ATI has given Nvidia some staunch competition on the 3D card front the past six months or so, but with the dual-chip GeForce GTX 295, Nvidia has raced back to the top of the performance pile. At $500 for a boxed version (from Nvidia's board partners), the GTX 295 is aimed at serious PC gamers, but it's also the best value among high-end boards, taking out the best chips from ATI. This card requires a beefy PC to run it because of significant power demands, but for anyone with the financial and electrical wherewithal to put the GTX 295 to work, you'll enjoy the best 3D hardware currently on offer.
The Good
The Bad
The Bottom Line
Like its primary competition, the ATI Radeon HD 4870X2, the GeForce GTX 295 uses the familiar two-chips, one-card model we've seen from both Nvidia and ATI in the past. The Radeon HD 4870 X2 has been popular component in a few recent high-end gaming PCs, and with support for multiple graphics chips and graphics cards so prevalent in PCs these days, these dual-chip cards provide gamers with a relatively easy way to set up a quad GPU configuration.
The popularity of ATI's card had to do with the fact that it outperformed Nvidia's previous high-end behemoth, the $600 single chip GeForce GTX 280, for roughly $100 to $150 less. The GeForce GTX 295 closes both of those gaps, and also offers some noticeable power consumption savings.
AMD's aggressive pricing of its high-end Radeon cards surely contributed to Nvidia bringing the GeForce GTX 295 in for under $600. Nvidia suggested $500 as the starting price for this card, and retailers seem to be following that line so far. This is roughly the same as the price for stock Radeon HD 4870 X2 cards.
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 295 | Asus EAHD4870X2 | |
| Price | $500 | $479 |
| Manufacturing process | 55nm | 55nm |
| Core clock | 576MHz | 750MHz |
| Stream processors | 240 (2) | 800 (2) |
| Stream processor clock | 1.24GHz | NA |
| Memory | 1792MB | 2GB |
| Memory speed | 2.0GHz DDR3 | 3.66GHz DDR 5 |
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
| 1,400 x 960 | Â Â | 1,680 x 1,050 | Â Â | 1,920 x 1,080 | Â Â |
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
| 1,440 x 900 | Â Â | 1,680 x 1050 | Â Â | 1,920 x 1200 | Â Â |
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
| 1,440 x 900 | Â Â | 1,680 x 1050 | Â Â | 1,920 x 1200 | Â Â |
(Shorter bars indicate better performance)
| Load | Â Â | Idle | Â Â |


