Performance hierarchy

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Nashsafc

Nashsafc

Distinguished
May 13, 2009
1,142
0
19,310
i'm guessing the 8800GTX is better than the GTS 250. The 9800gx2 is better than them both, the 9800gx2 is a bit better than a ATI 4870. The GTS 250 is directly beneath the 4870 currently today since they don't sell 8800 Ultra or 8800GTX anymore? Is this correct?
 
The GTX 250 is a 9800GTX, so I think it ends up more around the 4850. The 4870 is a GTX 260 and the 4890 is somewhere above that. Or something like that. Each new driver release can change things, so this has probably changed. An 8800GTX should be faster than a 9800/250.
 
I thought a GTS 250 was a 9800GTX+ But then the 8800GTX is not on the market any more, and is terribly energy consuming for the performance that it has? I heard that the 9800GTX+ was actually slightly better than the GTS 250 is this true? My motherboard is a geforce 8300 i thought it might have been better to go for an NVIDIA card rahter than ATI because of NVIDIA performance can overclock the GTS 250, rather than ATI cards? Unfortunately i've seen a 4870 for the same price as a GTS 250, made by XFX same company as my GTS 250, and they perform quite a bit better? Would you say 10 to 20 FPS or more?
 
9800gtx+ and GTS 250 512Mb of ram should have an identical performance if not the exact same. GTS 250 is just a newer chip with shrink die, so it gives off less heat and etc. however, GTS 250 1Gb should out perform 9800 and GTS250 512Mb by ~5-10%.
10% might be pushing it tho.

what do you say at the bottom?
 
A quick browse of release views shows the GTX250=9800GTX+ except where the larger 1GB ram helps the GTX250. There is also a 512MB version though, and that should be about the same as the 9800GTX+. The GTX250 is a better card though as I believe it is cooler and quieter than the GTX+.

The 8800GTX consumes more power and I think would trade blows with the 9800/250 depending on the application.

I never worried about mixing and matching GPU/Chipset manufacturers. For the record, I have a 4850 on a nForce 4 SLI and it runs just fine, though I never tried OCing it on my ATI board or NVidia Board.
 


Beat u to the punch buddy :bounce:
 
The 1gb version is only a couple of FPS better such as 5fps better no more than that really. At the same resolution it's about the same isn't it, maybe 1 fps better lol. It's not worth it, 512mb suits the card better because it doesn't really have the potential to handle that much memory with compared to the ATI 4890. I like the XFX core version because it only comes with 1 PCI socket, making it the best card that runs on one PCI connector i am guessing is that not true. Other versions have two, and in that case might as well buy 4870 or gtx 260. Maybe this allows them to have higher core clock frequencies of 2200 rather than mine which has 2100. Or is it 1200 and 1100. And slightly higher overclocks. But anyway for me this card runs very hot anyway, it goes all the way up to 90 degrees celcius, is this normal for a GTS 250?
 
So i'm imagining that the physical hardware of the GTS 250 and the ATI 4850 are just as good as each other in performance, maybe the ATI 4850 could be better. It's just that because of the NVIDIA drivers which are better, make the GTS 250 perform slightly faster?
 
The G92/G92b based cards, such as the GTS250, have a few architectural improvements that make them better than the older G80 cards like the 8800GTX. It depends on the game, but generally the GTS250 is faster, sometimes significantly so. The few cases where the 8800GTX is faster is simply due to it's wider memory bus.
 
hopefully i should be ok with this graphics card for sometime. I wonder if having 3 GTS 250 in SLI is better than having 2 HD 4890 in cross fire x. In the future hopefully GTS 250 should be very cheap but is it worht buying three of them, since 2 4890s would be less power consuming and are more energy efficient for their perofrmance? Since the 5870 has come out, in sometime i would like to see the GTS 250 come to the £70 point or bellow, i doubt it will though !?!?
 
No, because you lose more with the 3rd card compared to the 2nd.

It would probably be pretty close in the end however.

If you wanted gts250 performance at £70 you could have bought 4770's like I did 4 months ago and got the best of every world.
 
You need to overclock them though to be as good as the GTS 250, that being the 4770. But does it run cooler, even when overclocked? In the future i should be buying my self a computer with 2 ATI 4890s in crossfire x or maybe the new 5870s if they come down in price by the long time eventually i get this new computer. Although i rekon the GTS 250 has plenty of power for a 1280 x 1024 resolution screen with 4 aa and 8 fsaa enabled, as long as your not playing Crysis on high settings and Far Cry 2. i get 80 FPS average on Raninbow Six Vegas 2 and about 90 to 100 average on Call Of Duty 4
 
The GTS 250 is better than the 8800 Ultra and GTX? is that because those are outdated graphics cards and they don't update the drivers anymore rather than the actual hardware being slower? I had a look at one review and it showed that the 9800gtx+ was slightly better than the GTS 250 at 512mb. By 3 fps but so what lol. The person said it was enthusiast level just because of this, it's rubbish to be honest.
 
"The GTS 250 is better than the 8800 Ultra and GTX? is that because those are outdated graphics cards and they don't update the drivers anymore:"

Im running the 190.38 Nvidia drivers on a 8800GTX with no troubles.
There are newer ones available I just havent gotten around to it yet.
 
so the GTS 250 is a better chip then? I looked at the 8800gtx specifications and it looked better. Has it not got more graphics processing units. Someone told me the 8800gtx was better than the 9800GTX+ aka GTS250?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom