Skip to main content

Nvidia GeForce GTX 275 Preview: A Well-Timed Retaliatory Strike?

Test Setup And Benchmarks

Test Hardware
ProcessorIntel Core i7 965 Extreme (Bloomfield) 3.2 GHz, 6.4 GT/s, 8 MB L3 Cache, power-saving settings disabled
MotherboardAsus P6T (LGA 1366) X58/ICH10, BIOS 0403
MemoryCorsair Dominator 6 GB (3 x 2 GB) DDR3-1600 8-8-8-24 @ 1,600 MHz
Hard DriveWestern Digital VelociRaptor WD3000GLFS 300 GB 10,000 RPM SATA 3 Gb/s HDD
NetworkingRealtek RTC8111C, 1 Gbps
Graphics CardsNvidia GeForce GTX 275 896 MB
Nvidia GeForce GTX 285 1 GB
Zotac GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 896 MB
ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2 GB
ATI Radeon HD 4890 1 GB
ATI Radeon HD 4870 1 GB
Power SupplyCooler Master UCP 1100 W
CPU CoolerThermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
System Software And Drivers
Operating SystemMicrosoft Windows Vista Ultimate Edition x64 Service Pack 1
DirectXDirectX 10
Platform DriverIntel INF Chipset Update Utility 9.1.0.1012
Graphics DriverNvidia GeForce 185.63
Nvidia GeForce 182.08
AMD Catalyst 8.592.1 RC1
AMD Catalyst 9.3
BenchmarkConfiguration
World in ConflictVery High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Patch 1009, DirectX 10
Very High Quality Settings, 4x AA / 16x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Patch 1009, DirectX 10
Far Cry 2High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Steam Version
High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Steam Version
CrysisHigh Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1900x1200, 2560x1600, Patch 1.2.1, DirectX 10, 64-bit Executable
High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1900x1200, 2560x1600 Patch 1.2.1, DirectX 10, 64-bit Executable
Left 4 DeadHighest Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Steam Version
Highest Quality Settings, 4x AA / 8x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Steam Version
Grand Theft Auto IVHighest Quality Settings, No AA / "High" AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Patch #3
Stalker: Clear SkyHigh Quality Setting, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10 lighting
High Quality Setting, 4x MSAA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10 lighting
3DMark VantagePerformance Default, High Quality, Extreme Quality
  • privardo
    This would be my good price, good performance and the right time upgrade from 8800 GTS 512mb. Thanks for this awesome review!
    Reply
  • eklipz330
    i think putting the competitors next to eachother would have been easier on the eyes... putting 4870x2 gtx295 next to eachother, 4890 gtx275 next to eachother...you catch my drift
    Reply
  • cangelini
    Yeah, but with each resolution its own color, after looking at it both ways, it was easier to put each product family in descending order--hopefully it makes just as much sense that way!
    Reply
  • eklipz330
    srry for dp butkudos to nvidia for stepping up their game in the last second that had nothing to do with renaming cards. an attractive card at an attractive price.

    it'd be smart for ati to not release the 4890x2. wouldn't make any sense, like my grammar skills. hopefully drivers can catch up and do some damage, id doubt they woudl do anything dramatic though.
    Reply
  • megamanx00
    Too bad they didn't overclock the 4890 and the 275 for the review. I would have liked to have seen how the two cards compared overclocked. The heat and power dissipation on the 4890 would probably be a little scary though :D.
    Reply
  • megamanx00
    I think the big thing for nVidia now is, who's going to spend money on a 285 with the 275 so close?
    Reply
  • cangelini
    megamanx00Too bad they didn't overclock the 4890 and the 275 for the review. I would have liked to have seen how the two cards compared overclocked. The heat and power dissipation on the 4890 would probably be a little scary though .
    No need to fuel the tin-foil brigade elsewhere on the Web re: hand-picked cards. When we can get our hands on these boards for our System Builder Marathons, straight from e-tail, then we'll give you the goods on overclocking with the same boards available to everyone else!
    Reply
  • privardo
    Originally we said that the price would be $249 in the US, and €249 in Europe, however if the Euros-to-USD conversion is correct (1.00 Euro = 1.31 U.S. Dollars), the North American version should cost $327 instead.

    If the retail price for this card is turn to be over $300, they will never fool this monkey cause he will just get two HD 4770 and crossfire'd them, which surely beat a single 275
    Reply
  • privardo
    "Originally we said that the price would be $249 in the US, and €249 in Europe, however if the Euros-to-USD conversion is correct (1.00 Euro = 1.31 U.S. Dollars), the North American version should cost $327 instead."

    If the retail price for this card is turn to be over $300, they will never fool this monkey cause he will just get two HD 4770 and crossfire'd them, which surely beat a single 275
    Reply
  • ifko_pifko
    Well... summing all the framerates is just nonsense. ;-) The games with higher fps will weigh more than the others. (I know that in this test the variance in fps is not as wide as in tests with more games, but keep that in mind in the future please and learn the basics of statistics... )
    Reply