Complete Nvidia GTX280 Scores Posted

Groo Wanderer writes "Since boredom is a dangerous thing on the weekends, I decided to alleviate mine by running 233 benchmarks on the new GT280. This includes 28 gaming related tests across up to nine resolutions, and 9800GTX numbers thrown in for good measure. Since there were no NDAs involved in getting you these numbers, we are not bound by the pesky NDA that lifts tomorrow. You can read all of the numbers here; enjoy."

Re:i see one little thing

[Quarters]

Currently the released nVidia drivers don't support the 2xx series and the beta drivers that do support the 2xx series don't have .inf file entries for anything but the 2xx series. Until unified drivers are released that support and install on the entire nVidia product line it will be problematic to produce comparisons with the same drivers.

Re:

[PhearoX]

....Can Vista run Crysis?

Re:

[IdeaMan]

No, but I've heard that Crysis is powerful enough to run Vista.

Re:

[Ferzerp]

All this tells us is that the previous generation of cards are still ahead of the cpu. When you see cards with similar framerates for lower resolutions and then they diverge at higher res, it tells you that it is the processor limiting the framerate at those resolutions. Sure, we can get a little more efficient and raise those lower resolution framerates (or, more realistically use better anti-aliasing, AF, etc to make it look better), but in general where the benefit comes with new cards these days is

Re:Great

[Kjella]

All this tells us is that the previous generation of cards are still ahead of the cpu. When you see cards with similar framerates for lower resolutions and then they diverge at higher res, it tells you that it is the processor limiting the framerate at those resolutions.

if by "those", you mean the lower resolutions, but I have to ask at what framerates? At low resolutions at 200fps both CPU and GPU is way ahead of the game and are overkill in any case. At the framerates that matter, most games are still GPU bound. I guess it's where you're starting at, I got a nice 1920x1200 widescreen monitor and it's definately the GPU keeping me back. With antialiasing I'm looking at 35-140% improvement here, with an average of maybe 60%. I'd say that's pretty impressive.

Re:

[nexex]

I got a nice 1920x1200 widescreen monitor and it's definately the GPU keeping me back. With antialiasing I'm looking at 35-140% improvement here, with an average of maybe 60%. I'd say that's pretty impressive.

What CPU/GPU do you have? (You are running the games at native res?)

AA?

[DRAGONWEEZEL]

AA isn't really meant for High Resolutions. It's meant to curb "Jaggies." The higher the resolution your set at, the more taxing AA is, and the Lower the visual benefit. Your allready packing more pixels, so your lines will have less jaggies in the first place.

I allways find it interesting how people want to run crazy resolutions, w/ AA maxed.

Am I way off the mark here? What does /. think about that?

Re:

[StarKruzr]

I don't understand the criticism. It looks like a better card across the board. What am I missing?

Re:

[Kjella]

It sounded like it described one of the first GHz CPUs. You know there are ways to increase performance using "primitive" technology by simply making it big, hot, extra noisy cooling and so on. Increasing performance per watt is much harder, and given that the benchmarks look good I'm guessing this will be as hot and heavy like a SLI solution without actually being a SLI solution. We will see...

Re:Slashdot: Keeping your wallet full since 1998.

[Fweeky]

Read the start:

WE HAVE BEEN dogging Nvidia's new chip for a while for being too big, too hot, too slow, and unmanufacturable. It is all of that, and you will know why we said that in a few weeks.

For example [theinquirer.net]:

Word has come out of Satan Clara that the yields are laughable. No, make that abysmal, they are 40 per cent. To add insult to injury, that 40 per cent includes both the 280 and the 260 yield salvage parts. With about 100 die candidates per wafer, that means 40 good dice per wafer. Doing the maths, a TSMC 300mm 65nm wafer runs about $5000, so that means each good die costs $125 before packaging, testing and the like. ...

To add insult to injury, the TDPs of the 260 and 280 are 182W and 236W respectively. This means big copper heatsinks, possibly heatpipes, and high-end fans. ...

The GT200 is about six months late, blew out their die size estimates and missed clock targets by a lot. ATI didn't. This means that buying a GT260 board will cost about 50 per cent more than an R770 for equivalent performance. The GT280 will be about 25 per cent faster but cost more than twice as much. A month or so after the 770 comes the 700, basically two 770s on a slab. This will crush the GT280 in just about every conceivable benchmark and likely cost less.

236W TDP! I have a 30" display, so good performance at very high resolutions is important to me, but.. I think I'll pass if the GPU alone is going to draw more power than my entire system.

Re:Slashdot: Keeping your wallet full since 1998.

[kesuki]

I keep wondering why people buy 30" computer monitors... is there something wrong with a 1080p 46" TV set? they sell DVD to hdmi cables, and many sets have a PC input.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824001098 [newegg.com] $1,299 = 30"

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16889234003 [newegg.com] $1,199 = 47"

that particular set has a PC connection, 2 dvi ports and 1 hdmi, and here's the kicker, the difference in response time? .5 ms the Samsung has 6ms the Westinghouse has 6.5ms

i've heard before that Westinghouse displays are basically big PC monitors, with a TV tuner attached.

now i know, a HDTV generally only supports 1080p, 1080i, 720p, and 480i on the HD inputs, and since this one has PC inputs on the pc input it accepts 1920 x 1080, 640 x 480, 800 x 600, 1024 x 768 on the PC input... finding a RGB PC cable is easy, i used to specifically pick out PC monitors with replaceable cables, in case the cable got cut/kinked or the end pins broken.. so i already have cables from old monitors!

is it really worth it to support 2560x1600 resolution? especially since modern (single card setups) gaming cards can't even handle 1080p on modern game engines.. and even with multi card support, the CPU winds up being a limiting factor... OCing to 4 ghz with some extreme cooling solution, like the xp-120 or water cooling... is probably the only way to really push frame rates, even with a SLI/crossfire solution.

Re:

[Fweeky]

I keep wondering why people buy 30" computer monitors... is there something wrong with a 1080p 46" TV set?

Erm, yeah, plenty; first, it's huge. 30" is marginal for a monitor you want to fit on a desk and sit 25" away from, 46" is going to be stupid.

Second, the TV set has a crappy resolution for its size; 1920×1080? If I wanted that resolution I'd get a 24" monitor (or two) which is at least going to have a sensible DPI for, well, a monitor.

here's the kicker, the difference in response time? .5 ms the Samsung has 6ms the Westinghouse has 6.5ms

Haha, right, a mere .5ms difference in dubious response time measurements sure does make for a kicker; I can't even tell the difference between my 16ms 20"'s and my 8

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you ever tried sitting on a desk in front of a 46" Monitor? I wouldnt be able to work (or game) on anything larger than 28". The sides of the monitor are almost outside of my peripheral vision. A monitor is not really workable if you have to move your head side to side to see the whole thing (this of course wouldn't matter if you werent sitting at a desk, but I would assume most PC users do).

Also at 2560x1600 resolution, CPU would not even factor in modern PC games. At that resolution, graphics cards w

Re:

[kesuki]

"Have you ever tried sitting on a desk in front of a 46" Monitor? I wouldnt be able to work (or game) "

in my specific setting i will be 4 feet from the monitor on my couch. a desk it might be harder, but i know how i'm building my next system, and where i'm using it, my fall back plan if to have a computer desk, in front of the tv stand my hdtv is on, i'll still be 2-3 feet away, which is plenty. my folks just got a 50" tv, so i have a really good idea just how far back i need to sit, i wasn't thinking in

Re:

[darkwhite]

Some of us actually do work on monitors as well as play games. And the upper limit of what's a reasonable resolution for work is still very far away. I would gladly use a 2560x1600 setup, or a 3840x2400 for that matter, if it was affordable. I can definitely use all that space and perhaps even make myself more productive! (Just kidding, it would definitely raise my maximum productivity)

Re:

[MogNuts]

you brought up an excellent point. i thought the same thing--so i did it. hooked up a beautiful 40" 1080p LCD TV to my computer (but keep in mind u need a DVI-HDMI converter).

But a big problem occured that I didn't account for. Eveyrthing is blurry and all text and images look like crap. Forget even being close to sharp. Everything looks like it was run through high JPEG compression.

As it turns out, LCD TV's can't do lower than 96 dpi. most LCD *monitors* do much lower, which we take for granted--it makes m

Re:

[kesuki]

you brought up an excellent point. i thought the same thing--so i did it. hooked up a beautiful 40" 1080p LCD TV to my computer (but keep in mind u need a DVI-HDMI converter).

But a big problem occured that I didn't account for. Eveyrthing is blurry and all text and images look like crap. Forget even being close to sharp. Everything looks like it was run through high JPEG compression.

As it turns out, LCD TV's can't do lower than 96 dpi. most LCD *monitors* do much lower, which we take for granted--it makes monitors look so sharp. So unfortunately, unless u barely use ur computer or u just don't care, that 30" or or any LCD monitor for that matter, is necessary.

which set, specifically were you looking at? some sets literally do run the image through some form of conversion/compression. some LCD tvs actually Are computer monitor guts, YMMV but there are sets that can do better than 96dpi.

you specifically mentioned a 'dvi to hdmi' cable, the set i'm looking at has a standard VGA jack in the back. with a dvi to hdmi link, you have to be very careful, to use a DVI-dual link cable that converts to HDMI, if you use a half link cable, there won't be enough bandwidth f

Re:

[MogNuts]

Hmmm--very good points. The set in question is a Sony Bravia, 1080p, 40 in. (do not have the model number on hand) set. It's gorgeous for DVD and TV viewing. I mean incredible. I did use the VGA connection, but images looked washed out, and in playing games it had that effect during fast images that monitors with a pure digital connection (DVI) do not have. That's why I figured to go DVI -> HDMI. I'll test it again and let you know so you don't have to make a $2000 mistake :).

I wouldn't count the chicks before they hatch

[Moraelin]

Especially when it comes to ATI, I wouldn't count the chicks before they actually hatch. They have a knack, really a talent, a _gift_, for screwing up half the time.

I also wouldn't take any theoretical numbers as gospel. For either of the two. They both love to talk about theoretical gigatexels per second and GB/s of memory bandwidth as if the pipelines will always be fully used, every cycle, and memory was a continuous read that never had any RAS and CAS cycles in there.

But especially for ATI. They have th

What about TV out?

[antdude]

Did NVIDIA remove the annoying TV out problems for fullscreen videos in Windows? As of now, I am going back to ATI cards later on (end of the year?).

Re:

[antdude]

What's wrong with that? I use my bigger CRT TV to watch videos, DVDs, etc.? Why do I want to watch it on my 19" LCD monitor?

Re:

[Shatrat]

I use TV out with my XFX 8800 GS and a standard definition TV using the supplied S-video to Component/Composite adapter.
The only real snag I've had was using an adapter other than the one supplied by XFX. I have an S-video to Composite cable with integrated 3.5mm stereo to rca audio, but that didn't work even with Force TV Detection checked.

Once I tried the adapter that came in the box I had no problems setting up TV-out in XP, Vista, and Linux.

Re:

[antdude]

So it worked for DVDs and others fullscreen? How about aspect ratios?

Re:

[Shatrat]

VLC works great. In Linux you have to specify in VLC preferences which screen you want fullscreen to taget, 0 or 1. In Windows you have to drag the player over to that screen and then go fullscreen.

As far as aspect ratios are concerned, widescreen shows up letterboxed with a small ammount of the sides truncated, maybe 5% on each side. Not noticeable until I checked just now. 4:3 ratio videos show up perfectly as you would expect.

Raw power isn't everything

[AmiMoJo]

ATI/AMD's new cards look more interesting. Performance is there, but also power saving and video processing. In both those areas they beat nVidia hands down.

3DMark Obsoletion

[ludomancer]

It's very telling to look at the disparity in scores between the two cards in 3DMark Vantage and 3DMark 06. The two cards perform almost the same on the 06 version, whereas there's almost a 2x gap between them for Vantage. I don't think I trust that.

Before...

[Deliveranc3]

We get a million comments saying how no one can afford this let's run some analysis.

GPU size, 65/55nm [wikipedia.org], pipelines 240 vs Mainstream 192, Mem-Bus 512 vs 448 Mainstream , so basically this means that the next generation mainstream card will be 80% as fast as this card.

Allright, so for $250-300 (in aproxx 6 months)you can get a GFX9800 x 1.2. Not too shabby, especially as this is the generation of PC games that kicks console asses.

Rock on nVidia, catch up time ATI... god I hope these things are user prog