MMM
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 141

Thread: Geforce GTS 450 appears on shelves

  1. #101
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,811
    Quote Originally Posted by bamtan2 View Post
    don't be stupid. that 5770 is the same speed as a normal one.
    An equal comparison is needed here. It doesn't make sense to provide performance results using a OC EDITION 450 against a SILENT EDITION 5770. Then you reply to me for point it out with name calling. No need for the unprovoked argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by Frodin View Post
    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.
    The temps are telling aren't they? But it I find it odd to use a silent edition for performance comparison review when the gist of such a card is passive cooling.
    Last edited by Eastcoasthandle; 09-12-2010 at 10:01 AM.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  2. #102
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle View Post
    An equal comparison is needed here.
    "Equality" is primarily based on price and the 450 is cheaper. How is that an unfair comparison?

  3. #103
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    los angeles
    Posts
    387
    Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
    "Equality" is primarily based on price and the 450 is cheaper. How is that an unfair comparison?
    well a giant passive heatsink isnt cheap...
    its apples to oranges

    compare a 5770 oc to 450gts oc
    Seti@Home Optimized Apps
    Heat
    Quote Originally Posted by aNoN_ View Post
    pretty low score, why not higher? kingpin gets 40k in 3dmark05 and 33k in 06 and 32k in vantage performance...

  4. #104
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    126
    ok so if I remove the default cooling on some card and slap on a passive cooler, does that make it any different if the clocks are the same ? From the benchmarks I see GTX 450 and HD 5770 are pretty much equal, now it just comes down to brand preferences, whatever floats your boat. Here in France the HD 5770 is selling for 175 eur, GTX 460 for 250 eur, hopefully the GTX 450 comes at 150 then it's good for me
    Last edited by Krizby87; 09-12-2010 at 10:31 AM.
    Core i7 8700k @ 5.1Ghz * Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 5 * 4x8GB Corsair RGB @ 3600 16-18-18-36 * GTX 1080ti @ 2050/11400 * Plextor M8Pe 512GB * Creative Sound Blaster Z * Audioengine 5+ * Corsair Obsidian 750D * Corsair RM1000 watt

  5. #105
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,811
    Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
    "Equality" is primarily based on price and the 450 is cheaper. How is that an unfair comparison?
    Quote Originally Posted by Krizby87 View Post
    ok so if I remove the default cooling on some card and slap on a passive cooler, does that make it any different if the clocks are the same ? From the benchmarks I see GTX 450 and HD 5770 are pretty much equal, now it just comes down to brand preferences, whatever floats your boat. Here in France the HD 5770 is selling for 175 eur, GTX 460 for 250 eur, hopefully the GTX 450 comes at 150 then it's good for me
    I think you are implying if I'm aware that HSF combo does more then cool the GPU? Yes, I am aware of that. So it always a good idea to make sure that not only the GPU has active cooling but the video card circuitry as well when providing comparison results. Which is why an OC actively cooled video card vs passively cooled stock video card is not a good comparison.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  6. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    38
    ^^^
    Why didn't they overclock it as well then?

  7. #107
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Ejizz View Post
    ^^^
    Why didn't they overclock it as well then?
    That's one reason people don't find the review valid. Could they have OC an actively cooled 5750 as well? Sure...
    Last edited by Eastcoasthandle; 09-12-2010 at 10:37 AM.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  8. #108
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    38
    ^^^
    Because Nv bought the review, they own it, it's only fair they get to make there cards look better than they actually are.

  9. #109
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    225
    Just wait a month or so ,if trend continues the card will be 100$,gtx460 768 was 200$ at launch,now 160-170$.
    My Heatware
    Originally Posted by some guy on internet
    That's your problem right there. Just forget about how things look on paper as that's irrelevant.

  10. #110
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    South Mississippi
    Posts
    161
    FTW OC them all passive cooled (same HS) and see what happens, then they will have red apple-v-green apple and maybe the 450 wont fall on it's face at high res.
    Gigagyte Z68X-UD3P
    i7 2600k@4.6/1.35v
    GSkill Rippers 2133
    MSI 7870@1275/1450
    Antec Kuhler 920

  11. #111
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle View Post
    I think you are implying if I'm aware that HSF combo does more then cool the GPU? Yes, I am aware of that. So it always a good idea to make sure that not only the GPU has active cooling but the video card circuitry as well when providing comparison results. Which is why an OC actively cooled video card vs passively cooled stock video card is not a good comparison.
    nah I mean if the video card is cooled well it doesn't matter if it has a passive or active cooler. You can put a 120mm fan right next to the passive cooled card and that makes it way better cooled than the default HSF, and that the way I prefer over the small little cooler.

    Anyways most people would agree that if the GTX 450 is selling cheaper than HD 5770 then it's a better deal.
    Last edited by Krizby87; 09-12-2010 at 11:36 AM.
    Core i7 8700k @ 5.1Ghz * Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 5 * 4x8GB Corsair RGB @ 3600 16-18-18-36 * GTX 1080ti @ 2050/11400 * Plextor M8Pe 512GB * Creative Sound Blaster Z * Audioengine 5+ * Corsair Obsidian 750D * Corsair RM1000 watt

  12. #112
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,870
    I'm still trying to understand why in the world it matters if one solution is passive or if one is factory overclocked? Even if they used a normal 5770, those run from $125-$180. How is it unfair to compare the 5770 to a $130 card?

    /boggle

  13. #113
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    2,095
    It's not like the comparison is fair or not. The main point is that the GTS450 draws more power for marginally less performance, and that anyone who can buy a 5770 can OC it to clear the difference for roughly the same price.
    E7200 @ 3.4 ; 7870 GHz 2 GB
    Intel's atom is a terrible chip.

  14. #114
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,128
    Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
    I'm still trying to understand why in the world it matters if one solution is passive or if one is factory overclocked? Even if they used a normal 5770, those run from $125-$180. How is it unfair to compare the 5770 to a $130 card?

    /boggle
    Maybe not from a performance point of view, the numbers do not change. But think about it. People look for numbers, do you think that overclocked edition vs. silent edition is anywhere near apples to apples comparison number wise?

    Now to the point. Why on earth do these sites even compare OC edition cards to vanilla cards? People care about numbers, so doesn't the OC edition quite much skew the numbers? But hey, it's no secret that the companies themselves ship the OC edition cards to the sites to be reviewed. Even THEY understand that it skews the numbers for them.

  15. #115
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,870
    Quote Originally Posted by cegras View Post
    It's not like the comparison is fair or not. The main point is that the GTS450 draws more power for marginally less performance, and that anyone who can buy a 5770 can OC it to clear the difference for roughly the same price.
    Agreed. That certainly wasn't the "main point" that was being argued though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Calmatory View Post
    Maybe not from a performance point of view, the numbers do not change. But think about it. People look for numbers, do you think that overclocked edition vs. silent edition is anywhere near apples to apples comparison number wise?

    Now to the point. Why on earth do these sites even compare OC edition cards to vanilla cards? People care about numbers, so doesn't the OC edition quite much skew the numbers? But hey, it's no secret that the companies themselves ship the OC edition cards to the sites to be reviewed. Even THEY understand that it skews the numbers for them.
    I'm not sure what numbers you're referring to. Price is the only number that matters. Are you saying that reviewing a $130 reference GTS 450 is more "fair" than reviewing a $135 factory overclocked one? Why is that? More than half the 450's on newegg are at higher than reference clocks.
    Last edited by trinibwoy; 09-12-2010 at 11:56 AM.

  16. #116
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,811
    Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
    Agreed. That certainly wasn't the "main point" that was being argued though.
    No, that was the main point. Like I said in the previous post, you don't have to OC just a 5770 they could have OC a 5750. As for price, you can accompany that with heat and power consumption since this isn't an enthusiast level video card. HTPC, OEM replacements, etc would also consider that segment of cards.
    Last edited by Eastcoasthandle; 09-12-2010 at 12:48 PM.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  17. #117
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,128
    Quote Originally Posted by trinibwoy View Post
    I'm not sure what numbers you're referring to. Price is the only number that matters. Are you saying that reviewing a $130 reference GTS 450 is more "fair" than reviewing a $135 factory overclocked one? Why is that? More than half the 450's on newegg are at higher than reference clocks.
    So you'll always get the cheaper card?

    People check the performance. This review indicates that GTS 450 would actually be somewhat matching HD5770, while in reality it isn't. Sure, it is actually clear that it's a OC edition, but that doesn't change the fact that they're comparing "GTS 450" to "HD 5770" here. It just boosts the GTS 450 numbers.

    I'm not even interested in this particular case, since for me these cards are worthless as I have no plans to buy any discrete cards for forthcoming years as I don't play any modern games. But what I hate is this current trend of making these reviews. It isn't hard to see that Nvidia and AMD are sending out samples with intent to make their cards look better than competitors. Heck, what was the buzz with GTX 280 and 1+n sites doing more or less the same review at exactly the same time, with more or less exactly the same games tested? Then, not only that, but the websites which run the tests with their "test suite"(which usually consists of timedemos) and add the results to a "database" and then one can compare the tests against other cards found in the "database". Just look at this thread "Nvidia cards usually gain performance with driver releases", that should say lots about the credibility of such test "databases".

    Guess people don't care about things like small inaccuracies when a driver release can bring up the performance by some 5-10 %, possibly multiple times. And yet difference of 15-25 % between cards is considered a "X COMPLETELY DESTROYS Y IN TEST Z!!". It's just pathetic.

    I partly understand that TweakTown is comparing products of the same price range, but I claim that the product was brought to them by Nvidia, with the intent to make their product look better than the actual product they ship to the market is.

    Isn't the idea of these reviews to give a consumer an idea of how the product performs? In that case, one could possibly think that accuracy of the results is very important, yet it seems that most of the sites aren't really caring about it. If Nvidia or AMD tells them to use X, Y and Z to test their hardware, the sites will gladly do so, and then the result database with old and not-to-date results. Not to mention that some sites have been using old versions of drivers for Nvidia or AMD in order to make the product look inferior compared to competitors offering(who more or less provided the new heardware).

    Is there any site which actually cares to provide accurate and up to date reviews?

  18. #118
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle View Post
    No, that was the main point. Like I said in the previous post, you don't have to OC just a 5770 they could have OC a 5750. As for price, you can accompany that with heat and power consumption since this isn't an enthusiast level video card. HTPC, OEM replacements, etc would also consider that segment of cards.
    Sure they could have chosen to compare it to an OC 5750 but I'm not sure that would change the outcome or conclusion. There's a 710Mhz 5750 for $135 AR and a 720Mhz one for $170 at the egg.

    And of course you have to consider heat, power consumption etc. But that's what reviews are for. However, you don't select cards for comparison according their heat or power consumption. They are chosen based on price. Why are you guys acting like this is such a foreign concept?

    Quote Originally Posted by Calmatory View Post
    People check the performance. This review indicates that GTS 450 would actually be somewhat matching HD5770, while in reality it isn't. Sure, it is actually clear that it's a OC edition, but that doesn't change the fact that they're comparing "GTS 450" to "HD 5770" here. It just boosts the GTS 450 numbers.
    So your problem is that reviews of factory overclocked cards give the wrong impression because they are faster than reference cards? That's unbelievably silly since people don't shop based on whether the products are reference or not. The factory overclocked cards are real products available for sale, not some shady marketing trick. This review indicates that Galaxy's OC edition 450 sometimes matches a stock 5770, that's all.

    I partly understand that TweakTown is comparing products of the same price range, but I claim that the product was brought to them by Nvidia, with the intent to make their product look better than the actual product they ship to the market is.
    So the factory overclocked editions aren't actual products shipped to the market and available for sale in volume? They're just gimmicks to fool people into thinking the 450 is faster than it really is? I could understand if it was something like the 480 lightning or 5970 ares you were complaining about but you're really not making any sense here complaining about cheapo cards anybody can buy, some of which aren't any more expensive than the reference options.

  19. #119
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,116
    some of you guys are going way overboard.

    they compared regular video cards you can buy in stores. they didn't hide the names or the prices. they didn't overclock one. this is apples to apples.

  20. #120
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    38
    ^^^
    Don't worry your disoriented and dizzy for a reason, I believe it's called 'spin', and good spin always has room reserved for 'plausible deny-ability'... Nv are masters at 'spin'.
    However PR problems can arise when 'spin' is used a little too often, and 'plausible deny-ability' becomes less and less plausible, which can then motivate the more 'perceptive' populace to speak out against such 'spin', which then feeds a viscous cycle of spin/speaking out, and that was how 'Nvidia bashing' was born.

  21. #121
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    197
    Can someone point me out to some reference model full review?, NOT Oced.

    Most people are going to buy the reference model most of the time, how can they compare it with other video cards when the only reviews available are Oced models..?

    This is the closest thing available i say:


    http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/P..._Sonic/28.html


    Reference model is on par with 5750

  22. #122
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    2,144
    In other words, reference model is about equal to an 8800Ultra...

    Took long enough...
    |-------Conner-------|



    RIP JimmyMoonDog

    2,147,222 F@H Points - My F@H Statistics:
    http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/...e=Conman%5F530

  23. #123
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    393
    so, the reference GTS 450 is equivalent to a (1 year old and similarly priced) reference HD5750, while the 5750 uses +- 70% of the power used by the GTS 450!?
    not the greatest thing you would expect from 1 year of evolution, but.. oh, well is at least one more option, and seems to be a good overclocker to, also the support for physx and the performance in some games is quite nicer,

  24. #124
    Champion
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Romania, lab501.ro
    Posts
    1,707
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnJohn View Post
    Can someone point me out to some reference model full review?, NOT Oced.

    Most people are going to buy the reference model most of the time, how can they compare it with other video cards when the only reviews available are Oced models..?
    It's not in english, but it is reference design and stock clocks

    Gigabyte GTS 450 OC - enter GF 106 - Google Translate

    Quote Originally Posted by Spectrobozo
    not the greatest thing you would expect from 1 year of evolution
    A few funny Nvidia facts, to spice this up a little bit:

    -13 September 2009 was the launch date for HD 5750 and HD5770
    -29 Octomber 2007 was the launch date of 8800GT, the first G92 implementation.


    Nvidia managed to finnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally replace G92 in just a little bit under 3 years. All hail the immortal G92 and his countless re-incarnations
    Weissbier - breakfast of champions



  25. #125
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    2,207
    Quote Originally Posted by Monstru View Post
    It's not in english, but it is reference design and stock clocks

    Gigabyte GTS 450 OC - enter GF 106 - Google Translate



    A few funny Nvidia facts, to spice this up a little bit:

    -13 September 2009 was the launch date for HD 5750 and HD5770
    -29 Octomber 2007 was the launch date of 8800GT, the first G92 implementation.


    Nvidia managed to finnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally replace G92 in just a little bit under 3 years. All hail the immortal G92 and his countless re-incarnations
    Man is there a bottle neck there. It seems upping the clocks don't do as much wonders as overclocking the memory. Considering it took so long to make a suitable g92 replacement, it took way too long and considering the legacy, it not nearly as strong a product.

    This product is going to look stale in 2 or 3 months.

    Its like they removed the good that made the gtx 280 and gtx 8800 and replaced it with this CGPU crap that makes this architecture so much less efficient.

    This architecture needs a clean up pronto, ALA 2900xt --> 3870.

    The gts is an ok product, but it needs to go down about 10 bucks to make it competitive.
    Core i7 920@ 4.66ghz(H2O)
    6gb OCZ platinum
    4870x2 + 4890 in Trifire
    2*640 WD Blacks
    750GB Seagate.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 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
  •