Quote Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post
Man that review is weird. The charts and results are extremely in favour of the gtx 480, however the writing seems like its trying to say the opposite.

"The GeForce GTX 480 is indeed the fastest single-GPU graphics card, being an average 28-33% faster than the ex-leader Radeon HD 5870. In some games, the GF100 GPU enjoys a 50% and larger advantage over the RV870. However, the Nvidia GeForce GTX 480 comes from a higher price category, so the difference in performance should not be wondered at."

I think the 100 dollar price difference is well worth it if we ignore power, since your getting more than a 25% performance improvement on average meaning the gtx 480 is greater bang for your buck, if just barely.

"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."

It strange they don't make the same price comparison with the 5970 really. When you consider most people game on 1920*1080 monitors and the 9% sacrifice seems pretty small when you consider you save a hundred dollars(more so because even they admit the 5870 cost more than 599) and you don't need to deal with dual card problems.

It looks like the gtx 480 is the best card in that review in terms of bang for your buck and performance.
I was about to post the same thing. In that review the 480 is nearly equal to 5970 on avg fps in 1680 and 1920 res, and much faster than it in min FPS, all the while being $200 cheaper, yet the guy always talks about the 2560 resolution and how bad Fermi's do at that res.

That review puts the 480 at 30% faster than the 5870 in avg. FPS (in min FPS it's ridiculously better) at only a $100 price premium. It also makes the 470 faster than 5870 in everything but 2560x while being $50 cheaper.

I don't really find this review to be very believable, I'm sure they screwed something up with their numbers. And it looks as if they tried to "balance" these ridiculous numbers with being biased in favor of ATI in their commentary.