First Ever GeForce GTX 285 2 GB Card

52

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Parrish
Contributor

Kevin Parrish has over a decade of experience as a writer, editor, and product tester. His work focused on computer hardware, networking equipment, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, and other internet-connected devices. His work has appeared in Tom's Hardware, Tom's Guide, Maximum PC, Digital Trends, Android Authority, How-To Geek, Lifewire, and others.

  • Claimintru
    How is it "Built" for vista. Using one right now (Not Palit mind you) on Win XP Pro and its butter.
    Reply
  • curnel_D
    "Despite the different memory helpings, both cards offer the usual Nvidia goodness gamers have come to know and love, including Nvidia's PhysX and CUDA technologies."

    Wow kevin, the second article today that you spew this crap. Cuda and PhysX isnt the finest thing since sliced bread. Infact, PhysX divides your graphic card's computational cycles between PhysX and Graphics, slowing games down in most instances, while Nvidia cuts out the best PhysX option, the seperate PPU. And second, Cuda has hardly any compatable bug free programs, and they're all way way to expensive. Both things are just exuberant amounts of propaganda from Nvidia to get them to buy their overpriced GPUs.

    Or have they threatened to black list you too, best of media?
    Reply
  • Darkness Flame
    I don't know about that, Curnel_D. I mean, both Mirror's Edge and Unreal Tournament 3 show rather nice eye candy with PhysX enabled. Sure, it cuts your frames, but it's better than running it on a CPU, and you could always get another card. In fact, if you already have one nVidia card, you could get a second nVidia card, that doesn't have to be the same mind you, and have that one focus on just PhysX, so you don't really see a drop.

    As for CUDA, sure, it's not perfect yet. But if you use the Adobe CS4 suite, or you just transcode a lot of video, spending ~$20 more on an nVidia card for equal frames, but a significant boost in those other applications isn't that bad.
    Reply
  • Tindytim
    the GeForce GTX 285 is (unfortunately) "built for Windows Vista,"
    Please fire Kevin Parrish.
    Reply
  • aevm
    ClaimintruHow is it "Built" for vista. Using one right now (Not Palit mind you) on Win XP Pro and its butter.
    It's a DX10 card, and DX10 is available only in Vista. I'm guessing that's what they meant.

    Of course your card works on XP, just like my 8800GTX works on XP, but we're losing some eye candy when running in DX9.
    Reply
  • ailgatrat
    "According to the company, its GTX 285 2 GB graphics card is the first in the industry to offer such a heavy load of memory, however consumers who don't have that kind of cash to thrash can option to buy the neglected step-child, the Palit GTX 285 1 GB version."

    Uh...neglected step-child? Where are the numbers to show how many of either of these cards are getting bought? And what the hell is "cash to thrash", anyways?

    If your going to write about your opinions on things, then say so from the get go and don't try to make this look like a serious news article.
    Reply
  • RiotSniperX
    Wait, first to have 2gb?

    4870x2 has 2gb -.-
    Reply
  • ravenware
    nvidiot article.

    There are plenty of Radeon cards with interesting modifications too.
    (4850x2 2GB, toxic/ atomic cards)
    Reply
  • Tindytim
    aevmIt's a DX10 card, and DX10 is available only in Vista. I'm guessing that's what they meant.That's still a retarded thing to say, and not only makes multiple fallacious logical jumps, but then wraps it up with a false and misleading statement.
    Reply
  • seboj
    TindytimPlease fire Kevin Parrish.
    Seconded.
    Reply