facebook rss twitter

Unannounced NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275 revealed?

by Parm Mann on 23 March 2009, 10:50

Tags: Gainward GTX275, NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qarjs

Add to My Vault: x

AMD's yet-to-be-announced Radeon HD 4890 has been caught on camera, had its specification detailed and managed to appear at retail, too.

Given the nature of the hugely-competitive graphics market, AMD's arch-nemesis NVIDIA won't be letting the Radeon HD 4890 hog all the limelight and will be firing its retort in the form of the GeForce GTX 275.

The card is, of course, yet-to-be-announced by NVIDIA, but as is often the case, its specification appears to have made its way online. Judging by the information we've already seen floating around, here's how the AMD Radeon HD 4890 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275 slot in to the existing mid-to-high-end line up:

Graphics cards NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285
1,024MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 1,024MB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275 896MB* NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 896MB AMD Radeon HD 4870 X2 2,048MB AMD Radeon HD 4850 X2 2,048MB AMD Radeon HD 4890 1,024MB* AMD Radeon HD 4870 512MB AMD Radeon HD 4850 512MB
PCIe PCIe 2.0
GPU(s) clock 576MHz 648MHz 602MHz 633MHz 576MHz 750MHz 625MHz 850MHz 750MHz 625MHz
Shader clock 1,242MHz 1,476MHz 1,296MHz 1,404MHz 1,242MHz 750MHz 625MHz 850MHz 750MHz 625MHz
Memory clock (effective) 1,998MHz 2,484MHz 2,214MHz 2,322MHz 1,998MHz 3,600MHz 1,986MHz 3,900MHz 3,600MHz 1,986MHz
Memory interface and size 448-bit (per GPU), 1,792MB, GDDR3 512-bit, 1,024MB, GDDR3 512-bit, 1,024MB, GDDR3 448-bit, 896MB, GDDR3 448-bit, 896MB, GDDR3 512-bit (2x 256-bit), 2,048MB, GDDR5 512-bit (2x 256-bit), 2,048MB, GDDR3 256-bit, 1,024MB, GDDR5 256-bit, 512MB, GDDR5 256-bit, 512MB, GDDR3
DirectX/ Shader Model DX10, 4.0 DX10, 4.0 DX10, 4.0 DX10, 4.0 DX10, 4.0 DX10.1, 4.1 DX10.1, 4.1 DX10.1, 4.1 DX10.1, 4.1 DX10.1, 4.1
Vertex, fragment, geometry shading (shared) 480 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue + MUL (unified) 240 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue + MUL (unified) 240 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue + MUL (unified) 240 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue + MUL (unified) 216 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue + MUL (unified) 1,600 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue (unified) 1,600 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue (unified) 800 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue (unified) 800 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue (unified) 800 FP32 scalar ALUs, MADD dual-issue (unified)
Multi-GPU SLI - quad SLI - three-board SLI - three-board SLI - three-board SLI - three-board CrossFire - two-board CrossFire - two-board CrossFire - four-board CrossFire - four-board CrossFire - four-board
Hardware-assisted video-decoding engine NVIDIA's PureVideo HD - full H.264 decode and partial VC-1 decode, plus dual-stream decode AMD UVD 2 - full H.264 and VC-1 decode, plus dual-stream decode 
Reference cooler dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot dual-slot single-slot
*rumoured product and specification

Both cards are believed to be going head to head sometime next month, and judging by the rumoured specification, the GeForce GTX 275's GPU appears to be a higher-clocked derivative of the GPU found in the class-leading GeForce GTX 295.

Judging by NVIDIA's naming choice, we're expecting performance to be somewhere between the GeForce GTX 280 and the 216-core GeForce GTX 260.



HEXUS Forums :: 6 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
well at least they have done a little more than just overclock a 260… not much though :/
Biscuit
well at least they have done a little more than just overclock a 260… not much though :/

Well… 24 stream processors more and a clock bump. In terms of extra power it's prob not far off the power of an 8600 GT. Not that that is saying much.
Judging by NVIDIA's naming choice, we're expecting performance to be somewhere between the GeForce GTX 280 and the 216-core GeForce GTX 260.
And judging by the specs, it's better than the 280 in everything but memory. It'd be logical to assume that in this case 275 will beat 280, unless memory peformance is the limiting factor.
Enough with this generation of chips already - we have more than enough choice. Roll on the new architecture with Dx11 support.
Crevan
And judging by the specs, it's better than the 280 in everything but memory. It'd be logical to assume that in this case 275 will beat 280, unless memory peformance is the limiting factor.

I reckon the slightly higher clocks on this board will eek out the 280 at resolutions below 1920x1200. Above however, and even more so with high AA levels is where the extra memory and 512-bit vs 448-bit memory interface will stretch it's legs a little and the 280 will take the lead.

(This is all based on what I have seen in reviews with graphics cards in the past).