Nvidia GT 220 Reviews

LoadsaMoney · 12 Oct 2009 at 15:09

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GT_220/

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gt-220-review-test/

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/15920/1/

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=794

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/palit_gt220_sonic/

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/2962/galaxy_geforce_gt_220_1gb_video_card/index.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gt-220,2445-3.html

http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=3&id=3035

elpedro · 12 Oct 2009 at 15:12

ATI beware :eek:

!

Greebo · 12 Oct 2009 at 15:20

elpedro said:
ATI beware !

Errr why? I only read the first review and it's the same price as a 4670 but up to 30% slower?

ANd ATI to shortly have their low end 5 series cards out soon as well.

Or did I miss the sarcasm smiley?

elpedro · 12 Oct 2009 at 15:25

Greebo said:
Or did I miss the sarcasm smiley?

Just thought it was funny, after the reviews of the new 5850 and 5870 that instead of nVidia releasing their next gen, instead we are reading reviews of a card mainly for use as an OEM solution.

I love you really nVidia, I will be cracking your drivers 2moro to play with PhysX on my 5870 <3

Mr Paul · 12 Oct 2009 at 15:42

I thought DX10.1 was pointless

NickK · 12 Oct 2009 at 15:52

elpedro said:
ATI beware !

When compared to the one-year old Radeon HD 4670, which sits at an even lower price point, the HD 4670 wins in Performance, Price, Perf/Watt, Perf/Dollar

ETNiES · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:15

Another fail I see. I hope Nvidia do hit back with something big, it would be ****ty if they never came back from this downfall

Its_Me · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:18

looks OK for its price point, obv the 4670 is a better buy - but some ppl would go Nv over ATi just because.

Greebo · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:19

Mr Paul said:
I thought DX10.1 was pointless

You're kidding me right? Haven't you heard about all the dx10.1 patches coming out like Assassin's Creed?

faugusztin · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:19

But why buy GT210 or GT220 then ? You could buy same cards even before - it was just called 9500GT or 9600GT

.

@ETNiES: well, maybe soon you will read about new cool graphics card from "NVIDIA, graphical division of Intel"

.

Lightnix · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:20

NickK said:

Wait, this thing loses out to the 4670 in performance/watt? That's horrible considering the 4670 is still 55nm!

faugusztin · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:22

Lightnix, it loses in everything except the power usage in 3D, where obviously the more powerfull card needs more power

.

Orangey · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:22

nVidia Larrabee BBQ Edition... some people would have a field day with that.

faugusztin · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:26

Jesus, those press releases are hilarious :
http://www.techpowerup.com/index.php?105883

"ZOTAC GeForce GT 220 graphics cards feature 48 lightning-fast processing cores while the more affordable ZOTAC GeForce 210 features 16 processing cores."

"lightning-fast processing cores"

Lightnix · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:28

faugusztin said:
Lightnix, it loses in everything except the power usage in 3D, where obviously the more powerfull card needs more power .

Yeah, after glossing over a couple of reviews I've noticed this. Wow, what a pair of utter failure graphics cards.

Oh well, in more interesting 40nm related news:

And let's also not forget the rumors of AMD's mid-range next-generation Radeon HD 5700-series cards arriving in the near future (Ed.: like, tomorrow)

Monkeynut · 12 Oct 2009 at 17:30

They've not just dropped a ball with this, they've dropped the entire sack.

gvers · 12 Oct 2009 at 18:58

Monkeynut said:
They've not just dropped a ball with this, they've dropped the entire sack.

Roll on tomorrow. Lets see how it compares with the mid range 5xxx cards.

Locky · 12 Oct 2009 at 19:24

what a load of crap.

londonbairn · 12 Oct 2009 at 19:26

Great card, ordered 10 of them

Greebo · 12 Oct 2009 at 19:27

rafster said:
Great card, ordered 10 of them

You called Dell?