Benchmark Results: Call of Duty: World At War
Although Call of Duty must be benchmarked with a fairly imprecise manual run-through with FRAPS running, the GTS 250 and GTX 9800+ are decidedly neck and neck, despite their frame buffer and clock speed differences.
The card in question—Nvidia’s GeForce GTS 250—falls right in between the AMD Radeon HD 4850 and 4870 cards, while Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 is decidedly the fastest board benchmarked in this comparison.
With the detail settings cranking up, the GeForce GTS 250 takes an almost imperceptible lead over the GeForce GTX 9800+, which is likely due to the slightly higher clocks. Nevertheless, both G92-based boards again fall in between the two top contenders from AMD. The GeForce GTX 260 is almost faster at 1920x1200 than the GTS 250 at 1280x1024.
...which (in the context it has been applied) is the same as saying we don't mind nVidia renaming an 8800GT to a 9800GT and then a 9800GT to a whatever 2xx series...and so on and so forth. My point is simple: nVidia is pulling an extremely sleazy marketing scheme on consumers by renaming existing models. If you goof admit it and get on with life; that's why I appreciated the fact that when the first generation of Phenoms were botched AMD gracefully renamed unaffected quads with a 50 (IE 9650 instead of 9600). Trying to remember all the different names of the exact same model is like dealing with someone who IM's you from five different screen names, eventually you just end up blocking them out.
Cherry picked? It's a retail product.
And there are MASSIVE rumours saying that Nvidia is hand-picking the review models sent to reviewers, even confirmed by HardOCP. Addressing that in this article would have been great.
thepinkpantherwhen the GTX4xx series i guess nvidia will launch the g92 refresh yet again, this time as an entry level graphics card.I Agree!