Page 10 of 31 FirstFirst ... 7891011121320 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 759

Thread: GTX 480 and GTX 470 Reviews

  1. #226
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    ROMANIA
    Posts
    687
    Power....
    From lab51.ro review using 980X at 4.2ghz which i trust.. i say 20% especially with 4AA and 8AA and especially ant 1920*1200.
    And GTX 480 beats especially in DX11 new titles.
    Anyway, GTX 470 is more appealing.
    Last edited by xdan; 03-27-2010 at 02:35 AM.
    i5 2500K@ 4.5Ghz
    Asrock P67 PRO3


    P55 PRO & i5 750
    http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=966385
    239 BCKL validation on cold air
    http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=966536
    Almost 5hgz , air.

  2. #227
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Shimla , India
    Posts
    2,631
    Quote Originally Posted by xdan View Post
    It think that most of reviewerss should have used an 6 core processor.
    The difference betwen 5870 and Gtx 480 is 20-30%, and in some situation GTX 480 reach 5970.
    Also in some situation G100 arhitecture is in deed 2x GT 200 With LN cooling without any voltage modification which is posible, but now there is any software, can reach 900MHZ core..
    The consum is indeed very bad...I hope than in 1-2 month to lauch GTX 490( 512 SP). A better revision chips could shave 10W TDP...All in all these cards are decent ...not very good, not bad either ant the prices are good.
    The best FERMI card will be the budget GTX 460...?
    [URL="http://lab501.ro/placi-video/nvidia-gtx480-animal-magnetism/22"]http://lab501.ro/placi-video/nvidia-gtx480-animal-magnetism/22[/UL]
    [IM]http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/warhead_1920.png[/IMG]
    [IMG]http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/jc2_2560.png[/IG]
    [IMG]http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/jc2_1920.png[/IG]
    [IMG]http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/hawx_2560.png[/IG]
    [IMG]http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2k5.jpg[/IG]
    Looking at this it seems that 5870 OCed is doing really well against the GTX480 stock and even to some extend the GTX480 OCed.

    Now the 5870 2GB matrix is 900Mhz and will most likely be good to go against the stock GTX480 price will determine how well it sells.


    Coming Soon

  3. #228
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    1,940
    the most disappointing thing i've noticed is that 2 overclocked 5870s are going to consume less than a single GTX480, run quieter and perform much better than the GTX480

    the huge power consumption is a huge dealbreaker; power draw is 2 times higher than on the 5870 for 10-20% more performance

    even the 5970 is much more power efficient than the gtx480


    it's even worse with the gtx470; slower than the 5870 and still in almost the same power envelope as the 480
    Core i7 2600k|HD 6950|8GB RipJawsX|2x 128gb Samsung SSD 830 Raid0|Asus Sabertooth P67
    Seasonic X-560|Corsair 650D|2x WD Red 3TB Raid1|WD Green 3TB|Asus Xonar Essence STX


    Core i3 2100|HD 7770|8GB RipJawsX|128gb Samsung SSD 830|Asrock Z77 Pro4-M
    Bequiet! E9 400W|Fractal Design Arc Mini|3x Hitachi 7k1000.C|Asus Xonar DX


    Dell Latitude E6410|Core i7 620m|8gb DDR3|WXGA+ Screen|Nvidia Quadro NVS3100
    256gb Samsung PB22-J|Intel Wireless 6300|Sierra Aircard MC8781|WD Scorpio Blue 1TB


    Harman Kardon HK1200|Vienna Acoustics Brandnew|AKG K240 Monitor 600ohm|Sony CDP 228ESD

  4. #229
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,023
    Quote Originally Posted by ajaidev View Post
    Looking at this it seems that 5870 OCed is doing really well against the GTX480 stock and even to some extend the GTX480 OCed.

    Now the 5870 2GB matrix is 900Mhz and will most likely be good to go against the stock GTX480 price will determine how well it sells.


    but why would you get the matrix when sapphire has their 2GB vapor-x which is probably cheaper, has a well known to be good cooler and has a 25MHz clock advantage?
    i7 920 @ 4GHz 1.25v
    GTX 470 @ 859MHz 1062mv

  5. #230
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    427
    13% gap is the magic number for existing games without tessellation and/or physx.
    Fermi architecture is a newborn, it is different and it came here to stay and thrive.
    I expect more fermi optimized games to come and increase the gap between GTX480 and HD5870.
    Fermi needs 28nm and more GPGPU (ie directcompute11) enabled programs to shine.
    Unfortunately little can be done about power/nm/GPGPU in a year time frame from now.

  6. #231
    Xtremely Bad Overclocker
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    East Blue
    Posts
    3,596
    I think I've never been so dissappointed by a new gen from nvidia as I am currently. Ok maybe it is the fastest single card (at stock speed) but a 6 month old card where all mods are available and there are coming some special editions with maybe 1500+ GPU our way maybe...I still prefer to bench 5870...

    On the practical side I would never ever put that money-burner into my allday system...GPU 500€, power bill another 250€??? Ah yes and you need ear protection - 50€...maybe lots of Asperin also ^^
    Also all reviews have been done in OPEN test systems - putting a 480 in a closed tower and thinking of summer with 32°C+ in my flat...lol that card will be killed before august for sure...

    So I am one of thoose calling it: EPIC FAIL!

    @xdan oh man please resize that image....
    | '12 IvyBridge - "ticks different"... | AwardFabrik IvyBridge round I by SoF | AwardFabrik IvyBridge round II by angoholic & stummerwinter
    | '11 The SandyBridge madness... | AwardFabrik / Team LDK OC-Season 2011/2012 Opening Event
    | '10 Gulftown LaunchDay OC round up @ASUS RIIE | 3DM05 2x GPU WR LIVE @Cebit 2010 @ASUS MIIIE | SandyBridge arrived @ASUS P8P67

    | '09 Foxconn Avenger | E8600 | Foxconn A79A-S | Phenom II 940 BE | LaunchDay Phenom II OC round up
    | '08 7.438s 1m LN2 | AMD 1m WR LN2 | 2nd AOCM | Phenom II teasing
    | '07 100% E2140 | 106.5% E2160 | 100% E4500 | 103% E4400 | 5508 MHZ E6850 | 7250 MHZ P4 641 126.5% by SoF and AwardFabrik Crew all on Gigabyte DS3P c? and LN2...
    | '06 3800+ X2 Manchester 0531TPEW noHS 3201MHZ c? | 3200+ Venice noHS 3279MHZ c? | Opteron 148 0536CABYE 3405MHZ c? all on Gigabyte K8NXP-SLI compressorcooled

    | '05 3500+[NC], 3000+[W], 2x 3200+[W], 3500+[NC], 3200+[V] 0516GPDW

    Quote Originally Posted by saaya
    sof pulled a fermi on all of us !!!

  7. #232
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,125
    Quote Originally Posted by generics_user View Post
    the most disappointing thing i've noticed is that 2 overclocked 5870s are going to consume less than a single GTX480, run quieter and perform much better than the GTX480

    the huge power consumption is a huge dealbreaker; power draw is 2 times higher than on the 5870 for 10-20% more performance

    even the 5970 is much more power efficient than the gtx480
    Quote Originally Posted by generics_user View Post
    the most disappointing thing i've noticed is that 2 overclocked 5870s are going to consume less than a single GTX480, run quieter and perform much better than the GTX480
    Heh, the best quote I heard all day was:

    2 x 5850 in price, 2 x 5870 in power, just over 1 x 5870 in performance
    The leakage must be awful for the process or something.
    Last edited by zerazax; 03-27-2010 at 03:15 AM.

  8. #233
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by zerazax View Post
    Looking through the reviews again (late night reading ftw)

    http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1258/15/


    "We are currently keeping memory clock high to avoid some screen flicker when changing power states, so for now we are running higher idle power in dual-screen setups. Not sure when/if this will be changed. Also note we're trading off temps for acoustic quality at idle. We could ratchet down the temp, but need to turn up the fan to do so. Our fan control is set to not start increasing fan until we're up near the 80's, so the higher temp is actually by design to keep the acoustics lower." - NVIDIA PR
    Yikes! 90C at idle for 2 LCDs??
    Do i remember correctly, that amd had this same problem with hd4 series but they got it fixed in hd5 series. That would point in hw change. It very well might be nVidia wont be able to fix it in long time...

  9. #234
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Shimla , India
    Posts
    2,631
    Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB "AMD's so called answer for gf100" vs GTX 480 1.5GB


    vs





















    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Power:










    That sums up nicely for me, AMD's answer is suppose to be a oced 5870 around 900-950mhz and this card fits the bill. Hopefully it costs $50-$70 less than the GTX 480 then it would make a lot of sense...
    Coming Soon

  10. #235
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,125
    Quote Originally Posted by Mechanical Man View Post
    Do i remember correctly, that amd had this same problem with hd4 series but they got it fixed in hd5 series. That would point in hw change. It very well might be nVidia wont be able to fix it in long time...
    I don't quite recall the exact issue, but right now I'm thinking it was an issue with the memory clocking for GDDR5?

  11. #236
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    235
    I would like to see 2560x1600 8xAA (maybe 16x AF also) testing with 5850 2 GB, 5870 2GB, GTX 470, GTX 480, 5970 and 5970 4 GB

    That would be awesome

  12. #237
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Mechanical Man View Post
    Do i remember correctly, that amd had this same problem with hd4 series but they got it fixed in hd5 series. That would point in hw change. It very well might be nVidia wont be able to fix it in long time...
    The only gpu that was ridiculously hot at idle was the 4850, but it wasn't due to the gpu but rather the fan profile: the fanspeed was set to 0% by default and under load the fanspeed didnt increase that much (95'c at load while the fanspeed remained at 30%...). To fix this you just had to adjust said profile or set the fanspeed manually. Ati f'ed that up nonetheless
    1. Asus P5Q-E / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @~3612 MHz (8,5x425) / 2x2GB OCZ Platinum XTC (PC2-8000U, CL5) / EVGA GeForce GTX 570 / Crucial M4 128GB, WD Caviar Blue 640GB, WD Caviar SE16 320GB, WD Caviar SE 160GB / be quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 550W / Thermaltake Tsunami VA3000BWA / LG L227WT / Teufel Concept E Magnum 5.1 // SysProfile


    2. Asus A8N-SLI / AMD Athlon 64 4000+ @~2640 MHz (12x220) / 1024 MB Corsair CMX TwinX 3200C2, 2.5-3-3-6 1T / Club3D GeForce 7800GT @463/1120 MHz / Crucial M4 64GB, Hitachi Deskstar 40GB / be quiet! Blackline P5 470W

  13. #238
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,264
    I've updated the Compliation of results I posted in the OTHER thread with HD5850, and some more review data as they came available. Thought i more appropriate here

    It's a big img now so had to shrink it.



    FULL SIZE link: http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/5...omparerev2.png

    and a Graph showing relative perf from AA/AF results compliation


  14. #239
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,264
    Quote Originally Posted by ajaidev View Post
    Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB "AMD's so called answer for gf100" vs GTX 480 1.5GB



    That sums up nicely for me, AMD's answer is suppose to be a oced 5870 around 900-950mhz and this card fits the bill. Hopefully it costs $50-$70 less than the GTX 480 then it would make a lot of sense...

    Well, technically, if a repeat of the HD4890 is on the cards aka, HD5890 with say a 925/1300 clock, and the 2GB RAM would likely be close enough to a 480 in most reviews for them to justify a price premium for it..

    Of course, it'd be better if it just replaced the 5870 pricepoint and brought the 480 down, but not much chance of that

  15. #240
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Space
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by mAJORD View Post
    I've updated the Compliation of results I posted in the OTHER thread with HD5850, and some more review data as they came available. Thought i more appropriate here

    It's a big img now so had to shrink it.





    and a Graph showing relative perf from AA/AF results compliation
    Thanks for that!

    Any idea why the hardware canucks have such a large difference?
    Last edited by Motiv; 03-27-2010 at 03:54 AM.

  16. #241
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,125
    Thanks for the numbers!

    No clue on the HWC thing... its 5-6 points higher than the other ones it seems

    Are there enough 2560 x 1600 data points to make a compilation of that as well?

  17. #242
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,462
    Please stop quoting the images please... I'm on a 15 inch TFT and it sucks to scroll sideways!
    Notice any grammar or spelling mistakes? Feel free to correct me! Thanks

  18. #243
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    1,264
    No idea why canuckes results are that way.

    Motiv can you Please delete the IMG bit out of the quote (i.e don't quote images) my graph is really pushing the limits with size as it is without annoying anyone heh

    Zerazax.. sure, I'll do a seperate 2560x1600 with AA/AF, it's just I originally set out to stick to 1920 as it's such a common resolution. When collecting the data it was apparent the 480 suffers a real hit at 2560x1600 on a lot of the reviews, so It'd be interesting to compare for sure.

  19. #244
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Posts
    423
    Are there any 3-sli reviews? I am interested in the numbers

  20. #245
    Xtreme Cruncher
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,215
    Thanks for the summary mAJORD!
    It looks like stock 480 is 14% faster than stock 5870 on average,while drawing a lot more power...

  21. #246
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Space
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by mAJORD View Post
    No idea why canuckes results are that way.

    Motiv can you Please delete the IMG bit out of the quote (i.e don't quote images) my graph is really pushing the limits with size as it is without annoying anyone heh

    Zerazax.. sure, I'll do a seperate 2560x1600 with AA/AF, it's just I originally set out to stick to 1920 as it's such a common resolution. When collecting the data it was apparent the 480 suffers a real hit at 2560x1600 on a lot of the reviews, so It'd be interesting to compare for sure.
    Imagines removed

    I was saying yesterday, before any results were out, that I lost faith in HardwareCanucks after the incredible bias 'big bang' nvidia driver review.

    There 480/470 review has done nothing to change my mind about them.

  22. #247
    Xtreme Mentor
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by ajaidev View Post
    Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB "AMD's so called answer for gf100" vs GTX 480 1.5GB

    That sums up nicely for me, AMD's answer is suppose to be a oced 5870 around 900-950mhz and this card fits the bill. Hopefully it costs $50-$70 less than the GTX 480 then it would make a lot of sense...
    The benchmarks you posted showed the Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB (925MHz/5000MHz ) to be a touch faster than the 5870 reference card (850MHz/4,800MHz)
    Personally, I do not think Sapphire 5870 Toxic 2GB is the 'answer" to GTX 480. Maybe a 5870 2GB at 1000MHz/5000MHz?

    Edit: Hexus conclusion
    2,048MB frame-buffer is only really useful in isolated gaming cases
    Last edited by onethreehill; 03-27-2010 at 04:07 AM.

  23. #248
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Brighton, UK
    Posts
    210
    Seriously, does anyone review GTA 4, i've been through sodding 12 reviews and it's all just the same, Dirt 2, Far Cry, Crysis.. I DON'T CARE.

    I've bought the 480 GTX for GTA 4/ Ballard of Gay Tony, and FSX.. And so far have no idea whether it was a good decision.
    Anyone care to enlighten me, are these games reviewed anywhere?

  24. #249
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,023
    I wonder why nvidia didn't tell them to use all minimum fps tests where in the one's I've seen even the 470 pulls ahead from the 5870.

    minimum fps is why I'm picking nvidia this time around.

    edit: @fiskov, GTA4 should get a bit of a boost because of the extra memory however FSX prefers high shader clocks on nvidia or higher clocked ATi cards so it might not be much better than a GTX 285 in FSX
    Last edited by Helloworld_98; 03-27-2010 at 04:20 AM.
    i7 920 @ 4GHz 1.25v
    GTX 470 @ 859MHz 1062mv

  25. #250
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    9,060
    From Anand's article:
    When we asked NVIDIA about working with GDDR5, they told us that their biggest limitation wasn’t the bus like AMD but rather deficiencies in their own I/O controller, which in turn caused them to miss their targeted memory speeds.
    So the rumours were true... Poor design. I wonder if this is limiting GTX480's performance...
    One new thing that both cards do share in common is that the shroud is no longer a single large device; on the GTX 480 and GTX 470 the top of the shroud can be snapped on and off, allowing easy access to the heatsink and fan assemblies.
    I don't see how it can be of use... For dust cleaning purposes maybe?
    The GTX 470 is 9.5”, making it the same length as the Radeon 5850 (or nearly 1” shorter than the GTX 200 series).

    And oh joy, it's a paper launch...
    If PhysX has less overhead on Fermi hardware, Batman is not the game to show it. On both the GTX 480 and the GTX 285, the performance hit on a percentage basis for enabling PhysX is roughly 47%.

    Hahaha! PhysX rocks!
    Pretty impressive GPGPU performance, however, crunchers and professional market are both going to be happy!

    What I don't get is why there is sometimes a bigger lead of GTX480 over 5870 at lower resolutions than on higher... Very odd. But great min framerate values, indeed.

    And holy 92C load temps in Crysis!
    Holy #$%^, check the power consumption in Crysis! 144W ahead of 5870!!!
    At 64.1dB the GTX 480 is the loudest single-GPU card, beating out even our unreasonably loud 4890.

    Finally, as we asked in the title, was it worth the wait? No, probably not.
    Well, I can't say I am terribly disappointed.
    The performance difference is there, albeit a small one.
    What I'd like to see is overclocked performance under a good waterblock.
    24/7 value of these cards without a waterblock is pretty low in my book...
    Last edited by zalbard; 03-27-2010 at 04:21 AM.
    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

Page 10 of 31 FirstFirst ... 7891011121320 ... 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
  •