Specs and synthetics
Before we get to play any games, we should stop and look at the specs of the various cards we're testing. Incidentally, the numbers in the table below are derived from the observed clock speeds of the cards we're testing, not the manufacturer's reference clocks or stated specifications.
|GeForce 9500 GT||4.4||8.8||4.4||25.6||90||134|
|GeForce 9600 GT||11.6||23.2||11.6||62.2||237||355|
|GeForce 9800 GT||9.6||33.6||16.8||57.6||339||508|
|GeForce 9800 GTX+||11.8||47.2||23.6||70.4||470||705|
|GeForce GTS 250||12.3||49.3||24.6||71.9||484||726|
|GeForce 9800 GX2||19.2||76.8||38.4||128.0||768||1152|
|GeForce GTX 260 (192 SPs)||16.1||36.9||18.4||111.9||477||715|
|GeForce GTX 260 (216 SPs)||17.5||45.1||22.5||117.9||583||875|
|GeForce GTX 280||19.3||48.2||24.1||141.7||622||933|
|GeForce GTX 285||21.4||53.6||26.8||166.4||744||1116|
|GeForce GTX 295||32.3||92.2||46.1||223.9||1192||1788|
|Radeon HD 4650||4.8||19.2||9.6||16.0||384||-|
|Radeon HD 4670||6.0||24.0||12.0||32.0||480||-|
|Radeon HD 4830||9.2||18.4||9.2||57.6||736||-|
|Radeon HD 4850||10.9||27.2||13.6||67.2||1088||-|
|Radeon HD 4850 1GB||11.2||28.0||14.0||63.6||1120||-|
|Radeon HD 4870||12.0||30.0||15.0||115.2||1200||-|
|Radeon HD 4850 X2||20.0||50.0||25.0||127.1||2000||-|
|Radeon HD 4870 X2||24.0||60.0||30.0||230.4||2400||-|
The theoretical numbers in the table give the GeForce GTS 250 a clear advantage in texture filtering rates and memory bandwidth, while the Radeon HD 4850 has an equally sizeable lead in peak shader arithmetic capacity. But look what happens when we run these cards through 3DMark's synthetic tests.
The 4850 1GB nearly matches the GTS 250 in the color fill test, which tends to be bound primarily by memory bandwidth, and the 4850 comes out on top in the texture fill rate test.
Meanwhile, the GeForce GTS 250 leads the 4850 in half of the shader processing tests, and our expectations are almost fully confounded. In this GPU generation, the theoretical peak capacities of the GPUs take a back seat to the realities of architectural efficiency. Although the G92 has more texture filtering potential and memory bandwidth on paper, the HD 4850 is stronger in practice. And although the 4850's RV770 GPU has more parallel processing power than the G92, the GeForce tends to use its arithmetic capacity more effectively in many cases.
|Gmail and Google Now conspire to streamline your Inbox||5|
|Lian Li's latest Mini-ITX chassis houses 11 hard drives||5|
|In the lab: WASD's Code keyboard with Cherry MX clear switches||28|
|GeForce 344.48 driver enables DSR on Kepler, Fermi GPUs||71|
|ARM intros two new CCN 'uncore' products for data center SoCs||12|
|G.Skill's Phoenix Blade PCIe SSD boasts 2000MB/s transfer rates||27|
|First Win10 Tech Preview update adds Action Center||19|
|Reports: Broadwell-E slips to 2016, but Skylake-S sampling already||30|
|I just found this AMAZING trick! Call of Duty takes up 0GB if you just don't buy it!||+106|