GeForce 9800 GTX+ vs GeForce 9800 GX2

Intro

Compare all that to the GeForce 9800 GX2, which has a core clock speed of 600 MHz and a GDDR3 memory speed of 1000 MHz. It also makes use of a 256-bit memory bus, and makes use of a 65 nm design. It is made up of 128 SPUs, 64 TAUs, and 16 Raster Operation Units.

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 9800 GTX+		50 FPS
	Difference: 31 FPS (62%)

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 9800 GTX+		34 FPS
	Difference: 21 FPS (62%)

---

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 52 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 9800 GTX+		84 FPS
	Difference: 52 FPS (62%)

---

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

GeForce 9800 GTX+		145 Watts
GeForce 9800 GX2		197 Watts
	Difference: 52 Watts (36%)

Memory Bandwidth

Theoretically speaking, the GeForce 9800 GX2 should perform a lot faster than the GeForce 9800 GTX+ in general. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		128000 MB/sec
GeForce 9800 GTX+		70400 MB/sec
	Difference: 57600 (82%)

Texel Rate

The GeForce 9800 GX2 should be much (approximately 63%) more effective at anisotropic filtering than the GeForce 9800 GTX+. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		76800 Mtexels/sec
GeForce 9800 GTX+		47232 Mtexels/sec
	Difference: 29568 (63%)

Pixel Rate

The GeForce 9800 GX2 will be quite a bit (about 63%) more effective at anti-aliasing than the GeForce 9800 GTX+, and capable of handling higher resolutions more effectively. (explain)

GeForce 9800 GX2		19200 Mpixels/sec
GeForce 9800 GTX+		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 largest amount of information (measured in megabytes per second) that can be transported across the external memory interface within a second. It is calculated by multiplying the bus width by its memory speed. If it uses DDR RAM, it must be multiplied by 2 again. If it uses DDR5, multiply by 4 instead. The higher the bandwidth is, the better the card will be in general. It especially helps with anti-aliasing, High Dynamic Range and high resolutions.

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

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the most pixels the graphics card can possibly record to the local memory in a second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is worked out by multiplying the amount of Raster Operations Pipelines by the the card's clock speed. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - aka Render Output Units) are responsible for drawing the pixels (image) on the screen. The actual pixel rate is also dependant on lots of other factors, especially the memory bandwidth - the lower the bandwidth is, the lower the ability to get to the maximum fill rate.