by Rob Williams on March 29, 2010 in Graphics & Displays
We’ve learned a lot about NVIDIA’s GF100 (Fermi) architecture over the past year, and after what seemed like an eternal wait, the company has officially announced the first two cards as part of the series; the GeForce GTX 470 and GTX 480. To start, we’re taking a look at the latter, so read on to see if it GF100 was worth the wait.
Five out of the seven current games we use for testing are either sequels, or titles in an established series. F.E.A.R. 2 is one of the former, following up on the very popular First Encounter Assault Recon, released in fall of 2005. This horror-based first-person shooter brought to the table fantastic graphics, ultra-smooth gameplay, the ability to blow massive chunks out of anything, and also a very fun multi-player mode.
Three-and-a-half years later, we saw the introduction of the game’s sequel, Project Origin. As we had hoped, this title improved on the original where gameplay and graphics were concerned, and it was a no-brainer to want to begin including it in our testing. The game is gorgeous, and there’s much destruction to be had (who doesn’t love blowing expensive vases to pieces?). The game is also rather heavily scripted, which aides in producing repeatable results in our benchmarking.

Manual Run-through: The level used for our testing here is the first in the game, about ten minutes in. The scene begins with a travel up an elevator, with a robust city landscape behind us. Our run-through begins with a quick look at this cityscape, and then we proceed through the level until the point when we reach the far door as seen in the above screenshot.



Similar to Call of Juarez, F.E.A.R. 2 favors ATI cards, and it’s evident here. Not to sound like a broken record, but with average FPS’ like this, all except the $100 and under cards can handle this game at most resolutions and detail settings.
|
|
|
|
NVIDIA GTX 295 1792MB (Reference)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
45
|
95.767
|
ATI HD 5870 1GB (Reference)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
62
|
91.733
|
NVIDIA GTX 480 1.5GB (Reference)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
52
|
82.357
|
ATI HD 5770 1GB CrossFireX
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
57
|
87.194
|
ATI HD 5850 1GB (ASUS)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
51
|
73.647
|
NVIDIA GTX 285 1GB (EVGA)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
39
|
62.014
|
NVIDIA GTX 275 896MB (Reference)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
37
|
57.266
|
ATI HD 5830 1GB (Reference)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
40
|
57.093
|
NVIDIA GTX 260 896MB (XFX)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
29
|
48.110
|
ATI HD 5770 1GB (Reference)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
31
|
47.411
|
ATI HD 5750 1GB (Sapphire)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
|
27
|
39.563
|
NVIDIA GTX 250 1GB (EVGA)
|
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
24
|
36.331
|
ATI HD 5670 512MB (Reference)
|
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
|
31
|
46.87
|
NVIDIA GT 240 512MB (ASUS)
|
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
|
30
|
45.039
|
ATI HD 5570 1GB (Sapphire)
|
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
|
22
|
40.430
|
With an average FPS of over 80, the GTX 480 can handle this game in all shapes and form. The best part is that it’s genuinely a great-looking title as well.