GTX285 / GTX295 - Worth additional cost?

ACESHIGH · 13 Apr 2009 at 05:39

OP get an ATI 4890 or GTX 275 -- the GTX 285 is overpriced.

Chandler_90 · 13 Apr 2009 at 13:58

spitzoid said:
What is CCC? The only thing I can think of is Catalyst Control Centre (makes no sense)
90 is pretty high, turn your fans up.

Its a custom High Texture pack for Crysis..makes the game look almost photo realistic.

TBH.. I've not overclocked the card.. its all at stock.. so shouldn't it be ok to hit 90?

I played for like 2 hours with it a 90c..only checked when I alt-tabbed due to noticing the fan noise..

555BUK · 13 Apr 2009 at 20:55

The GTX285 is currently the worst value high-end card. A GTX260/275 or 4870/4890 offer very close performance for significantly less cash. In comparison to the 285, the 295 is much better value because you effectively get two 275 cards in one, for twice the price.

For 1920 resolution I would buy either a GTX260 or 4870 1GB, and spend the money saved on improving other components.

Xplo · 13 Apr 2009 at 22:14

If you are comfortable with overclocking then get the 260-216-55nm at £150. Find your max core/mem and then back off a little on both. You then have a completly stable card which is not too far off 285 performance (you would not notice the difference in real world)

If you prefer not to overclock and want to stay nVidia get the 275, great performing card. Once again you will not notice the real world difference to the 285, and even if you do the difference will not be worth the extra price tag over the 275.

Either way your a winner and your gonna get a great performing card, make the choice and get playing some games, enjoy it!

danceMB · 13 Apr 2009 at 22:23

So it looks like I will need to spend the additional £114 for the upgrade from GTX285 to GTX295? This seems the general consensus of everybody here from what I can see, especially when I only really want a single card solution and dont want to go for an ATI card either, as im more happy with the Nvidia way of things

TheCenturion · 13 Apr 2009 at 22:44

danceMB said:
So it looks like I will need to spend the additional £114 for the upgrade from GTX285 to GTX295? This seems the general consensus of everybody here from what I can see, especially when I only really want a single card solution and dont want to go for an ATI card either, as im more happy with the Nvidia way of things

275 if you want single card, this would be good @ 22" (1680x1050)

danceMB · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:00

But I would want really high frame rates to go with my i7, surely I should go for the 295 to get a really high card from day 1 without having to upgrade for a very long time?

TheCenturion · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:04

danceMB said:
But I would want really high frame rates to go with my i7, surely I should go for the 295 to get a really high card from day 1 without having to upgrade for a very long time?

I'm not sure, there isn't really a future proof in the graphics card world. Because you have i7, your graphics card will never be bottlenecked so what you could do is this:

GTX 260 £150
GTX 295 £430

the 260 ought to be plenty, it should handle most game great. so you buy that, and save the £280 that you'd have spent going with the 295. The 260 should last you maybe a year. In that time you can save up more and get the thing that beats the 295, like gt300.

In the end it's your choice, if you have the money go for the 295 if your heart calls you there.

danceMB · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:06

The thing is that I dont want to have to upgrade the computer for at least the next few years, as I am spending a potential £2,000 for this new machine, so after laying that down I shouldnt have to spend any more cash for a very long time, while at the same time enjoying max frame rates for all current and upcoming games!

TheCenturion · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:15

danceMB said:
The thing is that I dont want to have to upgrade the computer for at least the next few years, as I am spending a potential £2,000 for this new machine, so after laying that down I shouldnt have to spend any more cash for a very long time, while at the same time enjoying max frame rates for all current and upcoming games!

that's the problem. I'm sorry to say it, but graphics cards have possibly the shortest lifetime of all cards. The 9800gtx for example, was the fastest single card at around this point last year, and was around £200 (I think). Now it is as fast as a 4850, mid/high range card @ £100.

danceMB · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:21

I had a 6800GS+ "Golden Sample" AGP (The special edition limited batch of only 1500 made due to the PCI - AGP bridge chip) and that now even runs games at a modest settings, just not at ultra high levels anymore, and that was a few years ago now, so I cant see that this latest card would run out of its shelf life in just a years time.

I can see that with all card on the market, the 295 is expensive, but the best to go for to make my setup the fastest and latest around at this point in time

Sasahara · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:36

I did read a study that showed you could buy the top card as soon as it came out and sell the old one and it cost under £100 per year in lost value.

Unfortunately I can't find the site now(really annoyingly), the last time I read it was before the GTX 200 series came out. That may have messed things up.

If anyone can link it, or a similar site pls link.

rjk · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:39

can of worms...

Final8y · 13 Apr 2009 at 23:53

anant_shah94 said:
I'm not sure, there isn't really a future proof in the graphics card world. Because you have i7, your graphics card will never be bottlenecked so what you could do is this:

GTX 260 £150
GTX 295 £430

the 260 ought to be plenty, it should handle most game great. so you buy that, and save the £280 that you'd have spent going with the 295. The 260 should last you maybe a year. In that time you can save up more and get the thing that beats the 295, like gt300.

In the end it's your choice, if you have the money go for the 295 if your heart calls you there.

But the 295 will play games longer than the 260 so the 295 is more future proof as it will take longer to run out of steam.
He did say so that he didn't have to upgrade for as long as he can.

Where does it say that he must get a gt300 when it comes out if the 295 is still doing the job just fine.

Your confusing future proofing which is the longest possible use of a product based on the individual needs with someone's desire to have the latest & greatest which are 2 different things that many commonly get mixed up.

ATI Radeon HD 4350 is not the latest or greatest, but in someone's HCPC it will mostly likely be in use for that person for far longer than the 4870 in their gaming rig, so for its needs the 4350 was more future proof than the 4870.
Thev 4870 will need to be replaced before the 4350 will.

If someone always desires to have to latest & greatest for the sake of it then they will buy as soon as the new product comes out regardless if they need it.

There are times when both are justified when there's been considerable time between upgrades & there has been a a worthwhile technical leap & the top of the range really offers what your looking for.

BTW: my comment is not about price performance ratio, value or worth.

Mikeey44 · 14 Apr 2009 at 01:38

in all, no.

danceMB · 14 Apr 2009 at 16:10

Final8y makes the most sense here, and seems to understand my original question as well, the 295 from what I can see is a card that you wont have to bother upgrading for at least the next few years time as it will have a lot of power that I need for the forseeable future.

Looks like I will start to need to get into the buy new card, sell the old card scenario which seems to soften the blow for a lot of people in the high end business of machines

square_nothing · 14 Apr 2009 at 18:39

imo it depends what you mean by fucture proof? will you want everything on max at a high res for the next 5 years? well that will never happen imo at the rate games are improving and the cards at the same rate.
if you mean running on a good setting with lower res you can get a card lasting a couple of years till you find games that will crush your card. i got a 8800gtx when they came out and running everything on max (only at a low res and with dx9) for me this is good enough and going to hold out for the 300 series which should last another 3 good years

but if it was me now i would get a 260 with that money and upgrade later with the spare cash you saved, in the long run will ahve better preformance because you will have a 300 series and eather sell the 260 or use it as a phyx card.

danceMB · 14 Apr 2009 at 21:02

I want to run everything at high res right now with everything switched onto max levels, as I have not been able to do something like that for many years on my machine, and as I have the chance to do this, I will want to while I still can, especially as I will have an i7 with 6gb ram to back it all up, and having that graphics card will make it a dream to run anything, and Crysis will be the first game that I will be booting up, as I want to see what it can really look like, as my current machine cant manage it at all.

TheCenturion · 14 Apr 2009 at 23:59

Final8y said:
But the 295 will play games longer than the 260 so the 295 is more future proof as it will take longer to run out of steam.
He did say so that he didn't have to upgrade for as long as he can.

Where does it say that he must get a gt300 when it comes out if the 295 is still doing the job just fine.

Your confusing future proofing which is the longest possible use of a product based on the individual needs with someone's desire to have the latest & greatest which are 2 different things that many commonly get mixed up.

ATI Radeon HD 4350 is not the latest or greatest, but in someone's HCPC it will mostly likely be in use for that person for far longer than the 4870 in their gaming rig, so for its needs the 4350 was more future proof than the 4870.
Thev 4870 will need to be replaced before the 4350 will.

If someone always desires to have to latest & greatest for the sake of it then they will buy as soon as the new product comes out regardless if they need it.

There are times when both are justified when there's been considerable time between upgrades & there has been a a worthwhile technical leap & the top of the range really offers what your looking for.

BTW: my comment is not about price performance ratio, value or worth.

Having thought about it the 260 still seems to make more sense, as a 295 is 2 260/280 cards in one. So if he gets a 260 and gets another when he needs it, sli 260s is only really a few frames off a 295, it will cost him at most £300, saving £130

MumboJumbo · 15 Apr 2009 at 00:12

Sounds to me like he just wants an excuse to get the 295. Without a 24" at elast i think its a waste of money personaly.

What is really irritating me is that i asked on here if i should get the 285GTX because id been out of the loop for a long time and was unawares of the 260 overclocking power. I got told by several people to get the 285. I hate people who think they know things when tehy dont. Coulda saved my self 160 quid. Granted i coulda done more research but was in a hurry and expected people wouldn't tell me to by teh second most expensive card unless they knew the alternatives well.