Widescreen Gaming Forum

This is a thread to discuss or comment on the latest benchmarks I've run.

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/WSGF_Benchmarking

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/WS_and_WTH_Benchmarking_%28GTX_295_Vista_Update%29

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/WS_and_WTH_Benchmarking_%28GTX_275%29

9-Mar-10 Update:
Radeon 5870 Driver Comparison - Catalyst 9.11 vs. 10.3 Preview
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/WS_and_WTH_Benchmarking_-_Radeon_HD_5870_1GB_Driver_Comparison

24-Nov-09 Update:
Radeon 5870
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/WS_and_WTH_Benchmarking_%28Radeon_HD_5870_1GB%29

08-Aug-09 Update:
Added Batman: Arkham Asylum
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/Batman_Benchmarking

28-Jul-09 Update:
Added GTX 275 1792MB in SLI
http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/index.php/WS_and_WTH_Benchmarking_%28GTX_275_SLI%29

At long last, some serious hi-res benchmarks of those RAM-rich cards for us "display power users" 8)
Can't wait for the SLI benches. That's where these 2 GB cards should shine. I'm considering swapping for 2 GB 285s myself ;) Cheers for the detailed FC2 perf analysis, again SLI will hopefully draw a clearer line between 896 & 1782 GB 275s...

PLEASE use the last nVdia WHQL 186.18 driver to benk this card... with new th2go driver...
it's working great to vista and win7 at 5040*1050 pixel...

Seems like the 1792mb GTX 275 needs more shader power to make use of all that extra RAM.

I'm interested to see how well a 2GB GTX285 performs, since it has a larger number of stream processors.

I will try updating both the Matrox and the NV driver to see what happens. However, the custom resolution issue is still listed in the driver notes:

http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/node/10696

And, there is no way I can go back and retest everything. I've already sent back the 896MB card, and I simply don't the time to redo everything else. If they work, I will see if they make that much of a difference.

The 186.16 drivers do not work for me, even with the newer GXM. Had to roll back to the 182.50 drivers.

Ibrin, Could i ask you that you support the 1680x1050 resolution again, because that way the beginning widescreen gamers have something to look at. :wink:

Look at the data I posted. In reality, with a Core i7 920, you're CPU limited below 1920x1200. You should have basically the same performance in 1920x1200 and 1680x1050.

The 186.16 drivers do not work for me, even with the newer GXM. Had to roll back to the 182.50 drivers.

Nor me and most people. The 186.24 however do, I posted a thread about it. You will likely have to run at 55/56Hz to get it past the custom res test.

Great review btw, very interested in these 1792MB cards. I second the 2GB 285 test, that's a monster of a single GPU card.


The way the performance flattens at 5040x1050 on both the 295 and 275 1792MB suggests to me either the drivers are not optimised for this res or there is an internal resolution "safe zone" limit, like back on the 6 series which occured around 1920x1200, IRC performance plummeted over 1600x1200 no matter how much video memory you through at it and it was only rectified with new hardware.

Incidentially, which App did you use for the graphs, they have a very cool "paper" look?

_________________
[GTX1080 - 4.48GHz 4690k - planning projector mayhem]

Thanks. The app was Apple Keynote (their answer to PowerPoint).