Geforce GTS 450 appears on shelves

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

08-30-2010, 04:52 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Stupid, I will keep my overclocked G92 thanks...

If I really wanted a 128bit memory bus I'll just slap in my old 6600GT... really the last decent card with a 128bit bus. Even the 6600GT was bottlenecked by it...

Anything after that is just clinging onto a technological relic.
08-30-2010, 05:02 PM
Spectrobozo

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAW-Raptor22

Stupid, I will keep my overclocked G92 thanks...

If I really wanted a 128bit memory bus I'll just slap in my old 6600GT... really the last decent card with a 128bit bus. Even the 6600GT was bottlenecked by it...

Anything after that is just clinging onto a technological relic.

but you are comparing a "1800MHz" 128bit(57GB/s) memory with a 500mhz 128 bit memory(16GB/s)?
I think there is little point in comparing cards by memory bitrate, what about HD2900XT vs HD5770? the 5770 is a very decent card, if the GTS 450 can have similar performance and power consumption, it will be a good card for it's price point, and there is probably some space for another card (slightly faster?) based on gf106...

anyway, I think the ideal upgrade for the g92 users is at least a GTX460,
08-30-2010, 05:10 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spectrobozo

but you are comparing a "1800MHz" 128bit(57GB/s) memory with a 500mhz 128 bit memory(16GB/s)?
I think there is little point in comparing cards by memory bitrate, what about HD2900XT vs HD5770? the 5770 is a very decent card, if the GTS 450 can have similar performance and power consumption, it will be a good card for it's price point, and there is probably some space for another card (slightly faster?) based on gf106...

anyway, I think the ideal upgrade for the g92 users is at least a GTX460,

I just hate how it looks on paper that our cards are getting dumber... :p:

We went from a 384 bit bus to a 256 bit bus to a 192bit bus and now back to a 128 bit bus on midrange cards... :p:

I'd rather have a 260 as an upgrade from a G92...

But I would rather have a G92 or G80 Ultra than a gf106...
08-30-2010, 05:28 PM
trinibwoy

That's your problem right there. Just forget about how things look on paper as that's irrelevant.
08-30-2010, 05:36 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

That's your problem right there. Just forget about how things look on paper as that's irrelevant.

However when my G92 does what I need it to, I dont really care.

I didnt even like Stepping up my GTS320 for my old 8800GT... :p:
08-30-2010, 06:16 PM
cegras

Quote:

Originally Posted by trinibwoy

The bajillions of people who don't upgrade every year? "Enthusiast" short-sightedness at work again :)

The bajillions of people who didn't upgrade from the 7xxx for any of the current cycles? (Steam Hardware Survey)

Of those that upgrade, much more have sprung for ATI's 5xxx compared to Fermi.
08-30-2010, 06:25 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by cegras

The bajillions of people who didn't upgrade from the 7xxx for any of the current cycles? (Steam Hardware Survey)

Of those that upgrade, much more have sprung for ATI's 5xxx compared to Fermi.

I still use my 7950 GX2 in my backup PC, its about as fast as my 9800GT in some games... :p:
08-30-2010, 06:29 PM
saaya

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vardant

What benchmarks? I just skimmed through CB.de review and the closest it gets is 20%, otherwise it's mostly 45-50% faster and sometimes even 80-100% in some extreme cases.

my bad, it was the 465 that loses to the 275 in some benchmarks
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...tx-465_14.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by K404

nVidias cheapest DX11 card. Given the heat output, that cooler should make for a cool running card.

Probably only 1 PCI-E power plug needed...

shame about the likely performance and cost though

its going to need a power plug?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Well, it depends. If you bought the card for $99, my guess is that purchase was made late in the product's lifespan. You can't expect a brand new GPU to carry the same price point as an EOL one.

sorry, but all this "x and y arent competing so dont compare them" is making me sick... thats what the manufacturers want you to think, but thats not the case...

you CANT launch a part that is barely faster than a 1-2 year old part, for a price that is notably higher than the previous one... it doesnt matter if the price had been this low for the previous product since it launched or only dropped recently... WHO CARES? :P

a new part has to be faster or cheaper, and ideally both...
if a product doesnt get there, then why should people buy it? cause its new? thats all?
08-30-2010, 06:36 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

my bad, it was the 465 that loses to the 275 in some benchmarks
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...tx-465_14.html

its going to need a power plug?

sorry, but all this "x and y arent competing so dont compare them" is making me sick... thats what the manufacturers want you to think, but thats not the case...

you CANT launch a part that is barely faster than a 1-2 year old part, for a price that is notably higher than the previous one... it doesnt matter if the price had been this low for the previous product since it launched or only dropped recently... WHO CARES? :P

a new part has to be faster or cheaper, and ideally both...
if a product doesnt get there, then why should people buy it? cause its new? thats all?

Agreed, my friend was scratching his head as to why he would buy a GT240 for $100 when he bought an 8800GTS 512MB for $55...

Its ridiculous...
08-30-2010, 07:07 PM
CrazyNutz

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAW-Raptor22

Stupid, I will keep my overclocked G92 thanks...

If I really wanted a 128bit memory bus I'll just slap in my old 6600GT... really the last decent card with a 128bit bus. Even the 6600GT was bottlenecked by it...

Anything after that is just clinging onto a technological relic.

128bit gddr5 = 256bit gddr3
256bit gddr5 = 512bit gddr3
etc....

gddr5 has allowed cards to shrink (i.e. half as many PCB traces) while maintaining
the same or better performance, with less power consumption, and lower cost :up:
08-30-2010, 09:38 PM
trinibwoy

Quote:

Originally Posted by cegras

The bajillions of people who didn't upgrade from the 7xxx for any of the current cycles? (Steam Hardware Survey)

Of those that upgrade, much more have sprung for ATI's 5xxx compared to Fermi.

Sorry, I'm not following you. The market of people who haven't upgraded this cycle is far greater than the market of those that have - i.e. your comment about everyone having 5770's was utter silliness. What do Fermi sales so far have to do with future sales of cheaper, lower power Fermi derivatives that are more attractive to the mainstream market?
08-30-2010, 11:28 PM
-Boris-

GTS 450: 128Bit GDDR5 3600MT/s = 57.6GB/s
GTS 250: 256Bit GDDR3 2200MT/s = 70,4GB/s

Can we put the bandwidth discussion aside now? ;)

I think we can conclude that GTS 450 is possibly even cheaper to produce than GTS 250, and sells to a much higher price. At the same time it will not give any significant boost in performance since fermi is less efficient, it does have more shaders, but at lower clocks, and with less TMUs. But nVidia gets their money.
08-30-2010, 11:34 PM
mindfury

The asus card is overclocked,925Mhz core.

http://i38.tinypic.com/21e5mrs.jpg
08-30-2010, 11:55 PM
eddieobscurant

Here is the rest asus top 925/1850/4000 instead of 783/1566/3600

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/6982/cg1z.png

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/2114/cg2z.png

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/8864/cg3z.png

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1302/img4402z.jpg

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/4579/img4405z.jpg

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/999/img4411z.jpg

http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/8251/img4414z.jpg

http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/710/img4418z.jpg

http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/7954/img4419z.jpg

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/4913/img4420z.jpg

http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/101/img4421zn.jpg

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/9376/img4422z.jpg

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/7738/img4427zw.jpg

http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/1869/img4431z.jpg

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/2087/img4432z.jpg

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/4100/img4433z.jpg

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/4800/img4457zf.jpg

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/2166/cojaa12.png

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/166/cojaa16.png

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/3073/cojaa19.png

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/1199/cojwo12.png

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/5558/cojwo16.png

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/5830/cojwo19.png

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8501/cryaa12.png

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/6348/cryaa16.png

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/9051/cryaa19.png

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2469/crywo12.png

http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/4366/crywo16.png

http://img808.imageshack.us/img808/7403/crywo19.png

http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/7324/faraa12.png

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/6196/faraa16.png

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/1277/faraa19.png

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4585/farwo12.png

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/8858/farwo16.png

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/677/farwo19.png

http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/9136/ha12.png

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1849/ha16.png

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/5807/ha19.png

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/8255/wic12.png

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/4183/wic16.png

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/78/wic19.png
08-31-2010, 12:38 AM
mAJORD

Weak at stock, but a good OCer.

I'm not a huge fan of the HD5770's performance, and now it's 12mths old, so this is quite a boring release at this time.

The full refresh of 40nm (6xxx series) is probably going to hurt this card. Maybe they should have released higher stk clocks if the OC models can clock so high
08-31-2010, 01:42 AM
saaya

im impressed it manages to get close to a 460 768mb... that makes it look like the 460 768mb is bandwidth starved... very bandwidth starved...

but even when overclocked it doesnt beat the 5770, but only reaches about the same level of performance... its a bit faster, yes, but not enough to make a difference...

Quote:

Originally Posted by mAJORD

Weak at stock, but a good OCer.

mhhh yes and no... it overclocks a lot, but the performance barely scales... it only gains a couple of additional fps when pushing it from ~750 to ~950... :/

Newegg:
180-190$ HD5830
180-190$ GTX460 768MB
130-140$ HD5770

so, how much is it going to cost?
if its anything above 160$, its a better option to get a 460 or 5830... faster than a 450 at stock and they both overclock very well...
or you get a 5770 for LESS, which is FASTER at stock, and overclocks pretty well too

if it costs 120-140$, its going to be a nice entry level/mainstream card!

my guess is that its going to launch for 169$ or something silly like that... :P
08-31-2010, 01:54 AM
eddieobscurant

i think the article said around 140$ or euros , and if i remember correct the gts 450 consumes 40watt more than 5770 under load.
08-31-2010, 02:00 AM
-Boris-

I fail to see what news GTS 450 bring. A more expensive and hotter piece than HD5770, one year later. And can't compete with 5830 or GTX 460.
GTX 460 seems to be a much nicer option IMHO.
08-31-2010, 02:30 AM
saaya

im still confused how this 192sp chip gets so close to a 336sp chip
and its even more confusing as it not only has 40% less sps, but is 128bit vs 192bit of the gtx460 768mb... 0_o
sure, its clocked to 900mhz+ while the gtx460 768mb is ONLY clocked to 700mhz... but thats a boost of only 28%...
like i said, it looks like the 460 768mb is a bit bw limited... makes me wonder if the 460 1gb is bw limited as well... does it scale a lot with increased mem clocks?
08-31-2010, 03:00 AM
jmke

this should sum it all up nicely:

http://a.imageshack.us/img801/6152/clipboard01mu.png
08-31-2010, 03:08 AM
Kingcarcas

Who would be interested? I would, my 9800 stopped working with GPUGrid and was no longer recommended so i switched to a GT240, made some money on the deal and will be interested in a better card down the road, moving this one to the other PC. ATI is useless to me since it doesn't run GPUGrid IIRC.
08-31-2010, 04:30 AM
Boissez

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddieobscurant

i think the article said around 140$ or euros , and if i remember correct the gts 450 consumes 40watt more than 5770 under load.

It's a Fermi all right. About equivalent to a HD5750 with a 50% higher TDP :shakes:
08-31-2010, 04:46 AM
SKYMTL

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

sorry, but all this "x and y arent competing so dont compare them" is making me sick... thats what the manufacturers want you to think, but thats not the case...

you CANT launch a part that is barely faster than a 1-2 year old part, for a price that is notably higher than the previous one... it doesnt matter if the price had been this low for the previous product since it launched or only dropped recently... WHO CARES? :P

a new part has to be faster or cheaper, and ideally both...
if a product doesnt get there, then why should people buy it? cause its new? thats all?

Wait a sec while I put on my tinfoil hat.

Seriously, you can talk until you are blue in the face about what manufacturers "should" do but it doesn't mean a darn thing. The reality is that companies in every industry do this. Ford, Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Toyota, clothing retailers, heck even Tupperware jacks up their prices when they add features between one product generation and the next. The difference between the last generation and this one is huge from a feature MARKETING standpoint: DX11. No, there aren't that many games with it but sine when has that stopped advertising?

I'm not sayings this is right or wrong but it's the reality of the situation. In addition to that, you CANNOT compare the launch price of a NEW product to the clearance price of the last generation. Launch MSRP versus launch MSRP is what you should be looking at.

I should also remind you that once again you are basing your statements on rumors. Price wise and performance-wise especially considering the final release drivers for the card have not been finalized.
08-31-2010, 05:37 AM
3Deye

ASUS GTS 450 TOP: Full Review
http://gpudesign.bafree.net/asus-gts...op-full-review
08-31-2010, 05:48 AM
eXa

How would this be as a physix card?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page