0iD (16-09-2009),alsenior (15-09-2009),Biscuit (16-09-2009),CAT-THE-FIFTH (15-09-2009),GheeTsar (15-09-2009),j.o.s.h.1408 (15-09-2009),kalniel (15-09-2009),pollaxe (15-09-2009)
Crickey, and nary an exclaimation mark in sight
Wow - those are some impressive results. That must have taken a long time to compile too.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!Originally Posted by kalniel
Crickey, and nary an exclaimation mark in sight
I can't view those images at work, whats it say?
In short: 5850 > 285, 5870 > 295, 5870 Crossfire > 295 SLI
DeludedGuy (15-09-2009)
You obviously haven't looked very hard.
The GTX295 is faster across the board than the 5870.
Not surprising really. The GTX 295 has two 1.4 billion transistor GPU's
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
Hmmm. Well it depends on how you like to play your games. If you play in 2560 x 1600 with AA and AF on then the 5870 beats the 295 on 12 out of the 14 benchmarks. I take the point that almost the exact opposite is true for 1920x1200 with no AA/AF.
True, though it's not across the board.
5870 wins: Battleforge, Prey, Stormrise, Unigine Tropics.
GTX 295 wins: CoH, CoD, Devil May Cry 4, Far Cry 2, UT3, Wolfenstein
They roughly draw for the rest.
Nasty stats (just averaging, and I haven't removed the 0 score for NVIDIA), but the 5870 is close to the 295...
@ 1920*1200 low res
ATI 99.2, NVIDIA 106.7
@ 2560*1600 low res
ATI 71.9, NVIDIA 80.0
@ 192*1200 high res
ATI 86.5, NVIDIA 83.5
@ 2560*1600 high res
ATI 61.9, NVIDIA 50.3
Average ATI 79.9, NVIDIA 80.1
Last edited by ajones; 16-09-2009 at 08:12 AM. Reason: comparing apples with pears
Corsair Air 540, Asus Prime X570-Pro, Win 10 Pro, AMD R9 3900X, Corsair HX 750, EVGA 1080 Ti, 2x Corsair 2TB MP600, 2x 2TB WD20EZRX, 4x8GB Corsair Dominator, custom watercooled (single loop, 2 rads)
Corsair 550D, Asus X470-Prime Pro, Win 10 Pro, AMD R7 2700, Corsair RM750i, Asus GTX780 Poseidon, 2x Sammy 500GB 970 EVO, 2x 2TB Seagate Barracuda, 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance, custom watercooled (single loop, 2 rads)
Synology DS918+ w/ 2xWDC Green 3TB + 2x Seagate Barracuda 6TB, N2200 w/ 2xSammy 1.5TB
backup:
Corsair 500R, Gigabyte GA-Z97MX Gaming 5, Win 10 Pro, i5 4690, Corsair HX750i, Sapphire Fury X, 256GB Sammy SM951 M.2 (System), WD SE16 640GB, 2x8GB Corsair Vengeance, Corsair H100i
impressive scores, now lets see how much they cost
They better be priced competitively because it’s going to take more than a DX11 gimmick to persuade me, considering their performance they would be crazy to outprice themselves out of the market.impressive scores, now lets see how much they cost
In theory the 40nm process should enable a reasonable price, but I can't see them being bargains until the GT300 series is released properly (ie. not just the inevitable paper launch).
Bloody heck that is some improvement over the current crop of cards for the 5850, which isn't even their top single GPU card to be released.
These are making me excited!
I agree - difficult to see the timescales on the GT300 at the moment - hopefully it will encourage some price competition.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote