FarCry 2 Performance

While the 4850 does lead the GTS 250 by a significant margine, the GTS 250 1GB edges out the 4850. As on board RAM seems to make a difference here, we'd like to see what happens with the 4850 1GB. This one again would be better suited to 1280x1024 or slightly reduced settings.




1680x1050    1920x1200    2560x1600


Left 4 Dead Performance

The Radeon 4850 leads the GTS 250 in this benchmark, and it even edges out the 1GB variant at and below 1920x1200. Interestingly, all these cards remain playable at 2560x1600, but the Radeon 4850 drops to the bottom in performance at this resolution. With the minimal difference we see other variations in RAM make, it doesn't seem like the 1GB 4850 would fare any better. Of course, you never know until you try, so we won't make any definitive statements here.




1680x1050    1920x1200    2560x1600


 

Race Driver GRID Performance

Across the board in this benchmark the Radeon 4850 leads both the GTS 250. The GTS 250 1GB catches up at 2560x1600 though. It does seem, however, that SLI scales better in this benchmark, and the GTS 250 1GB in SLI might post some decent numbers at 2560x1600 as well.




1680x1050    1920x1200    2560x1600
Crysis Warhead & Fallout 3 Performance Final Words
POST A COMMENT

103 Comments

View All Comments

  • mard - Wednesday, April 15, 2009 - link

    just wondering if anybody knew if the Thermalright HR-03 GTX Rev.A
    would be compatible with the GTS250. if not, what would be another passive cooling option for this card

    thanks
    Reply
  • Core Core - Monday, April 6, 2009 - link

    I'm glad this review was done, it really has given me more data on which card to buy. I hope it is updated with some more focus on people who have my set of concerns, see below...

    I want a newer HD Ready/DX10/Shader4 card, and it has to work in a SFF case. I have only one dual slot and one 2x6 video card power supply, so i want to choose one of the two 1GB cards from ATI/nVidia (250 vs. 4850).

    Low heat & power & noise are very important to me. I also think dual slot exhaust is needed in my case. Currently, i have a very hot, noisy, power hog (ATI's X1900XTX) that i want to replace.

    A nVidia GTS250 or ATI 4850 are in my price range and are roughly double the performance i have now, i am connecting to a very large HD Ready display and i want to watch HD movies, game, and compute without problems.

    Your review did not do the ATI 4850 1GB card or go into any details on High Definition 1080p uses, i would like a comparison and review of HDCP, 1080p, and clarity of displayed text on a HD ready test system.

    I'm a total gamer, i watch heaps of HD anime, as well as compute & web browse.
    Reply
  • cactusdog - Sunday, March 22, 2009 - link


    SiliconDoc, you should see a doctor. Instead of blaming everybody else for Nvidia's poor standing in the eyes of the tech community, maybe you should look at why no one likes them....and your own bullying attitude should give you a clue.

    I've read a lot of "fanboy" comments but you take it to a new level. Psychofanboy would be more appropriate for you.

    Reply
  • SiliconDoc - Wednesday, April 8, 2009 - link

    LOL - At least this fella tells the truth, and yet you admit "your idea is the tech community hates them".
    Believe me, I know EXACTLY why, I've seen it all too often, no need for me to find out, mr cryptic with the EPIC FAIL.
    .
    Well, that leaves the SANE PERSON with the conclusion all the little red haters are LYING SACKS OF FUD AND CRAP, and they are near always blabbing out a lie for unfair red advantage, and THEREFORE - buying the nvidia card is the smart thing to do. The more they hate (with their endless stream of lies), the better the nvidia card really is.
    Now, if you don't have an actual counterpoint to the OTHER posts I've made, that destroyed and exposed the 6 months long plus red rooster fanboy fud parrot lines, why then you just go ahead and respond like you did above - because this one absolutely matches yours - PURE SPECULATION with nary a fact in it - just like you, you idiot.
    Reply
  • SiliconDoc - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link

    The problem is even on all the other computer hardware, a naming scheme NEVER tells the avid consumer which one is really better. Same with CARS. Same with kitchen blenders.
    The REALITY of the product only hits the interested public when word actually gets around...when people buy it, reviewers and Consumer Digest take a stab, Tv commenters blab they have one and it's great or it's in the shop - facebook or myspace spreads the news, someone tweets about it...
    THIS is the reality of our computer age !
    In other words, I'm sure everyone wants an easier way out, and wants it all perfectly suited to absolute fairness - but the FACT REMAINS, on EVERYTHING one purchases, without some information far more extensive than the pretty PR ad box and name gives you - YOU WILL EITHER GET SCREWED OR GET LUCKY. PERIOD.
    If you have a really keen eye and some awesome circus sense, you just might make the right call from sight, smell, cover and wording, and placement on the shelves - but then...
    you'd be a wonderous expert with a special gift that could be put to work for pay.
    Face REALITY.
    Reply
  • earthshaker87 - Monday, March 9, 2009 - link

    My 4850 runs better than what these benchmarks say. I recently tested my card in COD: WaW with FRAPS. Im running XPSP3, C2DE8200 2.66, 2GB Kingston Value RAM, ASUS P5K-SE/EPU, MSI R4850(ref clocks and cooler) and got average FPS of 53.36 on same settings as yours. Could it be that Windows XP is the difference? Reply
  • cbm - Friday, March 6, 2009 - link

    How bout testing this on a system that people actually would own at this point in time. Reply
  • Hrel - Tuesday, March 10, 2009 - link

    They've said this before; they test on the highest end system they can to try and remove all system limitations so the only difference you're seeing in test results come from the GPU's. Instead of the CPU, RAM or HDD. If they tested GTS250 in SLI on a dual core DDR2 system the GPU would be limited by the system, so you wouldn't get accurate results comparing the cards. These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards. Reply
  • SiliconDoc - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link

    In other words, with "our systems" with limited cpu, ram, hd's and motherboards, these results especially at the enourmous resolutions and excessive framerates are really overkill and border on meaningless.
    The are meaningless to a large extent until games catch back up with the gpu's, or people catch up with the test beds and monitors.
    So when they, in these reviews, parse a few percentage framerate difference at the high rezz - on the high end rig, on the expensive 30" monitor, then screed out a winner, they are essentially DELUDED.
    It's a winner "for them" while they are at work, mind numbingly whacking away at the hundreds of runs... the few little frames that they have NO CLUE are any different even at high resolutions weren't it for fraps and the pretty yellow numbers on screen.
    Yes, it's a sad day, huh.
    Then, the raging wackos scream about the 1,2,3 maybe 10% difference on the supposedly "one to one" card comparisons - at resolutions and system powers they can only dream of.
    I think that makes it MORE THAN CLEAR that the added value is much more important - what comes with the card, a game, the adapters, the looks, cuda, physx, folding , video conversion, fan type - heat generation - and very important - drivers and stability.
    Well NVIDIA wins those, hands down (save the bundle in some cases). TWIMTBP - and plenty of reasons WHY.
    Reply
  • Hrel - Saturday, March 21, 2009 - link

    I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said, other than saying the tests are meaningless. But you seem to be block headed and not want to listen so here... repetition yeah:
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.

    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    These articles aren't supposed to show you how the cards will perform in your system, they're just supposed to show yo the difference between the cards.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now