NVIDIA Announces GTX 260 and GTX 280 Graphic Cards

[Rob Williams]

From our front-page news:

If there is one thing NVIDIA does well, it's the art of taking one GPU core and prolonging it's lifespan as much as possible. When G80 was first launched, in the form of the 8800 GTX, it offered mind-blowing performance that obliterated the competition. Amazingly, though, it kept that way for quite a while, as the 8800 GTX was the leading GPU all the way up until ATI released their HD 3870 X2.

But then we had the 9-series, and dual-GPU solutions. Of course, it's not surprising to see a dual-GPU solution out-perform a single GPU, but today, NVIDIA unveils their GTX 280, which accomplishes just that. Compared to the 9800 GX2, it wins in many competitions and follows just inches behind in others. For a single-GPU solution, that's impressive... as heck.

The downside is that the new GTX 280 is expensive, but that's to be expected for a brand-new offering that happens to blow away every other single-GPU solution before it. At $649 each, SLI might be out of the question for early adopters, but for the hardcore (and I do mean hardcore) enthusiasts, 3-way SLI is definitely possible.

In the end, the new GPU consumes less power than the 9800 GX2, is quieter, runs just as warm, and happens to perform like the true beast we expected it to. Hard to not like that. We didn't receive our samples in sufficient time, so we were unable to publish our content today, but stay tuned as it should be delivered before the end of the week.

Now we just need to await ATI's upcoming offerings to see where everything will fall into place.

<table align="center"> <tbody> <tr> <td>

</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
Though producing such a massive GPU, does have its drawbacks, which are evident when you consider its die size and when looking at power consumption characteristics, the fact remains NVIDIA has produced the most powerful and fastest graphics card we have ever tested - yet again.

Source: HotHardware
​

 

[Merlin]

Also I see that they are finally going to use CUDA
A parallel processor that has gone past the name of video card.
Yeah, I'd plop down 650.00 for one...but maybe not as SLI.....I still use a 24 inch monitor and thats what I'm happy with for the time.

Okay, where do I send the money order...do they take VISA?


Big Badda Boom
Merlin

 

[Greg King]

Reading through Anandtech's write up, a pair of 8800 GT's out perform a single one of these. Considering I am running one 24", one GT can chew up most games at 19x12 so when I get an SLI mobo (holding out for DFI's 790i board... if they ever release it) and a second GT, I will be sitting pretty. Considering that an XFX 8800 GT with a Zalman cooler installed can be had for $125 after MIR, I might get a second card before I get a capable motherboard.

I too am glad to see CUDA.

This is all just a macho way of saying that there isn't any way in hell that I can afford one of these cards right now...

 

[b1lk1]

You go from site to site and the reactions to this card are dramatic and all over the place. I for one thing it is grossly overpriced and is more a toy for benchmarking than anything. Far too hot and power hungry as well. It is a performance beast, but when we really see what the 4870's can do, I think the best performance per dollar cards will be ATI.

I agree, these cards are out of reach, just like the 8800GTX when it was released. They are not gonna take off like the 8800GTX as well since we are getting spoiled with the value of current cards and the lack of a major performance leap with the new cards.

 

[Greg King]

You go from site to site and the reactions to this card are dramatic and all over the place. I for one thing it is grossly overpriced and is more a toy for benchmarking than anything. Far too hot and power hungry as well. It is a performance beast, but when we really see what the 4870's can do, I think the best performance per dollar cards will be ATI.

I agree, these cards are out of reach, just like the 8800GTX when it was released. They are not gonna take off like the 8800GTX as well since we are getting spoiled with the value of current cards and the lack of a major performance leap with the new cards.

First off, I whole heartedly trust Anand but I too noticed a large range of opinions on the new cards as I bounced around from site to site. I also agree with you that the mid-range cards that most of us have at the moment are far more powerful than or monitors really need. 24" monitors were starting to become affordable by many and beast games like Crysis were still unreleased when the 8800 GTX came out so there was a need for that card. The cards we have now, most of them can handle a 19x12 resolution rather easily and for the time being, games aren't getting any more demanding so the actual need for these new round of cards really isn't there IMO... so like you said, with the pricing where it's at now, they seem to be a benchmarking toy indeed.

 

[Rob Williams]

As far as I'm concerned, the GTX 280 is for those who own a 30" monitor... and that's where a lot of power will be appreciated. Sounds a little stupid, I guess, but the fact is, today's cards are incredibly powerful, like you all said. But does that this mean that this shouldn't have been released, or priced so high?

It's there for those who want it, and can use it. It's priced high because it's new and packed an incredible amount of power.

As a side note, at $650, the card would be more expensive than what's currently considered a top of the line 24" monitor (Dell 2408WFP), so maybe that's a way to look at it.

 

[Greg King]

As far as I'm concerned, the GTX 280 is for those who own a 30" monitor... and that's where a lot of power will be appreciated. Sounds a little stupid, I guess, but the fact is, today's cards are incredibly powerful, like you all said. But does that this mean that this shouldn't have been released, or priced so high?

It's there for those who want it, and can use it. It's priced high because it's new and packed an incredible amount of power.

As a side note, at $650, the card would be more expensive than what's currently considered a top of the line 24" monitor (Dell 2408WFP), so maybe that's a way to look at it.

Everything you just said is true. No one ever said that releasing the card was wrong of NVIDIA (dont get me wrong, I would love to have one). Concerning your monitor statement, regardless of cost, the Dell you mention shares the same resolution with monitors half it's price and the same amount of pixels that a video card has to render.

 

[Rob Williams]

Everything you just said is true. No one ever said that releasing the card was wrong of NVIDIA (dont get me wrong, I would love to have one). Concerning your monitor statement, regardless of cost, the Dell you mention shares the same resolution with monitors half it's price and the same amount of pixels that a video card has to render.

The point that I was making that was even a top-of-the-line 24" monitor is still cheaper than a GTX 280. If you want to take full advantage of the GTX 280, get a 30" monitor and welcome to the big leagues. (Not you personally, in general.)

 

[b1lk1]

Welcome to the big leagues he says.........

Welcome to spending far too much on PC parts to play games, that is my answer to that. Seriously, your statement is so out of touch. There is no way 99% of the world can afford two of those cards and a 30" LCD. Your talking $1K for a decent 30" LCD and then $650+ each for video. These cards make no sense. They are benchmark queens. I am sure we will see the ORB full of them in no time with the "masters" chest butting each other about their super high e-peen scores.....

 

[Greg King]

The point that I was making that was even a top-of-the-line 24" monitor is still cheaper than a GTX 280. If you want to take full advantage of the GTX 280, get a 30" monitor and welcome to the big leagues. (Not you personally, in general.)

Your point flew right over my head... sorry about that.

 

[Greg King]

Welcome to the big leagues he says.........

Welcome to spending far too much on PC parts to play games, that is my answer to that. Seriously, your statement is so out of touch. There is no way 99% of the world can afford two of those cards and a 30" LCD. Your talking $1K for a decent 30" LCD and then $650+ each for video. These cards make no sense. They are benchmark queens. I am sure we will see the ORB full of them in no time with the "masters" chest butting each other about their super high e-peen scores.....

Your exactly right but the same can be said for the Extreme line of Intel procs or the FX line during AMD's heyday... not many people could / can afford those either but they were produced. If we want to broaden the argument, we could apply this to cars, boats, houses and well, anything. I won't own a 30" LCD or one of these cards anytime soon because I choose not to buy them (nevermind the fact that I just flat out cant afford them) but that a choice that everyone has to make. Doesn't make the cards wrong, just limits those who can own them. If everything were cheap, I'd drive a 911 to work everyday. Sadly, I still drive a Dodge.

 

[Rob Williams]

Welcome to the big leagues he says.........

Welcome to spending far too much on PC parts to play games, that is my answer to that. Seriously, your statement is so out of touch.

Where did I say that people should be running out to pick up this card, or a 30-inch monitor, for that matter? I clearly stated, if you want to take full advantage of a GTX 280, you will want a 30-inch monitor. In no way did I insinuate that people should go out and pick up either or. It's there for those who want it, and have the monitor that might actually take advantage of it's full potential.

It's already been made clear in this very thread that current GPUs (8800 GTs even) are more than powerful enough for most 1920x1200 gamers, so I'm unsure why there is confusion over the point I'm trying to make.

If you want to take full advantage of a GTX 280, you will want a huge monitor.

I am not sure how much more clear I could be. All I seem to be hearing is whining from people who are unable to take advantage of the card... simple, stick to your current GPU. I am not saying anyone needs this card, but those who do, better have a massive monitor, or else it's pure overkill.

So please, from now on, actually read what I'm saying, instead of jumping to conclusions and accusing me of being out of touch. Just because these cards are expensive and insanely high-end, doesn't mean they 'make no sense'. It seems like sour grapes to me.

 

[b1lk1]

Honestly, I am just the opposite. I fully understand these cards and they are no more expensive than the 8800GTX when it was released. They are certainly the nastiest things on the planet for a single GPU card. In fact, I also do not understand the mostly negative response to these cards on most websites/forums as well.

My whole point was that building a video card for 30"+ LCD's makes no sense. I would bet 95% of the world games on 24" or smaller LCD's and most have no plans on going bigger. If this card was built purely for 30"+ screens, then there is a real chance it will fail to sell since it is just not needed. I am not whining that I can't take advantage of one since I do not even need a new card. I just fail to see the point of such a card being released now when the world does not need such a card.

The only reason I stated you were out of touch is how easily you make it seem to just jump up to a 30" screen. That is just not a reality for almost all of us.

 

[Rob Williams]

The only reason I stated you were out of touch is how easily you make it seem to just jump up to a 30" screen. That is just not a reality for almost all of us.

It's the way I said it, and I didn't mean to imply that running out to purchase a 30" monitor is a minor thing. However, a $650 GPU is not exactly a light purchase either, and with 30" monitors constantly going down in price, it might not be too long before we see them all over.

Imagine once we see a $700 30". It will happen... just hopefully sooner than later. At that time, though, there will probably be an even larger resolution to drool over :-/

 

[Merlin]

Reading through Anandtech's write up, a pair of 8800 GT's out perform a single one of these. Considering I am running one 24", one GT can chew up most games at 19x12 so when I get an SLI mobo (holding out for DFI's 790i board... if they ever release it) and a second GT, I will be sitting pretty. Considering that an XFX 8800 GT with a Zalman cooler installed can be had for $125 after MIR, I might get a second card before I get a capable motherboard.

I too am glad to see CUDA.

This is all just a macho way of saying that there isn't any way in hell that I can afford one of these cards right now...

YEs, I can see a little better performance in new cards as opposed to the 8800GT
Streaming processors are better

Merlin

 

[Kougar]

You go from site to site and the reactions to this card are dramatic and all over the place. I for one thing it is grossly overpriced and is more a toy for benchmarking than anything. Far too hot and power hungry as well. It is a performance beast, but when we really see what the 4870's can do, I think the best performance per dollar cards will be ATI. .

Well do keep in mind two 4850's in Xfire consume more power than a single GTX 280, and usually offer less performance for it. Therefore the 4870 will only be more power hungry.

The ironic thing is, AMD appears to have the edge now, and I honestly was not expecting this at all.

4850 is a match for the new 9800GTX+. This is partly why the 9800GTX is now $199, and the GTX+ $229. Two 4850's in Crossfire compare favorably to the GTX 260... in WiC they beat even the GTX 280, and in Crysis they are a mere 2 FPS behind the GTX 280.

So continuing down this path, if the 4870 delivers noticeably better performance than the 4850, then two of them will easily outmatch a GTX 280 and do so at a cheaper price.

Either way you slice it, two $199 9800GTX cards, or two 4870's the GTX 280 is already surpassed in price&performance.

Ontop of this... Intel chipsets are by far the most popular choice. Personally, I wouldn't touch an NVIDIA board ever... (Never knew Samsung Spinpoint drives had issues with them as well). But I'm digressing, my point is the majority of Intel CPU boards are Intel chipsets, and most Intel chipsets run Crossfire... Two 9800GTX cards at $199 are rather attractive, but not many will wish to buy SLI capable motherboards ontop of that. AMD looks like they can easily win this launch generation, I honestly can't wait to see the 4870 now and hope AMD can pull it off. It's amazing what a little competition will do... 4870 in a few days, 55nm GT200 as soon as NVIDIA can rush it out the door...