Graphics Card Performance and Classification

[boredgunner]

GTX 280 should be above the 4850 x2 and right below the GTX 285.

HD 4870 512 MB should be above the regular GTX 260.

HD 3870 x2 should be above the 8800 Ultra.

9800GT/8800GT (and soon to be GTS 240) should be above the HD 4830.

8800GTS G80 320/640 should be right below the HD 3870.

9600GT should be above the HD 4670.

 

[Everlong]

8800GTS G80 320/640 should be right below the HD 3870.
.

The performance between these two are too close to tell really, same for the 9600 and 4670.

I've also just seen, you haven't got the 9600GSO on there.

9600GT ...(G92)
HD2900XT
HD2900PRO
8800GTS (G80)
8800GS(G80)
8800GTS 320MB
HD2600XT
HD2600PRO
HD2400PRO
HD3850

This area needs looking at I think. The 3850 should be above the 2600, not sure where them 2900s should be, but the 9600GSO should rank in above the 3850, but below the 9600GT.

 

[boredgunner]

The 9600GSO should also be below the 4670, as well as the 9600GSO 512. The 9600GT and 4670 aren't that close in performance, the 9600GT beats it by a decent margin. The 4670 is actually the 9500GT's competitor but it absolutely smokes the 9500GT.

Either way the 8800GTS G80 are obviously too low. The 8800GS (and 9600GSO) do not beat the 320 MB 8800GTS. Look at the differences.

8800GS/9600GSO
Chipset: G92
Transistor Count: 754 Million
Manufacturing Tech: 65nm
Memory Type: GDDR3
Memory Size: 384 MB
Memory Interface: 192 bit
Stream Processing Cores: 96
Texture Filtering Units: 48
Raster Operators: 12
Core Clock: 550 mhz
Shader Clock: 1375 mhz
Memory Clock: 800 mhz (1600 mhz effective data rate)

8800GTS 320
Chipset: G80
Transistor Count: 681 Million
Manufacturing Tech: 90nm
Memory Type: GDDR3
Memory Size: 320 MB
Memory Interface: 320 bit
Stream Processing Cores: 96
Texture Filtering Units: 48
Raster Operators: 20
Core Clock: 500 mhz
Shader Clock: 1200 mhz
Memory Clock: 800 mhz (1600 mhz effective data rate)

 

[smarteyeball]

How about putting the desktop cards above the mobility ones while your at it?

 

[Everlong]

The 8800GS (9600GSO) and GTS 320mb are pretty even

http://www.hardspell.com/pic/article/2008/1/18/5598da15-b8f8-4a24-a91c-313369c55ecb.png (only side by side comparison I could find)

The G92 chip alone compensates the lower specs than the GTS. Higher resolutions the GTS will most likely push ahead slightly because the 8800GS/9600GSO are crippled by their memory interface.

The other revisions of the GSO with more memory will be harder to place, like I think they released a 768mb version at one point, and www.scan.co.uk as a 1.5GB version for sale, though still crippled by the memory interface.

I don't think the list will ever be accurate by looking at benchmarks etc and real world performance with the endless number of setups you can test under, different computers will always yield different tests and the list isn't going off any specific setup either, like you can argue about resolution and at different resolutions the list will be different, though I think something like the Steam Hardware Survey would be ideal to go off to an extent (February 2009 showed 1280x1024 resolution as the most used resolution still).

I think the list would be better by just putting them in order of specifications

I think it's better how the mobile GPUs have been listed in the different classes such as "for high end gaming, go for these cards" and every card in that class will play the latest games with ease on the highest settings, and then the mid-range cards in another class and so on.

 

[rive0108]

How about putting the desktop cards above the mobility ones while your at it?

Because this thread started as a mobility GPU thread that is comparable to the desktop versions in classification and performance benchmarking), and the Independent Desktop card list was added by Skunksmash as a courteousy for users at a much later time, and I have asked him to help me keep the card performance rankings up to date.:D

Mobility cards updated...

 

[skunksmash]

ok....... have a look at the list now lads..???


now i don't believe the GTX280 is stronger than the 4850x2, everything ive seen shows it out performing the 280 & 285, but feel free to provide benches to the contrary...





SK

 

[Everlong]

I'd put the 3850 underneath the GTS 320. In my opinion they're around equal to each other.

But apart from that I'm happy with the list. It'll never be 100%

 

[skunksmash]

will do mate......


these GTS250s are getting raves everywhere i look, SLI is where these are supposed to excel....

& even though this still has a 256bit bus, the 1gb version has been tweaked for better AA delivery at high res.... unlike the complete shambles they were left with on the 1gb 9800gt





SK

 

[Everlong]

will do mate......


these GTS250s are getting raves everywhere i look, SLI is where these are supposed to excel....

& even though this still has a 256bit bus, the 1gb version has been tweaked for better AA delivery at high res.... unlike the complete shambles they were left with on the 1gb 9800gt





SK

That's interesting. Seems Nvidia are focusing more on improving AA, especially as the "performance increase" on the Nvidia driver download page say "with AA" when they never did before.

Still think it would have been better being made a GTX250 for a mid-range GT200 card

 

[boredgunner]

Also the 8800M GTX should be right below the 9800M GT in the mobility section. They are essentially the same card.

 

[rive0108]

Also the 8800M GTX should be right below the 9800M GT in the mobility section. They are essentially the same card.

Done. The 9800m GT has been downgraded below the 9800m GTS/GTS 160m Cards.

 

[boredgunner]

Actually the 9800M GT is a rebranded 8800M GTX. They have 512 MB VRAM and 256 bit interface with 112 stream processing cores. I don't know about the GTS 160M, but the 9800M GTS is actually worse than the 9800M GT. NVIDIA likes to confuse their customers.

 

[rive0108]

Actually the 9800M GT is a rebranded 8800M GTX. They have 512 MB VRAM and 256 bit interface with 112 stream processing cores. I don't know about the GTS 160M, but the 9800M GTS is actually worse than the 9800M GT. NVIDIA likes to confuse their customers.

8800m GTX (NB8E) 3dmark06 bench: 9194
9800m GT (NB9E-GT2) 3dmark06 bench: 9416/ vantage bench:4011
86 shaders/500 core speed/1250 shader speed/800 memory speed/256 memory bus

GTS 160m (NB9E-GT)
9800m GTS (NB9E-GT) 3dmark06 bench: 9692
64 shaders/600 core speed/1500 shader speed/800 memory speed/256 memory bus

Rank:
GTS 160m (?)
9800m GTS
9800m GT
8800m GTX

 

[boredgunner]

My bad, I meant 96 stream processing cores on the 9800M GT/8800M GTX. 3DMark 06 is not the place to test GPU's. Look at the specs, the GTS 160M is worse. 3DMark 06 is way CPU limited, 3DMark Vantage tests your GPU.

 

[Everlong]

Radeon HD 4890 review | test

Not sure where I'd put the 4890. Possibly just under the GTX285, although the 260 beats it in things like Farcry 2.

Not looked at the GTX275 yet, will have a look at some soon


Edit: Had a quick look at the 275, and will be between the 285 and the 4890 by the looks of it.

 

[skunksmash]

OK.....the list has been updated, the GTX275 seems to have the edge by 1-2fps in the standard resolutions, but the 4890 pulls away by a few frames when the res is pumped up.... they're very close in terms of performance.....

i am hearing the 275 is a VERY hot card though, 80-85c fully loaded :eek:


let me know how it looks..??






SK

 

[SCSIraidGURU]

I am waiting for the 4870x2 to drop back to $399 or below.

 

[Everlong]

OK.....the list has been updated, the GTX275 seems to have the edge by 1-2fps in the standard resolutions, but the 4890 pulls away by a few frames when the res is pumped up.... they're very close in terms of performance.....

i am hearing the 275 is a VERY hot card though, 80-85c fully loaded :eek:


let me know how it looks..??






SK

Looks okay

From what I've seen on benchmarks, they out perform each other or are around the same in various different games, so on average they do pretty much perform the same.

 

[moirae]

Skunksmash wrote:

i am hearing the 275 is a VERY hot card though, 80-85c fully loaded :eek:

That's absolutely horribad.