GeForce GTX 285 Gets 2 GB: Gigabyte's GV-N285OC-2GI

[Kill@dor]

The only benefits you gain from memory (i.e. GTA 4 can use 1600MB to run max settings flawless) is an additional 5-10fps, maybe more. It really does, help in a sense, but if you don't have a good CPU chip and RAM to support the GPU you will get little performance. For example, i still run an old age e6600 OC'd 3.0GHz with DDR2 1066 and a 1792MB GTX275 2xAA 4xAF with a 2:3 ratio. Yea, i spent money knowing the results, but i maxed everything out and i get 30-35fps max to a lowest 25fps, but no lower than that. If i turn off AA i get 40fps max, but still drops to 25fps in certain areas. Online i get 60fps+ with a 20mbps connection, no lag what so ever...with everything completely turned up (8xAA - 16xAF). Temps bounce between 70°C to 80°C on 80% fan speed. I don't have fan controllers in my system, but i need it.

So while i'm not getting the best results, i can see the difference in memory. Its small, but its significant.

 

[rambo117]

[citation][nom]enewmen[/nom]I expect future titles to fully utilize 2gb. So this may be a future-proof card. However, I don't see such titles coming out this year. By then it will be DX11.[/citation]
DONT use that stupid term 'futureproof'
there is no f***ing thing called futureproofing your system. technology changes!

remember when the first intel quadcores came out? all that stuff about futureproofing your system, well, its the future, and now we have core i7's and a whole manner of highly efficient chips.

anyways, call it future-resist not futureproof

 

[KyleSTL]

Intel Core i7-950 (3.20 GHz, 8 MB Cache)
Overclocked to 3.83 GHz (23 x 166.6 MHz)

The 950 is at 3.06Ghz stock with a 23x multiplier. The 965 is 3.2Ghz. Please clarify.

 

[scook9]

ya they had a lot of gpu typos as well calling 285 a 295 or vice versa.

I proof read my posts....be nice if they proof read their articles.

 

[KyleSTL]

As pointed out in the article the real advantage of this card is multi-GPU setups that can utilize more ram than any GTX 295 (as well as more ROPs and higher clocks). It would have been more informative to add in the numbers for 2-way SLI GTX 285 1GB and 2-way GTX 285 2GB. I'd venture to guess that SLI 2GB would blow the doors off of the GTX 295.

 

[eyemaster]

I like the conclusion. Tom's doesn't make any apologies about the card being for bragging rights alone.

 

[Kithzaru]

I agree with a previous poster. Would the amount of ram affect a "mid range" gpu more than the higher range?

Also, you could have included the differences between say a 9600gt with 512, 1gig and whatever else they are trying to sell on it now like 1745 or something.

could also do 1 gig of DDR2 vs 512 DDR3 on the same GPU platform..

 

[bk420]

I'm glad Tom's HW does all the testing. This save me a ton of money by finding out how much I would have actually flushed down the toilet by doing useless memory, CPU, and GFX upgrades.

Thanks again tom's hw, i'll wait 'till AMD dx11 gpu's are for sale.

 

[rambo117]

what would be interesting for an article would be to see how 2gb's of gddr5 mem differs from 1gb on the 4890.

 

[Guest]

Great article but...

There's one thing that I don't agree with here, the Western Digital Caviar Black 1 TB 7,200 RPM, 32 MB Cache SATA 3.0 Gb/s. We have a fairly top of the line CPU (O/Ced), 6 GB of RAM (proven already that more doesn't do jack for your gaming), yet we have this SATA drive. Two (2) of the games tested were done in-game, which to me means we should have seen an SSD used instead (who would spend the money on that CPU/GPU and still use a SATA?)

It's not that it may not make a huge difference or one at all, but to me it 'could'.

I'll await the flames of others who say it's just a CPU/GPU/RAM requirement, but there is an OS running and the game has to load things (at least for the ones conducted in-game). I just think that even if it DOESN'T make a difference, it's silly to not already be using an SSD on a rig like this.

 

[masop]

[citation][nom]KyleSTL[/nom]The 950 is at 3.06Ghz stock with a 23x multiplier. The 965 is 3.2Ghz. Please clarify.[/citation]

Great catch!

 

[rooket]

Oh yeah Hynix ram just screams quality.

 

[Regulas]

All I know is the GTX 285 rocks. I run a XFX GTX 285 1Gb card coupled with intel Q9650 (3GHz Quad Core) on a older but great X38 Gigabyte MOBO (1333MHz FSB matches the CPU) all in a nice Lian Li case and modular Corsiar PS, thanks Newegg. There is not game out there that it can't handle well at high settings at 1920 x 1200.

 

[Guest]

There is a different benchmark that needs to be included. The Badaboom/Cyberlink GPU video encoder. I imagine that could very well help encode larger files faster

 

[B-Unit]

@Rhodenator

Hard drives only load the data once, at the beginning. It has exactly 0 bearing on FPS. The only thing that would have improved with and SSD is the level load time.

 

[blppt]

I doubt fps would improve, but I would appreciate somebody commenting on how much benefit you see draw-distance/image quality wise in GTA4 by using a 2GB card (max settings like somebody already mentioned leaves you around 40-45% draw distance with a 1GB card.

 

[marraco]

Good data. spending on extra video memory returns nothing. Even DDR3 at high mhz and lower timmings return more... and it don't returns too much.

 

[anonymous x]

I would of really like a three way sli shootout between 3x 1gb gtx 285 cards and 3x 2gb gtx 285 cards at 2560 by 1600 with AA, that's when the framebuffer might become a bottleneck in some games. But I realize the ridiculousness of my request and the difficultly of obtaining that many cards, I just hope people don't leave this review with the impression that there is absolutely no point to more video memory as the instances where more video card memory is needed has not been tested yet.

 

[boulard83]

What about a SLI 2gb GTX285 vs a SLI 1gb GTX285 ?

I think the 2gb can pull ahead if they are in SLI config paired with a nice X58 platform and the I7 oced to 3.6ghz +.

TOMS ! lets do it !

 

[T3kl0rD]

Definately wait for DX 11 cards before getting this one. 2GB on a single GPU isn't necessary obviously for this level of GPU technology.

 

[steiner666]

how about you test using games that might actually make use of >1GB of vram? Like, oh i dunno, GTA4?

 

[tpoke]

Why people argue over the minimal stuff I don't know. Pretty much every single comment here is useless except the ones who noticed the missing of the gta4 test the only game that needs more then 1gb to max the graphics and actually locks you based on not having more then that. Also it requires one card to be more then 1gb because it dose not recognise dual cards solutions "second" bank of memory. Just saying plain and simple guys it's a good article but it was missing the home run. I singed up to comment just about this... I have been reading alot of comments on acticles for years this one was worth bursting the bubble on. It's a shame just a few months after reading about problems with maxing graphics on gta4 that a major entity and fellow gamers could forget it.

 

[radiowars]

Good article, definitely something worth testing. I guess we now once and for all, more does not always mean more.

 

[the associate]

I'll be the 4th (or 5th 0.o) to whine about no GTA4 bench. I bought an oc'd 4870 with a gig of ram over my 512mb 4850 and the difference was actually impressive, I can actually put texture quality on high along with everything else with a view distance of near 50 and still be in the green.
For GTA4 players, that 2 gig card is SWEET

 

[JonnyDough]

[citation][nom]hellwig[/nom]YAWN @ Nvidia. Over a year since the G200 was first released, and vendors are so bored they're just slapping worthless memory onto the cards. NVidia hasn't created a new chip since the GTX280/260 came out. They shurnk the die, but that one G200 chip architecture is the only one they created since the GeForce 8k line. Their marketing department works harder renaming their old crap than the system designers do. To me, this is indicative of a major problem with the architecture. I think Nvidia is having problems creating a new architecture based off the G200. Kinda like Intel and the P4, Nvidia is going to have to start from scratch if they want their next chip to really shine.[/citation]

What they need to do is fire a good chunk of their marketing dept. and stop focusing so much on sales and put more of that capital into engineers. They need to get on board with GDDR5 and lower power levels, and quit messing around with multiple cards, crappy sophisticated drivers, and GPUs that overheat. Who cares who owns the top end? Give us more competition in the mid ranged and actually stay competitive. NVidia is starting to hurt a little from AMD's manufacturing process/GDDR5/and targeting of the mid-low range masses. They need to refocus their efforts on making great GPUs, and stop worrying about their naming scheme. Their next card could be labled "5" and the next one "10". Variations that differ from the standard performance can be spaced in between these numbers. So for instance, they could create a standard for a "3" which might be a "5" with less memory or limited lanes.