The GeForce GTS 250 In Detail
Source: Tom's Hardware US – Keywords: geforce, gts, 250
The GeForce GTS 250 In Detail
BFG Shows Off Its GeForce GTS 250
As mentioned, the GTS 250 is a GeForce 9800+ by another name. Thus, its specifications should be easy to remember for anyone already familiar with Nvidia’s lineup.
Manufactured on TSMC’s 55 nm process, the card’s G92 GPU sports 754 million transistors and occupies 230 square millimeters of die space—less than half the size of the GT200. It features 128 unified shader processors, 64 texture units, and 16 ROPs.
Whereas most GeForce GTX 9800+ cards came with 512 MB of GDDR3 memory, reference GeForce GTS 250s will instead include 1 GB of GDDR3, according to sources at BFG and Zotac. Both the older and new G92-based boards employ a 256-bit memory bus, though.
A reference GTS 250 employs a 738 MHz core clock, 1,836 MHz shader clock, and 1.1 GHz (2.2 MHz effective) memory clock. But BFG sent us a sample of its GeForce GTS 250 OC Edition with a faster 750 MHz core and 1.12 GHz memory clock, while the shader clock remained unchanged.
| GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 | GeForce GTS 250 | GeForce GTX 9800+ | Radeon HD 4870 | Radeon HD 4850 | Radeon HD 4830 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing Process | 55 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC |
| SPs | 216 | 128 | 128 | 800 | 800 | 640 |
| Core Clock | 576 MHz | 738 MHz | 738 MHz | 750 MHz | 625 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Shader Clock | 1,242 MHz | 1,836 MHz | 1,836 MHz | 750 MHz | 625 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 999 MHz GDDR3 | 1,100 MHz GDDR3 | 1,100 MHz GDDR3 | 900 MHz GDDR5 | 993 MHz GDDR3 | 900 MHz GDDR3 |
| Frame Buffer | 896 MB | 1 GB | 512 MB | 512 MB | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Memory Bus Width | 448-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| ROPs | 28 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Price | $229 | est. $149 | $144 | $164 | $139 | $89 |
BFG’s card sports two dual-link DVI outputs. And while it supports HDMI output, enabling that feature requires an adapter and audio cable sold separately. It also supports two- and 3-way SLI out of the box; the requisite cables would be included with your SLI-capable motherboard.
Is This A Big Deal?
At this point, we can’t think of a graphics architecture that has been so re-used. But is that necessarily a bad thing, or a problem, for that matter?
Technologically, it isn’t an issue at all. None of Nvidia’s cards support DirectX 10.1, so it’s not like sticking to an older design has an adverse effect on what the GeForce GTS 250 can do versus its GT200-based big brothers. In fact, so long as performance goes up or sideways as price goes down, we don’t see an issue with the reintroduction of proven technology. Moreover, with software support for CUDA, PhysX, and 3D Vision enabled all the way down to GeForce 8-series GPUs (and PureVideo HD supported by everything down to 9-series GPUs), we see no reason to avoid the GTS 250 simply because it’s a rehash of the GeForce GTX 9800+.
The question changes when you look at it from a marketing angle, though. Officially, Nvidia is updating nomenclature to reflect the way its high-end cards (the GTX 260, 280, 285, and 295) are referenced. The GeForce GTS 250 is thus understood to be a more mainstream entry into that same lineup.
If you’re more cynical, it wouldn’t be a stretch to say that launching the GTS 250 makes it appear (to the less-informed) Nvidia has been up to something in the mid-range market other than selling former flagships at reduced prices.
Indeed, while a new name for the same tech does open a door for confusion amongst mainstream customers, it’s worth noting that the GeForce GTX 9800+ is being end-of-life’d and should cease to be a redundancy in the company’s lineup soon enough.
- Previous page The State Of Graphics
- Next page Test Setup, Benchmarks, And Notes
You would have to be stupid to buy one of these with the 4870 going to be the same price.
Why don't you tell the full story like the 512mb version will be worse than the 4850 just like it was when it was called the 9800gtx+.
Good review but how big are these Graphic's Cards
Nvidia seem to have gone mad this past 18 months with so many slightly different cards while ATI seem to have gone 4850,4870 and then the different builders just adding OC on the end while shipping with slight differences to the standard design.
I with they would just go series 8 V1, V2 etc.
You could be reading a list of Nvidia cards and versions and think PTO was a new card at the bottom of the page.
Here is a much better review
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3523
Maybe toms got a really good card from Nvidia but according to anand the 4850 is still a better card.
A few price comparisons..
US vs. UK prices*
Radeon 4830: $89 vs $133 (+50%)
Radeon 4850: $139 vs $191 (+38%)
Radeon 4870: $164 vs $253 (+55%)
Geforce GTX 9800+: $144 vs $249 (+74%)
Geforce GTS 250: $149 vs ??
Geforce GTX 260: $229 vs $314 (+37%)
* Inclusive of VAT.
why compare a 1GB nVidia card against a 512MB ATI one?
A few price comparisons..US vs. UK prices* Radeon 4830: $89 vs $133 (+50%) Radeon 4850: $139 vs $191 (+38%) Radeon 4870: $164 vs $253 (+55%)Geforce GTX 9800+: $144 vs $249 (+74%) Geforce GTS 250: $149 vs ?? Geforce GTX 260: $229 vs $314 (+37%)* Inclusive of VAT.
Sickening isn't it? Heaven knows what happens to the price when it leaves the American shores...
Anybody ever gone on a shopping trip to America? EG can you get these prices on the street, in shops? I would go just to say "bad luck, old boy" to GWB..but if I can get a Gfx card for 66% of the price too (4850) then ..YAnksville FTW!
Sickening isn't it? Heaven knows what happens to the price when it leaves the American shores...
You should see what it does when it gets to Germany, then! :,(
Blame the governments. Nvidia Cards aren't made in the US, their made in China, and since import taxes into the EU from the east are stupid, not to mention they could be coming in via the US (more tax)and your looking at a minimum 40% price increase.
Why dont you test with the stock GTS 250 and 260, Or OC versions of all cards tested?
Most consumers wont be buying the OC versions anyway. When they can get a better gpu for the same price. This is especially the case with the GTS250. Why by a rebranded 9800 oc when you can get a stock 260 for the same price.
Nvidia continues to flounder as they re-work their old products in a desperate attempt to compete at any level with AMD. This should be a great lesson not only in building a great video card but in marketing as well. AMD took a better product, made it much more affordable and rammed it down Nvidia's throat. This "new" GTS is indeed putting lipstick on a pig.
Terrible article. Not only is nVidia pulling a fast one but Toms is helping them. Again. I thought the 'tards that nVidia had in their back pocket had been thrown off the site, but I was wrong. In Ireland (and possibly the UK too) a STOCK GTS250 is equivalent to a stock HD4850 1GB, and a STOCK GTX260+1 is rougly equivalent to a no-frills HD4850X2 or a very heavily OCd HD4870 1GB. So why does Toms persist in pitting an OCd GTS250 against a much cheaper HD4850 and a massively OCd GTX260+ against a stock HD4870 which over here would be around HALF the price? (try running that thing against two of those HD4870s in CF!) There's a very simple reason why Toms did this. Money talks.
how is it that Anandtech's article claims the GTS250 as having lower idle and load power consumption compared to the 9800gtx+ but in Toms article it is the same.
What about a comparison on power consumption with EVGA's custom cooler version of 9800gtx+ which also only requires one 6 pin power connector
http://www.ncix.com/products/index [...] omoid=1015
how is it that Anandtech's article claims the GTS250 as having lower idle and load power consumption compared to the 9800gtx+ but in Toms article it is the same.
What about a comparison on power consumption with EVGA's custom cooler version of 9800gtx+ which also only requires one 6 pin power connector
http://www.ncix.com/products/index [...] omoid=1015
these test are really biased towards nVidia. you use OCed cards and compare them to reference designs, i bet that if you used a TOP version of the 4870/50 the results would've shown that the GTX+ and the 250 are'nt competitive.
What is the point in testing a re-badged card, the performance hasn't changed from when it was first released like a gazillion years ago. Roll on next gen cards already if there are any...
Bring on the day when they find their spine and write a review that just shows the good and bad points of both cards tested and leave it to the reader to decide.
Where's the integrity gone? Oh wait, it left when the site got redesigned.
Besides what others have said about a OC'd card tested against stock why don't they just do the sensible thing...
Test the cards from reference designs so you can see the potential of the raw hardware, not the gimmicky crap that partner companies slap on the product after they get it.