GeForce GTX 295 Previews and Reviews!

[DRen72]

Waiting to hear more once the final revisions come out in January. Granted, I have enjoyed the ATI 4870X2, but not the ATI drivers. I seriously miss the Nvidia drivers, so this card may bring me back. We will see.

[conantheogar2]

I may try this Card,

But wheres the benchies of GTA IV????

[ChrisRay]

Originally Posted by Toss3

Hmm didn't nvidia say those were just early engineering samples?






So why couldn't they do a full review?

Correct. The back may end up with a plating in time. But the entire cooling design is set around pulling air in from the bottom and top of the card. So putting something in the middle can constrict airflow. I was messing around with having a 9800GTX + as a PhysX card and noticed the tempature rise significantly. And the 9800GTX + isnt that hot of a card.

[jeong]

You happen to have any micro-stuttering issues w/ that quad-SLI setup? I'm definitely contemplating b/w 295 quad-SLI and 285 SLI.

[hell_of_doom227]

Originally Posted by ChrisRay

Its possible. But it'd require another special kind of bridge. And honestly I'm not sure people would be terribly interested. Im also not sure I like the idea. Because on the back of my 295 cards. The encasing isnt enclosed. And they are bigger than your typical card in width ((though length is the same)). It'd be really cramped. In comparison to the GTX280 which seems designed specifically to make 3 way SLI more practical.





As you can see it'd be kinda cramped to fit in a 3rd one with the current design. And the airflow system is setup to take in air from the top and bottom of the card.

Are you already running Quad 295 setup? Get me one of those babies?

[ChrisRay]

Originally Posted by hell_of_doom227

Are you already running Quad 295 setup? Get me one of those babies?

Yes I am running Quad. And for those who asked about performance. I am not permitted to discuss it until launch date I'm afraid. This wasnt the launch date

[JasonPC]

Originally Posted by Toss3

That's because some settings suit one card better than the other. HardOCP eliminates this by using the highest playable settings of each game on each card. This way you get a much more realistic picture of what kind of a gaming experience you'll get with each card.

But for the Crysis Warhead benchmark they kept the setting on both cards the same. And that's not the kind of performance I saw in other reviews.

[Blacklash]

Might want to look through here @ PC Perspective.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid...e=expert&pid=1

Pay close attention to the min frames on this card. More often than not, that makes it look quite attractive. It's not a clean sweep and it's pretty surprising in some cases.

Examples-







Personally, I'd rather something like a card with a 70FPS average and a 30FPS min than a card with a 85FPS average and a 14FPS min. Low mins = slow downs you feel and often stutter as well. What I'm saying is I'd gladly lose the average FPS war if I was always above 30FPS.

[conantheogar2]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-11.html




Seems Crysis Performance is Poor due to Microsutters.

Will go in cautious on this one and read reviews on Min Framerate/Microstutter

bah

[jeong]

Maybe the driver hasn't matured enough yet. Gonna have to wait till what other reviews say. did 260 SLI have microstutter problems?

[ChrisRay]

For Crysis its not untypical for the beginning of the level ((right when it loads)) to start out at a slower FPS ((usually single digits for 2 seconds or so)) then spike right up to the higher FPS range. But that only happens at the level loading area. It happens a few DX10 games actually. But like I said its only at the very start of the levels. Shouldnt happen repeatively.

[particleman]

Those highest playable settings reviews are BS. Everyone will have their own personal preference as to how they want to play. For myself I had a 30'' monitor but did not like the fact that even with the latest and greatest hardware you could not really enjoy the most graphically demanding games the way they should and LCD scaling interpolation is crap. Thus I sold it and got a 27''.

I find the benefit of 8x AA to be very marginal, and I would much rather have a less choppy gameplay experience. Maybe if I had an insanely high dot pitch like in the old CRT days I would appreciate 8x more like I used to, but I find you have to look way to closely to see the minor differences now. The only modes that I really notice a huge difference over 4x are true supersampling modes which help greatly by reducing shader aliasing. Everyone has their own threshold as to what they deem smooth.

I don't need a review to pick and choose settings for me to skew things the way they like. I prefer charts and then I find the settings that I play at.

Originally Posted by Toss3

That's because some settings suit one card better than the other. HardOCP eliminates this by using the highest playable settings of each game on each card. This way you get a much more realistic picture of what kind of a gaming experience you'll get with each card.