10:30 - Thursday 15 January 2009 by Thomas Soderstrom
Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: geforce, gtx, 295
Categories: Graphics
Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: geforce, gtx, 295
Categories: Graphics
Table of content:
Benchmark Results: Crysis
Crysis is getting old, and the updated stand-alone Warhead expansion is supposedly more efficient. Yet we decided to “chase the dream” of smooth gaming at 2560x1600 and super-high details once more.
It appears that Nvidia finally fixed its drivers, reducing the 3-way SLI penalty for Crysis at 2560x1600 pixels. Four graphics processors still stumble over each other at this setting, however.
With AA enabled and AF forced through the drivers, the GTX 295 is still unplayable at a resolution of 2560x1600. This is one of the few places Radeon HD 4870 X2 graphics in CrossFireX shines, but the winning result has little significance.
- Previous page Benchmark Results: COD World At War
- Next page Benchmark Results: Far Cry 2
Sponsored links
Sponsored links
Ad
Ad
Best offers
The Graphics Cards Articles and reviews
News
Reviews
Sponsored links
Popular Searches
- crysis sli
- driver for crysis
- 4870 hd crysis benchmark
- 3way sli gtx 295
- 3 nvidia gtx 295
- nvidia gtx 295 drivers
- nvidia gtx benchmark
- crysis graphics not all that
- crysis not 2560x1600
- crossfirex
- crysis running on hd 4870 x2
- how to run 2 nvidia gtx 295
- nvidia gtx 295 sli 3
- can i force 2560x1600
- 4870 x2 graphic issue
Videos
Partners
they would have been better off overclocking the original card they have rather than downclocking the new model since this will mess with results
also it has been proven better test results can be gotten useing a pair of 280 in sli then useing a card such as a 9600 gso as a seperate card to handle physX and ECUDA
its built into the drivers and does give better performance that 3 280 in sli
its alot cheaper as well since xfx recetly started selling their own 9600 gso directly from the site for £50
which is about a £200 saveing over the 3rd 280
gaming at 2560x1600? I'll take normal 1080p res.
Exactly! Your tests mean diddly squat these days as you choose to use resolutions that nobody uses... well except for yourselves.
You have succeeded in convincing me of 2 things with your tests.
Don't bother buying crysis; it is either poorly written software or so demanding of resources it isn't worth it.
High end cards aren't worth the money as they won't do anything a midrange card can't do at the resolution I would use.
I agree with THW that any expensive graphics solution should be nenchmarked by demanding games @ high resolutions, no body spends alot of money to play @ 1280x1024!!
Personally, after I read this article I started to think about replacing my 8800GT with a single GTX 295 after 2-3 months (after the price get reduced and any issues get resolved)..I wonder if my p35 mobo (PCI-e v.1) and my E6750 @ 3.6Ghz will pose a bottlenck to its performance. Any ideas on that people? Help!
I think the observation that should have been pointed out here is that the framebuffer on the GTX 295 is limited, in comparison to the 4870x2... It's simple memory, the 4870X2 has 2 x 1GB where the GTX 295 has 896mb per card, and even with 4 cards there is no sharing of this memory.
Really, it's the only failing in the GTX 295, but how many people play at 2560x1200 anywaay?
On your specs, you state that you used Vista 32-bit, wouldn't that limit how much of your system & video ram the OS could access?
lol who spends that much on GPU to underclock it.
If you want to invest that sort of cash then its safe to assume there is a knowledge of overclocking. Shoulda cranked the cards.