GeForce 9800 GX2 vs GeForce GTX 275

Intro

Compare those specifications to the GeForce GTX 275, which has core clock speeds of 633 MHz on the GPU, and 1134 MHz on the 896 MB of GDDR3 RAM. It features 240 SPUs along with 80 Texture Address Units and 28 ROPs.

Left4Dead 2

Settings:	Very High
AA:	8x
AF:	16x
Resolution:	1920x1200
Test Machine:	Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)

GeForce GTX 275		85 FPS
GeForce 9800 GX2		81 FPS
	Difference: 4 FPS (5%)

Supreme Commander 2

Settings:	High
AA:	8x
AF:	16x
Resolution:	1920x1200
Test Machine:	Tom's Hardware Test Machine (Source)

GeForce 9800 GX2		55 FPS
GeForce GTX 275		38 FPS
	Difference: 17 FPS (45%)

---

GeForce 9800 GX2 wins

(Based entirely on the benchmarks listed above)

When combining all game benchmark scores on this page together, the GeForce 9800 GX2 wins overall, by 13 FPS. Please note that we do not have the results of every benchmark ever done for these cards, so the results may differ wildly in different games.

GeForce 9800 GX2		136 FPS
GeForce GTX 275		123 FPS
	Difference: 13 FPS (11%)

---

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

GeForce 9800 GX2		197 Watts
GeForce GTX 275		219 Watts
	Difference: 22 Watts (11%)

Memory Bandwidth

Theoretically, the GeForce 9800 GX2 should be a little bit faster than the GeForce GTX 275 in general. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		128000 MB/sec
GeForce GTX 275		127008 MB/sec
	Difference: 992 (1%)

Texel Rate

The GeForce 9800 GX2 will be quite a bit (approximately 52%) faster with regards to texture filtering than the GeForce GTX 275. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		76800 Mtexels/sec
GeForce GTX 275		50640 Mtexels/sec
	Difference: 26160 (52%)

Pixel Rate

If using a high screen resolution is important to you, then the GeForce 9800 GX2 is superior to the GeForce GTX 275, but it probably won't make a huge difference. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		19200 Mpixels/sec
GeForce GTX 275		17724 Mpixels/sec
	Difference: 1476 (8%)

Please note that the above 'benchmarks' are all just theoretical - the results were calculated based on the card's specifications, and real-world performance may (and probably will) vary at least a bit.

One or more cards in this comparison are multi-core. This means that their bandwidth, texel and pixel rates are theoretically doubled - this does not mean the card will actually perform twice as fast, but only that it should in theory be able to. Actual game benchmarks will give a more accurate idea of what it's capable of.

Price Comparison

Specifications

Memory Bandwidth: Bandwidth is the largest amount of information (counted in megabytes per second) that can be moved past the external memory interface in one second. The number is worked out by multiplying the interface width by its memory clock speed. If it uses DDR type memory, it must be multiplied by 2 once again. If it uses DDR5, multiply by ANOTHER 2x. The better the bandwidth is, the faster the card will be in general. It especially helps with AA, High Dynamic Range and higher screen resolutions.

Texel Rate: Texel rate is the maximum amount of texture map elements (texels) that can be applied per second. This figure is worked out by multiplying the total amount of texture units of the card by the core speed of the chip. The higher the texel rate, the better the graphics card will be at handling texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels applied per second.

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the most pixels that the graphics card could possibly write to the local memory per second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is calculated by multiplying the amount of colour ROPs by the the core speed of the card. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - sometimes also referred to as Render Output Units) are responsible for drawing the pixels (image) on the screen. The actual pixel fill rate also depends on lots of other factors, most notably the memory bandwidth - the lower the bandwidth is, the lower the potential to reach the maximum fill rate.