Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 141

Thread: Geforce GTS 450 appears on shelves

  1. #76
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
    The HD 4850 was a $199 card. Why would someone be looking to "upgrade" to a lower price point in the first place? Direct replacements for the HD 4850 are the HD 5830, HD 5850 and GTX 460. IMO, any lower end 400-series card will likely act as a replacement for the HD 4830, HD 4770 and GTS 250.
    But isn't it NVIDIA that touts GTS 450 as a direct upgrade as GTS 250? I thought I saw a Powerpoint slide. That slide should be then considered misleading at best.
    I don't check my PMs very often.

  2. #77
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    408
    I mean, for an unsuspecting customer it surely sounds like an upgrade going from GTS 250 to GTS 450. I hope reviewers will point out this branding madness from both vendors. I hear rumors that AMD will release Bart (which is the 2nd tier compared to Cayman) as 6870, and I would only consider that legit if its performance is significantly better than 5870. Otherwise, that would also be a shady naming tactic to confuse consumers. Reviewers should make things like these clear for consumers.
    I don't check my PMs very often.

  3. #78
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Posts
    600
    Even with the arq change 450 seems more like a rebranded 250. As a previous post said, a better name would've been 440 o 435.

    450
    128bit*3600Mhz GDDR5 / 8 --> 57.6GB/s

    HD5750
    128bit*4600Mhz GDDR5 / 8 --> 73.6GB/s

    HD5770
    128bit*4800Mhz GDDR5 / 8 --> 76.8GB/s
    Last edited by Nintendork; 09-11-2010 at 11:58 AM.
    Athlon II X4 620 2.6Ghz @1.1125v | Foxconn A7DA-S (790GX) | 2x2GB OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066
    | Gigabyte HD4770 | Seagate 7200.12 3x1TB | Samsung F4 HD204UI 2x2TB | LG H10N | OCZ StealthXStream 500w| Coolermaster Hyper 212+ | Compaq MV740 17"

    Stock HSF: 18°C idle / 37°C load (15°C ambient)
    Hyper 212+: 16°C idle / 29°C load (15°C ambient)

    Why AMD Radeon rumors/leaks "are not always accurate"
    Reality check

  4. #79
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,095
    I'd buy it, if it was under 100 bucks, for a physX replacement card.

  5. #80
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,870
    Quote Originally Posted by lopri View Post
    But isn't it NVIDIA that touts GTS 450 as a direct upgrade as GTS 250? I thought I saw a Powerpoint slide. That slide should be then considered misleading at best.
    It is an upgrade. Just not much in performance but in features. They sure spent a whole lot of transistors on it though. Should have more reviews comparing it to the 250/260 by Monday.

  6. #81
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Budaors, Hungary.
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by cegras View Post
    Yeah, who WOULD buy this? Not people like me: perf isn't an upgrade. For the people that haven't upgraded yet, I highly doubt they will upgrade just because the GTS450 was released. Of the people who might upgrade to a mid range card, the 5770 and 460 have been stealing sales for a while now. Some people might buy it, but not in the numbers that will make this card a runaway success.

    Also, Saaya is completely right. I can't believe I backed out of my point because of pressure.
    I would if had the money for it.

    I'm still sitting on my HD3850 with 256MB VRAM.

    "We are going to hell, so bring your sunblock..."

  7. #82
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    38
    Holy crap...
    This chip is not that far off double the size of Juniper yet can't match a 5770's performance!
    That is just ludicrous, not to worry though, atleast it's a whole new architecture.

    Quote Originally Posted by BSN
    GTS 450 GPU, consists out of 192 CUDA cores [single GPC] and is the first part that comes without reserve cores [GF100 ships with 32 disabled cores, GF104 ships with 48 disabled cores, i.e. a single SM]. This "helped" the die size, which measures in very large 238mm2 [its direct competitor, ATI Juniper is only 166mm2 in size].
    Quote Originally Posted by BSN
    Known under codename GF106, this allegedly canceled part is set to power GTS 440 / 450 on desktop
    Just when I thought their stock wouldn't get any lower, they go and release this, Nvidia should of just cancelled it, what were they thinking? what's the point in making a product that can't economically compete, this is a large volume part! If AMD squeeze this card into a loss making product it could cost Nv huge sums of cash with only slight negative margins.
    Waste of R&D resources and silicon IMHO.

    Edit:
    Forgot to add the link...
    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...-revealed.aspx
    Last edited by Ejizz; 09-11-2010 at 03:44 PM.

  8. #83
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    2,207
    The reason this isn't more of an upgrade over the gts 250 I can imagine is drivers. The gts 250 driver are as wrung out for performance as you can get. I think if the gts 450 drivers were as mature, I think you could expect 10% more performance because during the gts 250 lifetime, the drivers have had multiple big jumps such as when big bang II drivers were released.

    But still this card should be performing better than it is, especially considering the die size. The biggest flaw in the gf1xx architecture it appears is that the shader clock is not at a higher ratio than 1:2. 1:2.5 would have done wonders for this architecture.
    Core i7 920@ 4.66ghz(H2O)
    6gb OCZ platinum
    4870x2 + 4890 in Trifire
    2*640 WD Blacks
    750GB Seagate.

  9. #84
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    606
    Tweaktown's Galaxy GTS 450 Review..

























  10. #85
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    France - Bx
    Posts
    2,601
    260.52 driver version shows really good gains in this review. We will see more tomorrow.

    Anyway, thanks for sharing Man from Atlantis

  11. #86
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    533
    Nice improvement from the earlier leaks. So it can give an HD 5770 a run for it's money after all.

  12. #87
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Vardant View Post
    Nice improvement from the earlier leaks. So it can give an HD 5770 a run for it's money after all.
    Did you notice the clock speeds of the Galaxy card by any chance? That's no stock-clocked card...

  13. #88
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    No(r)way
    Posts
    452
    So an overclocked version is about even with a 5770, performance per dollar seems ok, but it uses something like 50% more power than a 5770? (65W under load). Not very efficient IMO.
    Obsolescence be thy name

  14. #89
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Frodin View Post
    So an overclocked version is about even with a 5770, performance per dollar seems ok, but it uses something like 50% more power than a 5770? (65W under load). Not very efficient IMO.
    Not only that, for that power consumption it is a much better buy a vanilla 460

  15. #90
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    533
    Quote Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
    Did you notice the clock speeds of the Galaxy card by any chance? That's no stock-clocked card...
    Who cares, if it's still cheaper than it's competition?

  16. #91
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Vardant View Post
    Who cares, if it's still cheaper than it's competition?
    ...but draws more power than has hardly any overclocking potential?

    Nice to compare some OVERCLOCKED EDITION card against a SILENT EDITION card. Talk about apples to oranges comparisons.

  17. #92
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    No(r)way
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by Vardant View Post
    Who cares, if it's still cheaper than it's competition?
    Is it? Notice that the 5770 tested is a passively cooled version that is easily 15-20% more expensive than a regular 5770 (140-150 $ on Newegg).
    Obsolescence be thy name

  18. #93
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    533
    I'm pretty sure it is. Maybe not this exact model, but it seems some OC versions cost the same as the regular thing.


  19. #94
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,116
    very odd that the power consumption graph shows gts 450 == gtx 460.

    the average price for both gts 450 and 5750 appears to be around $135 on newegg. the average 5770 price is maybe 10-20 bucks more.

  20. #95
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    606
    Quote Originally Posted by Olivon View Post
    260.52 driver version shows really good gains in this review. We will see more tomorrow.

    Anyway, thanks for sharing Man from Atlantis
    Thanks Olivon

    i think i can discover more pictures thanks to my firefox caches

    Here that's all i've got





  21. #96
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by sutyi View Post
    I would if had the money for it.

    I'm still sitting on my HD3850 with 256MB VRAM.
    I had that card too. What's wrong with a 5770? More than 6 months ago they could have been had for as low as 130.
    E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
    Intel's atom is a terrible chip.

  22. #97
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Vardant View Post
    I'm pretty sure it is. Maybe not this exact model, but it seems some OC versions cost the same as the regular thing.

    http://www.shopbot.ca/m/?m=radeon+5770
    E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
    Intel's atom is a terrible chip.

  23. #98
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,811
    They are benching a OC EDITION 450 against a SILENT EDITION 5770 regarding performance. Lol really?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  24. #99
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    No(r)way
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle View Post
    They are benching a OC EDITION 450 against a SILENT EDITION 5770 regarding performance. Lol really?
    Well, according to their graph the passive 5770 is only 4 degrees hotter than the fanned 450; perhaps it overclocks really well? But yeah, strange comparison.
    Obsolescence be thy name

  25. #100
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle View Post
    They are benching a OC EDITION 450 against a SILENT EDITION 5770 regarding performance. Lol really?
    don't be stupid. that 5770 is the same speed as a normal one.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •