Just tweeted on their twitter accountQuote:
New GTX has the same number of transistors at 4 Intel Quad Core i7 CPUs (3BB)
Printable View
Just tweeted on their twitter accountQuote:
New GTX has the same number of transistors at 4 Intel Quad Core i7 CPUs (3BB)
Best review yet:
http://translate.google.com/translat...ml&sl=fr&tl=en
Covers numerous games and concludes that 480 makes a difference about 15% - 20% with 4x-8xAA. Not as bad as some feared, but IMHO not worth it. Let's hope they'll correct stuff with drivers.
Ashley McBroom:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDiaz
"it has so much compute capabilities in it that it's gonna let you blow some :banana::banana::banana::banana: up"
Friday March 26, 2010 6:20 Ashley McBroom
6:20
You can "blow :banana::banana::banana::banana: up", like your power supply :rofl:
Very interesting. In some cases we have the 5850 beating the 5870 :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezmen
Still 5870 1gb comparison, wth. What I can't explain right now is how even when the single 480 beats out the 5870, 2x480 in SLI get demolished by 2x5870s, let alone the 5970.
6:22 Ashley McBroom: "2x the performance in gaming so you can tear stuff up" Friday March 26, 2010 6:22 Ashley McBroom
6:21 Ashley McBroom: He's showing perf charts and everyone is cheering Friday March 26, 2010 6:21 Ashley McBroom
6:21 Ashley McBroom: "pretty good from one generation to the next" Friday March 26, 2010 6:21 Ashley McBroom
6:21 Ashley McBroom: GTX 480 is up to 2x faster than the 285, sometimes MORE Friday March 26, 2010 6:21 Ashley McBroom
6:21 Ashley McBroom: Comparing perf of GTX 285 versus 480
OK WTF is he lying to people right there ? He must be showing SYNTHETIC performance charts. It just is NOT 2X or more faster than GTX 285, so far as we have seen in benches. Sure would like this to be true but of course he doesn't say that it is in most games and also of course the "up to" wording.
WoW...massive damage on that card man...seriously
That's across the board... strangely, in DX11, the advantage drops down to 3-12% at 4xAA in 2560x1600 and 15-19% at 8xAA. It's at -1% to 10% in DX11 without AA.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Looks like Fermi will be good with AA, just ~5870 without it
She?Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
Anyways, it sounds like they're talking about synthetics, cause most of the reviews so far peg it in the 30-40% faster than 285 range, and slightly more than 295, depending on SLI scaling..
6:27 Ashley McBroom:
Sorry, correction: not of Need For Speed, Battlefield Bad Company 2
6:26 Ashley McBroom:
Drew is inviting up Gordon Van Dyke, Lead Producer from Need For Speed at EA
:frag::shoot::explode2::explode::bsod:
http://i41.tinypic.com/rax99k.jpg
Yeah, pretty much that. Not bad, considering I use 4xAA for all games I can. Can't see any benefit of 8xAA though.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Catalyst 10.3b available here:
http://sites.amd.com/us/underground/...3-preview.aspx
why don't they properly broadcast this event through the Internet ?
First review to show 5870 faster than 480 in Dirt2 @ 2560 res.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
There are only 3 games in the world right now, Dirt2, Hawx, and Farcry2. I am going to go buy these three games and dump them in a huge firepit.
Warhammer 40.000: Dawn Of War 2
, No AA, No AF
1280x1024 http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...1280-pcie.html
1680x1050 http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...1680-pcie.html
1920x1200 http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...1920-pcie.html
2560x1600 http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
AA 4x + AF 16x
1280x1024, AA+AF http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...1280-pcie.html
1680x1050, AA+AF http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...1680-pcie.html
1920x1200, AA+AF http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...1920-pcie.html
2560x1600, AA+AF http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
double post sorry
GTX 480 epic fail? :D Any LN2 results?And 3D mark 03 are interesting too. ;)
Epic Fail is your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by ..::G80::..
:down: thats why i don't trust pr bsQuote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
No surprise the GTX480 comes out faster than the 5870 at higher res and AA. Now let's get a 2GB 5870 then compare.
pax (vid link) is live here if you missed the earlier link
Anyone calling this card a total winner or loser is emotionally attached to Nvidia or AMD (respectively :D).
Performance with AA justifies its price (if its indeed $500, and 5870 stays at $400), but it fails on power issues (power draw, temperature and the resultant noise). PhysX and CUDA can be counted as slight advantages. Everything considered, if I were building a rig today I might consider buying a 480. However, for people who already own a 5800/5900/GTX 295 this card is worthless to upgrade.
haha nvidia fanboy! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
Bad day?:p:
VIDEO Stream now live of PAX
it's hot it's noisy it's electricity eater it's whatever you never wanted it to be... it's sex.-)
More like "Hello ATI fanboy, go .... yourself?" Nope I'm having a great day thanks my stocks are up and plenty there to buy many GTX 480 SLIs. Tell me ATI fanboy what does ATI have to compete with GTX 480 SLI? That's right the answer is absolutely nothing. Crossfire is LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by ..::G80::..
BTW I wasn't the troll that came into the Fermi thread to say "GTX 480 epic fail?"
Hehe careful, these trolls are feisty! :) I don't think 20-30% faster with normal gaming settings for a high-end user (2560x1600, 2-4xaa) at a 20-25% higher price can be considered a failure by a long shot. Maybe these people don't actually buy cards, just sit on forums rooting for their "side" all day :p:? Anyway, I switched my preorder for GTX 480 to amazon since I have Prime with them and could get $4 overnight shipping for $32 less total, this morning :).Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
What I saw so far doesnt look very good for NV.
btw.: werent this thread only at page sixty-something few hours ago?
Being on a forum doesn't mean we need to forgo civility folks. If someone is toeing the line, MM or other mods will take care of them just fine ;). Ignore the nonsense and enjoy the benchmarks. We're here to have fun and shoot the breeze, not each other :).
guru3d review:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...70-480-review/
problem isn't price but power draw (and heat of course) i wonder what would pc be if nvidia had left all cores active :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
They're all failures!Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Both NV and ATI!:fight:
Long live S3!:rocker:
I can only speak for myself, but power draw is meaningless to me as is, for the most part, heat (unless it affects my CPU overclock).Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
Going through now... seems memory bandwidth is hurting it badly, as it falls flatter at 2560x1600 while it does really well @ 1920x1200. I see myself trying to oc the RAM a lot... :p:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcover
No no, 3dfx!!! VOODOO!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
Clearly he just came in to spew his BS and doesn't read or research. Good switch Amazon is close to #1 for me, Newegg and Amazon I always trust to get me something that I really want there's no BS with those two e-tailers.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
Anyway it is a good card right now and obviously given the architecture it has the ability to be even greater. It is likely to be 2x faster than GTX 280 for more things so my upgrade from GTX 280 SLI to GTX 480 SLI will give me 2X performance increases, DX11, and I don't see me having issues running anything full details 2560x1600 which is the only res I care about.
Performance and price wise everything is fine.
But the power consumption, the heat and the noise :shakes:
Maybe with some Bios editing and the upcoming Accelero XTREME GTX480 will help.
Now I'm pissed Fing PAPER LAUNCH BS... WTF is this they don't think PAPER LAUNCH is going to piss people off?
6:53 Ashley McBroom: "Reviews will be posting in about 10 minutes or so" and they'll be in stores in about 14 days
Total BS..... They better be at etailers sooner than 14 Fin days.
just went down.:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcover
seems gilbert is really high on this review rape etc wth :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcover
Since they're dead and apart of NV, they are failures!Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenTiger
At any rate I'll be giving both current ATI and NV cards a miss. Maybe the next gen will be good enough to warrant an upgrade.
Also I hope to the watercooling gods they sort out Fermi's power draw and heat issue.
I hope so too... I'm on a 9800GT 512 running 2560x1600 while waiting, since I sold my 5870 :p:.Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
What do you have currently? Perhaps you can wait for 2 more gens after that, certainly then it'll be worth the upgrade :)Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
I'm not a fanboy and I can't speak for him, but from the results we have so far 5970 CF beats GTX480 SLI:Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
http://www.ixbt.com/video/itogi-vide...2560-pcie.html
GTX 480 would be a success if it was priced close to the 5870, if it stays at $550 its a failure.
Good review but GUru3D ALWAYS puts the cards its reviewing at a positive light. Number-wise they are a good source but I don't really trust their conclusions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcover
90 pages heh... so when can we see an ATI 6000 series thread? xD
From the Guru3D conclusion:
I thought it would be the other way around? I saw from the charts that at 2560 x 1600, some games that were previously 20% faster at 1920x1200 fell to < 10% faster. As a 2560x1600 user I was hoping they'd have delivered better at that resolution... sighQuote:
What surprised me was the fact that say from 1280x1024 up-to 1920x1200 NVIDIA seems stronger than the competition. And at 2560x1600 things tend to equalize a much more.
up again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
LOL actually it doesn't, these benches are defective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
Currently on a 4870X2.Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
It replaced my dead 8800GTX.
But upgrading all depends on playing games at 1920x1200, if it can't cope anymore, or DX11 has reached the mainstream then I'll upgrade.
Atm I've no problem with anything, that said I've no interest in Metro.
At this rate I'll probably be waiting for the new cpus and mobos also. :p:
6:53 Ashley McBroom:
everyone take your glasses off...if you have green nail polish in the center of your glasses you just won a GeForce GTX 480
:mad: :mad: :shakes:
Why couldn't I be there? :shakes: :(
Anandtech review also up but SO slow...
I think the real killer is the performance per watt...
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N..._Fermi/33.html
I agree that the IXBIT review is suspect. But I'm not going to just take your word for it that 5970CF is beat by 480SLI either. :rolleyes: :welcome:Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
Evga has them on their site for preorder.
http://www.evga.com/articles/00528/
$499 for the GTX480
$529 for the GTX480 SC
$649 for the GTX480 FTX (Watercooled)
$349 for the GTX470
$369 for the GTX470 SC
$499 for the GTX470 FTW (Watercooled)
well, yeah, after reading the conclusion and overall performance charts from some of the reviews in the review-thread it seems that the gtx480 sits right between the 5870 and 5970. 10-15% faster than 5870, 10-15% slower than 5970.
huge letdown, tbh, especially due to the high power consumption :(
anandtech review seems up yes, but has trouble loading :D
ot edit, so rumours are confirmed, hot,marginally faster and expensive.
*starts saving for the gtx485*
Drivers: NVIDIA: 195.62Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
ATI: Catalyst 9.12
GTX 480: 197.17
Epic fail..
OCUK want £448 for a gtx480! US$667!
5970CF so you are talking about QUAD GPU, ya I never said that. However 5870CF a fair comparison does lose if that is what you intended to mean. You don't have to take my word for anything I've been in this thread the entire time and read every single post and looked at all the numbers. It is a known fact that SLI does provide a better multi-GPU experience vs CF there are only rare cases that CF is better if an SLI profile isn't available or optimized.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
Why do all these review sites use terrible servers?
Not bad, got it exactly 1 minute after being posted.
http://home.btconnect.com/fiskov/images/480.jpg
I suppose i better read the reviews to see what a mistake i made...
Early adopter prices!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bodkin
It's 309 for their cheapest 5870.
That's quite a difference in price if you ask me.
The 470 is in the 5870 price range at the moment.
Wait for prices to settle and stock to become available.
You know I really hate how they do the "Highest playable settings" BS, you see 20 FPS min and think "oh it loses" however they have it at 16XCSAA vs ATI at 12XCFAA, anyway hard to know which really wins there stupid way to review.Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
didn't notice, thx for the headsup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvese
computerbase ran the 5870 with 10.3a :up:
Might want to block out your name too ;)
Well I certainly wont be reading any more reviews from that site anymore. I mean really atleast use 10.2 if you're that lazy to update your review to the 10.3 preview that was released last week. But 9.12? Pure silliness.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
Might want to block out your name too ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by fiskov
/agree it's really annoying + obfuscating.Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
ray-trace demo:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cool_st...ml#/demos/2116
sled demo:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cool_st...ml#/demos/2117
btw. file not found with sled demo, I'm downloading the other..
Basically: HOT & LOUD. It's fast though :P
They're not there to tell you which wins, it's to tell you what kind of settings you should expect to max and still be able to play the gameQuote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
I find it more enlightening than comparing a game at 7 fps vs. 17 fps at settings where both are unplayable.... or comparing 120 vs. 140 fps where clearly the gpu isn't being taxed.
edit: I'd say your best bet is to compare it to Apples to Apples benches for games that are "borderline" playable in the Apples to Apples benches. As in, games hovering around 25-30FPS and see if its due to settings etc. that you will use
Even xtremesystems slowdowned a little.
http://pclab.pl/art41241-20.html
This polish site works good, and graphs are universal language, many games!
What i find funny is that except few cases, 5870 is CATCHING UP in 2560x and not slowing down :ROTF:
HA! Idle power usage!
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/...0_sli_review/7
For all those crying about electricity bills, unless you are playing 24/7 3d gaming I don't think the max 3D power usage is going to really make or break your wallet. So while doing anything other than gaming in 3D the 480 is lower power consumption than 5870, not by much but the nit pickers might see 10 cents saving per month!
http://news.firingsquad.com/hardware...0_performance/
Best review imo.
I just preordered a GTX480 from EVGA baby!
LINK EDITED: Someone posted it above.
Firingsquad review seems pretty good so far, reading through it now.
EDIT2: Anandtech's review shows the 480 pulling ahead nicely in many tests, and used the 10.3a Catalysts... HardOCP's is hard to muddle through due to the varied settings. Firingsquad shows it pulling ahead barely in some and very nicely in others. Oddly, 1920x1200 lead is usually better than the 2560x1600 results :eek: .
You said that ATI doesn't have anything to beat GTX480 SLI with. As I pointed out, that's not true. ATI still has the fastest single card and fastest multicard.Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
That's your personal preference. After using both CF and SLI I don't really have any issue with either, though drivers become more critical.Quote:
You don't have to take my word for anything I've been in this thread the entire time and read every single post and looked at all the numbers. It is a known fact that SLI does provide a better multi-GPU experience vs CF there are only rare cases that CF is better if an SLI profile isn't available or optimized.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com has the best reviews by far. They actually separated the GTX 470 & 480 into two different articles!
All I get is "Database Error"Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDiaz
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/n...5215/22207.png
Er... ok, NOW i've seen it all.
I lost faith with hardware canucks with the Nvidia driver fiasco. it was one of the most unbalanced reviews I had seen.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDiaz
I can't get on at the moment, but I suspect they'll be claiming the new Nvidia card is 200% faster than a 5970.
You are aware that in the link you provided 480 eats 120Watts MORE than 5870?Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
Im not juding, it just seems odd that it would draw you to a conclusion that power consumption aint that bad...
HWC has been the best review site lately IMO *shrug*. I can't get on there right now though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
EDIT: Looks like overclocking the RAM helps a LOT... http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...nce/page17.asp
Firingsquad uses the 10.3a driver for their radeon results.
evga has their 400 series for pre-order.
http://www.evga.com/articles/00528/
you can buy a watercooled 480 for $650, the same price a gtx280 was at launch.
i downloaded it a while ago. it requires 400 series.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcover
He's just mad his card didn't live up to the hype :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
I mean yeah, let's talk about idle power consumption, when the first thing Nvidia did at the PR event was talk about folding@home performance...
Which means you'll be using that GPU at full load baby!!
Anyways, it sucks seeing that it actually scales WORSE at 2560x1600, which is what I'm using... so much for that I guess
Poor old Xbit loses out again...
I read one page , 2 more spring up , this thread is multiplying like crazy !!!
Am going back to reading page 89 :p
why these jokers cant use the newest drivers is stupid.
Good news!!
Max TDP is **only** 250W instead of the 285-300W we all feared! YAY!!
Bad news!!
Totaly system power in Furmark is 480W (GTX 480 - coincidence): higher than 5970. Wow, thatsa hot meata-ball.
From techpower, on the "performance per watt" and "performance per dollar", only GTX295 is worse than the 480.. ouch.
Performance is very good in Heaven, and some DX11 games, but even with 5870 (or bit slower) in everything else. Good card for the future... when the future gets here.
But, amazingly, you can overclock it to 770-830Mhz (with stock voltage and cooling). Wholy mozes batman.
"His" card? :rofl: @ that comment from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
It does scale worse at 2560x1600 but in Anand's and Firingsquad's reviews it holds its own very well with performance gains IMO... it's 25% more expensive and seems to be garnering nice performance with that in mind. Also, overclocking seems to give HUGE performance boosts: http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...nce/page17.asp
Ashley McBroom:
"Reviews will be posting in about 10 minutes or so" and they'll be in stores in about 14 days
dumb
Seems about right for OcUK. Price gorging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bodkin
lol at pentium777, talk about flies over a turd.
GT480 30% faster at 2560, defective benchmarks, that's some sick, sick, fanboyism right there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
Oh noes this review sucks, oh wait, better idle consumption? This review rocks!!Quote:
Originally Posted by pentium777
In the 454 reviews out by now that's the only one that have GTX480 with better idle consumption... funny you missed that, since you are "seeing all the numbers"
I liked the review, and the claim is more like 13%. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv