versions you get. Honestly I dont know right offhand but some of the newer 260-216 55NM PCBS are simpler and I'd have to check on the 260-280. Cant comment on the possibly newer stuff yet.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-08, 05:44 AM   #32
walterman
Rayne
 
walterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,525
Post Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay View Post
Which I dont. Most of the disparities seen between the GTX 280/260 can be accounted for the additional pixel pipes and clocks. Bandwith does help a little. But I think you'd be surprised how much FPS bang you get per bandwith verses how much FPS bang you get with higher pixel fillrate. I do to this day believe the GTX 280 has more bandwith than it needs. This is why high core overclocks of the GTX 260 make it so easily caught up with the GTX 280.
The latest games are bounded by the arithmetic power (SPs), but, the old games that need less arithmetic clock cycles per pixel, became bounded by the bandwidth.

Once you have enough arithmetic power, bandwidth is the constraint.

High resolution textures do need a lot of bandwidth (ex: my BR2 patch uses texture compression to save bandwidth), high AF needs to read more texels from the textures, SSAA does not use buffer compression, pixel blending uses a lot of bandwidth (bloom effects), ...

High bandwidth guarantees that your arithmetic power (your SPs) will be feeded with all the data that it needs.

This is a problem for the CPUs with more than 8 cores, so, try to imagine the memory wall in a GPU with thousands of SPs:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...pointless.html

Again, the memory bandwidth is like the gold ingots of a gfx card.
__________________
ASUS Rampage Formula X48 | Xeon 3350 @ 3.6 GHz (450x8/1.26v) | 4x1GB OCZ DDR2 PC2-6400 Reaper CL3 @ 900 MHz 3-4-4-15 | 1 x eVGA GTX 285 SSC | 1 x ASUS EN8800GTX (PhysX/CUDA -> Burnt by nVidia 196.75 driver) | X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty PCIe | 1 x Intel X25-M G2 80GB | 2 x 750GB WD RE2 7500AYYS SATA2 16MB | Samsung SH-B083L SATA | Enermax Revolution 1250W | Samsung SyncMaster 275T 27" 1920x1200 | Thermaltake Black Armor | BloodRayne 2 FSAA Patch
walterman is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-08, 10:23 PM   #33
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Except. Memory bandwith doesnt scale well with the GTX 280. You can add loads of bandwith and get nearly nothing. If the card was extremely bandwith limited. Scaling Core/ROP domains would not increase performance the way it does. Yet it does. Pixel and texture fillrate bottlenecks simply arent constrained by bandwith on the GTX 280 ((or 260 for that matter)).


Do some experiments yourself with Anti aliasing ((the most heavily zfill/bandwith limited tests there)). And watch as you gain more per clock than you do per bandwith. You reach a certain point where bandwith becomes a limiting factor on the texel and pixel fillrates. But currently these bandwith limitations are not that reachable. Since core clocks continue to be the best scaler of performance.

Next experiment with a low end card with little bandwith but high core clocks. You will get the exact opposite performance gains by increasing the bandwith verses the core clocks. Bandwith is only extremely useful if you have the fillrate to make it happen. As I said. Most of the GTX 280's bandwith is wasted. The improvements come with increased pixel/zfill fillrate than actual bandwith. This is why its so easy for GTX 260 cards to hang with GTX 280 cards with some core clock adjustments despite the bandwith disadvantage.

Chris
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-08, 01:00 AM   #34
Retrolock
 
Retrolock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,298
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

I dont know if this is already posted but damn

http://www.guru3d.com/news/tomorrow-18-december-/

Guru3d is probably gonna do a review/test on GTX 295
__________________
i7-2600k, Xspc rs240, Asus Maximus IV Gene-z, 8gb G.Skill DDR3 1866 RIPJAWSX CL7, PoV GTX 670, Corsair HX1000W, 128GB Vertex 4, WD 1tb Caviar Black, 500 & 320gb Seagate
Retrolock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-08, 05:56 AM   #35
Toss3
.<<o>>.
 
Toss3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 4,763
Default Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrolock View Post
I dont know if this is already posted but damn

http://www.guru3d.com/news/tomorrow-18-december-/

Guru3d is probably gonna do a review/test on GTX 295
Hey it's the 18th and no review yet...
__________________
: :Asus Rampage II Gene : : Core i7 920 4011Mhz : : 6Gb 1600Mhz A-Data DDR3 : : Club3D Theatron Agrippa : : Intel 80GB SSD : : 2xSamsung F1 750Gb : : Sapphire 5850 @ 850/1225Mhz : :
: :Benq FP241W : : Optoma HD80 Projector + 92" Screen : : Genelec 8020B speakers : : Sony MDR-XB700 Headphones : : Razer Lycosa : : Razer Lachesis : :
Toss3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-08, 09:54 AM   #36
walterman
Rayne
 
walterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,525
Smile Re: Nvidia's GTX 295 pics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay View Post
Except. Memory bandwith doesnt scale well with the GTX 280. You can add loads of bandwith and get nearly nothing. If the card was extremely bandwith limited. Scaling Core/ROP domains would not increase performance the way it does. Yet it does. Pixel and texture fillrate bottlenecks simply arent constrained by bandwith on the GTX 280 ((or 260 for that matter)).


Do some experiments yourself with Anti aliasing ((the most heavily zfill/bandwith limited tests there)). And watch as you gain more per clock than you do per bandwith. You reach a certain point where bandwith becomes a limiting factor on the texel and pixel fillrates. But currently these bandwith limitations are not that reachable. Since core clocks continue to be the best scaler of performance.

Next experiment with a low end card with little bandwith but high core clocks. You will get the exact opposite performance gains by increasing the bandwith verses the core clocks. Bandwith is only extremely useful if you have the fillrate to make it happen. As I said. Most of the GTX 280's bandwith is wasted. The improvements come with increased pixel/zfill fillrate than actual bandwith. This is why its so easy for GTX 260 cards to hang with GTX 280 cards with some core clock adjustments despite the bandwith disadvantage.

Chris
Good reply Chris.

If you raise the core/ROPs clock, the ROPs will be able to blend more fragments per clock, and the texture units will request more texels from memory. If your memory isn't fast enough, there will be stalls. Like you said with the example of the video card with slow memory.

You said that the GTX280 isn't bandwidth starved, but, this might be true in some cases, and false in others. I think that you are only considering new games like Crysis, where the shading power is the limiting factor. My example: Take an old game, with simple shader programs, use SSAA, high AF level, and check the scaling with different resolutions. There is a moment, in which the SPs generate so many fragments, that the ROPs & memory bandwidth can't process without delays. The ROPs might be able to blend the fragments, but if your memory isn't fast enough, they won't be written to the buffers without delays.

During the last 2 years, i have been doing custom experiments with different cards, resolutions, AA modes, ... on the coding side. Some nice guys at B3D have been helping me to analyze the performance in my projects, and this was the result of the analysis:



When using normal textures, and old game like BR2 depends a 42% of the memory bandwidth, a 44% of the core, and a 12% of the shaders. But, when i use high resolution textures (1024x1024 & 2048x2048), the memory bandwidth is a 70% of your framerate, the core a 30%, and the shading power becomes useless (because it cannot be feeded with the data that it needs).

I had to use texture compression to save the day, because, the frame rate was horrible in the beginning. Texture compression uses 1/8 or 1/4 of the real bandwidth. The change is huge.

Check it yourself Chris, i just wrote a little howto:
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/show...&postcount=159

Try to run my work at 1920x1200 with SSAA 2x2, and then we talk
__________________
ASUS Rampage Formula X48 | Xeon 3350 @ 3.6 GHz (450x8/1.26v) | 4x1GB OCZ DDR2 PC2-6400 Reaper CL3 @ 900 MHz 3-4-4-15 | 1 x eVGA GTX 285 SSC | 1 x ASUS EN8800GTX (PhysX/CUDA -> Burnt by nVidia 196.75 driver) | X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty PCIe | 1 x Intel X25-M G2 80GB | 2 x 750GB WD RE2 7500AYYS SATA2 16MB | Samsung SH-B083L SATA | Enermax Revolution 1250W | Samsung SyncMaster 275T 27" 1920x1200 | Thermaltake Black Armor | BloodRayne 2 FSAA Patch
walterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Product Spotlight ' EVGA GTX 670 Review Round Up News GeForce GTX 670 Reviews 1 05-11-12 12:15 AM
New GPU from Nvidia Announced Today, the GeForce GTX 670 News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 01:50 PM
GALAXY Launches the GeForce GTX 670 and GTX 670 GC! News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 09:28 AM
Gainward Unleashes the Sexy GeForce GTX 670 Phantom Graphics Card, Also launches the News Archived News Items 0 05-10-12 09:28 AM
NVIDIA Unleashes the GeForce GTX 670 Graphics Card ' Performance Perfected (WCCFTECH) News GeForce GTX 670 Reviews 0 05-10-12 08:40 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:07 PM.


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