GeForce 9800 GX2 vs GeForce GTS 250 1GB

Intro

Compare those specs to the GeForce GTS 250 1GB, which features GPU clock speed of 738 MHz, and 1024 MB of GDDR3 RAM set to run at 1100 MHz through a 256-bit bus. It also features 128 Stream Processors, 64 Texture Address Units, and 16 ROPs.

Left4Dead 2

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

GeForce 9800 GX2		81 FPS
GeForce GTS 250 1GB		58 FPS
	Difference: 23 FPS (40%)

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 GTS 250 1GB		31 FPS
	Difference: 24 FPS (77%)

---

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 47 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 GTS 250 1GB		89 FPS
	Difference: 47 FPS (53%)

---

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

GeForce GTS 250 1GB		145 Watts
GeForce 9800 GX2		197 Watts
	Difference: 52 Watts (36%)

Memory Bandwidth

The GeForce 9800 GX2 should theoretically perform quite a bit faster than the GeForce GTS 250 1GB overall. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		128000 MB/sec
GeForce GTS 250 1GB		70400 MB/sec
	Difference: 57600 (82%)

Texel Rate

The GeForce 9800 GX2 should be quite a bit (more or less 63%) better at anisotropic filtering than the GeForce GTS 250 1GB. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		76800 Mtexels/sec
GeForce GTS 250 1GB		47232 Mtexels/sec
	Difference: 29568 (63%)

Pixel Rate

If using a high resolution is important to you, then the GeForce 9800 GX2 is superior to the GeForce GTS 250 1GB, by a large margin. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		19200 Mpixels/sec
GeForce GTS 250 1GB		11808 Mpixels/sec
	Difference: 7392 (63%)

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: Memory bandwidth is the maximum amount of data (in units of MB per second) that can be transferred over the external memory interface within a second. The number is calculated by multiplying the card's interface width by its memory speed. In the case of DDR type memory, it must be multiplied by 2 once again. If DDR5, multiply by 4 instead. The better the memory bandwidth, the better the card will be in general. It especially helps with anti-aliasing, HDR and higher screen resolutions.

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

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the most pixels that the graphics chip can possibly record to its local memory per second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is worked out by multiplying the amount of Render Output Units by the the core speed of the card. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - aka Render Output Units) are responsible for filling the screen with pixels (the image). The actual pixel fill rate is also dependant on lots of other factors, especially the memory bandwidth - the lower the memory bandwidth is, the lower the potential to reach the max fill rate.