Poorly written article and already scooped by Charlie (surprise surprise). I guess it confirms what most rational people have already guessed.
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Quote:
The 295 beats 260 sli. The 295 is basically 2x260's with more stream processors.
But i guess after OC the 260's might win. Im not sure how much the 295 OC's but i know the 260;s clock very nicely.
Originally Posted by xJumper The GTX 285 is a 280 made on the 55nm die. The 260 OC'ed could give a 280 a run for it's money, at best this card is only 8-10% faster than a OC'ed 260. They don't make as much because a lot of people are realizing that's it's a waste, for the price of one of those I can get 260 SLI configuration which rapes everything. |
But i guess after OC the 260's might win. Im not sure how much the 295 OC's but i know the 260;s clock very nicely.
Quote:
....they're talking about the GTX295. That's two GTX285 sandwiched together. GTX260 SLI can't beat it.
Originally Posted by xJumper The GTX 285 is a 280 made on the 55nm die. The 260 OC'ed could give a 280 a run for it's money, at best this card is only 8-10% faster than a OC'ed 260. They don't make as much because a lot of people are realizing that's it's a waste, for the price of one of those I can get 260 SLI configuration which rapes everything. I would think that this is a PR stunt. |
3
Quote:
![]()
![]()
??
Originally Posted by xJumper The GTX 285 is a 280 made on the 55nm die. The 260 OC'ed could give a 280 a run for it's money, at best this card is only 8-10% faster than a OC'ed 260. They don't make as much because a lot of people are realizing that's it's a waste, for the price of one of those I can get 260 SLI configuration which rapes everything. I would think that this is a PR stunt. |
Seriously
Did anyone really think it was anything other than a PR stunt?
Got my PR stunt
![]()
Did anyone really think it was anything other than a PR stunt?
Got my PR stunt
I couldn't find the picture but here's a quote from that mod.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robilar Too bad that test is way off for the GTX295.... I bought GTX295's based in part on reviews like Tom's compared to my X2's. Once I got the cards and starting actual testing of COD WAW and COD4, I quickly realized that the 4870X2 is faster than the GTX295 at 1920x1200 regardless of graphic options enabled. Even my pair of GTX 260 216's are faster than my GTX295. |
5
Quote:
Not from my testing it doesn't. My pair of BFG OCX (GTX 260 216's) are faster in every test I threw at them over my BFG GTX295.
My 4870X2 is also faster than the 295 as well.
Bear in mind this is only tested at 1920x1200 (my monitor's max res). Not that I care about any other resolution mind you...
I also tested Left 4 Dead, COD4 and COD WAW (the games I am currently playing). Again the 4870X2 was the fastest followed by the GTX 260 SLI and then the GTX295 in 3rd place in FPS. this again at 1920x1200 with all settings at max.
For example, here is my GTX295 (cpu at 3.6) and my pair of GTX260's (again cpu at 3.6). One is a Q9650 and the other a Q9550 so no performance differences between them. ram at stock speeds, no overclocks on either card, current drivers on both.
As you can see, the GTX 260 SLI is quicker in 3dmark06 by a fair bit. The GTX295 score is consistent with other owners here at OCN.
Originally Posted by Slinkey123 The 295 beats 260 sli. The 295 is basically 2x260's with more stream processors. But i guess after OC the 260's might win. Im not sure how much the 295 OC's but i know the 260;s clock very nicely. |
My 4870X2 is also faster than the 295 as well.
Bear in mind this is only tested at 1920x1200 (my monitor's max res). Not that I care about any other resolution mind you...
I also tested Left 4 Dead, COD4 and COD WAW (the games I am currently playing). Again the 4870X2 was the fastest followed by the GTX 260 SLI and then the GTX295 in 3rd place in FPS. this again at 1920x1200 with all settings at max.
For example, here is my GTX295 (cpu at 3.6) and my pair of GTX260's (again cpu at 3.6). One is a Q9650 and the other a Q9550 so no performance differences between them. ram at stock speeds, no overclocks on either card, current drivers on both.
As you can see, the GTX 260 SLI is quicker in 3dmark06 by a fair bit. The GTX295 score is consistent with other owners here at OCN.
Quote:
That may be true as I did not test lower resolutions.
However, anyone spending $400-$600 on a video card had better have at least a 24" monitor otherwise there is no point...
Originally Posted by Bleached At 1920x1200 and higher it is known that the 295 has a huge dip in performance. People were speculating that it would improve once drivers matured, but I don't have the card so I don't know. Any resolution lower the 295 outperforms the 4870X2. It is similar to the 260 216sp vs the 4870 1Gb 260 is better at lower resolutions and 4870 at 1920x1200 and up. |
That may be true as I did not test lower resolutions.
However, anyone spending $400-$600 on a video card had better have at least a 24" monitor otherwise there is no point...
2
Quote:
I know as 3dmark06 runs I posted above are at 1280x1024 (low enough res eh?)
3dmark06 being a synthetic bench though, I don't give it much creedence compared to actual game FPS.
The GTX 260 SLI was faster than my GTX295 in everything I threw at it. My X2 was quicker than the 260's but not by much
Originally Posted by xJumper lol the quote comes from you and ironically you post right bellow. Show em your picture of the 3D Mark runs, 260 SLI vs 295. |
3dmark06 being a synthetic bench though, I don't give it much creedence compared to actual game FPS.
The GTX 260 SLI was faster than my GTX295 in everything I threw at it. My X2 was quicker than the 260's but not by much
The GTX295 is a waste of money, as I've said before in other threads.
SLI Some GTX260's if you want nice / better performance for $150-$200 less.
![]()
SLI Some GTX260's if you want nice / better performance for $150-$200 less.
Quote:
Are all these tests / 3dmark runs done in xp x64 pro?
Originally Posted by Robilar I know as 3dmark06 runs I posted above are at 1280x1024 (low enough res eh?) 3dmark06 being a synthetic bench though, I don't give it much creedence compared to actual game FPS. The GTX 260 SLI was faster than my GTX295 in everything I threw at it. My X2 was quicker than the 260's but not by much |
first of all,
Quote:
QFT
the 295 shouldnt even be on a benchmark list at any resolution under 1600
however, people seem to forget that the 295 can overclock too.
sure a set of OCd 260s may beat a stock 295, but mine overclocks like a beast, (i dont know what heat problems you are talking about) and i havnt seen any benchmarks comparing OCd 260s with an OCd 295.
also, the drivers are poo
![]()
i do get massive frames in almost any game i play, but a solid half of them are being held back at a driver based level, and it is driving me nuts.
i paid for 2 cards in 1, if i had wanted just one 285 i would have bought it.
my $.02
Quote:
However, anyone spending $400-$600 on a video card had better have at least a 24" monitor otherwise there is no point... |
the 295 shouldnt even be on a benchmark list at any resolution under 1600
however, people seem to forget that the 295 can overclock too.
sure a set of OCd 260s may beat a stock 295, but mine overclocks like a beast, (i dont know what heat problems you are talking about) and i havnt seen any benchmarks comparing OCd 260s with an OCd 295.
also, the drivers are poo
i do get massive frames in almost any game i play, but a solid half of them are being held back at a driver based level, and it is driving me nuts.
i paid for 2 cards in 1, if i had wanted just one 285 i would have bought it.
my $.02
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
