Powerful GPU For 2009

NVIDIA

	GTX 285	GTX 275	GTX 260 Core 216	GTS 250 / 9800 GTX+
Stream Processors	240	240	216	128
Texture Address / Filtering	80 / 80	80 / 80	72/72	64 / 64
ROPs	32	28	28	16
Core Clock	648MHz	633MHz	576MHz	738MHz
Shader Clock	1476MHz	1404MHz	1242MHz	1836MHz
Memory Clock	1242MHz	1134MHz	999MHz	1100MHz
Memory Bus Width	512-bit	448-bit	448-bit	256-bit
Frame Buffer	1GB	896MB	896MB	512MB
Transistor Count	1.4B	1.4B	1.4B	754M
Manufacturing Process	TSMC 55nm	TSMC 55nm	TSMC 65nm	TSMC 55nm
Price Point	$360	~$250	$205	$140

ATI RADEON

	ATI Radeon HD 4890	ATI Radeon HD 4870	ATI Radeon HD 4850
Stream Processors	800	800	800
Texture Units	40	40	40
ROPs	16	16	16
Core Clock	850MHz	750MHz	625MHz
Memory Clock	975MHz (3900MHz data rate) GDDR5	900MHz (3600MHz data rate) GDDR5	993MHz (1986MHz data rate) GDDR3
Memory Bus Width	256-bit	256-bit	256-bit
Frame Buffer	1GB	1GB	512MB
Transistor Count	959M	956M	956M
Manufacturing Process	TSMC 55nm	TSMC 55nm	TSMC 55nm
Price Point	~$250	~$200	$150

The fact that its worst-case performance is still better than the GTX 260 core 216 and in the best case, it can hit that of the GTX 280 was a plus for the GTX 275. It often posted performance more in line with its bigger brothers than a $50+ cheaper part. This is pretty sweet for a $250 card, especially as many games these days rely very heavily on shader performance. The GeForce GTX 275 is a good fit for this price point, and is a good option. But then there's the Radeon HD 4890.

The 4890, basically a tweaked and overclocked 4870, does improve performance over the 4870 1GB and puts up good competition for the GTX 275. On a pure performance level the 4890 and GTX 275 trade blows at different resolutions. The 4890 tends to look better at lower resolutions while the GTX 275 is more competitive at high resolutions. At 1680 x 1050 and 1920 x 1200 the 4890 is nearly undefeated. At 2560 x 1600, it seems to be pretty much a wash between the two cards.

At the same time, there are other questions, like that of availability. With these parts performing so similarly, and price being pretty well equal, the fact that AMD parts can be bought starting today and we have to wait for the NVIDIA parts is an advantage for AMD. However, we have to factor in the fact that AMD driver support doesn't have the best track record as of late for new game titles. Add in the fact that NVIDIA's developer relations seem more effective than AMD's could mean more titles that run better on NVIDIA hardware in the future. So what to go with? Really it depends on what resolutions you're targeting and what the prices end up being. If you've got a 30" display then either card will work, it's just up to your preference and the items we talked about earlier. If you've got a 24" or smaller display (1920x1200 or below), then the Radeon HD 4890 is the card for you.