Trending

Best Of The Best: High-End Graphics Card Roundup

By

Power Consumption, Noise Levels, And Temperature Readings

Power consumption is measured in watts for the complete test platform. The 2D value comes from a normal Windows user interface at idle (Aero is also turned off to establish a truly minimal value). The 3D value is measured when both CPU and graphics card are running under heavy load (to establish a peak value). The measurement comes from the wall socket, and the efficiency rating for the power supply we used averages around 82.4% (according to its vendor).

Temperatures and Motherboard Slots2D Temp3D TempSlots
EVGA GTX 295 Hydro Copper (GTX 295 2x896 MB)3968Double
GeForce GTX 295 (2x896 MB)3966Double
Zotac GTX285 AMP Edition (GeForce GTX 285 1024 MB)4585Double
MSI N285GTX SuperPipe OC (GeForce GTX 285 1024 MB)4287Double
GeForce GTX 285 (1,024 MB)4585Double
MSI N280GTX OC HydroGen (GeForce GTX 280 1024 MB)3451Single
GeForce GTX 280 (1,024 MB)4586Double
BFG GeForce GTX 275 (GeForce GTX 275 896 MB)4792Double
GeForce GTX 275 (896 MB)4792Double
GeForce GTX 260 216SPs (896 MB)4581Double
GeForce GTX 260 (896 MB)4890Double
GeForce 9800 GTX+ (512 MB)4881Double
GeForce 9800 GTX (512 MB)5574Double
Radeon HD 4890 (1,024 MB) 9.46080Double
Radeon HD 4870 X2 (2x1,024 MB)4979Double
Radeon HD 4870 (512 MB)6074Double
Radeon HD 4850 (512 MB)7994Single
Radeon HD 4770 (512 MB)5272Double
Power Consumption2D Watts3D WattsTDP WattsPower Connectors
EVGA GeForce GTX 295 Hydro Copper (GTX 295 2x896 MB)1885322891 x 6 + 1 x 8 pin PCIe
GeForce GTX 295 (2x896 MB)1884682891 x 6 + 1 x 8  pin PCIe
Zotac GTX285 AMP Edition (GeForce GTX 285 1,024 MB)1503561832 x 6 pin PCIe
MSI N285GTX SuperPipe OC (GeForce GTX 285 1,024 MB)1563481832 x 6 pin PCIe
GeForce GTX 285 (1,024 MB)1503481832 x 6 pin PCIe
MSI N280GTX OC HydroGen (GeForce GTX 280 1,024 MB)1633582361 x 6 + 1 x 8 pin PCIe
GeForce GTX 280 (1,024 MB)1553472361 x 6 + 1 x 8 pin PCIe
BFG GeForce GTX 275 (GeForce GTX 275 896 MB)1563552192 x 6 pin PCIe
GeForce GTX 275 (896 MB)1563512192 x 6 pin PCIe
GeForce GTX 260 216SPs (896 MB)1502951822 x 6 pin PCIe
GeForce GTX 260 (896 MB)1543301822 x 6 pin PCIe
GeForce 9800 GTX+ (512 MB)1652771412 x 6 pin PCIe
GeForce 9800 GTX (512 MB)1702781562 x 6 pin PCIe
Radeon HD 4890 (1,024 MB)1823121902 x 6 pin PCIe
Radeon HD 4870 X2 (2x1,024 MB)2344652861 x 6 + 1 x 8 pin PCIe
Radeon HD 4870 (512 MB)1912881572 x 6 pin PCIe
Radeon HD 4850 (512 MB)1662701141 x 6 pin PCIe
Radeon HD 4770 (512 MB)152199801 x 6 pin PCIe
Noise Levels Measured2D dB(A)3D dB(A)Fan slotsFan diameter
EVGA GeForce GTX 295 Hydro Copper (GeForce GTX 295 2x896 MB)Water coolerWater coolerDoubleWater cooler
Zotac GTX285 AMP Edition (GeForce GTX 285 1,024 MB)37.951.4Double75 mm
MSI N285GTX SuperPipe OC (GeForce GTX 285 1,024 MB)36.138.7Double2 x 65 mm
GeForce GTX 285 (1,024 MB)37.951.4Double75 mm
MSI N280GTX OC HydroGen (GeForce GTX 280 1,024 MB)Water coolerWater coolerSingleWater cooler
GeForce GTX 280 (1,024 MB)38.045.4Double75 mm
BFG GTX 275 (GTX 275 896 MB)36.844.2Double75 mm
GeForce GTX 275 (896 MB)36.844.2Double75 mm
GeForce GTX 260 216SPs (896 MB)37.541.2Double75 mm
GeForce GTX 260 (896 MB)37.853.8Double75 mm
GeForce 9800 GTX+ (512 MB)36.641.4Double73 mm
GeForce 9800 GTX (512 MB)37.244.8Double70 mm
Radeon HD 4890 (1,024 MB)36.748.4Double73 mm
Radeon HD 4870 X2 (2x1,024 MB)51.260.4Double73 mm
Radeon HD 4870 (512 MB)38.049.4Double73 mm
Radeon HD 4850 (512 MB)36.247.9Single60 mm
Radeon HD 4770 (512 MB)36.338.5Double70 mm
111 Comments Comment from the forums
  • 22 May 2009 13:24
    Only one ATi card? What happened to all those OC'd 4890s?
    Reply
  • 22 May 2009 13:27
    And those HAWX benchmarks look ridiculous. ATi should wipe floor with nvidia with that. Of course you didn't put dx10.1 support on. Bastard...
    Reply
  • cangelini 22 May 2009 13:35
    quarzOnly one ATi card? What happened to all those OC'd 4890s?
    These are the same boards that were included in the recent charts update, and are largely contingent on what vendors submit for evaluation. We have a review upcoming comparing Sapphire's new 1 GHz Radeon HD 4890 versus the stock 4890. It'll be up in the next couple of weeks, though.
    Reply
  • ohim 22 May 2009 13:52
    Am i the only one that find this article akward since looking at the tests done on Ati cards on The Last Remnant game makes me wonder what went wrong ... i mean it`s UT3 engine ... why so low performance ?
    Reply
  • curnel_D 22 May 2009 13:57
    Ugh, please tell me that The Last Remnant hasnt been added to the benchmark suite.

    And I'm not exactly sure why the writer decided to bench on Endwar instead of World In Conflict. Why is that exactly?

    And despite Quarz2's apparent fanboism, I think HAWX would have been better benched under 10.1 for the ATI cards, and used the highest stable settings instead of dropping off to DX9.
    Reply
  • anamaniac 22 May 2009 14:06
    The EVGA 295 is the stuff gods game with.

    I would love that card. I would have to replace my whole system to work it properly however.
    I want $1500 now... i7 920 (why get better? They all seem to be godly overclockers) and EVGA 295.

    How about a test suit of the EVGA GTX 295 in crossfire for a quad-gpu configuration? I know there's driver issues, but it would be fun to see what it could do regardless. Along with seeing how far Toms can OC the EVGA GTX 295.
    Actually... Toms just needs to do a new system building recommendation roundup. I find them useful personally, and would have used it myself had my cash source had not lost his job...
    Reply
  • 22 May 2009 14:42
    Weird test:
    1) Where are the overclocking results?
    2) Bad choice for benchmarks: Too many old DX9 based graphic engines (FEAR 2, Fallout 3, Left4Dead with >100FPS) or Endwar which is limited to 30FPS. Where is Crysis?
    3) 1900x1200 as highest resolution for high-end cards?
    Reply
  • EQPlayer 22 May 2009 14:47
    Seems that the cumulative benchmark graphs are going to be a bit skewed if The Last Remnant results are included in there... it's fairly obvious something odd is going on looking at the numbers for that game.
    Reply
  • armistitiu 22 May 2009 14:48
    Worst article in a long time. Why compare how old games perform on NVIDIA's high end graphic cards? Don't get me wrong i like them but where's all the Atomic stuff from Saphire, Asus and XFX had some good stuff from ATI too. So what.. you just took the reference cards from ATI and tested them? :| That is just wrong.
    Reply
  • pulasky 22 May 2009 15:00
    WOW what a piece of s********** is this """"""review"""""" Noobidia pay good in this days.
    Reply