GTX275 review from XBitlabs

[thilanliyan]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...y/bfg-gf-gtx275oc.html

 

[cbn]

4890 looks really strong in this review.

 

[zod96]

Wow in that review at 1680x1050 the 4890 pretty much beats the GTX275 at almost everything..

 

[Spike]

This pretty much agrees with what I have been reccomending to friends. If they want top performance for cheapish at 1680x1050 the 4890 is the card for them. If they want higher res it becomes a toss-up with a slight lean towards the 275, more so if physX or distrubuted computing is something they value.

 

[zod96]

Agree at 1680x1050 get the 4890 at anything above that get the GTX275...

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: zod96
Agree at 1680x1050 get the 4890 at anything above that get the GTX275...

Am I reading the graphs (on the conclusions page) wrong? At 2560x1600 it seems the 275 loses to the 4890 more than it wins. For example in Crysis Warhead, the 275 VS. the 4890, the 275 is 37.5% SLOWER than the 4890. That is why when comparing VS. the 260-216, the numbers are all positive since obviously the 275 would be faster than the 260-216. Correct me if I'm wrong. If I'm reading the graphs correctly, it's at 1920x1200 and lower resolutions that the 4890 loses to the 275.

 

[Keysplayr]

Nice review. The 275 does well. I linked that article to my friend who just bought the 275. He is giddy. LOL. Weirdo.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

4890 vs. 275 really depends on the game. There are a few games where the Geforce card screams ahead and then there are a few games where the Radeon card screams ahead. In the other games and other settings they are pretty much tied. I wouldn't say one card is better than the other as it entirely depends on the game you're playing.

 

[lopri]

Yeah I am really not liking this trend, and it's hard for one to understand why similarly priced cards perform so differently, on a per-game basis. Right now the saving grace is that both cards are powerful enough to handle majority of the games at maximum settings and video cards got a lot cheaper in general, but we don't know how long things will stay that way.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: lopri
Yeah I am really not liking this trend, and it's hard for one to understand why similarly priced cards perform so differently, on a per-game basis.

Nothing unusual. For instance try comparing two $30k sporty cars. One might have a faster 0-60MPH but the other one might trump in the ¼-mile. One might hit a higher G on the skidpad but the other might have a shorter stopping distance from 60MPH. One might have more HP while the other more pounds/feet torque.

That's why some people buy the GTX 275 and some the 4890. There is no clear-cut "winner" thus people have to decide which card is better for their purposes.

 

[cbn]

Originally posted by: zod96
Wow in that review at 1680x1050 the 4890 pretty much beats the GTX275 at almost everything..

It noticed the 4890 doesn't do well in FEAR 2 though (according to this article)

 

[kreacher]

With GPUs the parameters for selection besides price are FPS, Temp, power consumption and noise. Would be nice to see a clear winner in at least the FPS race.
All these reviews about cards 'trading blows', 'no clear winner' and 'depends on games' is starting to sound like a cartel with ATI and NVIDIA each claiming the advantage on some games/engines.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: kreacher
With GPUs the parameters for selection besides price are FPS, Temp, power consumption and noise. Would be nice to see a clear winner in at least the FPS race.
All these reviews about cards 'trading blows', 'no clear winner' and 'depends on games' is starting to sound like a cartel with ATI and NVIDIA each claiming the advantage on some games/engines.

I personally would rather have the fps numbers be equal and decide based on the other stuff. It's much easier for me to fix a cooling issue (eg. aftermarket cooler) than a fps issue (which I can't fix at all).

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: lopri
Yeah I am really not liking this trend, and it's hard for one to understand why similarly priced cards perform so differently, on a per-game basis.

Nothing unusual. For instance try comparing two $30k sporty cars. One might have a faster 0-60MPH but the other one might trump in the ¼-mile. One might hit a higher G on the skidpad but the other might have a shorter stopping distance from 60MPH. One might have more HP while the other more pounds/feet torque.

That's why some people buy the GTX 275 and some the 4890. There is no clear-cut "winner" thus people have to decide which card is better for their purposes.

Yup. Vastly different architectures. One will certainly run a particular game better than the other, and vice versa. If both ATI and Nvidia shared similar architectures, I'm sure that most games would be more level across the board.

 

[Elfear]

Nice article. I like the slew of games they always test with. I wish they would have included an oced 4890 in the mix to more directly compare to the oced GTX 275.