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