Upgrade to gtx285

Hi, currently I have 2 8500gt 1gb video cards and I was wondering if/what difference there would be if I upgraded to a single gtx285?

I have an intel q6600 processor 2.4ghz, 4gb ram, 500gb hard drive and I have windows xp sp2.

Thanks

There would be a massive difference.

Even going with a slightly lower end card like a GTX 275 or a GTX 260 Core 216 you would gain a ton of performance over your 8500gt's.

sounds good,

so game wise would it improve them a lot or would the rest of my pc limit it??

I have a few "game maps" which require physx (not sure how to spell it) so would this card be able to play them without the lagg that I have now?

Thanks

Well your rig may hold it back in certain games. That and it would be worth checking if you have a PCI-E 16x or a PCI-E 2.0 16x slot as well.

Depends on what settings you run and such. What resolution do you run at? A lower resolution your rig will hold you back more than at a higher resolution as it will be more CPU dependant at a lower resolution.

As for whether or not it will make a difference when it comes to physx. I can't guarentee you anything but it should help some. However the physx thing is really designed to have a seperate GPU to only had the physix calculations for the game, so you won't quite have the full "physx experience".

I'll wait for stang to chime in further, he will know more.

1680 by 1050

I'm not sure how to check which I have but my motherboard is a ASUS p5n e sli.

and thanks, will wait to see what he posts.

So, could I use my current card as the physx card and the gtx285 for the rest??

I would say You wouldnt even need a card like that for 1650x1080. My 8800gt can do 2048x1152 with a lot of games maxed.

As for using a card for physx I do believ its gotta be in the same family to use it . So a 8800gt would be the best card you could get. Used they go for 50-60. new around 80.

I run mine with a e6600 @3.4ghz, 4gb ddr2 ram (mixed) and xp and at 2048x1152 which is higher than 1080p so I dont think you would have a slowdown at your resolution.

First off I would agree with the others here that you really do not need a GTX 285 for 1680x1050. First you have to take into account the difference between the 8500 GT and the GTX 285..you can refer here to see how the specs compare...but your talking about 30x the potential performance if not more. You are talking about 15x as many shader processors alone, ignoring the fact that they run at higher speeds and can process more data. It is just unthinkable performance leap forward from 8500 GT SLI.

But really, for 1680x1050 a GTX 285 wont really be fully utilized and I wouldn't suggest buying one unless you have immediate plans to upgrade your monitor to something that pushes at least 1080p (or 1920x1200). For 1680x1050 a card like the GTS 250 will perform incredibly well and in only a few select games would you need anything more than what it can provide. Games like Crysis, Fallout 3, or Farcry 2 for instance, a GTX 260 can be about 20-25% faster than the GTS 250 so if you want to knock up the AA/AF and other post processing eye candy, it'll be a better route.

A nice GTX 260, such as this will currently set you back $165 ($145 after rebate), and it will offer you all the performance you need to max out all your favorite games, and you'll be saving $150 that you could put towards other upgrades such as to your ram, hard drive, processor, cooling etc. So really, I would focus my attention on the GTS 250 or GTX 260, anything higher will not be fully utilized and will not last you any longer. By the time a game rolls around in a few years where a GTX 260 struggles to get smooth frame rates, the GTX 285 will be in the same boat.

*edit*
And yes, you should be able to use your 8500 GT as a dedicated physx card for games that support it, you would simply go into your nvidia control panel, and under "3d settings", select "set SLI and physx configuration", and simply change "Set Physx GPU accelearation" to "enabled on: Geforce 8500 GT". I don't, however, know how well this scenario would work for you as you may be better off using the shared power of a higher end card like a GTX 260 instead, I guess you will just have to see and compare your results.

Hi, thanks for all the advise, will take that on board especially since it saves me a bunch of money and I should still be able to notice a difference.

Also, I might be complety wrong but you said that it's not worth getting a better card at my resolution but with a better card won't I be able to just increase my resolution, isn't that sorta the point. My monitor is a LG Flatron L225WS.

Since I live in the UK, I will order from here, so just wondering which card you thought was the best. (ther's like 9 different versions of the gtx260)

novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a1049x1y0z1p2s0n0m0

Thanks again.

well the LG Flatron L225WS you have, has a maximum resolution of 1680x1050, so you will not be able to go higher than that. If you are running at a lower resolution than that right now, then you will be able to run that maximum resolution with virtually any new graphics card you can get today in this range. You always want to run an LCD at its native resolution as anything else requires scaling of the picture which has an effect on the image quality. So running at your native resolution of 1680x1050 will mean you get the clearest picture your monitor can provide.

If you have a monitor that goes higher than than 1680x1050, or plan on getting one in the near future, a GTX 260 will still be plenty of power. A GTX 260 will run 1920x1080, 1920x1200, or 2048x1152...basically everything under 2560x1600, smooth as can be with high details. You may sacrifice some AA/AF in some games, but with such a high resolution you dont have to worry so much about texture compression messing with your gaming experience. But again, look at the specific games you play and we can help you make the best decision.

As for which GTX 260 to choose...well there are a few things to consider. First note that not all GTX 260s are made equal, some are built on the original GT200 processor with 192 shader processors, some are built with the original GT200 processor with 216 shader processors, and some are built on the 55nm GT200b with 216 shader processors. So you have 3 flavors to choose from, but what you really want is the 55nm GTX 260 with 216 shader processors as it provides the best performance and the lowest heat/power consumption. Most 216s you will see today are the 55nm version, but if they are not labeled as such, dont hold your breathe.

Beyond that you want to look at the clock speeds because some cards are wildly overclocked and others are running the reference speeds from Nvidia. Stock clock speeds will be 576mhz core, 1242 mhz shader, and 1998 mhz memory. If you can get a card with higher clock speeds than this, you can get better performance. Granted, you can overclock a slower card by yourself, but some people simply prefer to pay an extra $10 and have it done for them by the company. What I would suggest from your list is this BFG model for 140. It runs slightly higher than the reference speeds, but you dont pay but a few bucks more than the cheaper models. BFG is a good company, no messing around with tech support if you ever need help - they are very direct and easy to deal with. Warranty is solid, and hell it comes with a free game

But just remember, going from dual 8500 GTs to a GTX 260 is a HUGE step up, its really something you wont believe till you see it. We are not talking about simply getting a few more fps, this is going to be BIG.

Thanks for all the info. I will probably be ordering that card soon.
will post if/when I have it all set up.

What would you suggest could be the next improvement, but not spending £500 on a processor

The cards all fitted and working now. Games look better than ever. I can play ut3 maxed out and the optimal settings thing on Crysis sets it to high and that looks brilliant.

My 3dmark score rose by 9000
fps rose by around 100 in ut3
and my furmark score rose by 3000

glad we could help, but now you see what I mean about how big the jump in performance was gunna be. A lot of people dont realize how fast technology advances and by how much a high end card out classes a low end card.

I think you would be happy with the gtx-285. At the beginning of the year i started with a 9800gt, then swapped to a 9800gtx 1 gig factory oc from evga, 2 months later i got the 285 and iam not looking back. Of course running max res on the 27.5 widescreen is just awesome. Crysis wars i play with best performance so i dont gain anything really and the card only jumps up 5 deg c when iam playing. Any other game.. cod4, cod wow, silent hunter 4 at max settings and no problems.

Intel core 2 Q9550 (12MB, 2.83GHz, 1333FSB)
EVGA 132-CK-NF78-A1 780I
Windows Vista home premium SP1, 64bit
8 Gig G-Skill ddr2-800
2x 500GB - 7200rpm Sata 3.0Gb/s, 32MB Cache Raid 0
EVGA GTX-285
Hahns g 27.5 ws
22"ws

I run 2x 260 GTX core 216's on a PC Power & Cooling 750 PSU on XP SP3 and its pretty cost efficient @ 1920x1200 resolution.

Most games are simply stunning on this rig, without getting a jaw dropping electric bill @ the end of the month!!