*Official* GTX 275 Thread

[Zenki]

DUDE! lol I love you seriously I am in the same boat as you were.

I have a 55nm GTX 260 Core 216 SC and its crapping out at stock values, got off the phone with EVGA and the tech was like "Well for 17 dollars you could get the GTX 275 and that card is a much better one than the 260". Think you might just have made up my mind.

[shiloh]

I have got the BFG OC version of the GTX 275. I did some test on it to make sure it was working fine before removing the stock cooler to install my waterblock on it.

My card is squealing quite a lot under load and it's very annoying. Anyone else got a squealing 275?

is it worth RMA it?

[USlatin]

Finally a thread for these! I bet by the time I build these will cost as much as the 260's and they will be the best bang for your buck. Hope they will do cause they sound like true beasts without the ridiculous prices.

[kilrbe3]

Originally Posted by shiloh

I have got the BFG OC version of the GTX 275. I did some test on it to make sure it was working fine before removing the stock cooler to install my waterblock on it.

My card is squealing quite a lot under load and it's very annoying. Anyone else got a squealing 275?

is it worth RMA it?

Its a normal issue with all nvidia cards, the capacitors are just squealing. You can try some tips, like finger nail paint remover or silicon oil. But yes, it is 100% RMA issue. They will accept the RMA.

[ATME]

Build Log coming. I've uploaded my photos, so here's a little snippet:

[moward]

benchies from my Palit GTX 275, screenshots can be found in this thread

2009-04-03 18:29:07 - UT3
Frames: 12284 - Time: 203341ms - Avg: 60.411 - Min: 50 - Max: 63
(1920x1200, Max settings, 8xAF, 16xAA)


2009-04-03 18:39:17 - Empire (Total War)
Frames: 13154 - Time: 327312ms - Avg: 40.188 - Min: 20 - Max: 66
(1920x1200, Ultra settings, Ambient occlusion off)


2009-04-03 18:46:50 - Empire (Total War)
Frames: 1505 - Time: 51140ms - Avg: 29.429 - Min: 17 - Max: 35
(1920x1200, Ultra settings, Ambient occlusion on)


2009-04-03 18:54:19 - crysis64 (warhead, dense jungle)
Frames: 3748 - Time: 191684ms - Avg: 19.553 - Min: 3 - Max: 27
(1920x1200, 2xAA, 2xAF, Enthusiast Settings)

3DM06 - 17,245 (700 Core, 1200 Memory, 1555 Shaders)

Edit: unlinked the Core & shaders:
3DM06 - 17,705(740 Core, 1200 Memory, 1552 Shaders)

3DMark Vantage
P14,790
GPU: 12,286
CPU: 38,049

Crysis Benchmark Tool Results

73.16 FPS - 1280x1024 -DX9 - High - moward -- E8400 @ 3.825GHz -- GTX 275 705/1600/1225 -- Vista x64

60.94 FPS - 1280x1024 - DX10 - High - moward -- E8400 @ 3.825GHz -- GTX 275 705/1600/1225 -- Vista x64

24.57 FPS - 1900x1200 - DX10 - Very High - moward -- E8400 @ 3.825GHz -- GTX 275 700/1600/1200 -- Vista x64

44.98 FPS - 1680x1050 - DX9 - Very High - 8xAA - moward -- E8400 @ 4.00GHz -- GTX 275 730/1525/1200 -- Vista x64

37.61 FPS - 1900x1200 - DX9 - Very High - 8xAA - moward -- E8400 @ 4.00GHz -- GTX 275 730/1525/1200 -- Vista x64

[Kai-]

How are the temps on the Palit custom cooler?

Can anyone with the stock cooler post up some temps for comparison?

[moward]

Guru3D reviewed a selection of GTX275's recently and came to the conclusion that the Palit cooler provides the same temps as the reference design but is a good bit quieter.

Some Palit temps:

Standard clocks
83°C Max at Full load (45% fan speed)
Drops to 73°C at 100% fan speed
Idle temps around 46°C



700 Core Clock
83°C at Full load (100% fan speed)
Idle temps around 46°C

[Lyric]

700 Core Clock
83°C at Full load (100% fan speed)
Idle temps around 46°C

that's some crappy cooling then, seems they should have stuck with the OEM cooler.

Mine at 720 core / 1584 shader / 1215 memory is folding 24/7 @ 57-59*C maximum on the stock cooler with the fan @ 100%. 3dmark06 benchmarks, and 3dmark vantage only brings the card to about 55*C max as well.

I imagine it would maybe be around 70*C max with 100% fan speed if I ran Furmark, but I don't have time to do that, too busy folding.

[kilrbe3]

Originally Posted by moward

benchies from my Palit GTX 275, screenshots can be found in this thread

2009-04-03 18:29:07 - UT3
Frames: 12284 - Time: 203341ms - Avg: 60.411 - Min: 50 - Max: 63
(1920x1200, Max settings, 8xAF, 16xAA)


2009-04-03 18:39:17 - Empire (Total War)
Frames: 13154 - Time: 327312ms - Avg: 40.188 - Min: 20 - Max: 66
(1920x1200, Ultra settings, Ambient occlusion off)


2009-04-03 18:46:50 - Empire (Total War)
Frames: 1505 - Time: 51140ms - Avg: 29.429 - Min: 17 - Max: 35
(1920x1200, Ultra settings, Ambient occlusion on)


2009-04-03 18:54:19 - crysis64 (warhead, dense jungle)
Frames: 3748 - Time: 191684ms - Avg: 19.553 - Min: 3 - Max: 27
(1920x1200, 2xAA, 2xAF, Enthusiast Settings)

3DM06 - 17,245 (700 Core, 1200 Memory, 1555 Shaders)

Edit: unlinked the Core & shaders:
3DM06 - 17,705(740 Core, 1200 Memory, 1552 Shaders)

3DMark Vantage
P14,790
GPU: 12,286
CPU: 38,049

Crysis Benchmark Tool Results

73.16 FPS - 1280x1024 -DX9 - High - moward -- E8400 @ 3.825GHz -- GTX 275 705/1600/1225 -- Vista x64

60.94 FPS - 1280x1024 - DX10 - High - moward -- E8400 @ 3.825GHz -- GTX 275 705/1600/1225 -- Vista x64

24.57 FPS - 1900x1200 - DX10 - Very High - moward -- E8400 @ 3.825GHz -- GTX 275 700/1600/1200 -- Vista x64

44.98 FPS - 1680x1050 - DX9 - Very High - 8xAA - moward -- E8400 @ 4.00GHz -- GTX 275 730/1525/1200 -- Vista x64

37.61 FPS - 1900x1200 - DX9 - Very High - 8xAA - moward -- E8400 @ 4.00GHz -- GTX 275 730/1525/1200 -- Vista x64

hey, wonder if you can do a simple request.

Are those maxed? All Very High?
Could you possible do 1680x1050 4xAA DX10?