I believe once you get your GTX480 you will be able to experience this for real and not just literally (sorry GoldenTiger was not able to resist...).
Voted 4 for the good drivers and developer support Nvidia has.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
GTX 480: Your verdict
- Thread starter alg7_munif
- Start date
- Status
I believe once you get your GTX480 you will be able to experience this for real and not just literally (sorry GoldenTiger was not able to resist...).
Voted 4 for the good drivers and developer support Nvidia has.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,686
alg7_munif
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2006
- Messages
- 5,862
So it begins, the "ATI driver sucks" argument. Thank god that the bad driver didn't kill any video card because of the fan issue, oh wait...
Seems like if someone is in the market right now you either want to go ATI or wait for the refreshes from Nvidia on these new cards they're about to put out. That's the message I'm getting anyways.
I'm better off sticking with my GTX 280 SSC otherwise.
I'm better off sticking with my GTX 280 SSC otherwise.
UtherLazarus
n00b
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2009
- Messages
- 50
I gave it a 6, simply because heat production and noise levels pretty much kill what little performance boost it gets over the HD 5870 for me. It's kind of disappointing since I don't like to see either side have a bad run, but the reason I didn't score it lower is because of the potential I see in the new architecture.
Nvidia really had everything going against them. Building a massive chip utilizing a new architecture on a new and buggy fab process. But unlike GT200, this new arch looks to be quite scalable and seems it could really benefit from a smaller fab process. To me it seems similar to NV30 (not nearly as bad though) where the first line of chips from the new arch were total yawn fests, but later iterations really impressed.
Hats off to AMD, they won this round. Evergreen turned out to be a very efficient architecture, and it seems AMD will only improve on this in time. Here's to hoping the next round will provide better competition... because from the looks of it prices are going to stagnate.
Nvidia really had everything going against them. Building a massive chip utilizing a new architecture on a new and buggy fab process. But unlike GT200, this new arch looks to be quite scalable and seems it could really benefit from a smaller fab process. To me it seems similar to NV30 (not nearly as bad though) where the first line of chips from the new arch were total yawn fests, but later iterations really impressed.
Hats off to AMD, they won this round. Evergreen turned out to be a very efficient architecture, and it seems AMD will only improve on this in time. Here's to hoping the next round will provide better competition... because from the looks of it prices are going to stagnate.
To recap to GTX280 times. The card was also hot and big compared to the competition. I rushed to buy it after having a good experience with the 8800GTX and was upset once the 4870 scores come out just a few weeks after.
Still I sticked to it, bought a watercooling block to keep the thermals in check and only sold it a few month ago going to 5870s.
I sticked with it since it was offering a very "safe" and convenient gaming experience, the drivers were solid, almost all games have no issues and you do have special features such as PhysX (although except in Mirrors edge it is hard to notice the difference).
I do believe that many people choosing this card may do so for the above reasons. For this Nvidia needs to be given credit, they are branching out to provide strong products support and add features.
Still I sticked to it, bought a watercooling block to keep the thermals in check and only sold it a few month ago going to 5870s.
I sticked with it since it was offering a very "safe" and convenient gaming experience, the drivers were solid, almost all games have no issues and you do have special features such as PhysX (although except in Mirrors edge it is hard to notice the difference).
I do believe that many people choosing this card may do so for the above reasons. For this Nvidia needs to be given credit, they are branching out to provide strong products support and add features.
I can handle the power usuage, but I dislike a noisy video card. I had to return my 4870 X2 within a week due to the hoover it used. This is the only thing that concerns me on the 480. Sure putting it on water will solve this, but don't know if thats a wise, longterm investment.
Except there isn't going to be a refresh (at least at 40nm), unless nVidia purposefully lied about A3 being the final silicon. AMD will be releasing Northern Islands at 28nm and nV are going to want a new card to compete with them, not a refresh of current cards. But you never know. If you have the power supply (and either a high noise tolerance, well-insulated case or plan to watercool) then GTX480 is a viable option. GTX470 rather less so, but AMD do still have some catching up to do regarding GPGPU (although their DirectCompute performance is pretty impressive). OpenCL support still requires the Stream SDK afaik (I have it installed on my 4870 rig, but it really should be part of the unified driver by now), and 3D interop is only a preview feature. I would like them to support CUDA (developer preference), but that isn't likely to happen.
For most gamers with the DX11 itch, yes I would tend to agree that the 5k series is still the best option. The 5850 is the only card worth a score of 10 imo, although the MSRP hike has arguably knocked it back to a 9.
Well yeah there is that, they might pull a rabbit out of their hat. But really they have had almost as long to work on drivers as AMD have. They've acknowledged a problem with 2560x1600 performance though, so we can at least expect increases there
I don't think driver updates will improve performance drastically. Sure, it is speculating, but because of all the hardware problems, and all the delays, NVIDIA had more than enough time to optimize the drivers for this generation of cards. That was basically the only thing they had full control over, so it's probable that they took advantage of the delays and hardware problems by optimizing their drivers further.
[X]eltic;1035513025 said:
Well in some DX9 and DX10 games GTX 480 has no issue being 40-50% ahead of 5870. In others such as Crysis its barely ahead if not slightly slower. Considering that this is giant overhaul of nVidias core architecture there is still probably tons of ways that the drivers can be optimized for higher performance. Look at ATI's own HD 4870x2 when it came out. You would think that ATI would have the drivers and all the issues sorted out but no; when 4870x2 launched it had trouble beating GTX 280 decisively in most games.
But unless you really have to spend your money I would not buy GTX 480 and wait for its bigger & faster refresh.
Last edited:
Understood.
I have all of that for the most part except for water cooling. I've been amazed what I can get away with with good air cooling. If this card really isn't that much hotter or louder than the GTX 280 then I can live with it.
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1035456236&postcount=157
^^ I had at least one person make my jaw drop and suggest far more that I could get away with on my 750 watt PSU but I'm not sure I'd have the nerve to go as far as he's suggesting.
I'm not sure my PSU could handle a 5970 running 100 percent which means the crossfire mode and everything like that...could it?
I'm sure I can run a single GTX 480 without any problems.
^^ Overall, your post basically is spelling out what I've got jogging back and forth in my mind right now and what I'm thinking about.
The guys that wrote posts 126 and 127 also pretty much covered the gambit for what I'm thinking as well.
That's what my instincts are telling me upfront except for your own point, and it's a good one, about evolution of drivers. That could open this thing up a bit more several months from now just like any other GPU. Drivers matter and make a big difference, at least to a point.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,686
You can very easily run a 5970 full tilt on a good-quality 520w+ PSU with enough headroom to be comfortable. The GTX 480 takes close to the same amount of power, so you'd be fine with that as well.
Look at the load #'s. Remember these are from the wall power draws, factor in a 0.8 efficiency factor (80+ certified) for the internal power which is what a PSU is rated for, and you end up with plenty of room to spare without issue:
GTX 480 clocks in at about 392w from wall, 0.8x means around 330w internally, on an i7 system running 4ghz... 419w for the 5970, 0.8x comes to around 346w internally.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...s/30297-nvidia-geforce-gtx-480-review-29.html
Similar results here:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_gtx_480_470_performance/page18.asp
People have very grave misconceptions as to how much power is needed to run a high-end PC. You usually want to leave around 20% capacity internal headroom to be comfy... so on an average high-quality 80% efficient PSU, these numbers still fit well within what you'd want (400w or less internal draw, on a Corsair/PCP&C/Seasonic/other high quality PSU that is rated 500w or so).
Blazestorm
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2007
- Messages
- 6,940
Well that and it is wasn't helping that a lot of power supplies were vastly overrated, so when a 600 watt generic PSU wasn't able to power their system only pulling 200 watts they thought they needed a bigger PSU... but in reality it was just a shitty PSU to begin with.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,686
True enough, though I'd argue that also falls under the blanket of "do your research"... it's lame and misleading of the manufacturers, but then again so are bags of chips: they have a lot of air in them and look bigger than they actually are
. I always check sites like jonnyguru, hardocp (whose PSU reviews are actually pretty darn good), pcper, and other sites that do real, measured tests on specs like ripple, the internals, and maximum power draw/ratings.qft. was hoping the rumors were just rumors, but alas they werent!
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I gave it an 8 because the only things that are wrong with it are the heat and power. But the performance in multi-GPU is Kyle's words "awesomeness".
If heat and power bother you, don't get it. If you want the best performance for multi-monitor configs and don't care about the heat and power or are willing to deal with it for the performance then get it.
It's that simple for now. Still not necessarily an easy decision, I am thinking about 3x 5870 but that will be a substantially slower solution if not a lot cooler.
If heat and power bother you, don't get it. If you want the best performance for multi-monitor configs and don't care about the heat and power or are willing to deal with it for the performance then get it.
It's that simple for now. Still not necessarily an easy decision, I am thinking about 3x 5870 but that will be a substantially slower solution if not a lot cooler.
I was reading anantech.com's review of these as well and that's a good read to bounce off and compare with the excellent work always done here by Kyle and the gang.
I don't think anyone's really saying anything different from anyone else about all of these cards but it's worth reading if you haven't.
Also: Thanks for the information, Tiger.
What's this 2GB 5870 that's supposedly coming from ATI real soon? That could make this even more of an interesting landscape.
I don't think anyone's really saying anything different from anyone else about all of these cards but it's worth reading if you haven't.
Also: Thanks for the information, Tiger.
What's this 2GB 5870 that's supposedly coming from ATI real soon? That could make this even more of an interesting landscape.
thehybridfrog
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 422
I don't understand what all the hate is against nVidia fans who support the Fermi core. You would think they want ATI to be the only company on the market and charge 900 bucks for a 5970 and 500 for 5870 (or worse I guess).
As an enthusiast and fan of graphics in general, I want both these companies to succeed.
I will be buying a 480, and SLi'ing them once I understand the power and maybe WC. I acknowledge that "bang-for-buck" it is worse than the 5870, but who really gives a fuck in the end.
As an enthusiast and fan of graphics in general, I want both these companies to succeed.
I will be buying a 480, and SLi'ing them once I understand the power and maybe WC. I acknowledge that "bang-for-buck" it is worse than the 5870, but who really gives a fuck in the end.
Rattle
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2007
- Messages
- 2,841
1. Bad
I wanna see a respin with 512 and reasonable power consumption and more gaming performance.
I wanna see a respin with 512 and reasonable power consumption and more gaming performance.
nvidia fans don't give a fuck about what others think and try to downplay real issues with the Fermi. That's your right to spend your money any way you want but don't go around converting others into your beliefs.
Anandtech worded it as well as anyone could and I think this is what has a lot of people saying: "May as well wait for the real thing."
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3783
May as well wait for a "real" and 100 percent complete Fermi card. All this delay and still this? These are good cards obviously and I'm sure owners will be very happy with them but you see something like this and you look at the delay and it just doesn't sit fully well with a lot of folks and especially when you see how well ATI has been doing with no signs of slowing down.
That's my observation anyway.
I voted 4 for 480 SLI. If you got the cash, solar and wind power, and waterblocks, it's the way to go.
Yup, you can keep your furnace off in the winter if you live up North, you don't have to use your stove, and oh yeah, it'll play videogames real sweet, too.
terrybogard21
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 645
Heat is a huge factor, because over-clocking is so easy & the gains are really nice. With the % of performance increase over my XFX 5870; and I've yet to run into any issues. Nvidia is just to little to late to the market with a card of this stature. It'll still sell because of the name, & Nvidia's holding out of the card, but if you want to get great performance with a great deal ATi can do both & make you feel like you're room isn't the Arizona desert.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,686
Same with ATI fans and their cards... instead, mention anything positive about Fermi and you get jumped in a dark alley here.
sushiwarrior
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2010
- Messages
- 161
7, it is equal to a 5870 IMO (FPS scales linearly with price, pretty odd for high-end) with a lot of heat thrown in. With some driver updates I see this really beating the 5870. Not better, not really worse. Not a fail, but not a win.
EDIT: And the great SLI scaling makes that look like a great option, the cut-outs in the back of the PCB also let the 2nd card be reasonably cooled.
EDIT: And the great SLI scaling makes that look like a great option, the cut-outs in the back of the PCB also let the 2nd card be reasonably cooled.
That's very true, but you might be surprised by the number of folks who don't go for a decent brand and wonder why their system is unstable. You also have to factor in how that power draw figure is arrived at - for me, I go worst-case scenario and have prime95 running on all cores while Furmark is taxing the GPU. An unlikely load, I know, but I prefer to err on the side of caution when it comes to a stable PC. I do have a slightly overkill PSU for my system (TX650 powering a Q6600 @ 3.5, single GTX260 with a hefty OC, 5 HDD's, optical drive, 7 fans and an MCP655), but I plan to keep it for a while. I've had an 8800GTS in there running GPGPU as well, no problem. Just a shame it didn't make 'High' PhysX playable in Batman!
Had a run of bad luck with Enermax Liberty 620w supplies (used to swear by Enermax and Antec) that were blowing up under a modest load (back when I had an X1900XT).
What you are seeing mostly is not hating, but disappointment. The cards are 6 months late, have a much higher transistor count, higher power consumption and despite all of that, are still only 10-15-20% faster. A couple months ago NVIDIA said that the Fermi cards would 'blow AMD away' and that just didn't happen.
I am personally buying a Radeon HD 5870 for my new rig, since I am worried about the longevity of these cards. Despite the reassurance by NVIDIA, I don't believe that running the graphics card at or over 95C is good. I want components that run relatively quiet as well. That said, I certainly think the GF100 family has potential, it just needs a die shrink and some additional tweaks. I'm sure NVIDIA will be back sooner or later.
YeuEmMaiMai
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2004
- Messages
- 34,179
lol wut 5970 is the fastest single card on the market
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,686
It's still crossfire, just on one physical card. Fermi is the fastest single GPU which is what he's talking about.
2GB 5870 is not a response to Fermi - they are aimed at Eyefinity users, since a 1GB framebuffer is only rarely an issue even at 2560x1600 (and then it usually requires 8xAA). Since another gigabyte of high-speed GDDR5 is added power/heat and cost, single monitor users would actually be better served getting a GTX480 (TDP is not dissimilar btw, although actual power draw might be another matter).
- Status