Saturday, March 28th 2009

GeForce GTX 275 Gets First Listing

Pitted for direct competition with ATI Radeon HD 4890, NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 275 is slated for launch in April. The new SKU already has a listing by European retailer DollarShops.eu, where it is priced at 249 Euro. Yet another $1 = €1 equation in the making, as $249 is expected to be its American MSRP.

This time around, NVIDIA leaves it to the partners to make and sell graphics cards based on the GPU. Technically boards supporting the GeForce GTX 260 with its 14 memory chips, should be able to support the new GPU, which has 240 stream processors, while having a 448-bit wide GDDR3 memory interface, coming with memory capacities of 896 MB or even 1792 MB, if partners choose.Source: GPU Café
Add your own comment

19 Comments on GeForce GTX 275 Gets First Listing

#1
Weer
So, this really is half of a GTX 295. And a 4890 X2 should be on par with the GTX 295. The competition is neck-in-neck, and I say kudos to both contestants.

EDIT: It even costs exactly half what the GTX 295 costs. Impressive.
Posted on Reply
#2
Blacksniper87
hmm another stopgap measure, they really are trying to outdo each other arn't they. Can't wait for the next gen hell even the GTX 280 with GDDR5 would be awesome
Posted on Reply
#3
my_name_is_earl
Nvidia number is confusing me :[ not the 275 but the awkward 448, 896, and 1792. Come on man WTF? They try to break the pack but these numbers make no sense. 249 is that even a number? Shouldn't it be 249.99.999 rounded to 250? I'm not good at math for most part but I don't think they use math either. Doesn't 450, 900, and 1800 sounded better? Hell, I'm a gamer and I don't even remember the exact memory my Nvidia graphic card has. There is something wrong with that. If it weren't for their graphic card performance I wouldn't buy any of their carp numbering scheme.
Posted on Reply
#4
Homeless
by: my_name_is_earl
Nvidia number is confusing me :[ not the 275 but the awkward 448, 896, and 1792. Come on man WTF? They try to break the pack but these numbers make no sense. 249 is that even a number? Shouldn't it be 249.99.999 rounded to 250? I'm not good at math for most part but I don't think they use math either. Doesn't 450, 900, and 1800 sounded better? Hell, I'm a gamer and I don't even remember the exact memory my Nvidia graphic card has. There is something wrong with that. If it weren't for their graphic card performance I wouldn't buy any of their carp numbering scheme.
64*7 gets you 448. 64*14 = 896. Each memory chip contains 64mb and that size * the number of chips gets you the memory amount. It would be false advertising if they rounded up. As for pricing, there was a study a long time ago that showed that consumers found the number 249.99 more appealing than 250 even though it's literally a cent difference and have been using it ever since. It's nothing new, so I don't see why it's even an issue.
Posted on Reply
#5
Nick89
by: my_name_is_earl
Nvidia number is confusing me :[ not the 275 but the awkward 448, 896, and 1792. Come on man WTF? They try to break the pack but these numbers make no sense. 249 is that even a number? Shouldn't it be 249.99.999 rounded to 250? I'm not good at math for most part but I don't think they use math either. Doesn't 450, 900, and 1800 sounded better? Hell, I'm a gamer and I don't even remember the exact memory my Nvidia graphic card has. There is something wrong with that. If it weren't for their graphic card performance I wouldn't buy any of their carp numbering scheme.
The reason the memory is in odd numbers and not rounded is becuase each memoy chip on a GTX260 is 64mb of ram. and a GTX260 has 14 Memory chips on the card, so 64 x 14 = 896mb.

Edit: Blah didnt see that post^
Posted on Reply
#7
my_name_is_earl
OK people, I'm just suggesting not that they should round it up something. If you and a few hundreds other people who would preferred to remember such number then that's is up to ya but for most people who like rounded number it up to them. So you all disagree that 450-bit doesn't sound better than 448-bit or 1800mb doesn't sound better than 1792mb?
Posted on Reply
#8
phanbuey
by: my_name_is_earl
OK people, I'm just suggesting not that they should round it up something. If you and a few hundreds other people who would preferred to remember such number then that's is up to ya but for most people who like rounded number it up to them. So you all disagree that 450-bit doesn't sound better than 448-bit or 1800mb doesn't sound better than 1792mb?
Precision is a big deal in the tech industry. Those numbers that you are reading are the TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS of the card... they're called specifications because they're... wait for it... SPECIFIC!!! You can't falsify specifications to make them prettier - that defeats their whole purpose.
Posted on Reply
#9
paulm
by: my_name_is_earl
OK people, I'm just suggesting not that they should round it up something. If you and a few hundreds other people who would preferred to remember such number then that's is up to ya but for most people who like rounded number it up to them. So you all disagree that 450-bit doesn't sound better than 448-bit or 1800mb doesn't sound better than 1792mb?
No, 450 bit doesn't sound better than 448, and 1800 doesn't sound better than 1792.

If someone can't remember the number or wants it rounded up, they stick to integrated graphics and avoid any high-tech top of the line components.
Posted on Reply
#11
t77snapshot
by: hayder.master
they must decrease the price
indeed;)
Posted on Reply
#12
Slyr7.62
by: Weer
So, this really is half of a GTX 295. And a 4890 X2 should be on par with the GTX 295. The competition is neck-in-neck, and I say kudos to both contestants.

EDIT: It even costs exactly half what the GTX 295 costs. Impressive.
Agreed. Yeah, 1/2 a 295, or a GTX 280 core w/ the RAM of a GTX 260.
by: hayder.master
they must decrease the price
They should. Considering a GTX 260 can be had for under $200 all over the place. :toast: (shhh, mine was $114 :rockout:). Edit: That was after MS cashback & a coupon.
Posted on Reply
#13
TheGuruStud
Ram clocks are higher (than 260) and with 240 shaders, if it's 250 bucks it'll be priced just fine (although I assume sales of it and the 4890 will skyrocket and cause some price war if either can afford it). I would like to see o/c potential with V increase on it.
Posted on Reply
#14
a_ump
sweet. The GTX 275 is going to beat the HD 4890 for sure though. no benchmarks or proof but seeing as how the GTX 260 216 beats the HD 4870 1GB, i'm sure a GTX 260 with 240SP and increased memory speed will beat an overclocked HD 4870(HD 4890). Nvidia will win performance wise, it's up to AMD to keep the pricing right on the HD 4890.

Though i don't see how their GTX 285 will keep selling, GTX 260 216's that had a great overclock matched the performance and sometimes won over the GTX 280. but maybe not since the 285 did get a boost in frequency's. Should be interesting but i'm betting the GTX 275 will be on par with the GTX 280 at 1680x1050 or lower res.
Posted on Reply
#15
jagass
It's nice that they already have listings...
Posted on Reply
#16
AltecV1
that card is the most pointless they mayd it soo far!!!well the second,the first was fx5200:p THAT WAS THE WORST CARD EVER!!!!!!!!!!
Posted on Reply
#17
TheGuruStud
by: AltecV1
that card is the most pointless they mayd it soo far!!!well the second,the first was fx5200:p THAT WAS THE WORST CARD EVER!!!!!!!!!!
lol fx5200... it was useless but I did use them for cheap-o build b/c integrated was so atrocious back then.
Posted on Reply
#18
15th Warlock
by: AltecV1
that card is the most pointless they mayd it soo far!!!well the second,the first was fx5200:p THAT WAS THE WORST CARD EVER!!!!!!!!!!
Ummm... pointless? You could say the same about the HD4890 then, both cards will share around the same price/performance ratio.

Me, I just want both AMD and nVidia to stop rehashing the same cards that only have higher clocks and/or shader counts every 2 months and just release their new flagship cards :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#19
a_ump
by: 15th Warlock
Ummm... pointless? You could say the same about the HD4890 then, both cards will share around the same price/performance ratio.

Me, I just want both AMD and nVidia to stop rehashing the same cards that only have higher clocks and/or shader counts every 2 months and just release their new flagship cards :shadedshu
hha reminds me of when they released the 9800GTX, everyone was hoping for some awesome technical breakthrough that would own crysis, but it was just an overclocked 8800GTS(G92). Well the GTX 260 216 i think will be phased out and obviously the GTX 280 as well. So they're replaced by the GTX 275 and GTX 285. Makes perfect sense to me, better card is made to increase price again with better profits due to lower fab process.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment