Conclusion
The GeForce GTX 285 consumes less power on average while producing better performance than the GTX 280, and its smaller die allows Nvidia to produce more parts per wafer at a reduced cost. It would appear that everybody wins.
The only problem for consumers is that because the GTX 285 performs better than the GTX 280, Nvidia can charge more for it. An average performance increase of around 6% for the base card (8.75% for our mildly-overclocked test sample) has been met by a price difference of around 10%. It’s up to buyers to decide whether or not they’d like to quibble over a 4% reduction in value, but there’s one thing we can say with certainty: if you already own a GeForce GTX 280, an upgrade to the GTX 285 isn’t practical. GTX 280 owners who want a reasonable performance improvement would be better advised to purchase a second matching card and use the pair in SLI.
Better news for value seekers is that today’s GeForce GTX 285 graphics cards are cheaper than GTX 280 cards were only a few weeks ago. Rather than create a new price class for the GTX 285, Nvidia lowered the price of the GTX 280. SLI upgrades were just given a big value boost for current GTX 280 owners.
But if the GTX 280 is a slightly better value, why would anyone choose the GTX 285? With so small a performance increase, we’d instead consider the card’s improved efficiency. Furthermore, we expect that GTX 280 inventory to be depleted within a few months, making the GTX 285 a better choice for buyers who might be considering an eventual upgrade to SLI.
Noticeable improvements make the GTX 285 a good solution for new systems, but its value as an upgrade part is purely dependent on the inadequacy of the part it will replace.
Let me know when we can run Crysis in HD full detail on a mid range card that doesn't need its own powerplant. Till then, I'm keeping my money.
Good point...
hm.. they should try to OC it... see how much more you can get than GTX 280... Otherwise you dont want to spend fifty dollar more for 2-8 FPS more
Why does this article seem to think http://hubpages.com/hub/Geforce-9-Series
that 9 series is better than the gtx?
They should offer degree courses in computer graphics card revisions. Add another one to the list of cards that are trying to find fit into a niche than invent one.
I'd also expect much better power-savings from the 285, given smaller 55nm die (yep, even with overclocking).
"Noticeable improvements make the GTX 285 a good solution for new systems, but its value as an upgrade part is purely dependent on the inadequacy of the part it will replace."
What kind of nonce poofy queer way of speaking is this?
still got my eye on a 295..i think that's the way to go..
check it out:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/gefo [...] 31470.html
cheers,
bill
p.s. stuff and nonsense: http://www.eupeople.net/forum
Why not run them at the same speeds? Try the 208 at 648MHz and leave the 285 at its stock 648... Most 208s will easily do 648. I have just bought a 208 for £241 and it's happily doing 702. Why buy a 260 at that price for a 280? Why spend £300 on a 285 for a few fps that will not be noticed anyway? I hope, though, they keep the 280 around for a time so I can buy another for SLI at hopefully less. They won't though since it's too close to the 285. The 295 though is a different beastie and the real upgrade for 280ers but it's steep.
I agree with TRibal GFX. get to the point man.
Whats the bottom line. I aint interested in 5% increase.
Im interested in new hardware giving me 30% increase in performance.
Looks like a waste of manufacturing effort to be honest.
Talk about milking it for all its worth.
This seems to be a waste of time to the consumer. The Power Efficiency of 5 watts in idle is unlikely to sway any punters.
They could have at least added GDDR5?? And also ATi are planning a 40nm die for this year, nVidia should have skipped 55nm.
Yeah, I'm surprised they bothered with 55nm.............
40nm/45nm is pretty well mainstream now. Can get nearly twice the number of transistors on a 40nm design compared to a 65nm design. Power consumption per transistor at the same clock speed is roughly halved as well.
So at 40nm, a GPU design twice as complex as the 280 and clocked at the same speed should consume about the same power..............
I have this set up:
Intel Core i7 920 2.66Ghz (Nehalem)
Akasa AK-967 Nero Direct Contact Heatpipe CPU Cooler
Asus Rampage II Extreme Intel X58
Corsair 6GB DDR3 1600MHz Triple Channel DDR3
Asus GeForce GTX 285 1024MB GDDR3
Why am i not getting similar results?
Maybe yours i7 is on 2.66? The i7 in test is at 4.00.
i7 2.66Ghz with no overclock made
Asus p6t
Corsair Dominator 6G 1866Mhz
Asus gtx 285
Velociraptor 300G
3d mark vantage score: P14580
Cpu Score : 45130
Gpu Score : 11896
in this review the cpu is overclock but my results almost the double how can this be possible?