Ok,Guys Make no mistake.Effect of 8800gt was the last Effect.no matter what nvidia can do again.AMd & ATI learned everything from Past and Will not allow to repeat event.
Printable View
Ok,Guys Make no mistake.Effect of 8800gt was the last Effect.no matter what nvidia can do again.AMd & ATI learned everything from Past and Will not allow to repeat event.
the effect has nothing to do with the quality of the card, its as simple as timing it with consoles, most games run well on a 8800gt, because they were built to run on hardware half as good that were put into a ps3 and 360Quote:
Originally Posted by behrouz
GTX465 die:
http://i40.tinypic.com/ou6uzs.jpg
Performance:
Farcry 2 1920x1200 8x AA Max:54fps
Crysis Warhead 1920x1200 VHQ 4x AA:19.9fps
3Dmark Vantage:X5741
Heaven Benchmark 2.0 1920x1200 4xAA:18.8fps
Source:
http://translate.google.com/translat...sl=zh-CN&tl=en
thx for the link! :toast:
~10% better than a 285Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfury
~same as gtx285Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfury
~10% slower than a 285Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfury
~25% slower than a 5850Quote:
Originally Posted by mindfury
sounds like its going to be a gtx275 with dx11 pretty much...
maybe this is why nvidia EOLd gt200 cards (pretty much) cause they planned to replace them with the cut down gf100 chips...
any infos about ocing and unlocking? :D :D :D
Sucks much? It looks slower than a 5830 which is already horribly overpriced but is cheaper than this?
This should be priced at $200 max, not $250, if these are true!
Man if this is true I wondered what happened. I mean, it has close to 50% more shaders than the gtx 285, yet it performs the same. What has NV done this new generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
forgot to add the magic goblin powder????
And waht did the 8800GT use? Like 135Watts max?Quote:
Originally Posted by RejZoR
yeah, it really does seem odd, doesnt it...Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
it probably has to do with how they moved the blocks around and tied them together... and ive said it before, i think texturing is what holds gf100 back, they cut down tmus too much...
xbitlabs:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...gtx400_17.html
i read somewhere that the tmus in gf100 work more efficiently, but even then... everything else got doubled up while the tmu perf remained about the same or only increased a little.Quote:
If we don’t separate gaming graphics cards into single- and multi-GPU ones, the Radeon HD 5970 still remains the king of the hill. The GeForce GTX 480 cannot match it, especially at 2560x1600. Here are the numbers: the GeForce GTX 480 is an average 3% slower at 1600x900, 9% slower at 1920x1080 and as much as 22% slower at 2560x1600. The gap is even as large as 45% in certain tests. The explanation is simple: even the senior model of the new series has a main domain frequency of only 700 MHz. Besides, the number of TMUs has been reduced from 80 in the G200b to 60 in the GF100 whereas the Radeon HD 5970 has 160 TMUs up and running.
and thats a full blown gf100, if a 465 only has 30tmus active then its actually surprising to see that it still beats a 285 with 80tmus, if only by a little...
i disagree though, it does show in other games as well, but not as much... im sure the reason the 470 is only 1-8% faster than a gtx285 in a few games is a result of the tmus as well... just cause2, metro2033, and dirt2 for example seem to all be texturing heavy... and thats where the 470 is barely faster than a 285.Quote:
Compared to the previous generation, the weaker TMU subsystem only shows up in Wolfenstein OpenGL (gtx470=27%slower than a gtx285). The GeForce GTX 470 is on average 30% faster than the GeForce GTX 285.
the performance is still good, i wouldnt really see that as the main issue, the problem is price perf... for 200$ this would be a great card, especially if it overclocks well and can maybe even get some extra units unlocked...Quote:
The bottleneck of the GF100 architecture – the low main domain frequency and the cut-down TMU subsystem (the GeForce GTX 470 has only 56 TMUs) – shows up most clearly at 2560x1600. In six out of the 15 tests the GeForce GTX 470 is more than 15% slower than the Radeon HD 5870.
but if you can get a 470 or 5850 for around 350$, and a 5770 for 180$, then why would anybody spend 300$ on a 460?
It could have. But was like 3 times slower than HD5850. For a 20W difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by deathman20
GTX465:
Core 607Mhz
352 shader 1215Mhz
256bit GDDR5 3206MHz
Benchmarks:
Dirt2
http://i47.tinypic.com/2ic1ls8.jpg
Metro2033
http://i48.tinypic.com/29f8iaf.jpg
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat
http://i46.tinypic.com/15ps5rs.jpg
Aliens vs Predator
http://i46.tinypic.com/1zverzo.jpg
3Dmark Vantage P(PhysX on)
http://i50.tinypic.com/25jcw02.jpg
Crysis Warhead
http://i47.tinypic.com/vzkbja.jpg
Farcry 2
http://i47.tinypic.com/1i05dx.jpg
Tom Clancy's HAWX
http://i49.tinypic.com/bc039.jpg
Thanks mindfury ;)
This card seems to fail really hard ...
Maybe the pricing will help it. If not - God help this card get sold, haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
i think its a good thing they didnt put a 5850 on the charts, would have scared too many people