NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 Graphic Card
The beginning of March was marked, like each year or almost since good a long time, by the behaviour of the annual edition of CeBIT. In the past living room impossible to circumvent for new technologies, CeBIT in speed, is wedged in the calendar between an international show, and a major European event, the IFA. This phenomenon is not exactly new and the world economic crisis did nothing but accentuate it this year with a particularly morose edition. For proof, the only advertisement of importance, in the graphic map productions, was the exit of GeForce GTS 250, the card which occupies us today.
So formerly CeBIT was used as platform of launching to the manufacturers for new products, it is not more the case today and GeForce GTS 250 is, to be clear as much as of the beginning, only one famous version of GeForce 9800, itself an updated version of GeForce 8800 GTS. It was necessary for us thus to give a progress report on this at the very least unexpected graphics card whose name change leaves think that it is about an innovation in the family of the GeForce chips 200, what is alas not the case. With it all the same an interest?
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250: new name of G92
We wrote it and repeated, the too ambitious architecture of the chips GeForce 200 does not allow NVIDIA to decline them in versions more economic to produce, as it was for example the case with preceding architectures. It is indeed of use, in the manufacturers of graphics card, to conceive an architecture and to decline it on a whole range of product by adapting various parameters in order to obtain the best compromise performance/price. Only here, with 1.4 billion transistors, the chips GeForce WP 200 are too difficult mammoths with to decrease (note: any analogy with famous remarks would be fortuitous).
Whereas NVIDIA thought its gaining strategy, the renewed and unexpected aggressiveness of AMD with the range of Radeon HD 4000 took the firm with the chameleon of short. The departments research and development of NVIDIA company on the future graphics chip DirectX 11 of the firm, but, while waiting, it is necessary to occupy the ground not to be too much let outdistance in the sales by AMD. For that, NVIDIA appealed, once again, in G92! It is indeed a graphics chip built on famous G92, itself an optimized version of G80 equipping first GeForce 8800, which finds with GeForce GTS 250.
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250: characteristics and 55 Nm!
You will have included/understood it, no new technical thing is not to be awaited of GeForce GTS 250, if it is not that it is a question of a new supposed name of making it possible NVIDIA to align its quotation with the remainder of its current range. To return from there to the chip, this one benefits from architecture DirectX 10 of GeForce 8 with a total of 128 processors of flow. In order to maximize profitability, one will announce all the same the change of manufactoring process. Whereas the G92 chips animating GeForce 8800 WP, 8800 GTS 512 Mo, 9800 GT/GTX+ are engraved in 65 Nm, always by TSMC, G92 which one finds within GeForce GTS 250 is engraved in 55 Nm. It should thus less heat and less consume that its elder, the surface of the die being indeed reduced.
Side of the frequencies of operation, the chip GeForce GTS 250 benefits from frequencies raised vis-a-vis the first models based on G92. One thus finds oneself with a chip operating with 738 MHz for processors of flow turning to 1836 MHz. Side report, we are always in the presence of a bus 256 bits with a frequency of 1100 MHz for the chips GDDR3 which equip the cards of GeForce GTS 250. Small innovation for this model, increase in the memory quantity with 1024 Mo of memory for the model of reference. Partners NVIDIA remain free to propose models of GeForce GTS 250 with 512 Mb or 1 Gb of video memory.
GeForce GTS 250 made by Gigabyte: GV-N250ZL-1GI
Gigabyte is one of the first manufacturers to have been able to forward to us a graphics card based on the processor GeForce GTS 250. Equipped with its own PCB, blue color please, the card moves away very largely from the design of reference suggested by NVIDIA. Exit indeed the radiator double-stage which proposes NVIDIA and place with a cooling system personalized and signed ZALMANN. If the graphics card is adjusted in a simple square, it will occupy all the same two sites in your computer, device ZALMANN being rather cumbersome. Resting on the graphics chip, and only on this one, the system is composed of a broad aluminium tube radiator in the center of which breath a ventilator.
Interfaced in the NCV-Express train 2.0, the card embarks 1 GB of memory GDDR3 distributed on components of Hynix mark. Its power supply is ensured by the bus NCV-Express train, but also by a connector six pins. Equipped with a connector SLI, the card in multi-GPU mode with another card GeForce GTS 250 but also with GeForce 9800 GTX+ can be used, like specifies it the documentations transmitted by NVIDIA.
As for the frequencies of operation, they are strictly identical to those recommended by NVIDIA with 738 MHz for the graphics chip, 1836 MHz for the processors of flows and 1100 MHz for the memory. Let us finish by the exits which one at the very least finds on this card since they are one nothing unusual. Gigabyte indeed proposes a connector DVI, a connector VGA and a connector HDMI. Of what to be able to connect any screen, or almost, without passing by an adapter.
Remain a problem to be underlined, as you can see it on the photographs, the total completion of this card which seems rather average. The cooling system is assembled twisted, whereas the pressure which he exerts on the PCB seems to twist this last. Difficult to say if it is of an exclusive problem to our sample of test or a more general phenomenon.
Re: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 Graphic Card
To test the performances of GeForce GTS 250, we used a recent platform whose detail appears below:
Our system operated under Windows Vista Edition Integral with Service Pack 1. It was about the version 64 bits of the operating system. On this machine we will extremely logically test GeForce GTS 250 but also GeForce 8800 WP, GeForce 8800 GTS 512 Mb but also GeForce GTX 260. We will also test Radeon HD 4850 and Radeon HD 4830, in version 512 Mo, without forgetting Radeon HD 4890 which is used to us as Master standard.
Side drivers, we had resort to drivers for NVIDIA GeForce 185.63 beta and the CATALYST 9.4 beta. It should be noted that the protocol of test comprises the last plays inaugurated at the time of the test of Radeon HD 4890: Tom Clancy' S H.A.W.X fascinating charges with it DirectX 10.1 and BurnOut Paradise history not to make the dead end on the plays of race.
First test impossible to circumvent of our arsenal, 3DMark Vantage gives its preference to Radeon HD 4890 follow-up of GeForce GTX 260. GeForce GTS 250 which interests us today locates at semi way between Radeon HD 4830 and Radeon HD 4850. In 1680x1050, GeForce GTS 250 is 16% faster than Radeon HD 4830 but it is made precede by more powerful Radeon HD 4850 5%. Vis-a-vis GeForce 8800 GTS 512 Mb, GeForce GTS 250 are faster 8% in 1920x1200.
Call Off Duty 4 - v1.7
Celebrate FPS, Call Off Duty 4 Modern Warfare gives its preference to recent Radeon HD 4890. GeForce GTS 250 finishes here in third position, and this whatever the resolution. In 1680x1050, the card of NVIDIA is 8% more powerful than Radeon HD 4850 whereas it exceeds GeForce 8800 GTS 512 Mb of approximately 7%.
Crysis Warhead - v1.1 - 64 bit
Extremely greedy, Crysis complicates gives it. Cards of NVIDIA provided with 512 Mb of video memory are not able here to follow since the resolution is higher than 1680x1050. If GeForce 8800 are thus exceeded, GeForce GTS 250 remains third with an unquestionable advantage on Radeon HD 4850. In 1920x1200, the last card of NVIDIA is 16% faster than Radeon HD 4850.
Left 4 Dead
For the zombies in madness, not of doubt, Radeon HD 4890 remains the most powerful graphics card. If GeForce GTX 260 preserves its second position, GeForce GTS 250 also remains in third place. However, the last reference of NVIDIA is only 3% swifter than Radeon HD 4850 in 1680x1050. One will note however that the more the resolution increases, plus this variation increases. Thus in 2560x1600, GeForce GTS 250 are 12% faster than Radeon HD 4850.
Far Cry 2 - v1.02
No notable change under FarCry 2 since our trinity is always composed of Radeon HD 4890, GeForce GTX 260 and finally of GeForce GTS 250. In 1920x1200, the advantage of this last vis-a-vis Radeon HD 4850 climbs at 13%. Compared with GeForce 8800 GTS 512 Mb, GeForce GTS 250 is up to 30% more powerful here. It should be said that GeForce GTS 250 profits from a quantity of video memory twice higher than GeForce 8800 GTS.
World In Conflict - v1.010
Let us finish this first page of tests by a glance with the performances obtained with the RTS Wolrd In Conflict. There is hardly upheaval in the classification, if it is only GeForce GTS 250 is made precede by Radeon HD 4850 in the resolutions of 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Vis-a-vis GeForce 8800 GTS 512 Mb, GeForce GTS 250 are 4% more powerful in 1680x1050.
Re: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 Graphic Card
As for each test of graphics card, we had in heart to check the electricity consumption of our various protagonists. With this intention we measure, by means of a wattmeter, the total consumption of the system. Initially at rest… then in load during a test 3DMark Vantage in 2560x1600.
One immediately notices the fall of electricity consumption in favour of GeForce GTS 250 which, thanks to its higher intricacy of engraving, consumes at rest on average 25 Watts less than GeForce 8800. In load, GeForce GTS 250 is also the graphic controller who less consumes with GeForce 8800 WP.
The frequencies of operation of the chip evolve/move indeed in a very moderate way with the result that in final GeForce GTS 250 are hardly 5% faster than GeForce 8800 GTS 512 Mb under certain conditions. Admittedly, in other cases of figure, the gigabytes of memory allows more important profits, in particular under Crysis where one observes deltas of 12% between the two cards.
But the commercial name of this card remains a true problem is quite simply misleading! Because finally, GeForce GTS 250 does not have anything familiar with the chips GeForce 200 which one finds with GeForce GTS 260,275,285 and 295. Not, NVIDIA re-elects an existing product, already old, while trying to make it pass for nine. It is alas nothing and GeForce GTS 250 is only the consequence of the choices operated when designing the GeForce chips of series 200. By making a too ambitious chip, because too complex, NVIDIA deprived itself of the possibility of declining it. Blow, GeForce GT200 remains confined on the high-end whereas the firm with the chameleon can propose only chips based on architecture GeForce 8, alias G80, on the entry and the midrange. The strategy could have functioned … but it was without counting on the renewed aggressiveness of AMD. AMD which proposes graphics chips to him exploiting DirectX 10.1, a specificity always absent from chips NVIDIA.
Sold in 150 euros including all taxes, GeForce GTS 250 in its version 1 Gb better than Radeon HD 4850 provided with 512 Mb makes certainly, but it is also more expensive. Consequently, if the card of NVIDIA seems positioned well in term of performances, its price appears one to us nothing too high for really convincing.
Re: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 Graphic Card
I'm somewhat of a novice here, please bear with me.
I am confused.
You are showing on this page two different NVidia GeForce GTS 250 video cards.
One that looks cool (first pic) with the dual DVI outputs, and then further down one made by gigabyte with DVI, HDMI, and VGA outputs....
Are these are the same video cards?
Reason I ask, I just purchased a new machine and was told I'd get the GTS 250 with Dual DVI outs, but when I got it home yesterday, I have the other version, with the three different outputs... have I been swindled?
Thanks very much for your help and feedback.
|Tags: geforce, graphic card, gts 250, nvidia, review|
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|Similar Threads for: "NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 Graphic Card"|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|How is NVIDIA GeForce G405 (1 GB) graphic card||aNaHiTa$||Monitor & Video Cards||7||09-12-2011 07:45 AM|
|Which graphic card has better performance NVIDIA GeForce GT 230M or NVIDIA GeForce GT 320M||Kordell||Monitor & Video Cards||6||26-09-2010 03:40 AM|
|Which is better graphic card between Nvidia Geforce G210 and Nvidia Geforce 7600GT||Charites||Monitor & Video Cards||5||29-03-2010 12:15 PM|
|The NVidia GeForce 310 Graphic Card||Aloke||Monitor & Video Cards||5||22-12-2009 10:59 AM|
|NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 Graphic Card Test||Hardwareman||Reviews||3||09-01-2009 06:57 PM|