GeForce GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4890 Part5

Last but not least, Company of Heroes: Tales of Valor,
the gap is merely 3.5%






The gap opens to 5% with 4xAA & 16xAF.

You can see from the result that both cards perform at a similar level, with the GeForce GTX260+ edges out by a small margin in most games. Given both cards are selling at the same price, the Nvidia card definitely makes a better choice.



Part 1: Introduction & Specification
Part 2: Test Setup
Part 3: 3Dmark & Call of Duty 5
Part 4: NSF:Undercover & FarCry2
Part 5: COH: Tales of Valor

GeForce GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4890 Part4

Need For Speed: Undercover, again no significant difference between the two.






The GTX260+ almost achieved what is known as "free AA",
while the HD4890 suffered a 12.6% drop in frame rate.








Moving on to the first DX10 game benchmark, FarCry2,
HD 4890 performs much better than its counterpart.





The gap maintained after switching on AA & AF.



Part 1: Introduction & Specification
Part 2: Test Setup
Part 3: 3Dmark & Call of Duty 5
Part 4: NSF:Undercover & FarCry2
Part 5: COH: Tales of Valor

GeForce GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4890 Part3

Benchmark Result




3Dmark Vantage (Performance),
where GTX260+ leads by 1717 points or 16%,
thanks to its support for PhysX technology.






3Dmark06 running at its default 1280x1024,
shows that both cards are on par.






Moving on to Call of Duty 5, running at 1920x1200 0xAA 0xAF,
GTX260+ is merely 2fps faster, no significant difference between the two.






GTX260+ suffers a drastic drop in performance when AA & AF is turned on.



Part 1: Introduction & Specification
Part 2: Test Setup
Part 3: 3Dmark & Call of Duty 5
Part 4: NSF:Undercover & FarCry2
Part 5: COH: Tales of Valor

GeForce GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4890 Part2

Test Setup

Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 @ 3.6Ghz (400x9)
Memory: Corsair DDR2-1066 2x1GB
Motherboard: Asus P45
Harddisk: Seagate Barracuda 320GB 7200.10
Power Supply: GreatWall 650W
Display: Hanns.G 28" (1920x200)

Graphics:
Gainward GeForce GTX260+ 55nm 896MB Golden Sample (625/1348/2200)
Radeon HD 4890 GDDR5 1GB (850/3900)

Driver:
Forceware

O/S: Windows Vista Ultimate SP1
Chipset: Intel P45 Vista 9.0.0.1008 WHQL
Framerate: FRAPS 2.9.8



Part 1: Introduction & Specification
Part 2: Test Setup
Part 3: 3Dmark & Call of Duty 5
Part 4: NSF:Undercover & FarCry2
Part 5: COH: Tales of Valor

GeForce GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4890 Part1

GeForce GTX260+ 55nm vs Radeon HD4890

AMD turns up the heat with an improved core and thus the birth of it's flagship Radeon HD4890. As part of their pricing strategy, ATI has announced that HD4890 will be retailing for under $260, which is also the price point of an overclocked GTX260+. Today, we will find out which card is the most bang for bucks.




Sample GPU-Z screenshot:



GeForce GTX260+ core216 with a 55nm core


Specification Comparison

Product	GeForce GTX 260+	Radeon HD4890
Core Code	GT200	RV790
Process	55nm	55nm
Transistors	1400 million	959 million
Core Clock	625Mhz	850Mhz
Shader	1348Mhz	850 Mhz
Shader	216	800
ROP	28	16
TMU	72	40
Memory Clock	2200Mhz	3900Mhz
Memory Bus Width	448-bit	256-bit
Memory Size/Type	896MB GDDR3	1GB GDDR5

Part 1: Introduction & Specification
Part 2: Test Setup
Part 3: 3Dmark & Call of Duty 5
Part 4: NSF:Undercover & FarCry2
Part 5: COH: Tales of Valor

GeForce GTX260 vs GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4870

GeForce GTX260 vs GTX260+ vs Radeon HD4870

Initially, the GT200 based GeForce GTX280 and GTX260 were priced so high, the price/performance ratio was so bad that it didn't make any sense to pay the huge premium over the little performance gain. Of course we are comparing it against Radeon HD4800 series. To boost sales, Nvidia cut GeForce GTX280 price by 62%; GTX260 by 33%, placing the latter in the same price point with Radeon HD4870.

Things got interesting when Nvidia launched a new GTX260 version known as GeForce GTX 260+ Core 216, containing 216 shader processors as compared to the original GTX260's 192 SP. Bla bla bla.. Let's not waste anymore time on complex technical details, time to watch the triple-threat match of GeForce GTX260 192SP vs GTX260+ 216SP vs Radeon HD 4870!

Test Platform

CPU	Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850
Motherboard	GIGABYTE GA-X48T-DQ6
Memory	A-DATA DDR3-1066 Extreme CL7 2x1GB
Graphics	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 192SP 896MB
	Inno3D GeForce GTX 260 GOLD 216PS 896MB
	ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
Power	GIGABYTE ODIN GT 1200W
OS	Windows Vista SP1
Driver	Forceware 177.43
	ATI Catalyst 8.8

Benchmark Result

	GeForce GTX 260+ 216SP 896MB	Radeon HD 4870 800SP 512MB	GeForce GTX 260 192SP 896MB
3DMark 05
16 x 10	17487	18840	17335
19 x 12	16975	18367	16712
16 x 10 8AA	15415	17328	15281
19 x 12 8AA	14299	16238	14025
3DMark 06
16 x 10	14260	14125	13948
19 x 12	13246	13183	12844
16 x 10 8AA	9448	10606	9339
19 x 12 8AA	8755	9704	8607
3DMark Vantage
High (GPU)	5726	5133	5321
Extreme (GPU)	4030	3604	3712
Company of Hero (DX10, High)
16 x 10	57.1	56.1	55.9
19 x 12	54.5	52.9	52.2
16 x 10 8AA	45.3	52.4	43.1
19 x 10 8AA	38.9	48.5	36.1
Crysis (DX 10, High)
16 x 10	41.46	39.46	39.21
19 x 12	35.06	33.02	32.81
16 x 10 8AA	30.54	35.54	29.25
19 x 10 8AA	24.33	29.38	23.33
PT Boat (DX10, High)
16 x 10	56.9	46.2	55.6
19 x 12	54.3	43.9	52.8
16 x 10 8AA	40.3	23.7 *	39.1
19 x 12 8AA	34.4	16.5 *	33.2
Lost Planet (DX10, High)
16 x 10	87.5	51.4	82.2
19 x 12	71.1	42.8	68.1
16 x 10 8AA	61.4	48.7	58.7
19 x 12 8AA	49.7	40.9	48.1

*FPS drops dramatically when required vram >512MB


On average, the new GTX260 containing 216SP outperforms it's 192SP brother by around 5%.






Source: http://game.ali213.net/thread-2275669-1-1.html