backtop


Print 90 comment(s) - last by Goty.. on Jun 19 at 1:48 AM


NVIDIA GTX 280 3-Way SLI  (Source: NVIDIA)

NVIDIA GTX 280 GPU  (Source: NVIDIA)
The GPUs in the series include the GTX 280 and GTX 260

NVIDIA launched a new family of GPUs today called the GTX 200 series. Within the series there are currently two GPUs -- the GTX 280 and the GTX 260. The NVIDIA GTX 280 is now the flagship GPU from NVIDIA and sits in the line above the 9800 GX2.

NVIDIA is stressing with the new GTX 200 family that the GPUs go beyond gaming and are one of the most powerful processors in a PC and can be used for rendering video and other functions. NVIDIA says that its goals with the architecture of the GTX 200 series were to design a processor twice as powerful as the GeForce 8800 GTX, rebalance the architecture for future games with more complex shaders and more memory, improve efficiency per watt and per square millimeter, provide enhanced CUDA performance, and add a significant reduction in idle power requirements.

NVIDIA says that the GTX 200 line provides nearly a teraflop of computational power. The GTX 200 family also offers support for PhysX powered physics processing right on the GPU. Both the new GTX 280 and GTX 260 support SLI and 3-way SLI. The previous NVIDIA 9800 GX2 could not support 3-way SLI.

Key features in the new GTX 200 GPUs include support for three times the number of threads per flight at any given time. A new scheduler design allows for 20% more texturing efficiency. The memory interface for the GPUs is 512-bit (GTX 280) and full-speed, raster-operation (ROP) frame blending is supported. The GTX 200 series also features twice the number of registers for longer and more complex shaders and IEEE754R double precision floating-point. The GTXC 200 line also supports 10-bit color scan out via the DisplayPort only.

One of the main goals with the GTX 200 line was improved power management. Both the GTX 200 series GPUs have idle power requirements of about 25W; during Blu-ray playback power requirements are around 35W; full 3D performance requirements vary with the most power needed being 236W (GTX 280). The GTX 200 line is compatible with HybridPower, which makes the power needs of the GPU effectively 0W.

The GTX 280 is built on a 65nm process and has 1.4 billion transistors. The stock video cards have a graphics clock of 602 MHz, processor clock of 1,296 MHz, and a memory clock of 2,214 MHz. The GTX 280 has 1GB of GDDR3 and 240 processing cores and 32 ROPs.

The GTX 260 is also built on the 65 nm process and has 1.4 billion transistors. The graphics clock for the GTX 260 is 576 MHz, the processor clock is 1,242 MHz, and the memory clock is 1,998 MHz. The memory interface on the GTX 260 is 448-bit and it has 896MB of GDDR3 memory. The GTX 260 has 192 processing cores and 28 ROPs. The maximum board power is 182W.

Both video cards will support PhysX processing on the GPU. NVIDIA purchased Ageia in early 2008.

GTX 280 video cards will be available tomorrow for $649 and the GTX 260 cards will be available on June 26 for $399.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Great Achievement
By Mitch101 on 6/16/2008 3:21:27 PM , Rating: 5
I think its a great achievement however I feel its in desperate need of a die shrink to be successful.

Pro's
Fast might possibly be faster than ATI's 4870 in GPU power.

Cons's
High Price
High Heat
No DX10.1
Low yields so its going to be hard to find to purchase.
Requires Extra power and connection which some might not have requiring a power supply purchase.

I know this will certainly merit a -1 thread rating because of fanbois of NVIDIA however I think this would be a great chip when it die shrinks even with the lack of DX10.1




RE: Great Achievement
By gyranthir on 6/16/2008 3:38:22 PM , Rating: 1
No DX 10.1 isn't a big loss because it does support the only real useful part of DX10.1 already.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3334...

"We support Multisample readback, which is about the only dx10.1 feature (some) developers are interested in. If we say what we can't do, ATI will try to have developers do it, which can only harm pc gaming and frustrate gamers."

The requiring a 6 pin and an 8 pin, annoys me greatly, as my beast of a computer will require a brand new PSU to be able to use one. My 8800GTX will have to suit me for a while because I don't have $850 to waste on a new video card and a new PSU....


RE: Great Achievement
By JLL55 on 6/16/2008 3:46:03 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
WNo DX 10.1 isn't a big loss because it does support the only real useful part of DX10.1 already.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3334...

"We support Multisample readback, which is about the only dx10.1 feature (some) developers are interested in. If we say what we can't do, ATI will try to have developers do it, which can only harm pc gaming and frustrate gamers."

The requiring a 6 pin and an 8 pin, annoys me greatly, as my beast of a computer will require a brand new PSU to be able to use one. My 8800GTX will have to suit me for a while because I don't have $850 to waste on a new video card and a new PSU....


If you continued to read TA on anandtech you would realize that they basically said BS to that comment, however, I completely agree with you on that last part. Requiring those extra pins is a big PITA cause if I wanted to stick it in my machine, I would have to get a new PSU besides the purchase of the new video card. I can't wait to see the 4870 X2 and pray that it can be used without a new PSU


RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/16/2008 3:53:06 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty sure the 4870X2 is going to require 2 8-pin connectors.


RE: Great Achievement
By Warren21 on 6/16/2008 5:11:42 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think it will. The vanilla HD 4870 may come with 2 x 6-pin PEG connectors, but it certainly doesn't need them, rather they are for more clocking headroom. A better way to think of it is HD 4850 X2 with a little bit of a OC. The 4850's only require 1 6-pin, so I would assume 1 75W 6-pin PEG + 1 150W 8-pin PEG + PCIe 1.1 75W slot (must be backwards compatible) = 300W should be enough.


RE: Great Achievement
By gyranthir on 6/17/2008 11:14:48 AM , Rating: 2
Brilliant to rate me down, for explaining Nvidia's point of view as to why they excluded DirectX 10.1,

Let's not forget that DX 10.1 is vista only.

When something like 75-80% of gamers aren't using Vista, because they see ZERO benefit from it. So the idea to not use DX10.1 isn't really that big of a stretch anyway.

Latest hardware + lamest software = LOL for gaming.


RE: Great Achievement
By Mitch101 on 6/17/2008 1:19:55 PM , Rating: 3
No problem here running Vista and Gaming on it. So maybe I don't get 130FPS anymore but my LCD monitors refresh rate wouldn't allow it anyway. Its not like Linux would run Crysis any better the engine exceeds todays hardware abilities and Im not sure its necessary to improve the graphics that high after seeing Cinema 2.0

Everyone knows that DX10.1 gave ATI hardware in Assasins Creed a what 25-35% speed increase on some Anti-Alias modes. It didnt put the ATI lightyears ahead of NVIDIA but it gave it enough of a boost to make the cards relatively the same. By that I mean you can play it on either system with the same level of visual quality on either.

Seriously if Assassins Creed was broken using DX10.1 why doesn't anyone have a screen shot of one of those game play reducing images yet we hear about but haven't seen proof of? If the DX10.1 was so broken where are all the screen shots and complaints to prove it? Seems there are more complaints to put DX10.1 back than there were of anyone screaming the visuals are broken.


RE: Great Achievement
By MrBlastman on 6/16/2008 3:39:08 PM , Rating: 5
If all games utilized Open GL, then we wouldn't be bickering over 10.1 would we? :)

Not to mention in the modding community we wouldn't have such strict limitations and hurdles to overcome as we do if say we were to take a DX 7 game and port it to DX 9.

Oh, and the cost - I think at some point something is going to need to rock the trend of 600+.00 video cards - to the lower direction.


RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/17/2008 10:00:17 AM , Rating: 5
No we'd be bickering over the latest and greatest OpenGL features.


RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/16/2008 3:51:12 PM , Rating: 4
The performance of these cards right now definitely does not justify the price. A pair of 8800GTs in SLI routinely outperforms even the GTX 280. Cost of a pair of 8800GTs is $300-350.

In the single card world, yes these are good parts. But if you can get SLI, the 8800GT or GTS is a far better value. And yes it will be interesting to see how the 4850 stacks up against these two.


RE: Great Achievement
By AssassinX on 6/16/2008 4:30:40 PM , Rating: 5
Yeah, IMO, it's kind of a win-lose/lose-win situation with SLI.

Create a new video card that is more powerful than the top of the line video card in SLI mode and people will say that SLI is useless and just buy the new video card.

Create a new video card that is less powerful than the top of the line video card in SLI mode and people will say it is not worth the money.

I realize price is a huge factor in determining if it is worth it or not but really if Nvidia did drop the price of the GTX 200 family then we will have people saying again to screw SLI and just go for the new card. Obviously this is just my opinion but it seems like almost any tech forum site swings back and forth on the subject of SLI. Although, I do feel it is interesting to see SLI as a viable upgrade option since it TYPICALLY SEEMS like it is a waste of money, power/heat and space.


RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/16/2008 4:47:14 PM , Rating: 3
If even the GTX 260 performed at the level of two 8800GTs in SLI for $300-325, I'd consider it a good buy. But when its about 33% more money and around 10-15% slower, its not.

When you look at the fact that the GTX 280 is over double the cost and doesn't perform even identical most of the time, its definitely not a good buy.

The only time it'd seem reasonable to run it is if you don't have a dual slot board. But in my mind if you can afford a $650 graphics card, you probably have a motherboard with dual 16x slots.


RE: Great Achievement
By Parhel on 6/16/2008 4:56:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
. . . its definitely not a good buy.


I wish I could disagree with you there. I guess that nvidia's yields were so bad that the only choice was to release them at far beyond the price/performance levels of other options.

It's a very impressive chip. If the die shrink allows them to raise clock speeds, reduce heat and power, and lower the price it might be worth purchasing. Hopefully they will execute on that. That said, if I were looking for a card right now, I'd be anxiously awaiting AMD's new lineup.


RE: Great Achievement
By Adonlude on 6/16/2008 6:13:06 PM , Rating: 5
Holy heatsinks Batman! The only powersupplies certified to run SLI with these bad boys are 1200W or above. I have a single 8800GTX in my machine and it literally heats my small room. In the summer it gets pretty hot and I always have to have my window open and my door open to get air flow through my room.

I am amused that I would literally need to install an A/C unit into my room if I wanted to SLI these suckers.


RE: Great Achievement
By ImSpartacus on 6/16/2008 5:20:49 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. I never thought about what would happen if nVidia released a product that was inferior to two last gen GPU's in SLI.

I actually have an 8800GT, and I may wait until 8800GT's go down in price and get another.


RE: Great Achievement
By paydirt on 6/17/2008 8:51:21 AM , Rating: 2
Huh? Maybe you're being sarcastic? Recent history (past 3-4 years?) shows that nVidia releases a single card that underperforms two lesser gen cards in SLI and the two lesser gen cards are less expensive combined than the new single card. This isn't a new concept, not sure why people are reacting the way they are, or why people think things should have been different this time.


RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/17/2008 9:00:23 AM , Rating: 3
I don't think the prices on 8800GTs are going to get much lower. I mean you can get an ECS 512MB 8800GT with the AC Accelero S1 on it for $145 right now. The heatsink is $30 so you're paying $115 for the GPU.


RE: Great Achievement
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2008 9:07:50 PM , Rating: 4
Good points.

Personally as a PC gamer I would like to see SLI not become the standard by which every game will be required to run to enjoy it.

I mean, Crisis isn't even that good of a game. Its certainly not revolutionary. Its just one game that someone decided to make at the time when hardly any system could run it at good frame rates. But everyone is running around acting like you need the two hottest video cards in SLI to enjoy high frame rates on the PC. I just don't get it.

Video cards are expensive enough. I enjoy building my own systems and buying all the components, with the emphasis on performance. But I would hate to see the day where your pretty much required to buy two of the hot video cards in SLI to enjoy PC gaming.


RE: Great Achievement
By SlyNine on 6/16/2008 11:56:56 PM , Rating: 2
You can play Crysis with a X800XT. Why people insist you need the best of the best in videocards x2 to play this game is beyond me. Heres a clue, turn down the graphics. Unless you are implying that the Devs should just turn the graphics down for you so no one elses game can look better ?

As far as gameplay thats pure opinion. I loved Crysis and thought it was a great game with a bad ending, But alot of games and movies end up that way.


RE: Great Achievement
By othercents on 6/16/2008 4:51:29 PM , Rating: 2
9800GX2 outperforms this card too and is running ~$480.

Other


RE: Great Achievement
By Cunthor666 on 6/16/2008 7:14:05 PM , Rating: 2
...I'm still not too keen on buying two of something just to play new games for next six months.

I wonder how much does it cost to actually produce a video card these days, because the price for something that *still* can't give you decent frames at max settings on 24" screen is beyond justification for an average gamer like myself.


RE: Great Achievement
By Silver2k7 on 6/17/2008 2:53:22 AM , Rating: 2
I agree 75-80 fps @ 1900x1200 should be required of a flagship video card.


RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/17/2008 9:02:20 AM , Rating: 1
Why when the most the human eye can see is 60 fps?


RE: Great Achievement
By ali 09 on 6/17/08, Rating: 0
RE: Great Achievement
By FITCamaro on 6/17/2008 9:03:19 AM , Rating: 2
I am going off the review numbers here at Anandtech. Perhaps you should read the article. If you have an issue with their numbers, take it up with them.


RE: Great Achievement
By GhandiInstinct on 6/16/2008 4:48:55 PM , Rating: 2
Nvidia released the unappealing 9800 followed by the underwhelming GTX200.

It's safe to say we're back to the Geforce days where there's no competition and a company becomes stagnant.

I'm skipping the GT for their 2009 product. And will be a nice performing 9800x2 once it goes under $400.

Thanks.


RE: Great Achievement
By VahnTitrio on 6/16/2008 5:08:05 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot a pro (looking at that 3 way SLi):

World's best multipurpose space heater (well, con if you live in a warm environment).


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive

Related Articles
Update: NVIDIA to Acquire AGEIA
February 4, 2008, 5:31 PM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki