Discussion in 'NVIDIA' started by MrHydes, Jun 16, 2008.
NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX280 REVIEWS
NDA as finished
yeah amd is in real big trouble.. i dont think they can beat cuda and if nvidia does an x2 version..... they are royally screwed.
I like the 260 benchmarks better than I expected.
I was expecting more in 3DMark06 tbh, and the power consumption is just silly XD
yea, with everything being smaller, more efficient and greener I thought we would eventually go back to a competitive 450 watt range market guess that won't be happening anytime soon lol.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showp... GDDR3 TV-Out/Dual DVI (PCI-Express) - Retail
Anyone want one by tomorrow morning? £490 delivered XD
Both cards look great, but why in the hell is the 280 $250 more than the 260 :shadedshu
lol nice ill take 2. Seen the price of the EVGA SSC Edition
no big deal i think...
I like how they toute things like movie compression as a new feature. I could do that with my X1800XT a long time ago.
I like the performance, and the power consumption is a bit high, but only when gaming. Too much heat.
my favourite review here with some decent CPU that's what
this GPU's need not Quad's at 3.0GHz
All that I can say it's too mixed reviews. None two of them are equal. In some GTX 280 is faster than the GX2 and in some others it's slower, same game, same settings. And happens the same with power consumption. And this two things are also mixed between different reviews so we have 4 different GTX 280 pictures in comparison to the GX2:
1. better performance - worse power consumtion
2. worse perf - better pc
3. worse perf - worse pc
4. the performance-per-watt wonder.
Which one should we believe? There's no coherence even between most reliable sites.
I haven't looked at them closely except TechReport and Guru3D, pretty much my favourites, but it seems most sites are using different drivers, as well as mobos and CPUs (more than on other launches IMO, as they are using now 680i, 780i, X48, X38, P35 and 790i boards and I think I have seen 3 different drivers used). I would say a beast like this one needs a fast system to show it's full potential, but are we talking about massive system bottleneck here paired with some poor early drivers?
EVGA Joins GTX 280 party
http://www.evga.com/products/prodlist.asp?family=GeForce GTX 200 Series Family
my favourite is overclock3D and i've never seen anyother but 177.26 have you?
give link plz
and diferente results depends on many things: PC config; Software used; the reviewr him self
not to mention some go with average scores, some with maximum and others with minimum... so it's hard to tell
here is a video of a presentation with the card in action with Far Cry 2. according to the end of the presentation (this is the second half) this is the game in a "no compromise" configuaration. IOW high res, IQ, Lighting, etc....
looks like pretty good performance if the game is as demanding as the visuals suggest. look at the last part with the wide open spaces
thing looks Crysis worthy. i just hope it runs a little better
/not spending $500 for a vid card
No card ever needs MultiCore CPUs just to run right, bottlenecking is such a myth in my book.
Uff I don't remember where. Sorry. I'm definately not going to read all those reviews again.
I remember seeing 177.34, 177.26, 177.22 (I'm thinking it might be a typo) and 177.16 which was the only one mentioned in one of the tests that I checked to see which driver they were using, although most probably that was only used for older cards.
But now that I think, OS is another factor too, as some are testing on XP yet. I thought they all were testing on Vista now, but seems not.
My comment was not about that there are differences (I already knew it ) but that IMO are significantly greater than on previous ones, as if this cards were more sensitive to these changes.
But I think most favorable reviews were using 177.34. As a matter of fact you can enter Wizzard's review and check that out. He's using those and it's one of the reviews where the cards does better. Maybe we have to start to talk about these new cards as with Ati in the last generation.
what im getting outta the benchies:
gtx 280 pwns in synthetics (computing, phyx, cuda)
game rendering? NAH 9800x2 pwns there
it would be nice to see the GTX280/260 pitted against G92's and G80's using 177.26
then the performance lead will become even smaller, with the cheaper and trusty G92's pulling even further ahead.
http://www.dailytech.com/6162008 Da...IDIA GeForce GTX 280 Edition/article12100.htm
I'd imagine that thes cards are significantly bottlnecked by both system and drivers at this point. the gtx280 has ALOT of raw horsepower which I seriously doubt is optimised quite yet. so it'll probably end up around 20% faster than the 9800gx2 on average on good drivers and a decent rig to back it up. but I still think that clock speed is the issue here, and that the gt200b will be able to alleviate that issue.
they've managed to reduce the 285 TDP to 183W from 236W
Separate names with a comma.