Will the GTX 295 not run any games maxed?

Forevermore1337

New Member
Well im not a fanboy to the extent I would ignor what you say because of the brand but i simply already bought everything.

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of the whole thread? If you already purchased the card, then you were probably stuck with the card anyways, despite the performance. And since you are set on stealing games, you could just download whatever you wanted and try it out.

Besides the point, think about it logically. The GTX 295 was the best card on the market before ATI's 5000 series was released, and is still only one step beneath. Would a game company profit any from making a game that couldn't be run on the hardware accessible at that time?
 

dirtbikeryzz

New Member
Doesn't this defeat the purpose of the whole thread? If you already purchased the card, then you were probably stuck with the card anyways, despite the performance. And since you are set on stealing games, you could just download whatever you wanted and try it out.

Besides the point, think about it logically. The GTX 295 was the best card on the market before ATI's 5000 series was released, and is still only one step beneath. Would a game company profit any from making a game that couldn't be run on the hardware accessible at that time?

Bringing up the torrent subject again... Sorry I don't feed trolls. And I bought everything I haven't got it in the mail.
 

Gooberman

Active Member
Ok to end this thread! it can run any game maxed! :) only possible problems will be crysis but that's not the cards fault :)
 

Springy182

New Member
plenty of games already use 4 cores. Crysis and Crysis Warhead benefits from 4 cores, along with GTA IV (Q6600 listed for recommended specs) which benefits heaps from quad cores. I'm pretty sure a lot of recent games will support quad cores as well. 2010 is meant to a be a good year for games.

The GTX 295 can max all games as far as i know. but it would be better to invest in a DirectX11 card from Ati, or wait till nvidia releases their Fermi based cards. the 5870 is only 5 to 10 percent slower, but you wouldn't really notice that amount.

Neither Crysis nor Warhead benefit any from 4 cores, they only use 2. GTA 4 however does benefit, apart from that very few games support quad core atm.

Um I haven't bought a computer game in years. If im dropping 2,500 on a pc im getting my damn games free.

You do realize that talking about piracy is against the rules, right?

????? Look at what they make, 9500gt thats worse then a 8800gtx, gts 250 thats what 3fps better then a 9800gtx? You didn't see a good card in the 200 series until the 260.

Traditionally highend from one series is comparable to midrange from the next series and lowend from the one after that. Just because it has a higher number doesnt mean anything.

A GTS 250 is a 9800GTX+ just with a different model number, you cant expect it to run much faster considering it still has the same G92 core.

My point is why would someone replace there 550$ gtx295 for a 700$ GTX 310 that will only gain 10fps?

A G 310 would presumably come out months after a GTX 260 or 280, following NVIDIAs' previous strategy for the 200 series cards. It will NOT be comparable to any highend card currently on the market.
 
Last edited:

starlitjoker

New Member
its a high end card why would it not run any games on high???
for the 4 core issue, only a couple games utilize 4 cores but it is a useful investment
 

Bodaggit23

Active Member
The GTX 295 was the best card on the market before ATI's 5000 series was released, and is still only one step beneath.

What makes you say this?

ATI's best card, the HD 5970, "keeps up" with the 295, it certainly does not put it a step behind.

Granted the GTX 295 is a dual GPU card, but considering the HD 5970 is $150 more...
 

dirtbikeryzz

New Member
What makes you say this?

ATI's best card, the HD 5970, "keeps up" with the 295, it certainly does not put it a step behind.

Granted the GTX 295 is a dual GPU card, but considering the HD 5970 is $150 more...

So do dual GPU cards run SLI? Or for some reason do they act like one. Because if they run in SLI going for two 285s would be a better choice
 

bomberboysk

Active Member
What makes you say this?

ATI's best card, the HD 5970, "keeps up" with the 295, it certainly does not put it a step behind.

Granted the GTX 295 is a dual GPU card, but considering the HD 5970 is $150 more...
Not sure where you are getting your info, the 5970 essentially murders the GTX295, considering a 5870 singlecard comes relatively close(eg- ~10%) to a 295. Especially when you bring overclocking into the mix because the 5970 uses volterra vregs(generally regarded as the best available) and high quality caps, the 5970 can hit some very nice clockspeeds.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1141/1/
http://www.techspot.com/review/221-ati-radeon-hd-5970/
 
Last edited:

Gooberman

Active Member
Not sure where you are getting your info, the 5970 essentially murders the GTX295, considering a 5870 singlecard comes relatively close(eg- ~10%) to a 295. Especially when you bring overclocking into the mix because the 5970 uses volterra vregs(generally regarded as the best available) and high quality caps, the 5970 can hit some very nice clockspeeds.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1141/1/
http://www.techspot.com/review/221-ati-radeon-hd-5970/

Thinking the same thing
 

bomberboysk

Active Member
Not sure where you guys learned to interpret data, but a difference of 20-30fps stock is hardly a "murder".
20-30fps when your talking 50fps to begin with is, if you know what percentages are you are talking anywhere between 30-60% better for a 5970, and these are still with relatively new drivers.
 

Bodaggit23

Active Member
20-30fps when your talking 50fps to begin with is, if you know what percentages are you are talking anywhere between 30-60% better for a 5970, and these are still with relatively new drivers.

50fps to begin with? Perhaps you should look through your own reference links again. :rolleyes:
 

tlarkin

VIP Member
That is why I hate benchmarks. They don't really reflect real world performance, especially when they are selling it to the build-it-yourself PC crowd. A simple change in motherboard/chipset, drivers, or other hardware configurations can easily change benchmark scores.

There is no "control" to test it against. How do you compare that data to the the minimum requirements for games, or overall performance? When you make blanketed statements that it is 30% faster, in reality it does not make a game run 30% faster, or even noticeably faster for that respect.

A lot of it is hype and/or sales pitches. I have a Q9560 and a GTX 260 and I can get 18k in 3D marks. That is with very little tweaking.

Under the hood both card companies pretty much run similar hardware so it is a matter of firmware/drivers + hardware/OS configuration that really will make the small differences. Also the difference between 100FPS and 200FPS is really nil. Sure, 200FPS may actually be, "double the amount," but it doesn't mean double the performance. There is a sliding curve where performance doesn't matter after a certain point. Now, the difference between say 25FPS and 60FPS is a huge difference, more so than 100 vs 200.
 

bomberboysk

Active Member
50fps to begin with? Perhaps you should look through your own reference links again. :rolleyes:

take a look at the high res benches. Heck, a single 5870 comes relatively close to a 295.
http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/221/bench/STALKERCP_02.png
http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/221/bench/STALKERCP_03.png

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/221/bench/FC2_03.png

Heck, even in 3dmark vantage the 5970 does superbly, and vantage is notoriously sided towards nvidia gpu's.
http://www.techspot.com/review/221-ati-radeon-hd-5970/page3.html
 
Last edited:
Top