NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295: Leading the Pack
by Derek Wilson on January 12, 2009 5:15 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
We'll start with NVIDIA vs. NVIDIA and move on from there. The GeForce GTX 295 performed pretty much where we expected: between the GTX 260 SLI and the GTX 280 SLI setups. In some games, the GTX 295 performed very nearly at GTX 260 performance, indicating a bottleneck somewhere in memory bandwidth or with the ROPs. Because the clock speeds and hardware widths are the same, on GTX 295 and 260 SLI games limited by memory performance or ROP performance will run fairly similarly. In cases where shader performance was more important we saw more separation, but the clock speed, memory bandwidth and ROP advantage of the GTX 280 SLI system consistently outpaced the GTX 295 by a good margin.
When it comes to how the GTX 295 stacks up against NVIDIA's current line up, it's closer to a single card GTX 260 SLI than anything else. Putting two GTX 260 core 216 cards in SLI will get a little closer, but since the 295 will still have an advantage in shader power we can't expect the gap to disappear. Those who already have a GTX 260 or two will not really be interested in the GTX 295 as an upgrade option, as GTX 260 SLI is very much close enough to GTX 295 performance.
Comparing NVIDIA to AMD, it's clear that NVIDIA has recaptured the halo product at least in the majority of tests we ran in this snapshot of performance. We are noticing a trend that has some games heavily favoring one architecture or another, which makes general recommendations harder than usual. But the advantage this time around is certainly with NVIDIA. The Radeon HD 4870 1GB still hangs on competitively, but SLI wins out over CrossFire.
Though we are using the 8.12 hotfix that improves game performance and (as far as we've noticed) stability on Intel Core i7 systems, we can't be sure when this hotfix will make it into a WHQL driver. We've spent a good deal of time being hard on AMD for their driver support lately. As we've said since the launch of the R700, the success or failure of AMD's new direction for their highest end parts depends entirely on the ability of their driver team to make sure the experience and performance are top notch on single-card dual-GPU platforms. This includes having support in at least beta driver as the launch of new games and having high quality support for all new hardware platforms released. It is also imperative that all fixes in any beta or hotfix driver make it into the very next WHQL driver.
NVIDIA has the advantage on the highest end single card product, but we don't see this as a boon for anyone but people running 30" displays at this point. There really is just no reason to drop the cash on a GTX 295 unless you're looking at 2560x1600 gaming. For smaller displays, cheaper parts will work great. It's still hard to recommend buying for longevity because of the way performance can fall heavily in favor of AMD or heavily in favor of NVIDIA depending on the game. We just can't know until we get there which solution will be better on future titles.
While NVIDIA has the halo, AMD's top of the line card is slightly cheaper than the GTX 295 and still outperforms it in some cases. Currently the Radeon HD 4870 X2 is a $450 card while the GeForce GTX 295 is a $500 part. This 11% price advantage (10% savings depending on how you look at it) might be incentive for some people. We don't consider it enough to recommend the Radeon HD 4870 X2 over the GTX 295 though. There are some opportunities with mail in rebates that could net you a 4870 X2 for closer to $400, but mail in rebates are always hit or miss, aren't permanent and not everyone likes them. If the 4870 X2 were being sold without a rebate for $400, the choice would be more difficult, but as it stands, the GTX 295 gets the nod even considering price from us. If you need a top of the line single card option that is.
The highest performing soluiton we tested is still the GeForce GTX 280 SLI setup. And when the GTX 285 makes its way out, GTX 285 SLI will very likely take that crown. We do have yet to test quad performance as we only have one card. We suspect scaling similar to past experience with quad (meaning between 2x and 3x performance rather than a linear increaes), but we will certainly bring you an update as soon as we are able.
Now what we really need are some midrange GT200 based parts.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
100 Comments
View All Comments
Hxx - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link
Siliconduc,I said that a 4870x2 can be had for 400 after mir learn to read next time. Both companies have driver and crash issues with their cards, Nvidia is not an exception. That is especially if you run vista 64 bit so its unfair to judge ATI based on that. Second, Nvidia is known for overpricing their cards and the gtx295 is no exception. Third, the gtx 295 DOES NOT wipe the floor with 4870 x2, its slightly faster, like 5-10% in the majority of the games, not all of them. There isn't any game out there that will be playable on a gtx 295 but not on a 48700 x2, NONE, regardless of your display resolution. So why pay 100 extra? Especially since the life span of these videocards its so short that you would need a better card every year if you wanna keep maxing out ur games.
SiliconDoc - Saturday, January 17, 2009 - link
Oh, on the 7th SPAM reposting, you deleted some of your idiocy, the last few lines of overtly excessive bs, as compared to the former bs plain lines you decided to keep.So, psycho $3v3n spamfanboy, you feel corrected now ? rofl
I asked about your feelings because that's what you post about. lol
Hxx - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link
Siliconduc,I said that a 4870x2 can be had for 400 after mir learn to read next time. Both companies have driver and crash issues with their cards, Nvidia is not an exception. That is especially if you run vista 64 bit so its unfair to judge ATI based on that. Second, Nvidia is known for overpricing their cards and the gtx295 is no exception. Third, the gtx 295 DOES NOT wipe the floor with 4870 x2, its slightly faster, like 5-10% in the majority of the games, not all of them. There isn't any game out there that will be playable on a gtx 295 but not on a 48700 x2, NONE, regardless of your display resolution. So why pay 100 extra? Especially since the life span of these videocards its so short that you would need a better card every year if you wanna keep maxing out ur games. So that's why i consider this card pointless. Because your paying extra for physics ( which is used by a handful of games) and is not noticeably faster than a 4870 x2. As for the power consumption, if you have the money to throw on either one, than you don't care about the difference in wattage.
Hxx - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link
Siliconduc,I said that a 4870x2 can be had for 400 after mir learn to read next time. Both companies have driver and crash issues with their cards, Nvidia is not an exception. That is especially if you run vista 64 bit so its unfair to judge ATI based on that. Second, Nvidia is known for overpricing their cards and the gtx295 is no exception. Third, the gtx 295 DOES NOT wipe the floor with 4870 x2, its slightly faster, like 5-10% in the majority of the games, not all of them. There isn't any game out there that will be playable on a gtx 295 but not on a 48700 x2, NONE, regardless of your display resolution. So why pay 100 extra? Especially since the life span of these videocards its so short that you would need a better card every year if you wanna keep maxing out ur games. So that's why i consider this card pointless. Because your paying extra for physics ( which is used by a handful of games) and is not noticeably faster than a 4870 x2. As for the power consumption, if you have the money to throw on either one, than you don't care about the difference in wattage.
Hxx - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link
Siliconduc,I said that a 4870x2 can be had for 400 after mir learn to read next time. Both companies have driver and crash issues with their cards, Nvidia is not an exception. That is especially if you run vista 64 bit so its unfair to judge ATI based on that. Second, Nvidia is known for overpricing their cards and the gtx295 is no exception. Third, the gtx 295 DOES NOT wipe the floor with 4870 x2, its slightly faster, like 5-10% in the majority of the games, not all of them. There isn't any game out there that will be playable on a gtx 295 but not on a 48700 x2, NONE, regardless of your display resolution. So why pay 100 extra? Especially since the life span of these videocards its so short that you would need a better card every year if you wanna keep maxing out ur games. So that's why i consider this card pointless. Because your paying extra for physics ( which is used by a handful of games) and is not noticeably faster than a 4870 x2. As for the power consumption, if you have the money to throw on either one, than you don't care about the difference in wattage.
Hxx - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link
Siliconduc,I said that a 4870x2 can be had for 400 after mir learn to read next time. Both companies have driver and crash issues with their cards, Nvidia is not an exception. That is especially if you run vista 64 bit so its unfair to judge ATI based on that. Second, Nvidia is known for overpricing their cards and the gtx295 is no exception. Third, the gtx 295 DOES NOT wipe the floor with 4870 x2, its slightly faster, like 5-10% in the majority of the games, not all of them. There isn't any game out there that will be playable on a gtx 295 but not on a 48700 x2, NONE, regardless of your display resolution. So why pay 100 extra? Especially since the life span of these videocards its so short that you would need a better card every year if you wanna keep maxing out ur games. So that's why i consider this card pointless. Because your paying extra for physics ( which is used by a handful of games) and is not noticeably faster than a 4870 x2. As for the power consumption, if you have the money to throw on either one, than you don't care about the difference in wattage.
Hxx - Friday, January 16, 2009 - link
Siliconduc,I said that a 4870x2 can be had for 400 after mir learn to read next time. Both companies have driver and crash issues with their cards, Nvidia is not an exception. That is especially if you run vista 64 bit so its unfair to judge ATI based on that. Second, Nvidia is known for overpricing their cards and the gtx295 is no exception. Third, the gtx 295 DOES NOT wipe the floor with 4870 x2, its slightly faster, like 5-10% in the majority of the games, not all of them. There isn't any game out there that will be playable on a gtx 295 but not on a 48700 x2, NONE, regardless of your display resolution. So why pay 100 extra? Especially since the life span of these videocards its so short that you would need a better card every year if you wanna keep maxing out ur games. So that's why i consider this card pointless. Because your paying extra for physics ( which is used by a handful of games) and is not noticeably faster than a 4870 x2. As for the power consumption, if you have the money to throw on either one, than you don't care about the difference in wattage.
SiliconDoc - Saturday, January 17, 2009 - link
After you claim one card is cheaper than another, then you claim if you have money to throw on either one you don't care about the power savings from NVidia.Clearly you are deranged.
Hxx - Saturday, January 17, 2009 - link
You will understand in time that not everything that is been released its actually worth the money , especially with computer hardware with a high depreciation factor.SiliconDoc - Saturday, January 17, 2009 - link
Now you're off on another argument, since you made a fool of yourself on the former one.Tell us how Corvette's are always a waste of money, too. I'm sure we're all waiting for your condsiderate opinion on the matter. Do tell us as well how adults in this forum, even I, do not understand such a concept, I'm sure some other idiot will believe you.
You done stuffing your own shoe in your mouth ?
I certainly don't believe you are as ignorant as the last statement you typed, nor that anyone here is as ignorant as you claim possible.
Adults in a tech not understanding that some modern items purchased may be overpriced, even beyond their percieved consumer value ?
Surely you jest, bs artist.