xentr_theme_editor

  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

GeForce GTX 275 Roundup (Gigabyte, EVGA, MSI, Sparkle, BFG)

Status
Not open for further replies.
xentr_thread_starter
Included Software

Included Software


Yes, we know that there are plenty of free programs out there which will help you overclock and monitor your graphics card. From Rivatuner to GPU-Z, they can be downloaded in a few clicks of the mouse and are regularly updated to support the latest and greatest hardware. In order to try and break into the GPU tuning scene, graphics card manufacturers are turning to their own proprietary software. We haven’t really focused much on what manufacturers offer but in this roundup we decided to take a look at the programs each of these companies distributes with their cards. Unfortunately, some of the cards featured here do not come with any included overclocking software.

Gigabyte GamerHUD Lite
System Resource Usage: ~4.8MB


Gigabyte’s GamerHUD is a straightforward program that offers basic overclocking functions as well as a temperature and usage logger. There are also areas in which you can see the specifications of the GPU and control whether the card downclocks itself in a 2D environment. This is all presented in a highly stylized pop-up box that is actually more confusing than it is functional.

Unfortunately, the issues with this interface are everywhere. There is no way to drag the sliders so you have to endlessly click away on the tiny arrows in order to increase your clock speeds. Want a 50Mhz bump in core speeds? That’ll be 50 clicks, sir. In other overclocking programs it is possible to link and unlink the Core and Shader clocks; not here. Temperature “monitoring” isn’t monitoring at all considering the program doesn’t keep a record of past temperatures or GPU load. In addition, the GTS 250 1GB OC came with the Lite version of GamerHUD so it was missing the voltage tweaking section (which never worked to begin with) that comes with the full version.

Stick with Rivatuner, you’ll be happier for it.



EVGA Precision
System Resource Usage: ~6MB

GTS250-211.JPG

Click on image to zoom

Even though EVGA’s Precision isn’t bundled with their GTX 275 cards, it is readily available on their website. We decided to include it here because it is simply one of the best manufacturer-released overclocking and GPU monitoring tools in existence.

Above we have the main window which has every single feature you could possibly want right at your fingertips. Directly below the Precision logo are sliders to control the speed of the core and memory as well as simple buttons to link or unlink the core / shader speeds as well as fan speed control. Next to the fan speed control is a button to toggle on and off the automatic fan speed profiles. To the left of the sliders is an area to select individual GPUs if you are running more than one card in SLI as well as a button to sync or unsync the clock speeds of all GPUs.

To the left of the settings section is where all of the GPU health and clock speed monitors are located in a setup reminiscent of Rivatuner. Directly below this is a button to set the program to apply all your new settings when Windows boots as well as a box where you can save and select custom profiles.

GTS250-212.GIF

Click on image to zoom

In the Properties dialog box, there are a stunning number of options for you to play around with. This includes compatibility with certain Logitech keyboards’ LCDs, setting on screen displays for your GPU temperature and other properties, screen shot capture options and countless other things. It is brilliant, well done and only available if you are running and EVGA card.



MSI CoreCenter
System Resource Usage: ~5.5MB

Even though MSI doesn’t offer their CoreCenter software on the installation disk with their cards, it is linked directly from the product pages so we decided to include it here.

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-62.jpg

When it first starts, CoreCenter opens in a small compact window on the bottom right-hand corner of your screen. Here you are able to see clock speeds as well as power savings if you happen to have one of the power savings modes enabled. At the left there is a number of tabs ranging from AV to Cool that can be selected to overclock or downclock the card to suit your needs. Most of these are superfluous considering Nvidia’s own power savings features will be more than enough for pretty much anyone. At the bottom, there are four circles with pictograms that can be pressed in tandem to bring up…

2404a1b70615bc88.bmp
2404a1b70617800d.bmp

This thing. When you dig a bit deeper, CoreCenter offers you everything from overclocking options to hardware monitoring and even incorporates functions for motherboard monitoring of you have an MSI motherboard. Unfortunately, even though we had an MSI card installed when we took the above screenshots, the voltage options were not available and the fan options were locked. Ironically, EVGA’s Precision tool allows you to control the fan on MSI Nvidia cards without an issue.

All in all, we think MSI could have done a lot more with this software. First and foremost it isn’t user friendly at all and most of the options are locked by default. Overclocking using it is a serious pain in the butt yet if you venture into the Help documents, you won’t find much help. If you have had success with this program, we would love to hear from you.
 
Last edited:
xentr_thread_starter
Test System & Setup

Test System & Setup

Processor: Intel Core i7 920(ES) @ 4.0Ghz (Turbo Mode Enabled)
Memory: Corsair 3x2GB Dominator DDR3 1600Mhz
Motherboard: Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Cooling: CoolIT Boreas mTEC + Scythe Fan Controller
Disk Drive: Pioneer DVD Writer
Hard Drive: Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB
Power Supply: Corsair HX1000W
Monitor: Samsung 305T 30” widescreen LCD
OS: Windows Vista Ultimate x64 SP1


Graphics Cards:

EVGA GTX 285 (Stock)
GTX 275 896MB (Stock)
Sapphire HD 4890 (Stock)
BFG GTX 275 OC
EVGA GTX 275 FTW
EVGA GTX 275 1796MB
Gigabyte GTX 275
MSI GTX 275 Twin Frozr
Sparkle GTX 275 Plus



Drivers:

Nvidia: 185.85 WHQL
ATI 9.5 WHQL


Applications Used:

3DMark Vantage
Call of Duty: World at War
Crysis: Warhead
Fallout 3
Far Cry 2
Grand Theft Auto IV
Left 4 Dead
Tom Clancy’s Hawx


*Notes:

- All games tested have been patched to their latest version

- The OS has had all the latest hotfixes and updates installed

- All benchmarking is done on a fresh install of Vista

- All scores you see are the averages after 4 benchmark runs

All game-specific methodologies are explained above the graphs for each game
 
xentr_thread_starter
Call of Duty: World at War

Call of Duty: World at War


HD4890-27.jpg

To benchmark this game, we played through 10 minutes of the third mission (Hard Landing) starting from when the player first enters the swamp, through the first bunker until the final push onto the airfield. This was benchmarked using FRAPS.

1680 x 1050

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-70.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-71.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-72.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-73.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-74.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-75.jpg
 
xentr_thread_starter
Crysis: Warhead (DX9)

Crysis: Warhead (DX9)


HD4890-23.jpg

To benchmark Warhead, we recorded a 5 minute timedemo on the Ice level which included ranged and hand to hand combat. The sequence was then played back using the Crysis Benchmarking Tool from HOC.

1680 x 1050

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-120.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-121.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-122.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-123.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-124.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-125.jpg
 
xentr_thread_starter
Crysis: Warhead (DX10)

Crysis: Warhead (DX10)


HD4890-23.jpg

To benchmark Warhead, we recorded a 5 minute timedemo on the Ice level which included ranged and hand to hand combat. The sequence was then played back using the Crysis Benchmarking Tool from HOC

1680 x 1050

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-126.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-127.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-128.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-129.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-130.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-131.jpg
 
xentr_thread_starter
Fallout 3

Fallout 3


HD4890-21.jpg

For these Fallout 3 benchmarks we decided to use one of the more graphically intensive portions of the game: a gameplay session which starts at the exit from Vault 101, through Springvale, over a small hill towards Washington and then back towards Megaton. Within this session two ants were fought near Springvale. All in all, the gameplay time is about 6 minutes.

1680 x 1050

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-76.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-77.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-78.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-79.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-80.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-81.jpg
 
xentr_thread_starter
Far Cry 2 (DX9)

Far Cry 2 (DX9)


HD4890-24.jpg

Even though Far Cry 2 has its own built-in benchmarking tool with some flythroughs and “action scenes”, we decided to record our own timedemo consisting of about 7 minutes of game time. It involves everything from run-and-gun fights to fire effects. The built-in benchmarking too was then set up to replay the timedemo and record framerates

1680 x 1050

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-82.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-83.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-84.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-85.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-86.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-87.jpg
 
xentr_thread_starter
Far Cry 2 (DX10)

Far Cry 2 (DX10)


HD4890-24.jpg

Even though Far Cry 2 has its own built-in benchmarking tool with some flythroughs and “action scenes”, we decided to record our own timedemo consisting of about 7 minutes of game time. It involves everything from run-and-gun fights to fire effects. The built-in benchmarking too was then set up to replay the timedemo and record framerates

1680 x 1050
GTX-275-ROUNDUP-88.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-89.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-90.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-91.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-92.jpg


GTX-275-ROUNDUP-93.jpg
 
xentr_thread_starter
Grand Theft Auto IV

Grand Theft Auto IV


HD4890-19.jpg

Due to the limitations the game puts on the graphics presets and how they can be adjusted, we decided to tweak our install. To do this we added a .txt file within the main game install folder with the command parameters –norestrictions and –nomemrestrict. In addition to this, we added the -availablevidmem (+memory multiplier) to effectively fool the game into thinking 512MB and 896MB cards were in fact able to access about 1GB of memory. Unfortunately, this means a 512MB or 896MB card will in fact be accessing slower system memory to make up for the discrepancy but that is a necessary evil to get comparable results. Finally, view distance was limited to 50%. Here are the full settings we used:

HD4890-28.jpg

In this test we didn’t use the built-in benchmark but rather used a 10 minute gameplay sequence during in-game daylight conditions of which approximately 6 minutes were spent on foot while the remainder was spent driving. Basically, we find the in-game benchmark isn’t worth spit. All results were recorded with FRAPS.


1680 x 1050

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-94.jpg


1920 x 1200

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-95.jpg


2560 x 1600

GTX-275-ROUNDUP-96.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top