Reviews - BFG GeForce GTX 280 OCX: fast but fast enough?

[HEXUS]

Pre-overclocked GeForce GTX 280 slugs it out with AMD Radeon HD 4870 X2. Who wins?

Read more.

[Daydreamer]

I think it would be useful for Hexus to show crysis benchmarks when reviewing a card. Given that most high end cards can pretty much play anything else, I think it is important to test cards with the one game that could really cause it problems.

[TAKTAK]

The card can be purchased for £305 here.

the hyperlink is missing

will these ever come down in price to a reasonable level

[kalniel]

Compared to the initial launch price of the GTX 280 it's already much more reasonable

[Michael H]

the hyperlink is missing

Thanks, now fixed.

[Tarinder]

I think it would be useful for Hexus to show crysis benchmarks when reviewing a card. Given that most high end cards can pretty much play anything else, I think it is important to test cards with the one game that could really cause it problems.

We looked at Crysis numbers for a short while but concluded that the lack of scaling, as one moves up the GPUs in one family, cause it to be a somewhat academic benchmark.

You can take a look at some numbers over here:

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=14144

However, if folks want it back in, please holler in this thread.

[Biscuit]

I think that crysis benchmarks should be included in the review but because of the scaling issues you have mentioned i dont think its entirely fair for it to be included in the bang for buck result.

Aside from this i think the new game line up is great and much more balanced. Im also glad you took my advice on removing the FPS limit in COD4

[miniyazz]

I vote for Crysis :-)
As the most demanding game on the market to date, it's one of the few games that seriously challenges today's high end graphics cards at mainstream resolutions (1680x1050, 1920x1200). Also - w.r.t. bang4buck scores, surely the whole point of the score is to get a feel for how well the cards do overall, and compare that to its price? So if one card has a flaw (in this case, poor internal crossfire scaling) that can reduce the card's performance, that flaw should be reflected in its bang4buck score, not skimmed over because it's inconvenient! And while Crysis, being more demanding, will of course reduce the card's bang4buck score, this will be reflected over all the cards, so the comparison will remain fair.

On a side note, the 4870 X2 is one of the best things that could happen to the graphics card market at the moment. nVIDIA had gotten lazy since the 8800 GTX - they haven't produced a card with sufficient performance over my 8800 GTX for the price to persuade me to upgrade - and this will give them a kick up the backside to start producing good quality cards for the price.

[kalniel]

It depends what the point of Bang 4 Buck is - if it's to be used as a measure of inherent performance per buck of the card then all your benchmarks need to add information that's of use in gaming in general, not be an individual unique case.

On the other hand if you are using bank 4 buck purely to give an indicator of performance in each specific game then you have a problem relying on just 4 tests, and instead you need to test every game out there that's being played.

Personally I think it's the former - benchmarks are representative of the wider gaming experience out there. Crysis doesn't do this. If you want to know performance in Crysis by itself then I think it's valid to test against it, but not valid to use it as an indicator of performance in general.

[Biscuit]

What Kalniel says ^
Looking at the benchmarks listed on Hexus, the card has superb internal crossfire scaling its just crysis that doesnt handle it very well.

[TooNice]

I am going to quote a previous post I've made because it's something I'd like to see and should be feasible to implement regarding the Bang4Buck page:

I do have a suggestion as to how it may be improved: it's really good as it is, and I'll have absolutely no complaint if it's just left as it is. But it would be handy if the 'current price' field on the table can be left 'open' for user edit (client side) and the 'HEXUS.bang4buck score at 1920x1200' updated accordingly. Since some cards (especially in the upper mid-range) perform and are priced very similarly I can see 'upsets' occurring when a bargain shows up. Furthermore, as reviews become dated, users can update the prices as they move. Lastly, in the event that prices between cards are very different here and elsewhere in the world, oversea visitors can also adjust as they need.

[Biscuit]

whilst i can see the benefits to that TooNice, i cant see it being technically viable

[Zhaoman]

Why don't you just do it in excel on your own computer? Put in the Hexus benchmarks and stick in your own price.

[Tarinder]

I am going to quote a previous post I've made because it's something I'd like to see and should be feasible to implement regarding the Bang4Buck page:

TooNice,

In a very short while, the HEXUS.bang4buck graph will be calculated dynamically, taking daily pricing into account.

We'll take a look at designing a client-side interface, too.

[this_is_gav]

Well I'm sure Hexus have a spreadsheet of sorts that they're working with for the graphs, so would it be feasible to have a link on the Bang for Buck section or right at the end of the conclusion page or something?

I like the idea TooNice if it is technically possible.

//edit: typically, Tarinder gets in there before me.

[TooNice]

Why don't you just do it in excel on your own computer? Put in the Hexus benchmarks and stick in your own price.

I do that sometime. Actually, I used to use the results from various reviews to work out my own 'Bang4Buck' spreadsheet. That was time consuming (a lot of manual data input) and I do appreciate Hexus' Bang4Buck saving me from that step.

But I also think it is more efficient, assuming it would benefits a good number of visitors (and not just me), to find ways to improve on the already useful feature. I am glad to hear that the graphs will soon adjust dynamically according the daily pricing.

That's a very good step forward