The GT300/Fermi Thread

[BenchZowner]

You need to pay attention...
They left A.I. ( Artificial Intelligence ) enabled, thus the benchmark becomes CPU limited and differences between differently clocked or even maker CPUs arise.
Considering that in a sum of games the 5870 needs an i7 clocked at 3.7GHz to be CPU-limit-free, and there you have it.

I know I'm going to have a hell of a time if what I saw and my other info is wrong, but here it comes:
The GTX 380 will be nearing the 5970 in most games, and will have a significant advantage over the 5870.
Regarding the price... well, if you're a realist and live under no illusions, then it's easy to say that it will be priced similarly to the 5970, normally 50 bucks lower or so.

[Jamesrt2004]

You need to pay attention...
They left A.I. ( Artificial Intelligence ) enabled, thus the benchmark becomes CPU limited and differences between differently clocked or even maker CPUs arise.
Considering that in a sum of games the 5870 needs an i7 clocked at 3.7GHz to be CPU-limit-free, and there you have it.

I know I'm going to have a hell of a time if what I saw and my other info is wrong, but here it comes:
The GTX 380 will be nearing the 5970 in most games, and will have a significant advantage over the 5870.
Regarding the price... well, if you're a realist and live under no illusions, then it's easy to say that it will be priced similarly to the 5970, normally 50 bucks lower or so.

ok i missed the AI thing....


I agree with yo on the second point... like i've said it's a lot like the last series of cards,

[SKYMTL]

You need to pay attention...
They left A.I. ( Artificial Intelligence ) enabled, thus the benchmark becomes CPU limited and differences between differently clocked or even maker CPUs arise.
Considering that in a sum of games the 5870 needs an i7 clocked at 3.7GHz to be CPU-limit-free, and there you have it.

FINALLY someone hit the nail on the head....

I just wish I had said that myself.

However, it begs the question: if the HD 5870 is CPU-bound in the tests, why isn't the GF100 as well?

[Florinmocanu]

FINALLY someone hit the nail on the head....

I just wish I had said that myself.

Well, than, your simulated result is not anymore relevant than the result with the 1080 core 5870.

we have to see results made with the same identical test-bed/settings in order to check the level of performance. Simulating the same setup is practically impossible, there are always things which change the outcome.

[SKYMTL]

Well, than, your simulated result is not anymore relevant than the result with the 1080 core 5870.

we have to see results made with the same identical test-bed/settings in order to check the level of performance. Simulating the same setup is practically impossible, there are always things which change the outcome.

Hence why it is "simulated".

The results were never presented as definintive in any way, shape or form regardless of which way people are taking them. However, considering that I was able to replicate their GTX 285 benchmarks quite well, it goes to reason that the results are a good approximation of overall performance.

No, there isn't any way to replicate any driver tweaks, Windows tweaks or anything on the software side from the GF100 system but once again: that's why the results were simulated.

Heck, for all we know the GF100 in that system was running balls-out overclocks that won't be seen in the production samples...all I did was put the results people videotaped into charts and added a HD 5870 running in a near-identical system. It isn't rocket science nor do I have any reason to hobble the ATI card. If the ATI card perfromed as good as the GF100, we would probably be getting even more hits.

[Setix]

Ok so I think I missed something. When the NDA lifted yesterday, what information was able to be released?...I didnt really see anything...

[Sam_oslo]

FINALLY someone hit the nail on the head....

I just wish I had said that myself.

However, it begs the question: if the HD 5870 is CPU-bound in the tests, why isn't the GF100 as well?

Good question is bugging you.
Maybe because the GF100 is "almost" a CPU by itself? Maybe this new architecture is capable of running more of those stuff that traditionally was running on CPU?

[Jamesrt2004]

FINALLY someone hit the nail on the head....

I just wish I had said that myself.

However, it begs the question: if the HD 5870 is CPU-bound in the tests, why isn't the GF100 as well?

you ran it on a better processor lol.. jk i dunno what you did but im guessing intel i7 so yeah.

this whole thing sounds like its gonna be another 8800gtx vs 3870x2. except this time, the ati card was released first.
and as with the 8800gtx, nvidia has basically set itself up with a good architecture that will be seen over and over in future gpu's, while the sense im getting from ati is that their 5000 series will need a complete overhaul.

yeah this shrunk on 28nm will be like a frigging rocket, will be amazing..

and Your correct on ATI thats why they are preparing a new arc to launch H2 this year probably more towards Q4.

[SKYMTL]

you ran it on a better processor lol.. jk i dunno what you did but im guessing intel i7 so yeah.

NVIDIA = i7 960 + 6GB + ASUS Rampage II Extreme

Me = i7 960 + 6GB + Gigabyte X58-UD5


Basically the same setup minus the motherboard which doesn't do all that much anyways when you get to high IQ settings.

[Sam_oslo]

Same CPU, RAM and the same X58 MB, then it has to be the new GPU- architecture making this differences.

This is really interesting and needs further investigation, But
I put my bet on the new F100-architecture, which is more capable of running CPU-stuff on the GPU.

[ajaidev]

NVIDIA = i7 960 + 6GB + ASUS Rampage II Extreme

Me = i7 960 + 6GB + Gigabyte X58-UD5


Basically the same setup minus the motherboard which doesn't do all that much anyways when you get to high IQ settings.

Can you test the 5870, 5870 @ 1ghz and 5970 with the exact settings as the GF100.

Ya all will be simulated but then again its a good side scale

[Solus Corvus]

And? I didn't bother scrolling back through that whole conversation between you all, but if the tests were all done with the same hardware (CPU, Mobo and RAM) and only changing out the GPUs, what does that have to do with anything?

Didn't they all have a common baseline?

No, the Xbit numbers were on a completely different system. Comparing the minimum framerates xbit got for 5970 with what nvidia got for fermi is meaningless.

FC2 is very CPU limited and I'm pretty sure they use either a 3.8Ghz or 4Ghz i7 which in my tests could equate a 15-18% improvement in the Ranch Small benchmark over a chip clocked at 3.2Ghz.

You need to pay attention...
They left A.I. ( Artificial Intelligence ) enabled, thus the benchmark becomes CPU limited and differences between differently clocked or even maker CPUs arise.
Considering that in a sum of games the 5870 needs an i7 clocked at 3.7GHz to be CPU-limit-free, and there you have it.

FINALLY someone hit the nail on the head....

I just wish I had said that myself.

However, it begs the question: if the HD 5870 is CPU-bound in the tests, why isn't the GF100 as well?

Then why are AT's numbers for 285 and 5870 lower at 1920x1200 but higher at 2560x1600? All I'm saying is that the numbers look a bit off, IMO, and we need a proper review to know for sure.

[hennyo]

I know I'm going to have a hell of a time if what I saw and my other info is wrong, but here it comes:
The GTX 380 will be nearing the 5970 in most games, and will have a significant advantage over the 5870.
Regarding the price... well, if you're a realist and live under no illusions, then it's easy to say that it will be priced similarly to the 5970, normally 50 bucks lower or so.

This information sounds about right for the performance, but I couldn't even venture a guess at the price point myself. There is something deceiving here tho in the way you are describing the performance here. What should be noted is yes the GTX380 part will be trading blows with the 5970 based on what we know and it will most likely slightly lose in most scenarios, but what isn't mentioned here is what "most scenarios" are, or as you put it "most games".

The fact of the matter is, that "most games" the 5970 plays at frame rates that are far higher than what is needed to get the absolute most out of them. It is the few games and scenarios where the 5970 is not enough power is where the GTX 380 will out shine the former. Things such as high IQ Crysis settings, extreme resolution, high usage of DX11, and things such as texture mods. Another important difference is the GTX 380 will be night and day in minimum frame rates in places that can bring these GPU's to their knees. All these factors combined will paint a much lighter picture for the GTX 380 in real world use over the 5970 than traditional benchmarks will let on to.