Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Jun 12, 2008.
To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_280_Amp_Edition/
A damn nice card, but WAY to expensive for my tastes. I think I'll stick with my 9800GTX for a while, maybe pick another up when the price hits $200.
I think do what I did with the 8800 series and wait for a die shrink.
The price should come down a bit when AMD's offerings come out...hopefully .
Excellent detailed review, as always W1zz
Expensive too, for a new card prices need to go down to sell more
The performance per dollar chart says it all. It'll probably be an awesome card to buy in a few years when the price falls back down to earth.
God that is one fast thing...I bought my 9800GTX several days ago, and I am not frustrated from it at all after seeing this...
I don't see why everyone is complaining about price...9800gx2 was $599 at launch, and is still over $500 now, gtx280 beats it in almost all tests, so yeah its gonna be more expensive. If you remember what the prices of the 8800gtx/ultra/gts were at launch, then this should be no surprise. (in fact I'm pretty sure the 8800gtx was over $700 at launch)
Would I be right in saying thats the GX2 appears to beat it in more than half but the GX2 is cheaper?
No, you would be wrong. In overall performance, at least in this review, the GX2 was 8% slower.
8% its not too much could be 20% or more but the tech aplied to this card is very high compared to others
I would still buy a lower end card and not pay an insane price. This card is worth more than my current computer is worth! I would consider a 9800gtx, but not a really expensive card like this. The price per perf ratio is poor (say that 5 times fast).
Doesn't look worth it atm, As usual it was over hyped and it didn't deliver as much as everyone expected, I'l just pick up another 8800GT.
I expected performance way beyond a 9800GX2. I guess I was wrong. Considering how a HD4870 itself is faster than the 9800GTX, and how the new dual core config on the HD4870X2 SHOULD be efficient, this GTX280 doesn't look that good in my eyes.
Then again, results may have been CPU limited.
The only thing about it is that's a real world system. I have a e8400 that I crank up to 4Ghz once in a while but I won't even think about gaming at that speed. By the time the X2 comes out the 280 should have some faster drivers, but that won't make a difference if the X2 beats it in raw power which is a real possibility. The 280 can have that ridiculous price ATM but it definitely needs to come down by the time the X2 shows up.
Im wondering about Crysis numbers, is that a MAX FPS graph ? Doesnt look like AVG.
Crysys to me its a buged game, and have something wrong with this game something in the scriptcode, i had a CF of 2900xt 1GB DDR4 cards when Crysis launches and im disapointed about this games but with new games likes Grid, COD4, front lines only 1 card played all of this in very high mode soo Crysis to me in a buged game.
This new GTX 280 , and other brands could be better if them implement more cores to GPU processors but i dont know if this thing could be possible.
It's not bugged its just more advanced than current hardware
Lol its just poorly coded.
But back on topic.
Werent these cards MEANT to be affordable?
They are ... to the wealthy ...
this is sooo good news......since they have their cuda drivers out now and this card isnt under NDA anymore...that means that hopefully
The awsome drivers that this card uses should come out and officially support the 8/9 series in physx calculations.
this also means that since these drivers are out and when the 8/9 series ones are supported by cuda that the nvidia F@H client will come out soon!!!!!
im really impressed because as soon as those drivers come out im really anxious to compare my physx card with people enabling hardware physx on their cards.
So these cards are the next wave huh? wow i thought my new(ish) 3850 would future proof me for a little longer than a year. Damn technology moving so quickly.
This card is as fast as TWO G92 cores. This to me is the first fresh new core for the past few years. The price tag is where it should be for a card this fast.
i agree 100% its totally diff than the revamps theyve been doing on the older cores..that and this is cheaper than a couple years ago when the ultras came out...and this card has the same affect on the old generations that the ultra did so i dont see a problem...something that coasts this much to make and performs this well isnt going to coast 2-$300
I have to disagree, here: IMO, the difference in price (percentage wise) over the GX2 should be in relation to the GTX (+ a tad bit more, maybe) because you should be comparing 2 single GPU cards and not a single VS dual GPU card (in price).
its a bigger die wich uses mroe wafers per set and is a completely different arch i dont see where that compairs at all to the coast of 2 cores because this one is bigger better and totally diff.
Separate names with a comma.