Video card benchmarks list - does it seem accurate?

Chevy-SS

Chevy-SS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
310
Found this (see below) video card benchmarks list at: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

I'm thinking about building a new gaming computer and just trying to get a feel for the best cards out there at the moment.........

Does the list seem accurate? :p

3dcardslist.jpg


-
 
I think that most people are going to want to know a couple of things before an answer can be provided.

1) What resolution are you going to be gaming at - this is vital information.
2) What types of games will you be playing?

EDIT: A GTX 295, in many cases, will nearly, but not quite, double the frame-rate of a GTX 275/280/285. If you were to ask me which card is the best bang for the buck, I'd say that the GTX 275 or the ATI 4890 are relatively inexpensive cards that both pack a pretty decent punch.

EDIT AGAIN: No! That list is complete crap. Is this a test or something? Why is the 4870X2 being listed as a slower card than the 4870? That list is bogus.

This is the reason you need 'real world' testing.
 
Last edited:
Synthetic benchmarks are meaningless. How does 1 4870 beat a 4870x2? How does a GTX 275 beat a GTX 295x2? (same card in SLI)? :rolleyes:
 
Agreed, unless the benchmark directly relates to how you use your PC, its not worth much and should not be the only benchmark you use.
For example, if you want the best gaming card that benchmark could mislead you greatly.
Look at all the dual GPU card results.

Why not read the [H] evaluations as you are already here?
There you will see that different cards are better in different games, so choose based on the games you prefer.
 
Last edited:
Whatever test is being run is not using SLI or Crossfire at all, so the results of the dual-GPU cards like the 4870X2, GTX295, 9800GX2, etc are invalid.

A 9600GT is not faster than a 9800GT.
An 8800GT is exactly the same card as a 9800GT, so why the different results?

This looks like a tomshardware VGA chart result - in other words, wrong and unreliable.
 
Ah, very interesting comments. Many thanks! This is exactly why I posted the list. I am not a real computer guru, though I have built a few computers and replaced/updated many internal parts. I consider myself an amateur tech at best.

I use a Dell 3007 monitor and I like to play it at 2560x1600 resolution. My favorite game is Battlefield 2. So, based on that info - what card would work best for me then?

Many thanks. I'm grateful for the feedback.

BTW - where are the "[H] evaluations"?

-
 
Chevy-SS said:
BTW - where are the "[H] evaluations"?-
Click to expand...

You know, even though I recommended looking at the [H] reviews, I struggle to find old articles myself which is sad as I consider the results [H] find are the best measure of true performance on the web.
The site enthusiast.hardocp.com is where links for reviews point but the root of that site displays the same as www.hardocp.com

The archives section is unfriendly, listing only by month, you cannot browse categories.
The search looks like it might be good but is missing product categories so you cant search just the PSU reviews for example.

I rarely need to find an old review as I read them when they appear so it hasnt been a major gripe but I think it could do with some improvement.
At the moment, google seems to be the best tool for searching on [H].
If anyone can prove me wrong with a decent way to browse them, I'll gladly listen and eat my words if appropriate :)
 
The O.P. wants to game at an insane resolution.

So that's either a single GTX 295, or two GTX 285 cards running in SLI, or two 4890 cards running in Crossfire.

The next question becomes, which CPU and what Power Supply will be required to handle these options? O.P. I hope that you have deep pockets, or else this thread is going to cross over into fantasy land.

EDIT: The most cost effective solution, for that resolution, is a single GTX 295, coupled with a core i7, and a 1000 watt power supply. I'd recommend that you start reading reviews for the GTX 295.
 
WabeWalker said:
The O.P. wants to game at an insane resolution.

So that's either a single GTX 295, or two GTX 285 cards running in SLI, or two 4890 cards running in Crossfire.

The next question becomes, which CPU and what Power Supply will be required to handle these options? O.P. I hope that you have deep pockets, or else this thread is going to cross over into fantasy land.

EDIT: The most cost effective solution, for that resolution, is a single GTX 295, coupled with a core i7, and a 1000 watt power supply. I'd recommend that you start reading reviews for the GTX 295.
Click to expand...



Well, I am already playing BF2 at 2560x1600 and have been for ~2 years. Gameplay is mostly smooth as long as I use no AA, and all other settings at about medium. But I would love to crank up the settings and really enjoy the beauty of the battlefield. :)

-
 
If you slap a tolerance of +/-10% on there and remove the X2 combinations, it's reasonable.
 
Chevy-SS said:
Well, I am already playing BF2 at 2560x1600 and have been for ~2 years. Gameplay is mostly smooth as long as I use no AA, and all other settings at about medium. But I would love to crank up the settings and really enjoy the beauty of the battlefield. :)

-
Click to expand...

A single GTX 285 or 4890, at that resolution, will get you above 30 FPS with a lot of games - but some games, at that resolution, will stumble, and will require a second card.

You should look into a single GTX 295 (in my opinion, this card was meant for high resolution gaming), or alternatively just buy a single GTX 285 or 4890 and see how they work on their own, and if you find that you need more juice, then, and only then, buy a second GPU.

For your needs you might find that a single GPU will get the job done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top