Printable View
Wow bro, this review seems so biased to me. Don't get me wrong it a descent review but everytime AMD comes out ahead, there's a sentence defending Nvidia right after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian
I was really looking forward to the GTX 580 but to be honest I'm pretty disappointed. Nvidia only "corrected" their mistakes, they didn't bring the GPU that'll truly dominate to the table *sigh* guess I'll be staying with AMD for another round...
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
SKYMTL:
Thanks for bringing back a 'closer look.'
Do you have any comments on how this card compares to the 'silence references' like a GTX460 or a vanilla 4850 / 9800GTX+?
There's no denying what the charts say, but there are explanations in every chart why nvidia or AMD win or lose.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeaponX
IMO, it is louder than the GTX 460 but not enough to hear it over your typical "gaming" case's 2-4 120mm fans not to mention in-game sounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
The adaptive fan control really helps the acoustical footprint since it is able to gradually increase the fan speed unlike the GTX 480's which seemed to be designed far too aggressively.
"B-b-b-but they did it so that makes it ok when we do it!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
:rofl:
Eazy Boys. Dont eat your selfs :)
IM kinda glad for nvidia, i hope amd feels same :) :D
I agree. I prefer AMD, but i am glad that Nvidia has done well here. It can only be good for competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ego
Just finished reading the Guru3D review and I'm seriously impressed with the performance increase over the already fast 480. Good stuff.
Oh PS, I can now go out and buy 6!! different brand 580s from scan.co.uk, delivered to me on thursday, plenty of stock it seems!!
Again, just forget about Semiaccurate, what a load of nonsense. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
I think it's quite appropriate to quote SKYMTL here. With a touch of my own below. ;)
http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/9431/9nov2010.jpg
Some things interesting...
http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/5...80voltages.jpg
So more volts, more SP's, and less power consumption...?
So GF100 problem was just a very bad manufacturing process...
Just think GTX 480-480SP's with same voltage 0.96v, with GF110 characteristics...
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4471/textureet.jpg
Good...
good to know, BTW fantastic review. i think the GTX 580 is good step forward. the thing that was amazing for me was the load temps. those are just outrageously low compared to the 480. also the performance is higher then i thought it would be considering only 64tmu's it's a great card and offers great performance from a single GPU while using less power, dumping less heat and costing close to the same price (in Canada anyways) the real test will be when Cayman shows up. Cayman will be a beast but i think that lots of people are overestimating what it can do. Im willing to bet it will be right on par with the 580 in which case Nvidia will be forced to drop prices and then we all win.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
it is a new silicone rev, if u remember it was claimed that it had near 100% fail, now if i had a power trenching problem and needed a quick fix i would just double it, so im guessing thats what happened since the transistor count is significantly down. so this is what the gf100 should have been.Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
honestly though im not impressed i was expecting a new card like a giant gf104 (something with more ROPs per shader). this is a nice gain but its just a clock increase, the power drop is the main appeal of this to me over the 480.
AMD has surprised people in the past, that's for sure. However, many seem to forget that in order to add high level geometry processing horsepower, an wicked increase in die size and power consumption is a must. NVIDIA found that out and I am sure AMD will as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
Btw, SKYMTL... thanks for digging that image up. Lots of laughs are being had.
so finally homerun for nvidia then...now bring on the 560 pretty please
it looks like the original gf100 specs, so i wouldent call it a home run maybe a stand up double nowQuote:
Originally Posted by geo
Anyone happen to see FRAPS (or any other) benches with the 580 and Call of Duty: Black Ops?
Yeah I know it just came out and won't be any reviews but if you see anything in the wild please post a link.
Thanks
This is the card that should have been released 7 months ago that was announced 6 months priorQuote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
All the Nvidia hate aside, the GTX 580 looks to be a solid card from every aspect but price. The inevitable competition from ATi will be the solution for that. What a great pre-holiday present!
There is any reviews of these?
Gainward GTX 580 GS and Palit GTX 580 Sonic.
Both at 835/4200.
http://www.gainward.com/main/product...7d7e23321f.jpg
http://www.palit.biz/enews/event/wor.../580_ft_01.jpg
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=1034
From the article:
Yikes! Nvidia has hit a new low. I try to stay manufacturer agnostic when it comes to the Nvidia vs. AMD fight, but here is a "feature" installed for two evil purposes: to trick benchmark utilities and to stop overclocking and watercooling of their cards. I mean they went out and actually allocated ICs and card real estate for this rubbish. I know that corporations are evil, but this is ridiculous. It's just so OTT. I can picture Jen-Hsun Huang twirling his mustache and laughing maniacally like some kind of comic book villain. Next we'll be hearing about him catching kittens, puppies and babies on bayonets. It makes me wonder if a overvolted (voltmodded?), overclocked, watercooled GTX480 could beat a current-limited, essentially clock-locked GTX580. I'd like to see that comparison.Quote:
An interesting addition to the GTX 580 hardware is a hardware-based current monitor that keeps track of the voltage and current coming IN through the 12V rails on the 8-pin, 6-pin and PCIe bus. The goal here was to keep the GPU within the power specifications shown above in all cases, even when programs like the oft-despised FurMark are run that heat up the GPU "more than any real-world application ever could" according to NVIDIA. The logic on board will adjust the clocks and performance of the GPU when these types of current draws are detected thus limiting the benefit of such applications for temperature and cooling testing.
While I have no problem with NVIDIA protecting their hardware in this way I am curious to see how long it will take for a "real-world" application to hit this current draw limits in some way and initiate these performance drops on its own. FurMark doesn't really do anything special to the GPU - it simply attempts to work as much of the GPU core as possible all at one time. In many people's view, this is only testing the top efficiency possible out of the GPU - something that software developers should really be striving for anyway.
Looks like a very very good card. Well done Nvidia. The card is a beast and really has few weaknesses.
Have to say this launch came out of no where for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/2435/93065155.jpg
AMD has done the same thing with power monitoring since either the HD3000 or HD 4000. Do you have a problem with that?Quote:
Originally Posted by gojirasan
Well correct me if I'm wrong:Quote:
Originally Posted by phantomferrari
1. Still slower than the 5970
2. Still has high power consumption
3. An overclocked gtx480 can match its performance .. across the board
This is just like the iPhone 2G vs 3G. The 3G was the "real" iphone, and the GTX580 is the "real" contender to the 5870/5970.
I'd only buy this if I had more money than brains. Shouldn't take long for that anyways, but still :2cents: