Nvidia's GeForce GTX 285: A Worthy Successor?
Table of contents
- 1. Faster And Cheaper
- 2. Test Settings
- 3. Benchmark Results: COD World At War
- 4. Benchmark Results: Crysis
- 5. Benchmark Results: Far Cry 2
A manufacturing process shrink is a lot to get excited about for both vendors and their customers, as the change normally leads to increased performance and efficiency, while reducing production cost by increasing the number of units produced per wafer. But the eventual benefit to design firms often comes at a huge up-front cost, since significant alterations normally result in bugs that need to be fixed before a full production run can begin. Each test run costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, so it pays to get things right the first or second time. Production delays are an even costlier problem when new architecture is involved, which is why Nvidia normally updates its current products before introducing any new ones.
Today’s updated product, the GeForce GTX 285, makes the typical promises of improved performance and efficiency compared to the GeForce GTX 280 on which it is based. Let’s take a quick look at how it compares to other high-end solutions.
| GeForce GTX 285 | GeForce GTX 280 | GeForce GTX 260 | GeForce GTX 295 | Radeon HD 4870 X2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Manufacturing Process | 55 nm TSMC | 65 nm TSMC | 65 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC | 55 nm TSMC |
SPs | 240 | 240 | 216 | 480 Total | 1,600 |
Core Clock | 648 MHz | 602 MHz | 576 MHz | 576 MHz | 750 MHz |
Shader Clock | 1,476 MHz | 1,296 MHz | 1,242 MHz | 1,242 MHz | 750 MHz |
Memory Data Rate | 2,484 MHz | 2,214 MHz | 1,998 MHz | 1,998 MHz | 3,600 MHz |
Frame Buffer | 1 GB | 1 GB | 896 MB | 1,792 MB Tot. | 2 GB Tot. |
Memory Bus Width | 512-bit | 512-bit | 448-bit | 448-bit x 2 | 256-bit x 2 |
ROPs | 32 | 32 | 28 | 56 Total | 32 Total |
Price | $380 | ~$340 | ~$260 | ~$500 | ~$430 |
The GeForce GTX 285’s most noticeable performance-oriented improvement is an increase in GPU clock speed of around 8%. The memory clock increase–while much larger at 12%–is likely not as important for performance. GeForce GTX 295 graphics units get two of these processors, although each one is handicapped with slower GPU speed, memory speed, and memory bus width. Meanwhile, AMD earns bragging right for both GPU clock and memory data rates, but only because less-complex graphics processors typically clock higher and GDDR5 memory uses a quad-data rate bus.
The specific card in today’s review is a special "XXX" sample of XFX’s GeForce GTX 285, model GX-285N-ZDDF, sporting a core clock of 670 MHz and GDDR3-2500. The larger numbers look more impressive than they are, since these are less than 4% GPU and 1% RAM above the reference specification, so we’ll split the difference and consider it a likely 2-3% average improvement over base speed.
In addition to the basics, XFX includes a door tag, the game Far Cry 2, a DVI-to-HDMI adapter, and an S/PDIF breakout cable. The breakout cable connects a motherboard’s internal S/PDIF audio output to an input adjacent to the card’s power connections, and the combined audio/video signal can be accessed though the output of the HDMI adapter. While this method has been available on Nvidia products for several generations, many previous packages did not include the special cable.
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?