NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250: A Rebadged 9800 GTX+
by Derek Wilson on March 3, 2009 3:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
More From CeBIT: New Mobile Parts
Unfortunately, we were unable to get any notebooks with these new GPUs to test them out before we tell you about them, but both NVIDIA and AMD are announcing new mobile GPUs today.
NVIDIA's move parallels what's happening on the desktop in that the newest additions to the mobile line up are 55nm G92 based parts with names in the new style NVIDIA has chosen. Actually, the entire lineup of 9xxxM series parts is being replaced by parts with new names. This is certainly more expected on the mobile side, as we usually do see much more lag in this space than on the desktop.
As for the specifics, the new parts are the top of the line models. The GTX 280M will be up to 50% faster than the 9800M GTX, which is nice in theory, but final performance will still be up to notebook makers who will set the final clocks on the part on a per notebook basis to accommodate their power budget. The GTX 260M is one step down from the 280M in that it has 112 SPs enabled (like the original G92 introduced as the 8800 GT) and lower maximum clock speeds.
These two high end GTX parts replace the top end 9800M parts, and subbing for the 9800M GS is the GTS 160M which will also offer improved performance, although we didn't get full specifications on this part. Rounding out the bottom of the lineup are the GT 130M and the G 110M.
On the AMD front, we see something a little more intriguing in the form of the first 40nm GPUs in the mobile space. Smaller die sizes, lower power and better power are promised, though the general naming will stay the same for AMD. The new 40nm 4800 series parts can be paired with either DDR3, GDDR3, or GDDR5; the choice is up to the notebook maker. AMD touts the fact that they can get about double the processing power in the same area with their new process, which will only benefit them going forward.
NVIDIA paints the GDDR5 option as overkill, but we really won't know about performance of either the new NVIDIA or AMD parts until we have hardware to test.
The NVIDIA and AMD supplied relative performance graphs are nearly useless in sorting out how these parts should compare to each other, so we'll really have to save the head to head for a time when we have hardware on our hands. 40nm could be a big plus for AMD, but remember that NVIDIA has made the first move in making mobile drivers available from their web site. The value of that is very high, as notebook OEMs tend not to like updating their drivers very often. Sure, it's possible to hack desktop drivers onto a mobile part, but it is a supreme headache and we hope AMD will soon follow in NVIDIA's footsteps with this move.
Back to the Tests at Hand
Now that we've covered all the announcements and introductory material, let's get to testing the hardware we've got in our hot little hands.
We got our card just a couple days ago, so we haven't had time to test everything, and we've only received one card so we haven't been able to test SLI with the 1GB version. We would also have added to our benchmarks by including 1280x1024 in our tests if we had had the time. This is a very important resolution for this class of hardware, but 1680x1050 should be a good enough indicator of relative performance in most cases so that this won't matter too much.
Our comparisons will be a little lop sided though. We've got two each (for single and dual configurations) of the 512MB 4850 and the 512MB GTS 250 (the 9800 GTX+). These comparisons we can do, and it's nice and neat as both parts are now set at a $130 (cutting recent street prices by about $15). We do have a GTS 250 1GB, but we don't have a 1GB 4850 to compare it to. On the flip side, since we've only got 1 GTS 250 1GB, we can't compare GTS 250 1GB SLI to the 4850 X2 2GB we have.
The test setup hasn't changed for this article, except that we've had to use the 182.08 for the GTS 250 1GB.
| Test Setup | |
| CPU | Intel Core i7-965 3.2GHz |
| Motherboard | ASUS Rampage II Extreme X58 |
| Video Cards | Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 4850 X2 2GB ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB CrossFire ATI Radeon HD 4850 CrossFire ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB ATI Radeon HD 4850 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 SLI NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX+ SLI NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 core 216 NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 1GB NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX+ |
| Video Drivers | Catalyst 8.12 hotfix ForceWare 181.22 |
| Hard Drive | Intel X25-M 80GB SSD |
| RAM | 6 x 1GB DDR3-1066 7-7-7-20 |
| Operating System | Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit SP1 |
| PSU | PC Power & Cooling Turbo Cool 1200W |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
103 Comments
View All Comments
SiliconDoc - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
The cheapest 4870 1G at the egg right now is 194.99 + shipping and they go up well over $200 from there -The cheapest GTX260/216 at the egg right now is 179.99 + shipping.
__________________________________-
Now let's look further - in order ! (second # after rebate)
4870 1g
199.99
199.99/169.99
199.99/179.99
214.99/194.99
234.99/209.99
239.99/214.99
GTC260/216
189.99/159.99
208.99/189.99
212.99/177.99
229.99/199.99
232.99/197.99
234.99/214.99
_______________________________
Oh well, another red fantasiacal lie exploded all over the place, AGAIN.
Griswold - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - link
It goes like this:8800GTS 512 -> 9800GTX(+) -> GTS250
Weak, nvidia...
Nfarce - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - link
When Uncle Sam gives me some of my money back in a few weeks, it will be spent on a mid-range i7 build. For months I debated two things in my GPU build spec: the less headaches of going Nvidia but paying more for less performance vs. ATI's more driver/support headaches but paying less for more (or in a few cases generally equal) performance. To this day there are a lot of Catalyst issues, especially in Crossfire. Even so, articles like this have helped push me over to a first time ATI/AMD GPU buyer. :)earthshaker87 - Monday, March 9, 2009 - link
Dude just stick to Single GPU setup. Ive had 4 Cards from ATi now: 9550,X800GT,HD3850,HD4850. None of them gave me headaches at all. I think the drivers are working just fine for me. No one needs 2 GPUs, its a stupid buy really...you pay double for most of the time not double performance and get issues with it. Why do you need it if you can buy a perfectly capable Single Radeon 4850 for dirt cheap or if you got more cash get a GTX285 the top single GPU card, no problems and headaches or inconsistent FPS. Multi GPU splutions is just not perfect yet...Frallan - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - link
Please include the 4830 in some tests in the future - Im not personally interested but 2 or 3 of my friends and family has asked and i honestly dont know what to say. A 4830 is about 1k SEK in Sweden and a 4850 is around 1.4k (+40%) (also a Gigabyte 4850 with the Zalmann cooler is 1.6k SEK *sigh*).For me this segment is getting more imprtant as almost all ppl I know wants dedicated graphics but without splurging for the best.
frozentundra123456 - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - link
In a way this just shows how strong the last generation of nvidia cards was, in that they can still compete with AMD. I definitely think the AMD naming scheme is much more straightforward (honest) than that of nvidis though. I have more of a problem with nvidia renaming a weak card with the latest model numbers such as the 8600GT which became the 9500GT which is now the GT120 or something. Someone who is not informed could easily think this is a high performace part due to the new model number, which it is not.What we really need is a benchmark of some sort to give relative performance like the windows experience index. That benchmark is really not useful now because even a midrange card rates the max in the windows experience index. Granted the relative performance varies from game to game, but some sort of performance index would give somewhat of a way to measure relative overall performance.
Hrel - Thursday, March 5, 2009 - link
The test you're looking for is called 3D Mark, and I keep messaging them about that asking them to include that test in their articles. Come one, join me in messaging them every day till they start to include that test!Adjudicator - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - link
Although the 1 GB Version of the GTS 250 looks "Further refined" (Shorter card length and requiring only 1 6 pin connector instead of two), It is practically the same card as the 1 GB version of 9800 GTX+ sold by eVGA.http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=01G-P...">http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.a...p;family...
This shows that the "new" reference design was not really new after all; this design was already in existance before NVIDIA announced the release of the GTS250.
To those who enquire if there will be a 512 MB version of the GTS 250 that needs only one 6 pin:
eVGA had released a 9800+ 512 MB that uses the refined short PCB and 1 6 pin connector:
http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=512-P...">http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.a...p;family...
Even Gigabyte had released a 1 GB version of the 9800 GTX+ on a shortened PCB with one 6 pin, although it uses a non-reference cooling solution:
http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/VGA/Products_O...">http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/Products/VGA/Products_O....
After all this rebadging of the G92b, I will not be surprised if NVIDIA's next move will be to release a 9800+ GX2 / GTS 250 GX2 rebranded as the GTS 255.
SiliconDoc - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
I wonder if nvidia heard all the constant ragging women nagging endlessly about the names of their cards, and finally decided the line them up in the 100-200 etc nomenclature....And now, the bleeding, edgy, old, wrinkled, crybaby know it alls that demanded a proper naming scheme are getting the new name lineup and the very first thing they do is forget they are the ones that demanded it be done, and they whip out a supergigantic tampon and fill it full up to overflowing.
There's not much blood left, you're all white as ghosts, in fact, you've been zombies for quite some time now.
I hope you're enjoying it.
XiZeL - Wednesday, March 4, 2009 - link
FAIL!!!by nVidia