Get your complete GTX280 scores here

I LOLed at the the difference between the 2 cards at 2569x1600x32x8 on UT3.
Over 2500% percent difference.
That's really weird.

well, not that bad.. but, does it really matter how it performs, when you have 2nd "motherboard" inside your case... I believe AMD/ATI could make even faster card @this wattage and sizes... but for a god sake! is it so bad fo NV that they make cards like this? prolly in next 2 gens we'll have to buy not a card, but separate case for NV cards, LOL!

thats why I'll prefer 48xx.. its fast enough and takes almost half energy, and its even faster for same money...

Hot and big? You betcha. But certainly not slow. With a 50%+ performance increase at resolutions above 1600x1200, I wouldn't say it's horrendous. Quite respectable, actually.

Will I buy one? Of course not. I'm waiting for ATi to top this at a lower price. :-]

Mr.DAAMIT salesman, are you bound by DAAMIT NDA? Why haven't you posted any supposed 4870 scores?

Are you AFRAID because 4870 results are much much worse than the GTX?

The majority of these benchmarks are CPU limited and don't come close to stressing the GTX 280.


In the name of balanced reporting on your RANTS, I dare you post equivalent ATI results!

You're just scared off your pants on singling out nvidia results without showing the competitor's poorer results.

Generally performance increase seems to be very good. Although mainly boost get resolution that needs 24"+ screens.

At least in my eyes it seems to do quite well compeared OC 9800 GTX but I am not sure does do enough well for $ 650 dollar card compearing 9800 GTX's current prices.

Green = Good , no?

I know you've mentioned there are lots of problems with the GT280 but at face value the scores look good.

That is unless the R770 is lots better...

for something that is "too big, too hot, too slow, and unmanufacturable" it sure looks like the single GPU 280 just put a hurting on the dual core GX2....and pay close attention to the extreme high resolutions and detail numbers.....


Uhm, how does that chart make GTX 280 slow? It seemed pretty fast to me, with big improvements in high resolutions.

Almost every comparison shows an average of 50% increase over the 9800GTX series. Why all the negative press?

This really gives the 9800 a pounding. Is the 4870 really going to be able to keep up?

What the hell was the Inquirer complaining about? The performance improvement over the 9800 looks pretty darn good to me.

A Comparison to GeForce 9800 GX2 and HD 3870 X2 would be nice ;)

here video review Nvidia GTX 280

Interesting results...

you cut off the bottom asshole.

What's your point Charlie? If is was that the GTX 280 smashes the 9800GTX, especially at resolutions like 2560x1600 like I play at, then well done. You're beginning negative spin seemed to be attempting to assert that it was a crap card and all you did was show how great the performance is.

You're very weird Charlie.

Looks Nvidia will milk the profit out of this card if they could manufacture enough of them.

So when do we get a hd4870 vs GTX280 chart?

why didnt you use the same drivers for both cards?




What? Not including anything above 200% increase in speed ive worked out an average increase to be very roughly around 70% across all benchmarks, obviously that ranges from -6% to +199%

so its possibly 70% more powerful with ~20% less GPU power, meaning its more efficient per cycle. 

This is at a very basic level, so unless the thing needs a small nuclear power station to power it and NO2 cooling it can’t be as bad as you are saying. The only other thing is what state the drivers are in, was the 9800 handicapped in someway with the older driver? Possibly but doesn’t that work the same for the 280? Could that be buggered drivers as well?

Its faster, its power requirements and its heat output is still to be seen

Is it revolutionary? No, but its good progress so lay of some of the crap that comes out of your keyboard.




What? Not including anything above 200% increase in speed ive worked out an average increase to be very roughly around 70% across all benchmarks, obviously that ranges from -6% to +199%

so its possibly 70% more powerful with ~20% less GPU power, meaning its more efficient per cycle. 

This is at a very basic level, so unless the thing needs a small nuclear power station to power it and NO2 cooling it can’t be as bad as you are saying. The only other thing is what state the drivers are in, was the 9800 handicapped in someway with the older driver? Possibly but doesn’t that work the same for the 280? Could that be buggered drivers as well?

Its faster, its power requirements and its heat output is still to be seen

Is it revolutionary? No, but its good progress so lay of some of the crap that comes out of your keyboard.

Your bias against Nvidia is shameful. It makes reading this site painful to say the least. I WANT BOTH GPU MAKERS TO DO WELL, as that BENEFITS THE CONSUMER.

You bash Nvidia cards like they are trash. Well, 20 to 80% improvement is great actually. And I know it makes you mad Nvidia doesn't play with you but get over it. If your gonna publish articles become unbiased or stop writing altogether. 

Way to go Nvidia, lets hope ATi has an answer as well, then let the price wars begin.

iLLz out!

So charlie, what did the memory speed end up being?

And it's the wallet from my back pocket, I will shell out the 600 dollars for this beast - it looks like - coupled with a 1080p hdmi tv, looks like the consoles have something to worry about.

Any eta on when we'll have some tests from a reputable hardware site to compare to these?

impressive for a single gpu card

Will run well and will burn a hole in my motherboard nicely.

It would be even nicer if you compare this results to daamit rademon 3870 benchmarks. Gfx war starts to be more and more interesting......

I hope you and your entire family burn to death Charlie, in the name of proper journalism.

Thats more like it! notice the GTX280 pulls away the higher the resolution goes? now we want comparisons with a 9800GX2 and a HD3870X2, once overclocked i'm sure this card will be a monster :)

Maybe it is too hot, too big and "too slow", but compared to that OC'ed 9800GTX it's damn fast at really high resolutions!

...is it just me, or aren't these scores quite good?

Certainly quantity over quality here inq, big ugly table of scores is big and ugly, still get all the info but it's just yuck.

Some impressive gains here, this thing just eats high reso's but by the sound of it this still doesn't justify how much this is (rumored) to cost.

There is no video card worth $600, sorry. What a waste of effort and money on Nvidias part. Yep, there'll be fanbois that will buy these things so they can brag to their fanboi friends (if they have any). But in the end, who really cares.

I can see all the 15 year old forum lurkers saying "nvidia owns" over and over again. I can't wait for the insanity of it all. After I realized I could cook a pizza on the 8800GTS SLI setup I had, I sold it all, bought a couple of 3870s and never looked back. The twin 3870s cost HALF of what one of these ridiculous Nvidia cards cost.

Nice catch, Charlie. Lets hope 4870 X2 can come close.

SPARKS

http://publish.it168.com/diy/showBigPic.asp?cDocid=20080611033801&picid=1040491.jpg

After comparing scores here and scores listed above it looks like Nvidia will still rule. For instance, Lost planet SNOW 1920x1200 DX10 SNOW here, (you used OC edition the italian page doesn't so the ATI 4870 there is running against a SLOWER GTX over there) scores 32 vs 58 for GTX280 (81.25% faster than this OC edition). On ITALIAN site, GTX NON-OC in 1920x1200 SNOW DX10 scores 48 vs 43fps for 4870. So a single 4870 already losess to GTX, and GTX gets smashed by about 70% vs GX2. So it would be slower than GTX280. Meaning even 2 4870's wouldn't beat GTX280. It would get stomped. Looks close in jaurez, WIC, but losing by good margins in everything else vs single GTX280. As you can see at IT site the 4870 is already smoked by GX2 and this card is a bit better than that and I'm thinking nvidia is underclocking it a bit to make better yields. If ATI wins even one benchmark all they have to do is up the clock 50mhz for Ultra version and it's a waste case again. Bummer for ATI.

So it will take 2 ATI's again to make a race with single GTX280 (before 2 month later die shrink, which we know is already taped out). How much wattage will 2 ATI's take vs 1 GTX280? By the time 4870x2 comes out Nvidia shrinks it and probably either jacks the clocks or does an x2 themselves making the whole thing a blowout again. As far as I can see AMD has about 1month window for an X2 version to win a few benchmarks until DieShrink version of GTX280 comes out and kills it (if not as a single high clock lower power($399? vs 4870x2?), they can do X2 model with lower clocks to dominate at say $500, then regular X2 speeds for $650...). Start buying NVDA stock. It's going to move 30-80% just like the last 5yrs from May-Dec15th. It happens every year for the last 5+yrs...LOL. I love them.

but how do these ati drivers hold up under linux?
does the card still out perform ?

The FIRST thing we see: 1024mb of Memory on a 512 Bit interface = HIGH RESOLUTION MADNESS ! That DOES NOT REQUIRE ANTIALIASING *** *** *** !"!!!!$"5..

Ok Second is just ... that beast will run crysis on a HD TV. That's AWESOME (since crytek engine was made by aliens, we're reaching their technologies).

Just a congrats like Charlie said. Charlie said too that 4870 will rock this card. Lets see that charlie. The Unicorn? :D Good day sirs,

I have been keeping my eye on this guys fake post and the conclusion i could get from the results is infact they are significant if you studied the numbers carefully. In some tests at lower resolutions increases can be almost 100% or less than 20 %. Performance benefits arise which proves the GTX280 is infact a powerhouse when you crank up resolutions to very large monitors making crysis playable at almost 30fps an increase of over 50% in some games aswell at those resolutions. 

Nvidia has helped those people with big screens. Rumour has it in the case of 3dvantage a dx10 benchmarking beast the GTX 280 wins the crown over Ati 4000 series by a large percentage.

Check this out. These are just rumours:
http://www.yougamers.com/forum/showthread.php?p=907103

It pretty obvious even from the results they designed there drivers to tackle 3dvantage and showing increases of up to 100% over the 9800GTX but staying around the same for with the 9800GX2. Technologically it is a sucess for a single core GPU to be level with the GX2 (dual core GPU). If they ever release a future card as a dual core then thats the card to buy. It will be 55nm shrinked since there changing manufacturing size for there next GPU's.

So is it worth buying? Yes if you have a weak gpu card and cant play games well enough. No if you have a 8800GTX, 9800 series or the GX2. Better to wait for 55nm shrinks or X2 versions. Frankly i want 1, but will wait. My 8800GTS 640mb is weak in crysis.

Seems to me like that's a pretty decent performance jump over the 9800. Driver updates will surely fix most of those anomalies.

Big and hot, sure, and I hate it, but what else is new? They'll keep making them bigger and hotter as long as the enthusiasts buy them.

Us regular folk will do well to wait until yields have improved, drivers have stabilized, a new revision is out, and the price has dropped.
Does the 8800 GT ring a bell?

I dread the day when the external gpu solutions (remmeber those nasty, huge PCI-Expres cables you showed us?) with their own enclosures and power supplies become the "must have" for gamers.

Talk about nice high end resolution score bumps. We'll see the AMD/ATI scores soon I hope :)

Hopefully they bring on something truly competitive at the high-end this time around.

Is it only me or does the top of the class, expecnsive GTX280 score just few percent more than the low class, cheap HD4850? This is some bad news for nVidia. And should they not be able to manufacture many of them, the worse. Lots of friends announced their migration towards HD4850 or HD4870 already and these results may be the last nail in the coffin already.

...here I come =)

Wow I really wasn't expecting so see so many games/levels with a performance increase of about only 10% over a 9800 GTX in 1280x1024. Is this what nvidia considers a new evolutionary step? Not for me or all those who aren't gaming at very high resolutions. We expect a consistent increase of over 20%, not just a game or three above 20% and the rest is all below.

Sure, you may all say "if you have the money for this card, you have the money for a bigger and better monitor", to which I will reply: do you honestly think that the cheaper cards will have the same performance at 1280x1024? Of course not. So this new generation of cards seem to bring very little new value to me.

Wow I really wasn't expecting so see so many games/levels with a performance increase of about only 10% over a 9800 GTX in 1280x1024. Is this what nvidia considers a new evolutionary step? Not for me or all those who aren't gaming at very high resolutions. We expect a consistent increase of over 20%, not just a game or three above 20% and the rest is all below.

Sure, you may all say "if you have the money for this card, you have the money for a bigger and better monitor", to which I will reply: do you honestly think that the cheaper cards will have the same performance at 1280x1024? Of course not. So this new generation of cards seem to bring very little new value to me.

For those with high resolution monitors!

1920 and above.

That's a lot of green.

The numbers @ 1280 are probably low because of CPU limitations. Anyway, who the hell plays at that res when you've got a kick ass card.

How is it performance score is much greater than Extreme score.

What Do Yoy Do, ADD Them Together or is Less intense useage Better?
Stewart Drashek

Well this card, just like the 8800GTX/Ultra it replaces, is clearly a worthy investment at a low low price.

Cheap as chips!*



*Anyone spending 600 quid on a graphics card is an idiot.

Well the problem is there's great performance increases in high-res but little to barely noticeable increases at lower resolutions. So essentially this card is sightly faster than a 9800GTX(OC) but with tonnes more ram so it does well at high res. 

It kinda suggests theres no real improvement in the architecture as a whole, rather tweaks to the high end. Which is good, but it doesnt suggest a new generation of cards (unlike what the naming suggests) and at what cost? tonnes more raw material and higher energy consumption than the competitor and the result is less performance (suggested by recent reports). All in all its not looking too good for nvidia but i hope it improves back to the olden days

-64mb GeForce 2 MX owner

Those of you who are complaining about the lower percentage improvements at lower resolutions are friggin CLUELESS. Like, OMG, it only does 200FPS, and the 9800GTX does 190FPS, BOO GTX 280!!!

Like, yeah, that REALLY MATTERS.

This is running on a 3.0GHz processor, people.

Have you all never heard of a CPU BOTTLENECK?!?

Be aware of the fact 1single core GPU equals a dual core 9800GX2's performance. This card is the first step towards a technological advancement that is astonishing. Fit 2 GPU cores on this baby and u have something that twice the speed of a GX2 on a single card. Both these in sli and GX2 in quad sli perform the same. However in Tri Sli nothing comes close. So if you ask me is Nvidia pleased with themselves then i say yes, me too! This is Frankly a step towards creating Dual core monsters that are equal the performance of Quad Sli on 1 card just like the 3870X2! A 280GX2 in Quad Sli would be equivalent to octal Sli on the 9800GX2 performance. If people cant see just what this means then your the ones who have been poisoned by charlie propaganda campaign against Nvidia. Nvidia has a lot to play around with now. ATi god well knows they need there X2 version to smoke this card but from what i have seen online so far there scores are mediocre considering there cards are dual core and 55nm. Very disappointing ATI. Green Teams are raining champions again with 65nm against ATI's 55nm. Heat dont matter anymore,the cooling is sufficient. Remember the 8800GTX is 90nm and so is my GTS. Its Silent, qiet. Stop whining about things charlie. 65nm solved this for Nvidia, ati needed to go further because there 2000 series where loud as hell overheating all the time. Stop comparing Nvidia to Ati all the time charlie, its pointless. ATI is a mid-range market provider most of the time. Nvidia is for enthusiast. Buy it if your desperate for more performance. I'll wait for the more raw power. Just want Quad Sli performance on 1 card thats all.

Shut up you lot. Charlie is right that the GTX280 is to big and to hot. He is probably wrong with to slow. But that is no reason to post such unqualified comments. Maybe some guys of you are loosing their brain due to the way it is meant to be brained programm of mighty Graphzilla.
Keep in mind - the HD 4870 will definitely not beeing faster than the GTX280 because it is a around 300 dollar GPU. But IMHO it will be close.

Have a nice day b******s

Smells like victory if they manage to deliver them. 

What makes me wonder are the statements about the long life of the 9800 series, and the announcement of the G200b. Not exactly "G200 for everybody".

I use a 24", and the best way to get the fast and smooth updates is using 150hz in 1192x745. (100hz is still not as good)

Using the LCD even 2ms ones doesnt come close and can cause strain on the eyes and tearing on the screen. 

shame the raw power doesnt change much only tricks, shaders etc. (when its fast universally then its raw)

To all who flamed the author of this article:

Learn to understand an article. Charlie didn't say that GTX 280 isn't FAST. He said it's NOT ENOUGH. When 4870 appears, it will not only give GTX280 a run for its money (literally!) but also come in much better quantities and much lower prices. For 10% performance advantage, who buys a card which is 40% more expensive.

And that is IF the 4870 will be beaten by GTX280 which is not really sure. We'll see in two weeks.

The shops have them listed, and at those prices they can keep them !

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?groupid=701&catid=56&subid=1176

They only have specs for one card and post them for the sake of information, and people bitch that they are biased. If they had both sets of specs, and wrote an article comparing them, people would bitch that the results were not fair for some reason. It seems like there is no pleasing the readers. People are just waiting to complain about something.

As for all of you who say that the cost is ridiculous, they wouldn't make them if there weren't people out there dumb enough to buy them. Some people have more money than brains, and if they want to buy a $1200 Quad Extreme and dual $600 graphics cards, and a $350 motherboard that does marginally more then a $90 one, then let them. I'd rather put a down payment on a house, but some people have messed up priorities. But you have to remember that YOU don't have to buy it. It's not a requirement. So why complain? You can still buy a $60 card if you choose, and if someone wants to drop $3000-4000 a year on their bleeding edge system, let them. It doesn't affect you, so shut up!

You gamers just LURV getting raped on video cards. I am VERY happy with my old 7600GT. Reason? I am not a gamer and even if I was no way would I pay the crazy prices for that extra couple of percent advantage. Also Nvidia have screwed everyone who uses their 'video' cards for 'video' editing by removing Video Mirror because of DRM. No editing in a Adobe Premiere window whilst having it display fullscreen on the secondary monitor for you!

The new GPU tops the 9800 by quite large margins (am I reading the chart incorrectly?). On performance it looks like quite an improvement.

We'll see about price and availability. Nvidia does seem to love selling very expensive cards...

Charlie, I do think your bias is showing. But, WTH, bias is half the reason I read the Inq!

He used a OC 9800GTX. Cheap trick to nake it look just that little bit slower...

It's not possible to optimize old games a lot. And DX10 will only rule once developers get control over the new DX10 pipeline. It is a lo harder to learn. In some ways it's both the freedom and the challenge of old software rendering.

that moderate power thirstyness cards are nothing new nvidia just follows ati steps and as ati expunged that external card "for notebook gamer kids" nvidia shall do jus the same next jear when that exlucive licence rights to that jaei pci-e connector expires.

in 2015 well probabl looking at external crossfire rigs of 7..20 cards like we have external optical and hard drives .... you need space you buy a backup drive .... you need a computing power you buy an backup graphic card/"calculator" .... and word backup gets totaly different meaning

So now you're bottlenecked by your monitor too... Great news for those of us who thought 19" widescreens were a good idea! Wouldn't mind seeing a price/performance breakdown.

Well some of us still remember this year february promises of triple power of next gen, well this gen, d10p gpus over 8800ultras is that happened ... NOT. Shrinkage of this chip even to 45nm and pumping it to 2GHz with additional 120 shaders cant brought out humble twice powerup for the next gen chips. So simple shrinkage is not a solution and nvidia's trashing on intel & amd from the end of april 2008 can tell us that they realize that also pretty good. They simply need a new architecture to keep the spice flow, or are that richy richs are really that stupid to pay ever year 700$ for just less than twice more power? Well the time will tell


Seriously, did Nvidia kill your parents or something? Why the hate? Nvidia has had the better cards for multiple years now. Am I saying this as a fan boy? No, I'm saying this as someone that is looking at price to performance ratio. 

Do I want ATi (or AMD or Dammit or whatever they are called now) to do better? Hell yes. When they make competitive cards again then we all win as prices will go down and performance will go up. 

But all ATI has been doing for a few years now is play catch up to Nvidia and yet they never catch up. It's irritating. Was there last gen almost as good as Nvidia? Yeah, sure - almost. Almost isn't good enough. They have to be as good or better than Nvidia for it to matter. And time after time they just can't close the deal. 

@MrWolf
I don't know for how long time in the past are you reffering on ATi can't catch up with nvidia. They perform tremendously well infact in these days having 70-75% performance in their RV chips comaparing to nvidias finest'n'bravest. RV are "values" chips in fact you know thats what V stands for. And they scale well,+70% with additional gpu in CF on RV670.
Don't know if you remember how ATi was trailing behind nV in the days of ATi Rage and first R100 they were more than 2x slower, and for Rage128 comparing it to those days value RivaTNT they wasnt even comparable ntm that when GF2 was a flagship that RageFurry were more than 4x times slower. But people were still buying them and why cause of additional features like tuners (ATi Wonder cards) and incorporated ViVo, ntm they have miserably poor drivers in those days. So I'd say that they give us in fact more for less prize today. HD4850 (RV770) will have 75% power of GTX280 and RV7700XT is 20% better s it falls somwher in 90% performance of GTX280 with 145W peak power. It's not something overclockers would appreciate no matter somoe of them already done :) http://en.expreview.com/2008/06/17/980mhz-x-3-x-gtx280-extreme-17241/
Only AMD's drawback nowadays is that they don't have CUDA like feature of their own. But for then who pays i believe they have an appropriate response with their firestream product line.

Holy Fu*# $#!^ man! I've seen some fanboi's but this is just unbeliveable and makes the author look completely inept. 

Sorry Charlie, but your opening lines don't match the results. Get a clue. ATi doesn't stand a snowball's chance of matching that! They don't have the money to match that. 

This card has already set world records. In it's first week it broke folding records that have stood for years. It averages about 4000 PPD for Stanford! Do you realize that Charlie? 

Do you realize that this card is the perfect match for the upcoming Bloomfield CPU and that it's CPU limited right now Charlie? Do you? 

Please pull Hector Ruiz out of your ass, loose the ineptitude, and come back to reality. Please do the PC world a favor and don't post anymore of this trash until you do. Fanboi's SUCK!!!

mate listen tghe reason the perfomance on ut3 is 2500% is because the physics processing on the card uis 10x the cpu and it has HavocX or sonmting on the lines of it physics processor.