The box is fancy looking with specs listed on it.

Inside you’ll find the card wrapped in bubble wrap and an anti-static bag along with extra PCI brackets and the driver software CD.

The GT430 is a low profile style card so it can fit into smaller cases. The VGA port can actually be removed to make it even shorter. The card though does feature a rather fat heatsink which could pose a problem covering the slot closest to it. The card features VGA, DVI and HDMI ports.

Specifications:

GeForce GT430 1024MB DDR3 Low Profile

Model No: SXT4301024S3LNM

GPU / VPU: NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
Processor Technology: 40nm
Processor Cores: 96 cores
RAMDAC: Dual 400MHz
Bus Type: PCI-EXPRESS 2.0
Bus Speed: 16x
Video Memory: 1024 MB
Memory Type: DDR3
Memory Interface: 128-bit
Core Clock: 700 MHz
Shader Clock: 1400 MHz
Output Connectors: HDMI x1, Dual-Link DVI x1, VGA x1
HDCP Capable: Yes
Overclocked: No
Cooling System: Fan
Video Card Profile: Low Profile
Video Card Slot: Double Slot
Power Connector: No

Same system as the other cards of course, C2Q9650, 8 gigs ram on a DFI Lanparty UT X48 T3RS motherboard. Here it is installed, the card is rather fat and will possibly cover the slot below.

Let’s get started with the testing, I’ve put the GT430 up against all of those GT240s I’ve reviewed recently. Same tests basically but with the addition of Cinebench 11.5 as well.

First up would be 3DMark06:

It’s a GT430 so I expected it to do much better than the GT240 cards, but I was wrong apparently.

Next up would be 3Dmark Vantage at default settings with resolution to 1920×1080.

Same here, rather low by performance standards, but still fairly close to the others.

Next test would be Cinebench 11.5:
vHow Does MAXON CINEBENCH Work?

The test procedure consists of two main components – the graphics card performance test and the CPU performance test.

Main Processor Performance (CPU)

The test scenario uses all of your system’s processing power to render a photorealistic 3D scene (from the viral “No Keyframes” animation by AixSponza). This scene makes use of various algorithms to stress all available processor cores.
In fact, CINEBENCH can measure systems with up to 64 processor threads. ThIS test scene contains approximately 2,000 objects which in turn contain more than 300,000 polygons in total, and uses sharp and blurred reflections, area lights, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and much more. The result is displayed in points (pts). The higher the number, the faster your processor.

You can find more specific technical information on this on the tech-page of CINEBENCH.

Graphics Card Performance (OpenGL)

This procedure uses a complex 3D scene depicting a car chase (by renderbaron) which measures the performance of your graphics card in OpenGL mode. The performance depends on various factors, such as the GPU processor on your hardware, but also on the drivers used. The graphics card has to display a huge amount of geometry (nearly 1 million polygons) and textures, as well as a variety of effects, such as environments, bump maps, transparency, lighting and more to evaluate the performance across different disciplines and give a good average overview of the capabilities of your graphics hardware. The result given is measured in frames per second (fps). The higher the number, the faster your graphics card.

The GT430 falls squarely in the middle here.

Next would be Crysis Warhead at 1680 and 1920 resolutions.

Well still not what I expected in terms of performance for the GT430 and Crysis Warhead isn’t exactly playable with it either.

Next is Far Cry 2, same thing with two different resolutions:

The GT430 does a lot better here as you can see.

Then next up let’s see how the GT430 does with HAWX2:

Average is 31 FPS, I guess not too bad, just barely playable.

Lastly let’s take a look at a couple from SiSoft Sandra.

The first is the media transcoder test:

Media Transcode

Measures the media transcoding performance, i.e. decoding video & audio from one format and then encoding it to another. Shows how your processors or hardware accelerators handle transcoding in comparision to other typical transcoders.

Such operations are used when converting media from a camcorder to your computer and then to a device (TV, tablet, phone, etc). Transcoding is needed as each device might use a different media format (and thus container or codec) or support different profiles (resolution, etc.).

Explanations
WMV (e.g. from Movie Maker) to MP4/H264 (TV, tablet, phone, etc.)
MP4/H264 (e.g. from camcorder) to MP4/H264 (TV, tablet, phone, etc.)
Profile you can select various profiles to test: HD TV, SD TV, Tablet, Phone.
See also Questions and Answers document for full information.

Results Interpretation:
WMV to H264 (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better transcoding performance.
H264 to H264 (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better transcoding performance.

They’re all fairly close here.

Next would be the video rendering test:
Video Rendering
Benchmark the graphics performance of the video adapters (GFXs).
Such operations are used by all graphics software, image manipulation, video decoders/encoders, games and modern operating systems.
Explanations:
The test involves the generation of Mandelbrot Set fractals that are used to realistically describe and generate natural objects such as mountains or clouds. Such instructions are used for audio and video encoding and decoding, games and other applications where the same operation needs to be applied to large amount of data.
Results Interpretation:
Float Shaders (Pixels/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better single (32-bit) floating-point performance.
Double Shaders (Pixels/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better double (64-bit) floating-point performance.

Here the GT430 does the worst oddly, I expected a lot better.

The card is quiet even under load, I’m guessing that’s because of the rather large heatsink. The heatsink seems to work but it might block the slot below the card, and in smaller cases it might become a bigger problem.

It’s not exactly meant to be a gaming video card is it? It would work fine for a basic HTPC I would guess.

Conclusion:
The GT430 isn’t exactly what I expected, I really thought it would perform much better than any of the GT240 cards, but I was wrong. It should work fine for light gaming.

It’s a small, low-profile card so it would work great in smaller cases. The GT430 is quiet and it does play HD video very well.

Pros:
+Low profile with extra brackets
+Decent performance
+Relatively quiet
+No extra power connection
+Direct X 11 capable

Cons:
-Rather fat card

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

To learn more about our review policy please visit this page HERE.

Review of Sparkle GeForce GT430 1024MB DDR3 Low Profile is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

The box is the box.

Inside you’ll find the card wrapped in bubble wrap and an anti-static bag along with documentation and a driver/software CD.

The card feature a rather large heatsink on  and it has HDMI, VGA and DVI ports. It does not require an additional power connection.

Specifications:

GeForce GT240 OC 1024MB GDDR5 w/ Native HDMI Port

Model No: SXT2401024D5-NM

GPU / VPU: NVIDIA GeForce GT240
RAMDAC: Dual 400MHz
Bus Type: PCI-Express 2.0
Bus Speed: 16x
Video Memory: 1024MB
Memory Type: GDDR5
Memory Interface: 128 bit
Core Clock: 550 MHz
Memory Clock: 1700 MHz
Output Connectors: HDMI x1, Dual-Link x1, VGA x1
HDCP Capable: Yes
Overclocked: No
Cooling System: Fan
Video Card Profile: Full Height
Video Card Slot: Single Slot

My setup is: Intel C2Q9650, DFI motherboard, 8 gigs ram and everything hooked up to a 47” Vizio HDTV via HDMI.

So I’m putting it up against the Sparkle GT240 with 1024mb of DDR3 ram and a Sparkle GT240 with 512mb of DDR5 ram.

I tossed in a couple more tests as well besides the usual suspects.

Let’s start it off with two from Futuremark, the first is 3DMark06:

As we can see DDR5 is much better than DDR3 that the stock has.

Next is 3DMark Vantage, settings are stock but set to 1920 resolution.

Same thing here again, the 1024mb DDR5 is much better, about double the performance.

Next up would be Crysis Warhead at resolutions of 1680c1050 and 1920×1080:

Here’s a surprise, the 512mb does a little bit better.

Next is Far Cry 2, same thing at 1680 and 1920 resolutions.

Average score again is better with the 512mb card oddly.

Next up would be HAWX2:

And again the 512mb card is better oddly, wonder why they both have DDR5 ram in them, you’d think the 1024mb card would be better.

Lastly I’ve got two from SiSoft Sandra 2011 that deal with rendering and transcoding

The first is the media transcoder test:

Media Transcode

Measures the media transcoding performance, i.e. decoding video & audio from one format and then encoding it to another. Shows how your processors or hardware accelerators handle transcoding in comparision to other typical transcoders.

Such operations are used when converting media from a camcorder to your computer and then to a device (TV, tablet, phone, etc). Transcoding is needed as each device might use a different media format (and thus container or codec) or support different profiles (resolution, etc.).

Explanations
WMV (e.g. from Movie Maker) to MP4/H264 (TV, tablet, phone, etc.)
MP4/H264 (e.g. from camcorder) to MP4/H264 (TV, tablet, phone, etc.)
Profile you can select various profiles to test: HD TV, SD TV, Tablet, Phone.
See also Questions and Answers document for full information.

Results Interpretation:
WMV to H264 (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better transcoding performance.
H264 to H264 (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better transcoding performance.

Not much of  a difference really between the cards.
Next would be the video rendering test:
Video Rendering
Benchmark the graphics performance of the video adapters (GFXs).
Such operations are used by all graphics software, image manipulation, video decoders/encoders, games and modern operating systems.
Explanations:
The test involves the generation of Mandelbrot Set fractals that are used to realistically describe and generate natural objects such as mountains or clouds. Such instructions are used for audio and video encoding and decoding, games and other applications where the same operation needs to be applied to large amount of data.
Results Interpretation:
Float Shaders (Pixels/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better single (32-bit) floating-point performance.
Double Shaders (Pixels/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better double (64-bit) floating-point performance.

Hmm, the GT240 OC with 1024mb DDR5 looked good in the beginning, but as the tests wore on the 512mb seemed to get the best of it.

The card performs well overall I think, it’s quiet under load and it’s small and of course it doesn’t require an extra power either.

I did the whole watching HD movies like blu-rays and they played perfectly fine.

Conclusion:
The Sparkle GT240 is labeled as OC or overclock but it really isn’t technically overclocked is it?  The performance isn’t bad, but it’s not great either.  It would work good for an HTPC or a very light gaming PC I think. The cost of course is about $100, so it’s not bad for a budget card.

Pros:
+No additional power required
+Quiet
+Decent performance overall

Cons:
-Not as good as expected

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

To learn more about our review policy please visit this page HERE.

Review of Sparkle Nvidia GeForce GT240 OC 1024MB GDDR5 w/ Native HDMI Port is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

The box looks familiar, all of the GT240 boxes look pretty much the same.

Inside you’ll find the card wrapped in bubble wrap and an anti-static bag along with user manual, driver cd and two PCI brackets. The VGA port is removable, it just plugs into the board so you can swap out the PCI brackets to use in a smaller chassis.

The card itself is short or small, but it’s double size is terms of the heatsink. The card will take up two slots. The GT240 has DVI, VGA and HDMI ports on it.

Specifications:

GeForce GT240 1024MB DDR3 w/Low Profile & Native HDMI Port

Model No: SXT2401024S3LNM

GPU / VPU: NVIDIA GeForce GT240
Processor Technology: 40nm
Processor Cores: 96 cores
RAMDAC: Dual 400MHz
Bus Type: PCI-EXPRESS 2.0
Bus Speed: 16x
Video Memory: 1024MB
Memory Type: DDR3
Memory Interface: 128 bit
Output Connectors: HDMI x1, Dual-Link x1, VGA x1
HDCP Capable: Yes
Overclocked: No
Cooling System: Fan
Video Card Profile: Low Profile
Video Card Slot: Double Slot

Since I reviewed the two GT240 card yesterday, I figured just add this low profile to the charts for comparison.

Same setup, Intel C2Q9650, DFI motherboard, 8 gigs ram and everything hooked up to a 47” Vizio HDTV via HDMI.

First up is 3DMark06:

The low profile performs better than the regular GT240 with 1024mb.

Next up is 3DMarkVantage:

Again the low profile is better, but the GT240 512mb is even better.

Next up would be some good old Crysis Warhead:

Very low frame rates for all of them of course, but it just goes to show which card performs better.

Next would be some Far Cry 2 at a couple different resolutions.

Again same performance here, no surprise.

Lastly I’ve got HAWX 2 benchmark:

Well you can play HAWX 2 with this card, 33FPS on average shouldn’t be too bad.

The card is large, or really  the heat sink is, so you’ll lose a slot below it and in some cases that might make things more cramped.

The card does work great in an HTPC, popped in a blu-ray and the picture was beautiful. HD Content played fine on my 47” HDTV.

The card is quiet so it will work great in an HTPC, even under load it added no additional noise to the system. I like my system as quiet as possible so I know what quiet is.

Conclusion:
The performance of the low-profile GT240 is ok I guess, it’s fine for light gaming, but it’s a card made for an HTPC really and there it will work just fine. It’s small, comes with PCI brackets and it’s quit, just what one needs in an HTPC card.

Pros:
+Small
+Quiet
+Greast for an HTPC setup

Cons:
-Not the greatest for gaming

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

To learn more about our review policy please visit this page HERE.

Review of Sparkle GeForce GT240 1024MB DDR3 w/Low Profile & Native HDMI Port is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

I’ve got two cards, so we’re going to do this quick and easy.

The first card is the 512mb edition. It has DVI, VGA and an HDMI port.

The second card is the 1024mb edition. It has DVI, VGA and HDMI port too.

Here’s both of the cards together, they look very different really in terms of the layout of the board and even the heatsink.

There is another difference between the cards, two actually. The 512MB uses DDR5 and the 1024MB uses DDR3. The 512MB also has 1GB of Turbo Cache as well, which means is uses or can use an additional 1gig of system memory.

Specifications:

GeForce GT240 512MB GDDR5 w/ Native HDMI Port

Model No: [ SXT240512D5-NM ]
GPU / VPU: NVIDIA GeForce GT240
RAMDAC: Dual 400MHz
Bus Type: PCI-Express 2.0
Bus Speed: 16x
Video Memory: 512MB
Memory Type: GDDR5
Memory Interface: 128 bit
Core Clock: 550 MHz
Output Connectors: HDMI x1, Dual-Link x1, VGA x1
HDCP Capable: Yes
Overclocked: No
Cooling System: Fan
Video Card Profile: Full Height
Video Card Slot: Single Slot

GeForce GT240 1024MB DDR3 w/ Native HDMI Port
Model No: [ SXT2401024S3-NM ]
GPU / VPU: NVIDIA GeForce GT240
RAMDAC: Dual 400MHz
Bus Type: PCI-EXPRESS 2.0
Bus Speed: 16x
Video Memory: 1024MB
Memory Type: DDR3
Memory Interface: 128 bit
Core Clock: 550 MHz
Output Connectors: HDMI x1, Dual-Link x1, VGA x1
HDCP Capable: Yes
Overclocked: No
Cooling System: Fan
Video Card Profile: Full Height
Video Card Slot: Single Slot

So for testing I ran a couple regular benchmarks and a few games at different resolutions to see the comparisons.

My system consists of an Intel C2Q9650, 8Gigs of DDR3 ram on a DFI Lanparty X48-T3RS motherboard.

First up is 3DMark06, I think you know what this test is.

Oddly the 512mb does better here, quite a bit better. The 512mb runs DDR5 and the 1024MB runs DDR3, could that be the difference?!

Next up is 3DMarkVantage running at default settings but with the resolution at 1920×1080.

Again we see the 512mb performs better.

Next up I ran Far Cry 2 at both 1920×1080 and 1680×1050.

Again here, I’m amazed really that the 512mb does better.

Another game I tried out is Crysis Warhead, same thing at 1920×1080 and 1680×1050 resolutions.

…and yet again the 512mb is better than the 1024mb version.

Finally I ran the HAWX 2 benchmark.

Here again the 512mb does better.

I’m truly amazed, I thought the card with 1024mb on board would do better.

Sure they’re not the best for gaming overall, light gaming and gaming at low settings will work, but don’t expect to max it out and have decent frame rates with this card.

Both cards are quiet even under load, so they could work well in an HTPC. I’ve got a blu-ray player in my PC and popped in a movie, it played fine.

Conclusion:
Again I’m stunned to say the least that the 512mb card did better than the 1024mb card.

Both cards though perform fairly well, or at least as well as you might expect them to for being a lower end card.

These would be great for light gaming or an HTPC system as they do run quiet  even under load.

Pros:
+Inexpensive
+Decent performance
+Quiet even under load

Cons:
-None really

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

To learn more about our review policy please visit this page HERE.

Review of Sparkle GT240 Video Card 512MB vs 1024MB is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

The GTX465 comes in a fancy and shiny looking box and is well packaged.

Inside you’ll find documentation, CD, VGA to DVI adapter, two molex to PCIE power connection and an HDMI cable.

The card itself is big and colorful, purple and black wouldn’t be my color choices but hey whatever. The card has a nice big fan on it with copper heatpipes sticking out of the side. It’s a dual slot card as well.

On the back end you’ll find to DVI ports and a mini-HDMI connection. I’m not too happy about the mini-HMDI connection though, what’s wrong with normal HDMI?

Here’s the GTX465 with an ATI 4870 and a GT240.

Specifications:

Geforce GTX465 Series – SXX4651024D5-NM

Model number : SXX4651024D5-NM
Graphics Processing : Geforce GTX465
Processor Cores : 352
Core Clock : 607 MHz
Memory Clock : 3206 MHz
Memory Type : 1024MB GDDR5
Memory Interface :     256Bit
Processor Clock : 1215 MHz
Bus Type : PCI-Express 2.0

Key Features:
-Microsoft DirectX 11 support
-NVIDIA CUDA technology with CUDA C/C++,DirectCompute  5.0 and OpenCL support
-NVIDIA PhysX technology
-NVIDIA SLI and 3-way SLI technology
-NVIDIA 3D Vision Surround Ready
-NVIDIA PureVideo HD technology
-PCI Express 2.0 support
-Two Dual-link DVI-I connectors
-One Mini-HDMI 1.3a connector
-Dual-link HDCP-Capable
-OpenGL 4.0 Optimization and support

Price: $204.99 (price from NewEgg at time of review)

I’m using the GTX465 in my gaming computer which consists of DFI Lanparty X48-T3RS Motherboard, Intel C2Q9650 CPU, and 8 Gigs DDR3 Ram installed in a Lian-Li PC-8FI case.

Here it is installed:

Before I installed the GTX465 I was using a GTX260, so that’s what I’m comparing it to.

We’ll start with a couple old favorites.

3DMark06:

Somewhat of a better showing.

Now here’s 3Dmark Vantage set at Performance with the resolution changed to 1920×1080.

Quite a bit better with the GTX465 in the system.

How about some Crysis with settings of 1920×1080, and 4X AA on High Quality.

As expected not the best results, but the GTX465 does better than the GTX260.

Next up is Far Cry 2 with Settings: Demo(Ranch Small), 1920×1080 (60Hz), D3D10, Fixed Time Step(No), Disable Artificial Intelligence(No), Full Screen, Anti-Aliasing(4x), VSync(No), Overall Quality(Very High), Vegetation(Very High), Shading(Very High), Terrain(Very High), Geometry(Very High), Post FX(High), Texture(Very High), Shadow(Very High), Ambient(High), Hdr(Yes), Bloom(Yes), Fire(Very High), Physics(Very High), RealTrees(Very High).

Oddly the GTX465 has lower minimum FPS than the GTX260, but the performance is still very good.

I’ve never used the HAWX2 benchmark so I figured why not give it a try. Settings for testing were 1920-x1080, Everything on high and AA set to 16xQ CSAA.

Very playable at those frame rates I would say with either card.

Mafia II is a game that involves Physics, so I figured why not use that one for testing as well. Setting were basically everything on HIGH at 1920×1080 with AA on and Anisotropic Filtering set to 16x. I ran three different tests at the available physics settings of off, medium and high.

Obviously having a physics card paired with the HTX465 would be a good thing here as neither card did too well with the Physics on.

The last test I ran, another that I never ran before, is the Unigine Tropics Benchmark with settings of 1920×1080, shaders on high, Anistropy at 8x and AA on 8x.

There’s a rather big difference in the Max FPS as you can see here.

The card seems quiet, even under load I couldn’t hear the fan.

Conclusion:
I think the performance of the GTX465 is decent overall and I’m very happy with it. The cost is relatively low for it, and I think anyone who does purchase this card will be happy with it.

For most game today though I think it should be paired with another card, especially one for physics.

The one gripe I do have is the mini-HDMI port, why use mini and not standard?! Yes they do include a cable but it’s barely long enough for my needs, and I’m sure it will be too short for others.

Pros:
+Low price
+Decent performance
+Includes HDMI cable

Cons:
-Mini DVI Connection
-Included HDMI cable might be too short for some
-Large sized card

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

To learn more about our review policy please visit this page HERE.

Review of Sparkle Nvidia Geforce GTX465 Video Card is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

Buying a video card can be a tricky thing. There are so many on the market made by so many brands, it is very difficult to know which card is truly the best for your needs. Many cards are so similar to others that it can make the decision overwhelming. Add to that the fact that new cards are constantly being developed, making graphics devices one of the quickest computer components to become outdated. Most likely, the card you choose will already be outdated, unless you intend to spend hundreds of dollars on the current best thing.

For most of us, a mid-level graphics card at a reasonable price will suit our needs just fine. There is some comfort in knowing that not very long ago, a card that now runs for $150 would have been the best on the market. At the same time, it shows the quick pace by which video cards develop and turn over.

Today I have to review a Zotac GeForce 9800 GT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 Video Card AMP Edition. Zotac is currently producing dozens and dozens of cards, from the GeForce 5 series through the 200 series. This particular card was chosen for a machine that I’d call a “casual everything” computer. By that, I mean that the machine running it occasionally does some video production, some gaming, some photo editing, and the like. However, it doesn’t do enough that it needs the world’s best card. It’s also not your grandma Betty’s solitaire and email machine.

Note that this is the AMP! Edition of Zotac’s GeForce 9800 GT, which means it is the overclocked edition. Zotac is all about selling cards pushed beyond the stock frequencies.

The Zotac GeForce 9800 GT comes in a nice box, covered with specs and info. On a retail shelf, it would be a really solid presentation and tell anyone who knows their specs a good bit about what’s inside.

Here is an awesomely enthusiastic video of the unboxing:

Inside the box you receive the card itself, a software install disc, user manual, HDTV cable, power cable, S/PDIF cable, and VGA/D-sub and DVI/HDMI adapters. There is some other literature as well, but who needs all that? Zotac seems to be big on extra promotions, and my particular box also included 3DMark Vantage Advanced software and a game – XIII Century: Death or Glory. That should be everything you need to hook up whatever display hardware you use, and a nice couple of extras. Those two bundled pieces of software may not be packaged with the card forever, but lots of Zotac cards do come with extras.

Of course, you also get the required Zotac nerd sticker to put on your case if you so desire. I did, because I’m that cool.

The card only requires one PCI power connector, which is on the far end. The heatsink is black and it has a very bright orange light on the fan, which comes in handy as all my other lights on the case which it will be put into are orange. The PCB is also orange. Dual link DVI ports that output up to 2560×1600 with HDMI via an adapter are on the back as well, flanking that is the SLI connector and SPDIF audio connector for HDMI sound.

Specifications:
Zotac GeForce 9800 GT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 Video Card AMP! Edition

Experience a world of high-performance 3D gaming and high-definition entertainment with the ZOTAC GeForce 9800 GT powered by NVIDIAs Unified Architecture. NVIDIA Unified Architecture empowers the ZOTAC GeForce 9800 GT with 112 ultra-fast processor cores for blazing-fast frame rates in 3D games and applications. Not only does the ZOTAC GeForce 9800 GT deliver brilliant life-life visuals in 3D games and applications, it also delivers a visually stunning high-definition video experience with NVIDIA PureVideo HD technology. Additionally, PureVideo HD upscales cleans up standard-definition video such as DVDs to near-high-definition quality.

Specs:

Model – ZT-98GES5P-FCP
Interface – PCI Express 2.0 x16
GPU – GeForce 9800 GT
Core Clock – 700MHz
Core Processors – 112 stream processors
Memory Clock – 1800MHz
Memory Size – 512MB
Memory Interface – 256-bit
Memory Type – GDDR3
Memory Bandwidth – 70.4 GB/sec
Texture Fill Rate – 34.2 billion/sec
DirectX – DirectX 10
OpenGL – OpenGL 2.1
DVI – 2
RAMDAC – 400 MHz
TV-Out – HDTV / S-Video Out
Max Resolution – 2560 x 1600
SLI Supported – Yes
Cooler – Fan
Power Connector – 6 Pin
Dual-Link DVI Supported – Yes
HDCP Ready – Yes
Package Contents – ZT-98GES5P-FCP, Driver Disk, User’s Manual, HDTV Cable, Power Cable, DVI to VGA/D-sub Adapter, DVI to HDMI Adapter, S/PDIF Cable
Dimensions - 13.26 X 10.23 X 2.67
Weight – 2.3000

Bus Support
- PCI Express 2.0 // PCI Express x16
3D Acceleration
- Microsoft® DirectX®10 support
- Unified Shader Model 4.0
- OpenGL 2.1

Price – Currently around $110, frequently offered with a mail-in rebate of at least $20.

The card is big, but not overly big. Most cards are rather large these days, and there are ones bigger than this for sure. If you haven’t replaced your video card in a good while, it will almost definitely be bigger than what you are removing, so take that into consideration. The case I was installing it into is mid-sized tower, the size of your standard every day consumer case. The length is somewhere around 9-10” and I had to shift a few things around inside to get it to fit. This is definitely the minimum size tower for this card.

A very quick look at the card in the case pre-boot:

In this particular machine, this was the first card install, as this card replaced on-board mobo graphics that were utterly horrible. The hard drive, in its current position, made it impossible to plug any power into the graphics card, so it had to be moved. Following that, the RAM was popped out before the video card was installed, as the northbridge cooler makes it tough for your fingers to get to the locking tabs with anything else installed near the card. Then, some power cables had to be re-routed to reach the video card. I had to take apart about half of the computer in order to fit this thing in. Again, that’s more a product of trying to cram it into a case just big enough to support it, and really doesn’t have anything to do with the card itself. You should, however, be made aware of its size and requirements.

Please excuse the craptacular quality of a few of those pictures.

So truly, installation was pretty basic, and would be a snap with proper space. Literally. Snap it into place, plug in the cables. It required a 6-pin PCIE power connection, but just a single one, so that’s all you need to have free to power this bad boy. In my machine, it is running fine off a simple 300 watt supply.

The GeForce 9800 GT is really the same card with identical specifications as the GeForce 8800 GT, which is why Zotac created this AMP! Edition to produce some higher clocks. This card uses a slim single-slot heatsink, common for Nvidia, though bigger than the one used for the 8800GT series. It does boast a pretty big fan and fan opening for quiet cooling, which it needs when under load, particularly in tighter cases. (During this writing, the card is running at 38C, or 100F). The tail end is designed with contours to open up air flow, and the rear allows air intake.

This card has Purevideo HD and Hybrid Power, which its predecessor does not. Hybrid Power enabled motherboards allow you to power down the card completely and use a lesser power consuming card when not using it, and kick it back up when using a 3D application.

The card doesn’t pull the entire amount of power it could utilize from the PCIE, which is awesome if you have a lower output power supply. The device is relatively quiet and efficient at cooling itself. After some usage, the heatsink definitely gets louder, but that’s just what you expect. You certainly wouldn’t call it noisy.

The look of the card in the case is fine. It faces downward, so you look at the back of it. The orange light illuminates the inside of the case pretty well.

I’ll throw a few benchmark tests at you, as well as some simple prose information. I find comparison charts hideously boring and so we’ll take a look at the basics. My PC is experiencing some inconvenient other hardware issues that are causing it to shut down any time I run standard benchmark tests, which saves you from looking at nine pages of charts. So we’re using some common info on a card running in a common computer. Here are some numbers to start us off…

Comparison to GeForce8800GT card, and GeForce9800GT model without overclocking:

GeForce8800GT:
Shader units: 112
ROPs: 16
GPU: G92
Transistors: 754M
Memory: 512MB
Memory Bus: 256bit
Core clock: 600MHz
Memory clock: 900MHz

GeForce9800GT:
Shader units: 112
ROPs: 16
GPU: G92
Transistors: 754M
Memory: 512MB
Memory Bus: 256bit
Core clock: 600MHz
Memory clock: 900MHz

GeForce9800GT AMP:
Shader units: 112
ROPs: 16
GPU: G92
Transistors: 754M
Memory: 512MB
Memory Bus: 256bit
Core clock: 700MHz
Memory clock: 1000MHz

And some testing information:
3DMark Vantage:
AMD HD 4850 Score: 7,277
Zotac 9800GT AMP! Score: 6,913
PoV GeForce 9800GTX Score: 5,937

Feature Tests ran between 13.85 – 26.04 FPS.
PerformanceTest 7.0 2D and 3D results:

PerformanceTest 7.0 comparison charts:

As we’ve mentioned, the machine running this card is nothing to write home about. Just your average computer. Here is how video rendering using the 9800GT AMP! And this machine stacks up against some others:

Overclocking the card is a little tricky, as it already is overclocked. It’s feasible to hit around a 10% overclock and you should see that difference in the 3DMark benchmarks, though it is relatively miniscule. If it’s something you just have to do to feel like the boss, go for it.

None of the stats will absolutely blow you away when compared to other cards or this card’s previous model. They do show an improvement over the past model, and for the price, it’s solid.

Running Second Life with all render values as high as they can be, I’m pulling in an average of 40FPS. Every standard PC game I own is running just swell. It is capable of running anything; the bigger variable when it comes to modern games is the power of the rest of your machine.

Conclusion:

The card offers great performance for the price. It holds its own against cards of comparable prices and performs as expected, while being quiet and power efficient. The difference between a standard GTX model and an overclocked GT are minimal, aside from the vast price difference that isn’t worth it. This card is just dandy for its price range. These days, anything that requires only one power connection is a double plus. Save yourself some power, save yourself some money, get some free bundled software and a mail-in rebate. For less than $100 after all is said and done, this card delivers at the level it should.

Being factory overclocked is a huge plus, and gives you performance that would have cost you quadruple the amount a year ago. Performance is still great, running all modern games at beautiful resolutions with no problem. Those with standard video needs should find this card sufficient and budget friendly.

Straight up, if you’re looking for a decent card good enough to get through some average load uses at a cheap price, pick this one up.

Pros:
+Excellent price
+Single slot
+Factory overclocked
+Nice design, efficient cooling and power consumption
+Great performance for price

Cons:
-Will be physically large for some cases
-Can’t compare to higher level cards, despite the bang for its buck
-Sits with its pretty parts facing the bottom of your case

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

Zotac GeForce 9800 GT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 Video Card AMP! Edition is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

Today I’ve got a video card review of the Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 512MB product, though it’s not technically an official review… A couple weeks ago I looked at the SmoothCreations LanShark Gaming system, and it had this card in it, SC asked me to review this card separately for them so that’s what I’m doing today.

So yes this is a review of the Sapphire HD4870 with 512mb of ram, but it’s also a comparison of what differences, if any there are between having 512mb or 1gig of ram on your video card. I’m comparing the Sapphire 4870 512mb to my Diamond 4870 with 1gig of ram to figure out if it’s worthwhile to double the ram or not. Both card run the same 750Mhz Core Clock and 900Mhz memory clock, and both have the 256bit memory interface, they pretty much the same except for the onboard memory.

So read on to learn more…

This card was provided by Smooth Creations for review, it was pulled from the LanShark Pyro system that I reviewed recently, so I don’t have any box shots for you.

I do have pictures of the card, and it’s large just like the other 4870 I have. It’s a dual PCI slot card as well, and has the same cooling system as my Diamond 4870 1gig does, just the sticker is different on the cover and the circuit board is blue as opposed to the red of the Diamond.

Here’s the two of them for comparison, the differences are the red and blue circuit board and the stickers on the coolers:

And here they are installed in my system, they look exactly the same from the side view really:

Currently my system consists of:
Evga NF680i Motherboard
IntelC2Q6600
8gigs of OCZ Fatality DDR2 ram
hard drives and dvd/rw drives as well
all powered by a Corsair TX750 750Watt power supply

Specifications:


SAPPHIRE ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB GDDR5 PCI-E

The ATI Radeon HD 4870 GPU brings the power of graphics supercomputing to gamers, setting a new standard for visual computing.

Redefine the way you play and take HD gaming to the extreme with best-in-class performance. The new TeraScale graphics engine delivers an immersive, cinematic gaming experience. Add this GPU to your PC and watch Blu-ray movies and play HD content with incredible visual fidelity. Do it all with break-through efficiency that doesn’t compromise performance.

GDDR5 memory and 256-bit memory interface
DirectX 10.1
24x custom filter anti-aliasing (CFAA) and high performance anisotropic filtering
ATI CrossFireX multi-GPU support for highly scalable performance
Use up to four discrete cards with an AMD 790FX based motherboard
PCI Express 2.0 support
Dynamic geometry acceleration
Game physics processing capability
ATI AvivoHD video and display technologyUnified Video Decoder 2 (UVD) for Blu-ray and HD VideoBuilt-in HDMI with 7.1 surround sound supportOn-chip HDCP
ATI PowerPlay technology

# Core Clock: 750 MHz
# Memory Clock: 900 MHz, 3.6Gbps
# PCI Express 2.0 x16 bus interface
# 512MB /256bit GDDR5 memory interface

So here we go onto the testing to answer the question posed in the beginning, and to check out the performance of this card..

First up is the old standby, 3dmark06:

You can see the Diamond just barely beats out the Sapphire.

Next up is SiSoft Sandra 2009 Video Rendering Test using DX10.1

The test involves the generation of Mandelbrot Set fractals that are used to realistically describe and generate natural objects such as mountains or clouds. Such instructions are used for audio and video encoding and decoding, games and other applications where the same operation needs to be applied to large amount of data.

Float Shaders (Pixels/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better single (32-bit) floating-point performance.
Double Shaders (Pixels/s) – higher results are better, i.e. better double (64-bit) floating-point performance.

Again you can see the Diamond just barely gets the lead over the Sapphire card.

Next up I’ve got Crysis, two graphs for DX9 and DX10 testing.

Settings were on High, at 1680×1050 resolution with 2X AA Enabled for both DX9 and DX10.

It’s close, but as you can see having the extra 512mb of ram does seem to help, still though not bad overall.

Not sure what’s up with the very low drop in framerates, but I ran the tests several times and came out close to that every time for the low end of the FPS… As we can see here again having the extra 512mb of ram does seem to truly help things out a bit.

Next up is Crysis Warhead, 1680×1050 resolution, Gamer settings with 2XAA Enabled, again both DX9 and DX10 testing included.

Here again we can see the extra 512mb of ram does help a bit.

here again we see that having the extra ram helps quite a bit, still though not bad for the Sapphire.
and finally I’ve got FarCry2 testing, in both DX9 and DX10.

Settings: Demo(Ranch Small), 1680×1050 (59Hz), Fixed Time Step(No), Disable Artificial Intelligence(No), Full Screen, Anti-Aliasing(2x), VSync(No), Overall Quality(Optimal), Vegetation(Very High), Shading(Very High), Terrain(Very High), Geometry(Very High), Post FX(High), Texture(Very High), Shadow(Very High), Ambient(High), Hdr(Yes), Bloom(Yes), Fire(Very High), Physics(Very High), RealTrees(Very High)

We see fairly close results here between both cards, the low end is rather low for both cards, below the magical 30FPS number, but the average for both is above.

here we see both cards perform well under DX10, with both cards performing better than in DX9 actually.

Conclusion:
The Sapphire 4870 512MB card is not a bad choice for a video card, it performs admirably well and runs cool and quiet while in idle.
The framerates you’ll get will of course depend on the resolution you’re running and the settings of the game, you can always adjust to get better performance.
Taking a quick look over at Newegg I see the Sapphire card runs normally $260, while the Diamond runs normally $300, personally after seeing the performance numbers of having the extra 512mb of memory I think it’s well worth it to spend the extra $40 for the 1gig card.

Pros:
Runs cool
Quiet while idle
Not bad performance for having 512mb of ram

Cons:
Large two slots
Loud under load
Not the best performance

Grades:
Overall
Design
Performance

SAPPHIRE ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB GDDR5 PCI-E Video Card is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog

With new games popping up all of the time, sometimes we need to upgrade our video cards, especially with the latest version of Crysis our now. Crysis fans will want to play Warhead with all the settings maxed to really enjoy it.. but is there a card that can handle Crysis?

Up on the review block today I’ve got a Radeon HD video card from Diamond, this card includes 1gig of ram to be able to easily play the latest games in all of their glory, but can it? I’ve put it up against Crysis and Crysis Warhead in my testing, running at several resolutions to give you an idea of the performance of this great card. So continue on to see the results…

Ok, First up we’ve got the Unboxing video for you, check it out and then continue on for the rest of the review:

Specifications:

Diamond – ATI Radeon HD 4870 PCIE 1024MB GDDR5 Video Card

SKU : 4870PE51G

The Diamond HD 4870 is a magnificent beast. A 956 million-transistor processing powerhouse, a technology statement and dream come true for enthusiast gamers hungry for the fastest GPU ever made. Featuring a 2nd generation unified shader architecture, massive processing power and an unprecedented 256-bit memory interface, HD 4870 will deliver astonishing performance and the richest feature-set yet for a big ultra-high definition gaming experience with all of the bells and whistles turned up to the max. The HD 4870 is quite simply a ticket to the future of PC gaming.

* Play the latest PC games supporting DirectX 10.1, the latest generation of gaming graphics.
* Work & Productivity Application
* Video playback and editing.
* HD video playback (Blu-ray and HD DVD) and editing.
* Everyday home computing applications (such as Vista, photos, standard videos, and games).

FEATURES:
* Superscale unified shader architecture
* PCI Express 2.0 support
* 800 Unified Stream Processors
* 256-bit memory interface
* Direct X 10.1 / Shader Model 4.1 / OpenGL 2.0
* ATI Crossfire X Multi-GPU Support for highly scalable performance
* Up to four GPU support with an AMD 790FX based motherboard
* High-speed 128-bit-HDR (High Dynamic Range) rendering
* Up to 24x Custom Filter Anti-Aliasing
* 55nm process technology
* Game Physics processing capability
* Support for the ATI Radeon DVI to HDMI adapter
* Unified Video Decoder (UVD) for Blu-ray and HD DVD
* ATI PowerPlay energy conserving technology
* RoHS compliant
* Built in HDCP Support

Performance:
GPU : HD 4870
ASIC Core : RV 770
Core Clock : 750 MHZ
GPU Architecture :
BUS : PCI Express x16
Ports : 2 Dual-Link DVI,Video Out [S-Video, Composite, HDTV]
Stream Processors : 800
MFG Process : 0,055 µ
Transistor Count : 956 million
Cooling : Active – FanCooler

Memory:
Memory Clock : 900 MHz
Memory Configuration : 32Mx32
Memory Type : GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth : 160.9 GB/sec
Memory Size : 1024MB
Memory Interface : 256-Bit

Standard Slot Solution : DOUBLE
CrossFire : CrossFire X
QuadFire Support : YES
Direct-X : 8.0,9.0,10.0-10.1
Open GL : OpenGL 2.0

Display Support:
HDTV : YES
HDMI : HDMI 1.2 / HDMI Ready
HDMI MODE : Dongle
Native Display Support : 18-, 24-, and 30-bit
3D Resolution : 2560×1600
TV-OUT Resolution : 720

Well since this card is rather large, it does take up two slots, and it also uses two PCI connections, so depending on what else you’ve got in your system you might need to upgrade your power supply for this card. Me personally I run three monitors, which means two video cards. The Diamond 4870 has become my main card for my main monitor and the run two other monitors off of my trusty X1800GTO card, so that means I need three PCIE power connections, I recently got a Corsair 7540TX power supply, which has four so I didn’t have any problems in that area.

The Diamond 4870 can get a bit loud when under load, and over the past week or so I’ve stressed this card a lot! I got Crysis Warhead for review and I played that for hours at a time as high as possible settings, and I ran benchmarks for hours on end, for several days, so it got quite a bit of a workout, more than most people will use the card in a month or more. So yes it can get loud, but that’s relative to me, I personally like my system as quiet as possible, and it’s a bearable loud for me, others most likely won’t care at all about the sound level.

So, before I got the Diamond 4870 I was running two EVGA 8600GTS cards in SLI for my gaming, out of curiosity I ran 3dMark06 to get a comparison:

So you can see it’s a nice improvement over the older generation of cards…

My system is:

EVGA 680i SLI Motherboard

Intel Quad Core 6600 -Non overclocked

4 gigs of ddr2 ram

Vista Ultimate 64bit

and of course the usual stuff, hard drive, dvd/rw..

First up for testing I’ve got Crysis, Crysis Warhead and Lost Planet DX9 and DX10 performance, I ran all tests for all of the games in testing three times and averaged the results out.

Crysis DX9 (1280×1024 and 1600×1200 Resolutions – 16xQ AA used for all testing)

As expected when using 1600 Resolution performance does take a hit, but it’s still playable.

Crysis DX10 (1280×1024 and 1600×1200 Resolutions – 16xQ AA used for all testing)

Running DX 10 we see a performance hit as can be expected, with average FPS under the optimal 30fps that we would like to see, but it’s easily fixed just by dropping the AntiAliasing down a bit.

Next is Crysis Warhead, I’ve also included 1024×768 Resolutions as well for this testing.

Crysis Warhead DX9 (1024×768, 1280×1024, 1600×1200 8xAA)

Crysis and Crysis Warhead are both hard on graphics cards, obviously running maxed settings at 1600×1200 is a bit out of the question, you can though of course tweak things a bit and get it to work fine for you. Running at 1290×1024 on Enthusiast it only takes dropping the AA down a bit to make the average FPS get above the optimal 30 we’d like to see. It still looks very nice, and is playable.

Crysis Warhead DX10 (1024×768, 1280×1024, 1600×1200 8xAA)

Here is something odd, and I’m guessing it has to do with what Crytek did to optimize the coding, DX10 actually performs a bit better on average than DX9 does.

and here’s Lost Planet, I know it’s a bit old, but it’s graphically intensive, the 4870 has no problems handling it at all. All the setting are maxed for both DX9 and DX10 testing.

Lost Planet is more than playable at any resolution in either DX9 or DX10…

Now with all of these results, the average we’re looking for is above 30FPS, that’s playable, but of course there are still slow downs at some points in the game, depending what’s going on.

Playable to me means the frame rate NEVER drops below 30fps at all, where the minimum is 30fps or above. To get that requires sacrifice in quality of course, at this point I don’t know many cards that are capable of playing Crysis or Warhead at full settings and never dropping below 30fps.

So if you’re thinking about upgrading go for the card with the higher memory, I was looking at comparisons and it’s about $40-$50 more for the full 1gig from the 512MB version, of course depending on which brand you get.

Images

Conclusion:

The Diamond 4870 1gig Video card is an excellent choice if you’re looking for a high end graphics card, it performs well in both DX9 and DX10 on the latest games with no problems at all.

Yes it can get loud when under load, but it’s relative to what sound level you personally can stand coming from your system, really it’s not that loud at all.

Pros:

-Well made

-Excellent performance in DX9 and DX10 games overall

-Works well under stress

-Adapters included

Cons:

-Can get rather loud when under load

-Takes two slots

-Takes two PCIE power connections

Grades:

Overall:

Design:

Performance:

Diamond ATI Radeon HD 4870 1024MB GDDR5 Video Card 4870PE51G is a post from: Testfreaks | The Blog