Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: geforce, gt, 220
Categories: Graphics
Introduction
There's an old adage associated with automobile racing: "what wins on Sunday, sells on Monday." The idea is that if a car manufacturer's product makes it to the winner's circle on the "weekend," then that technology might lead to more sales at the dealership down the road.
The PC graphics card industry has demonstrated an uncanny parallel with the automotive sector in this respect. The manufacturer that delivers drool-worthy enthusiast hardware at the high-end gets a lot of positive momentum that trickles down to the guy who walks into the local computer store looking for a new entry-level graphics card.
Nvidia and AMD have engaged in a battle for supremacy for the top-performing graphics card for years now. But their bread and butter comes from the more pedestrian models that represent the boards most folks can actually afford. The sub-$80 market represents a very diverse model selection with the least price differential, along with the tightest margins. This space is often used as a test market for new technologies (most recently, ATI used the $100 price point to test its transition to 40nm manufacturing, for example).
Enter Nvidia's new GeForce 210- and GT 220-based discrete graphics cards. While these models aren't intended to represent the cutting edge of performance, they do represent some important hallmarks for Nvidia. Mainly, these are the first Nvidia GPUs to use TSMC's 40nm process and sport DirectX 10.1 support. Could this be foreshadowing of die-shrinks to come in the next couple of month? That'd likely be a very fair assessment.
You might also notice that these are Nvidia's first sub-$100 GPUs to migrate to the GT200 family's naming convention. Let's have a closer look at what they actually contain.
- Next page GeForce GT220 And 210: Speeds And Feeds
Best offers
- nvidia geforce gt 220
- geforce gt 220 review
- nvidia geforce gt 220 review
- gt 220
- review nvidia gt 220
- geforce gt 220
- geforce 220
- nvidia gt 220
- nvidia® geforce™ gt 220
- geforce gt 220 price
- nvidia® geforce® gt 220
- hd 5870 price new
- why dont i have directx 10.1
- nvidia geforce gt 220 price
- geforce gt 220 crysis
LOL Nvidia Just now work at DirectX 10.1
When ATI Radeon have a New Videocard and the Best in The World with DirectX 11 
AMD-ATI Rullz
ATI rullz, they have 2. it keeps AMD alive.
I think they're both 64-bit
I don't really know what to make of these cards..two steps forwards, one step back is the closest I can come to a definitive impression.
The 210 seems like it' only good for low-spec HTPC's, or environments where minimal power draw is an absolute necessity. The features like CUDA and extended video acceleration are nice, but do they make up for that 64-bit drudgery that seems to go hand-in-hand with so many nVidia offerings? No, it doesn't..the competition in this price range is too stiff to start making those kind of cut-backs.
Just drop the junk and focus on what's good, even if it costs slightly more; the 22 is far superior to the 210, it's in a totally different class and is able to compete with AMD's budget offerings whilst sporting some nice new features. That 210 is the 'MX' of modern technology and quite frankly those days are gone..you just can't fob people off with junk like that anymore, in my opinion. Roll with the technology instead of repeatedly rolling out junk that can barely compete with technology that's a year-old..
I'm really not convinced that there is a compelling reason to choose these cards over older-generation cards with more muscle. They are too feeble to really utilise features in DX 10.1 whilst keeping the rezolution and framerates up.
I can see a place for the chips inside mass-market manufacturer's home desktops (Dell etc). I can't see why anyone with enough knowledge to be able to upgrade their own system would go for one of these, for the same budget you could get far better framerates (and overall gaming experiences) elsewhere.
Not what i was hoping for, why cant nvidia make a card that will rival the ati 4770 and the 5750, the gts 250 power consumption is way to high, i hope the GeForce GTS 340 is good
Compare these cards to say, the Geforce Geforce 2 MX 200, Geforce FX 5600 or the Geforce 7300LE - all those cards supported the latest features only in name, not performance. Same thing seems to be happening again. I reckon even decent onboard video would be enough to lure budget uses away from that 210. They've skimped, scraped and cut corners until there's half a card left, until there's a matter of weeks rather than months left in it unless you're used to performing only the most basic of tasks and can stand the longer CUDA processing times.
nVidia obviously feels there's a market for this stuff. I learnt my lesson a long time ago not to be duped by the fancy sales talk, however. nVidia does make some good products but they also have a tendancy to produce junk, and that's what I think they've done here. The 200 seems OK but that 210 is a lemming in my book.
*220.
now if only you could SLI these midgets and get more decent performance
which is the better ati radeon hd4350 or the geforce 8400 gs
your opinions are well needed
I have the gt 220 and i think its a very nice card
i have the asus engt 220 with 1 gb ddr3 memory. This is a low-profile card and very nice for games like call of duty 4.
It comes with a few programs (asus gamer osd, smartdoctor and some other programs)
When i play Call of Duty 4 it runs max detail very easy. And on the Nvidia site it says that the following games are viewed good on card:
- World of Warcraft
- Spore
- The Sims 3
- Fallout 3
- Left 4 Dead.
I have played left 4 dead myself on max quality, and its very nice gameplay
related links:
nvidia site: http://www.nvidia.com/object/produ [...] 20_us.html
videocard benchmark :
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/ [...] rce+GT+220