nVIDIA GeForce GTX200 - Page 3

nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post just about everything that isn't directly related to Spring here!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Keithus
Posts: 155
Joined: 06 Oct 2006, 05:59

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Keithus »

Preview of the r700 is up at Anandtech with just an engineering sample. Looks like ATI is having a nice run this generation. Seems like its only crysis that doesn't like to scale on its drivers.

Hopefully this will help keep AMD afloat.
User avatar
Hoi
Posts: 2913
Joined: 13 May 2008, 16:51

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Hoi »

Caydr wrote:Eh? I don't understand what "Spring" has to do with that quote. I'm outspokenly vocal about Spring's performance failings so what I said is true, perhaps qualified with "when the GPU is what's under stress." And before these new ATI cards came out it was certainly true, even when we were into the 9xxx series. It's just, now we've got both 40%+ better performance at half the cost, something that's never happened before. Trust me, I know, I've been following this stuff since a Geforce 2 MX 400 was a pretty OK card.

Can't say much more, my keyboard is suddenly not working properly for some reason, about 1/10 keystrokes are ignored.... Ugh... anyway here's a link showing that ATI has also apparently got their multi-card technology off the ground, with performance increases of between 40 and 80% when adding a new card: link

Compare the performance difference between single card Nvidia and SLI with the performance difference between single card ATI and CrossfireX. AFAIK SLI has always been far, far more efficient than Crossfire, but apparently now in some situations Crossfire is performing better. With these graphics cards being so cheap, the only SENSIBLE use of "SLI-like" technology (buy a second card when your current outdated card is getting behind the times) might actually be feasible.

WTF is going on with my computer!!! Now my mouse isn't working properly either.
if you have mouse and keyboard wireless, try putting that reciever thing closer, i had this one time and found out that it fell off the desk
User avatar
Cabbage
Posts: 1548
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 22:34

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Cabbage »

Caydr wrote:Trust me, I know, I've been following this stuff since a Geforce 2 MX 400 was a pretty OK card.
Since when exactly was any <XXXX> MX card considered OK? :P
User avatar
rattle
Damned Developer
Posts: 8278
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 13:15

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by rattle »

Never, all MX cards were pretty much useless.
reivanen
Posts: 180
Joined: 12 Feb 2008, 15:52

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by reivanen »

Nvidia dropped the prices for the second time now - gtx280 costs 449$ whereas 4870x2 is 500$ msrp.

And this is a mont before the release of 4870x2 !

Then just take a look at the performance which is quite similar of the two and the energy consumption whichs is lower in idle for the gtx280 then for even a single 4870 - not to mention 4870x2

And to be fair, a computer running 24/7 it will spend most of its time idle.

I wouldn't be surprised if a gtx280 would be some 50$ cheaper then a 4870x2 when amd finally gets their cards out to the consumers.

2 gfx xhips on one card is not clever as you need to put in extra complex xchip bridges, double the memory and energy supply components and what not...

a x2 card can be useful for the truly ultra-high-end when one chip just is not enough, but to compete with a decently built one-chip solution is just not feasible, atleast not as long as the cores can't share the same memory.
User avatar
Keithus
Posts: 155
Joined: 06 Oct 2006, 05:59

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Keithus »

^ love posts like that.

The 4870X2 is performing on par with gtx280 sli rather than a single gtx in everything except crysis (which shows almost no scaling on ATI hardware).
Its interesting how much more efficient the new PLX bridging chip on the X2 is, especially if you look at the GRID benchmark results. The power consumption of the X2 is a worry though, though it looks rather nice compared to the gtx sli option.

Hopefully nVidia has a nice 55nm solution soon before nehalem, as performance crown and price performance crown during the introduction of nehalem will be important as there will be many people looking to upgrade during this time (including myself).

On a positive note for nVidia it looks like intel will be supporting sli on their nehalem motherboards.
User avatar
det
Moderator
Posts: 737
Joined: 26 Nov 2005, 11:22

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by det »

HD4870 X2 _murders_ gtx280 in just about everything. Even the $300 HD4870 comes in at about 80-100% of the gtx280. Still, the price/performance crown lies elsewhere, I'm very happy with the HD4850 I got for $150.
User avatar
Elkvis
Posts: 222
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 05:18

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Elkvis »

Keithus wrote:On a positive note for nVidia it looks like intel will be supporting sli on their nehalem motherboards.
you mean that nVidia will be allowing Intel to use SLI technology. right?
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by [Krogoth86] »

Which was about one of the last advantages you had with an NVIDIA chipset... :wink:

Well now all what's left is Hybrid Graphics you'd want an NVIDIA chipset for...
reivanen
Posts: 180
Joined: 12 Feb 2008, 15:52

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by reivanen »

Crysis is currently the only game that uses true next-gen technology, and thus should be used as a measure how gfx chipsets will perform with future titles. And in crysis gtx280 clearly outperforms the 4870x2 (minimum framerate 25 vs 30 and avg framerate the same.) On top of that it draws less power and costs less so who would want the sphagetti-4870-x2

I agree that with the prices the gtx280 launched with you would have to be insane to buy one, but currently after the two price cuts its a bargain.
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by [Krogoth86] »

Imo Crysis has superb graphics but really isn't what you should see as the reference for next-gen gaming. It's mostly about an impressive Speedtree but apart from that there's nothing really special about it. So as long as you don't want to compare games with thousands of little plants standing around and want to play games with different locations than a jungle, things change a lot...

I also wouldn't say the GTX 280 really outperforms the X2. It's still a pre-release test and more important the X2 wins in the higher resolutions. So why buying a 400-500$ card if you just want to play in 1280x1024. Those who buy such a card have huge screens with high resolutions and want a card that can handle this which is what the GTX 280 and 4870 X2 aim for...

In addition to that the result still is disappointing for both cards which on the other hand shows either how unrealistic Crysis was designed or badly optimized it is. That's because of the huge differences you'll experience. Imo it looks like they've tested it on a jungle map when looking at the framerate because when you test in the ice levels (e.g. HERE) you don't have playable results with either cards - CF/SLI or not...
reivanen
Posts: 180
Joined: 12 Feb 2008, 15:52

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by reivanen »

[Krogoth86] wrote:Imo Crysis has superb graphics but really isn't what you should see as the reference for next-gen gaming. It's mostly about an impressive Speedtree but apart from that there's nothing really special about it. So as long as you don't want to compare games with thousands of little plants standing around and want to play games with different locations than a jungle, things change a lot...

I also wouldn't say the GTX 280 really outperforms the X2. It's still a pre-release test and more important the X2 wins in the higher resolutions. So why buying a 400-500$ card if you just want to play in 1280x1024. Those who buy such a card have huge screens with high resolutions and want a card that can handle this which is what the GTX 280 and 4870 X2 aim for...

In addition to that the result still is disappointing for both cards which on the other hand shows either how unrealistic Crysis was designed or badly optimized it is. That's because of the huge differences you'll experience. Imo it looks like they've tested it on a jungle map when looking at the framerate because when you test in the ice levels (e.g. HERE) you don't have playable results with either cards - CF/SLI or not...
The differences are coming after 2300x resolutions with aa and af, ando how many of us use something like that. The current high-eng montors support 1920-1280 so thats not an issue.

And as sai, nvigia gtx200 inmushmore energy efficient, cheaper, and in most cases on par with the 4870-x2 that atill suffers from some degree of microstuttering.
[Krogoth86]
Posts: 1176
Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by [Krogoth86] »

reivanen wrote:The differences are coming after 2300x resolutions with aa and af, ando how many of us use something like that. The current high-eng montors support 1920-1280 so thats not an issue.
Well that's still just in Crysis - everywhere else the X2 just is way superior with up 2x the performance like in AoC...
reivanen wrote:And as sai, nvigia gtx200 inmushmore energy efficient, cheaper, and in most cases on par with the 4870-x2 that atill suffers from some degree of microstuttering.
Well I don't know what you see negative about the energy consumption - it's ok for the given performance and as I said: Up to 2x the performance for just like additional 100 Watt in comparison to the GTX 280 sounds ok to me (plus no final drivers so we might see an additional gain in some games)...

In addition to that other previews talked about what was rumoured for some months and that is no more micro stuttering for the X2 - maybe google for it...
imbaczek
Posts: 3629
Joined: 22 Aug 2006, 16:19

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by imbaczek »

crysis may simply be written in a way that breaks AMD's SIMD processing model; check e.g. The Witcher or GRID to see how properly written shaders affect performance.
User avatar
Keithus
Posts: 155
Joined: 06 Oct 2006, 05:59

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Keithus »

Elkvis wrote:
Keithus wrote:On a positive note for nVidia it looks like intel will be supporting sli on their nehalem motherboards.
you mean that nVidia will be allowing Intel to use SLI technology. right?
Yeah, good point.

eVGA and XFX are actually offering cash back options to users who brought the gt200 series cards early as a way of compensating for their relative price performances numbers. Pretty impressive of the distributors to take a hit like this for nVidia. Shows good internal relations.

Where does the gtx280 perform on par with the 4870 X2 other than crysis where the 4870 doesn't seem to scale? It is performing slightly below and above 280gtx sli.

Sampsa's review also shows that micro stutter is effectively gone as frames are now rendered with equal intervals between them.

Don't worry reivanen, nVidia will be back and biting soon enough.
User avatar
SwiftSpear
Classic Community Lead
Posts: 7287
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by SwiftSpear »

reivanen wrote:Crysis is currently the only game that uses true next-gen technology, and thus should be used as a measure how gfx chipsets will perform with future titles. And in crysis gtx280 clearly outperforms the 4870x2 (minimum framerate 25 vs 30 and avg framerate the same.) On top of that it draws less power and costs less so who would want the sphagetti-4870-x2

I agree that with the prices the gtx280 launched with you would have to be insane to buy one, but currently after the two price cuts its a bargain.
No it isn't. The technology implimented by Unreal Engine 3 is generally higher then the technology implimented by the cry2 engine. The Epic engine builders are just the best that exist, so they know how to optimize. That being said, the sandbox editor is EXTREMELY nice.
User avatar
Caydr
Omnidouche
Posts: 7179
Joined: 16 Oct 2004, 19:40

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Caydr »

Cabbage wrote:
Caydr wrote:Trust me, I know, I've been following this stuff since a Geforce 2 MX 400 was a pretty OK card.
Since when exactly was any <XXXX> MX card considered OK? :P
Errrr.... well to be fair you're probably right... but at the time it seemed like a decent card for the price.
User avatar
Erom
Posts: 1115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 05:08

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Erom »

SwiftSpear wrote:the Epic engine builders are just the best that exist,
qft, those guys are nuts
User avatar
rattle
Damned Developer
Posts: 8278
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 13:15

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by rattle »

Do you really call 5 fps more in a specific GPU test outperforming?
User avatar
Muzic
Posts: 950
Joined: 09 Aug 2006, 07:08

Re: nVIDIA GeForce GTX200

Post by Muzic »

rattle wrote:Do you really call 5 fps more in a specific GPU test outperforming?
Certianly isn't a tie now is it?
Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”