GeForce GT 240: Low Power, High Performance, Sub-$100

Status
Not open for further replies.

rodney_ws

Splendid
Dec 29, 2005
3,819
0
22,810
17
Well, it appears I might be the first poster... and that's pretty indicative of how exciting this card truly is. At any price point it's just hard to get excited when a company is just re-badging/re-naming older cards. DDR5? Oh yay! Now about that 128 bit bus...
 

Ramar

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
249
0
18,680
0
I really can't justify this card when a Sparkle 9800GT is on newegg for the same price or less than these cards. Perhaps if energy costs are really important to you?
 

Uncle Meat

Distinguished
Jan 15, 2009
44
0
18,530
0
Before we get into the game results, something we want to stress is that all of the GeForce cards we used for benchmarking ended up being factory overclocked models, but that our Diamond Radeon HD 4670 sample is clocked at reference speeds.
The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.
 
G

Guest

Guest
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

Looking at what cards people actually have (8800gt mostly), I think there are very few that would want to upgrade to this. Give us something better, Nvidia! The only reason why Ati doesn't have a 90% market share right now is that they can't make 5800s and 5700s fast enough.
 

JofaMang

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2009
1,939
0
19,960
95
No SLI means they want to force higher profit purchases from those looking for cheap multi-card setups. That's dirty. I wonder how two 4670s compare to one of these for the damn near the same price?
 

KT_WASP

Distinguished
Apr 16, 2008
125
0
18,690
1
I too noticed the discrepancy in your stated numbers for the Diamond 4670. In the article it states 750MHz / 800MHz (1600 effective). But then in your chart it states 750MHz / 1000MHz (2000 effective).

So, which one was used? Reference is 750/1000 (2000 eff.) Diamond had two versions, I believe, one at the reference speed and one at 750/900 (1800 eff.)

Just trying to understand you pick so we could better understand the results.
 

hundredislandsboy

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2009
2,503
0
20,860
38
No idea what Nvidia is thinking with the the release of this card sine a new 9800 GT is $89. They either have to drop the price of these GT240s to below $70 soon or it'll be huge loss. But maybe not. The only reason I an think of as to why Nvidia made this card is they had a bunch of spare parts lying around and rather than junk them, try to squeeze out some pennies. But then again ATI is playing the same game so if you can't beat them, join them!
 

Aircraft123

Distinguished
Apr 24, 2008
32
0
18,540
2
This card is nice but the price just is not right. For the same price you could get a 9800GT or save $20 (at least) and get a 4670

From the benchmarks the change in performance isn't worth that large ramp up in price.

BTW I have a 4650 going in my HTPC
and 2 XFX4890s in my desktop/gaming computer
 

cleeve

Illustrious
[citation][nom]rodney_ws[/nom] At any price point it's just hard to get excited when a company is just re-badging/re-naming older cards. [/citation]

The GT 240 isn't a rebadge, it's a new GPU based on the same architecture as the GTX 200 series.


 

cleeve

Illustrious
[citation][nom]Aircraft123[/nom]From the benchmarks the change in performance isn't worth that large ramp up in price. [/citation]

I totally agree with you, however launch pricing is always high.

Remember, we don't get to see the actual launch pricing until you do. The article was written before the GT 240 was for sale, and we were told it was a sub-$100 card.

The reason I've been positive about this card is that production costs should be low enough for Nvidia to compete on price very quickly. For example, look at the GeForce GT 220: $80 at launch a couple weeks ago, it's already down to the low $60 range.

You'll need to use common sense. At $110, the Radeon 4850 is the obvious winner, and at $90 the 8800 GT is the way to go.

But pricing should fall into place with the DDR3 GT 240 at Radeon 4670 prices, and the GDDR5 GT 240 just under 9600 GT prices. That's where the new card is a recommended buy.
 

rdhood

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2006
192
0
18,680
0
What dark_lord69 and noob2222 said. The 4670 is starting to see after-rebate prices of just $40. The $100 price point is closer to the 4770.
 

Ehsan w

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2009
463
0
18,790
1
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]The GT 240 isn't a rebadge, it's a new GPU based on the same architecture as the GTX 200 series.[/citation]

that doesn't really matter,
it still sucks even compared to an old 9600 gt
 

TheViper

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2006
2,120
0
20,160
147
Price debate fail.

These cards are price in the HD 4850 to HD 4870 range. Almost twice that of the HD 4670.

You should have at least pitted them against the HD 4830 or HD 4770 instead.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Yet another NVIDIA advert,complete crap,i`d just wish someone somehow could shut you down,in your face NVIDIA loving,redo the article with the correct $$$ gfx cards,as stated a 4770/4850 are in this price point and kick this piece of `crap` to death.You are a joke
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY