Printable View
Power....:eek:
From lab51.ro review using 980X at 4.2ghz which i trust.. i say 20% especially with 4AA and 8AA and especially ant 1920*1200.
And GTX 480 beats especially in DX11 new titles.
Anyway, GTX 470 is more appealing.
http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/...consum_fur.png
Looking at this it seems that 5870 OCed is doing really well against the GTX480 stock and even to some extend the GTX480 OCed.Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
Now the 5870 2GB matrix is 900Mhz and will most likely be good to go against the stock GTX480 price will determine how well it sells.
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im...E/GTX480-6.jpg
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im...0-MATRIX-6.jpg
the most disappointing thing i've noticed is that 2 overclocked 5870s are going to consume less than a single GTX480, run quieter and perform much better than the GTX480
the huge power consumption is a huge dealbreaker; power draw is 2 times higher than on the 5870 for 10-20% more performance
even the 5970 is much more power efficient than the gtx480 :shakes:
it's even worse with the gtx470; slower than the 5870 and still in almost the same power envelope as the 480 :(
but why would you get the matrix when sapphire has their 2GB vapor-x which is probably cheaper, has a well known to be good cooler and has a 25MHz clock advantage?Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
13% gap is the magic number for existing games without tessellation and/or physx.
Fermi architecture is a newborn, it is different and it came here to stay and thrive.
I expect more fermi optimized games to come and increase the gap between GTX480 and HD5870.
Fermi needs 28nm and more GPGPU (ie directcompute11) enabled programs to shine.
Unfortunately little can be done about power/nm/GPGPU in a year time frame from now.
I think I've never been so dissappointed by a new gen from nvidia as I am currently. Ok maybe it is the fastest single card (at stock speed) but a 6 month old card where all mods are available and there are coming some special editions with maybe 1500+ GPU our way maybe...I still prefer to bench 5870...
On the practical side I would never ever put that money-burner into my allday system...GPU 500€, power bill another 250€??? Ah yes and you need ear protection - 50€...maybe lots of Asperin also ^^
Also all reviews have been done in OPEN test systems - putting a 480 in a closed tower and thinking of summer with 32°C+ in my flat...lol that card will be killed before august for sure...
So I am one of thoose calling it: EPIC FAIL!
@xdan oh man please resize that image....
Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
Heh, the best quote I heard all day was:Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
The leakage must be awful for the process or something.Quote:
2 x 5850 in price, 2 x 5870 in power, just over 1 x 5870 in performance
Do i remember correctly, that amd had this same problem with hd4 series but they got it fixed in hd5 series. That would point in hw change. It very well might be nVidia wont be able to fix it in long time...Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB "AMD's so called answer for gf100" vs GTX 480 1.5GB
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...G_3139-big.jpg
vs
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...G_3128-big.jpg
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/02.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/02.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/03.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/03.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/05.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/05.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/06.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/06.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/07.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/07.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/09.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/09.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/10.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/10.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/12.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/12.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/13.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/13.png
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power:
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/23.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/17.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/24.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/18.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/25.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/19.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car.../a/N174/26.png
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...58702GB/20.png
That sums up nicely for me, AMD's answer is suppose to be a oced 5870 around 900-950mhz and this card fits the bill. Hopefully it costs $50-$70 less than the GTX 480 then it would make a lot of sense... :)
I don't quite recall the exact issue, but right now I'm thinking it was an issue with the memory clocking for GDDR5?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
I would like to see 2560x1600 8xAA (maybe 16x AF also) testing with 5850 2 GB, 5870 2GB, GTX 470, GTX 480, 5970 and 5970 4 GB
That would be awesome :cool:
The only gpu that was ridiculously hot at idle was the 4850, but it wasn't due to the gpu but rather the fan profile: the fanspeed was set to 0% by default and under load the fanspeed didnt increase that much (95'c at load while the fanspeed remained at 30%...). To fix this you just had to adjust said profile or set the fanspeed manually. Ati f'ed that up nonetheless ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
I've updated the Compliation of results I posted in the OTHER thread with HD5850, and some more review data as they came available. Thought i more appropriate here
It's a big img now so had to shrink it.
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/2...erev2small.png
FULL SIZE link: http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/5...omparerev2.png
and a Graph showing relative perf from AA/AF results compliation
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/7...hofresults.png
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Well, technically, if a repeat of the HD4890 is on the cards aka, HD5890 with say a 925/1300 clock, and the 2GB RAM would likely be close enough to a 480 in most reviews for them to justify a price premium for it..
Of course, it'd be better if it just replaced the 5870 pricepoint and brought the 480 down, but not much chance of that :rolleyes:
Thanks for that!Quote:
Originally Posted by mAJORD
Any idea why the hardware canucks have such a large difference?
Thanks for the numbers!
No clue on the HWC thing... its 5-6 points higher than the other ones it seems
Are there enough 2560 x 1600 data points to make a compilation of that as well?
Please stop quoting the images please... I'm on a 15 inch TFT and it sucks to scroll sideways!
No idea why canuckes results are that way.
Motiv can you Please delete the IMG bit out of the quote (i.e don't quote images) :) my graph is really pushing the limits with size as it is without annoying anyone heh
Zerazax.. sure, I'll do a seperate 2560x1600 with AA/AF, it's just I originally set out to stick to 1920 as it's such a common resolution. When collecting the data it was apparent the 480 suffers a real hit at 2560x1600 on a lot of the reviews, so It'd be interesting to compare for sure.
Are there any 3-sli reviews? I am interested in the numbers :)
Thanks for the summary mAJORD!
It looks like stock 480 is 14% faster than stock 5870 on average,while drawing a lot more power...
Imagines removed :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mAJORD
I was saying yesterday, before any results were out, that I lost faith in HardwareCanucks after the incredible bias 'big bang' nvidia driver review.
There 480/470 review has done nothing to change my mind about them.
The benchmarks you posted showed the Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB (925MHz/5000MHz ) to be a touch faster than the 5870 reference card (850MHz/4,800MHz)Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Personally, I do not think Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB is the 'answer" to GTX 480. Maybe a 5870 2GB at 1000MHz/5000MHz?
Edit: Hexus conclusion
Quote:
2,048MB frame-buffer is only really useful in isolated gaming cases
Seriously, does anyone review GTA 4, i've been through sodding 12 reviews and it's all just the same, Dirt 2, Far Cry, Crysis.. I DON'T CARE.
I've bought the 480 GTX for GTA 4/ Ballard of Gay Tony, and FSX.. And so far have no idea whether it was a good decision.
Anyone care to enlighten me, are these games reviewed anywhere?
I wonder why nvidia didn't tell them to use all minimum fps tests where in the one's I've seen even the 470 pulls ahead from the 5870.
minimum fps is why I'm picking nvidia this time around.
edit: @fiskov, GTA4 should get a bit of a boost because of the extra memory however FSX prefers high shader clocks on nvidia or higher clocked ATi cards so it might not be much better than a GTX 285 in FSX
From Anand's article:
So the rumours were true... Poor design. I wonder if this is limiting GTX480's performance...Quote:
When we asked NVIDIA about working with GDDR5, they told us that their biggest limitation wasn’t the bus like AMD but rather deficiencies in their own I/O controller, which in turn caused them to miss their targeted memory speeds.
I don't see how it can be of use... For dust cleaning purposes maybe?Quote:
One new thing that both cards do share in common is that the shroud is no longer a single large device; on the GTX 480 and GTX 470 the top of the shroud can be snapped on and off, allowing easy access to the heatsink and fan assemblies.
:up:Quote:
The GTX 470 is 9.5”, making it the same length as the Radeon 5850 (or nearly 1” shorter than the GTX 200 series).
And oh joy, it's a paper launch... :shakes:
:rofl:Quote:
If PhysX has less overhead on Fermi hardware, Batman is not the game to show it. On both the GTX 480 and the GTX 285, the performance hit on a percentage basis for enabling PhysX is roughly 47%.
Hahaha! PhysX rocks! :lol:
Pretty impressive GPGPU performance, however, crunchers and professional market are both going to be happy! :up:
What I don't get is why there is sometimes a bigger lead of GTX480 over 5870 at lower resolutions than on higher... Very odd. But great min framerate values, indeed.
And holy :banana::banana::banana::banana: 92C load temps in Crysis! :eek:
Holy #$%^, check the power consumption in Crysis! :shocked: 144W ahead of 5870!!!
:shakes:Quote:
At 64.1dB the GTX 480 is the loudest single-GPU card, beating out even our unreasonably loud 4890.
Well, I can't say I am terribly disappointed.Quote:
Finally, as we asked in the title, was it worth the wait? No, probably not.
The performance difference is there, albeit a small one.
What I'd like to see is overclocked performance under a good waterblock.
24/7 value of these cards without a waterblock is pretty low in my book...