Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GTX 470 vs GTX 480 vs 5870 vs 5850 - Page 2

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Gtx
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

Which one do you feel is the overall best card for performance and the price?

Total: 0 vote

  • ATI 5830
  • 0 %
  • ATI 5850
  • 0 %
  • ATI 5870
  • 0 %
  • ATI 5970
  • 0 %
  • GTX 285
  • 0 %
  • GTX 295
  • 0 %
  • GTX 470
  • 0 %
  • GTX 480
  • 0 %
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 2:20:32 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
Well if you want to base your opinions off of onw diagram, there are plenty of benchmarks in games were the 5970 isn't that much better, I am not saying the 480 does better in performance, but I would say its right up there with it.
Then the 470 beats the crap out of the 5850 in everything period, and then gets higher FPS's in pretty much every games benchmarks, I am not writing this out of my azz, yeah there is certain if ands, and, buts, but in general I wouldn't place the 5970 as the route to go when buying a card, for many reasons. Also with that stated if I wasn't getting it why would I get 5870 when for $350, I could get a GTX 470 and with out OCing it get just as good fps in 1920x1200 then the 5870, not to mention I could get the asus 5850 and oc also and it would perfrom just as good as the 5870.
Plus if you want to talk about heat and wattage, I am not sticking them in my stock dell computer from k mart, so that isn't even a problem in my case.

And since your not satisfied with the "small" gain in fps, I would consider that your not interested in 3D or PsyX, which is what nvidia is offering a complete package, that actually works out of the box, how long has it taken them to get the newest driver out to get things the work, there lucky they did cause that would take that "small" increase a lot higher.
Obviously if your all ATI then nothing Nvidia has to offer will be good enough for you even if it did spank the 5970. The ATI cards were the best around cause there was nothing around, and I just hope ATI fans aren't scared of a "little" competition.
Intel is on top of AMD-fact, Nvidia is on top of ATI-fact. Intel with Nvidia on top of AMD with ATI-fact.



Blah Blah Blah I Love nVIDIA.

Seriously man... you've left your NV blinders on. Any Reasonable, Logical and Rational person will tell you that the GTX 480 is too little too late and that the GTX 470, although an interesting product for sure, is not as good a purchase as either a 5850 or 5870. The only way you could think otherwise is if you have a predisposed emotional preference for nVIDIA. Yes emotions are powerful that way (they can skew perception).
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 2:35:54 AM

Anyone realize that you can OC a 5850 to over a 5870's performance but if you OC the GTX 470 anywhere near as much your gonna have a 100% fans.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 3:27:15 AM

sabot00 said:
Anyone realize that you can OC a 5850 to over a 5870's performance but if you OC the GTX 470 anywhere near as much your gonna have a 100% fans.


http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...

Quote:
Fan speed was set to 70% for the duration of these tests.


Quote:
Core: 721Mhz
Processors: 1442Mhz
Memory: 3974Mhz (QDR)

Our GTX 470 sample simply overclocked like the dickens and screamed its way past the clock speeds used on a stock GTX 480. The memory speeds also saw a significant increase with full stability. Considering the perceived limitations of the architecture, these clock speeds on a lower-end part are simply stunning in our opinion.


Nope.

I love how I got my posts hidden, when I haven't said anything false. Why is it that some people are so hell bent on not giving the GTX 470 any credit whatsoever. It doesn't use much more power than a 5870, it doesn't run much hotter, it performs very close, it overclocks well, it does tessellation better, and it costs $70 less. That is pretty commendable. Yeah the 5870 is better, but the GTX 470 is a better deal than the 5870, at least for now.

Prove me wrong, please, I am open for discussion. Don't just mark me down because you don't like what I'm saying and there is nothing you can do to make it any less true.

Is the GTX 480 a success? Hell no! Is the GTX 470 a success? In many ways, yes, but it all depends on if the price stays at MSRP and if ATI lowers the price of the 5870.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 3:51:06 AM

Why isn't there a 5850 OC'd to compare to a GTX 470 OC'd?

Plus instead of using a game they used Unigine, of course I'm gonna play that.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 3:54:38 AM

I have never seen a video card review that OC'd more than the card being reviewed, its an odd trend but it isn't a reflection on anything but the odd practices of reviewers.

Yes, they used a benchmark and not a game, so what the percent increase isn't going to change much program to program.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 3:57:08 AM

AMW1011 said:
I have never seen a video card review that OC'd more than the card being reviewed, its an odd trend but it isn't a reflection on anything but the odd practices of reviewers.

Yes, they used a benchmark and not a game, so what the percent increase isn't going to change much program to program.


Unigine is very tessellation, I wouldn't put anything at all on a benchmark.
I don't see any reviewers that OC more than the card reviewed either but Catalyst 10.3 adds a huge boost, so older results are mostly invalid.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 4:06:57 AM

sabot00 said:
Unigine is very tessellation, I wouldn't put anything at all on a benchmark.
I don't see any reviewers that OC more than the card reviewed either but Catalyst 10.3 adds a huge boost, so older results are mostly invalid.


That is true, but the percent performance boost shouldn't change at all, it is still rendering something with higher settings...

As for drivers:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
Quote:
Drivers:

ATI 10.3a Preview + 10.3 Profile 1.0
NVIDIA 197.17 Beta
March 28, 2010 4:15:12 AM

AMW1011 said:
Jenny you prove my point. At 10% slower the GTX 470 still isn't bad. With driver improvements we should see it gain a 5-10% increase while the 5870 likely won't, making it on-par with the 5870. Also the heavy tessellation performance advantage, while not a huge deal, is still pretty nice. Also, find me one 5870 selling for $380 that is in stock. The best is $420 from the Egg, I know I've been shopping for one. Now you may say that the GTX 470 may increase in price above the MSRP, which is valid, but not a given outcome yet. At $70 more, the 5-10% performance now, equaling out to almost nothing in a month or so with an increase in tessellation performance, and 20w less power consumption at load is NOT a good deal. In this context, the current context that we are talking about now, the GTX 470 is a much better deal than the 5870.

Oh and of course the 5850 is a better deal than the GTX 470, it rapes the 5870 even more in that regard. The 5850 is a kick ass card for the money. When the 2GB version comes out, whenever it does. It will likely be slightly less than the GTX 470 and will likely perform the same, except with heavy tessellation, which will make it just as good of a product as the GTX 470 and make the 5870 even more irrelevant for the money.



The problem is AMD plans on new cards in 3-6 months time. I think GTX 480 being late is going to hurt Nvidia. This is like Barcelona vs Core 2. In this case AMD is getting ready to release i7 and Nvidia will be working on fixing Barcelona!

I hope for Nvidia's sake that AMD does not release HD 6xxx in 3-6 months time. I hope all AMD is doing is a die shrink to 32 (or 28 nm). If it is a die shrink then Nvidia is screwed, but not a screwed as HD 6xxx.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 4:17:57 AM

sedaine said:
The problem is AMD plans on new cards in 3-6 months time. I think GTX 480 being late is going to hurt Nvidia. This is like Barcelona vs Core 2. In this case AMD is getting ready to release i7 and Nvidia will be working on fixing Barcelona!

I hope for Nvidia's sake that AMD does not release HD 6xxx in 3-6 months time. I hope all AMD is doing is a die shrink to 32 (or 28 nm). If it is a die shrink then Nvidia is screwed, but not a screwed as HD 6xxx.


This is very true, but ATI is releasing a completely new architecture while nVidia just has to tweak, albeit heavily, the Fermi architecture. A 32/28nm Fermi would be amazing even with the current max of 512 SPs, not to mention even more.

I think we will see some interesting competition near the end of the year.
March 28, 2010 4:27:55 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
Well you all have convincing points, why would I want the new GTX 470 when it gets better performance then the 5850, and keeps up with 5870 but its 350 so that is definetly a rip-off. Then geez it has 3D and PsyX who needs that. I don't know what my case is going to do with all that normal heat, I dont know if all my fans and coolers are meant for that. Obviously its way to small for my case, I need one of those 12 inch cards to fill up my case. I also have to much money in my wallet and have an extra $800 to get the dual card 5970, and I have all the time in the world so I can wait until its in stock.
Yeah ATI cards are so much better cause Nvidia's cards are only slightly better but not a whole lot. And the gtx 470 needs a minimum required 550 watt power supply, and to ATI fans this is way to high, well the 5870 and 5850 needs atleast 500, so that is such a huge difference, so that is definetly a deal breaker along with the high temperature 93C with the GTX 470 fully loaded, which is only 7 degrees higher than the 5870 and 15 than the 5850. Well if someone is getting any of these cards, they know they "all" get hot, so everyone who gets any of them is going to have to have some kind of cooling system, so I guess that makes it a big deal, cause if I go get the 5870 you won't need the same amount of cooling as the 470 cause it runs way to hot compared to the 5800's, well that is just the stupid is thing I have ever heard, either way you go, your going to need cooling.

Well after all this is done and said, to think that the GTX 470 sucks just because it didnt beat the 5850 as hard as you think it should, to be a good card, and that it runs to hot and sucks way to much power just to catch up with the 5870, this all makes it a shiz card. Am I missing anything to why it sucks to ati fans. To wrap this it up, I would like to say that Nvidia has delivered the greatest card on the market, and to those who don't think so, then just go get the ATI card cause if your a FanBoy of ati then even if the gtx 470 could get you laid you still wouldn't see the positive side to it, you would say that gets way to hott.



You do realise what the challenge is when a CPU or GPU is created. Both Nvidia and AMD can make much, much, much faster GPU's than they currently make if they didn't need to keep the power down. The struggle is to make it fast and keep it within a certain power envelope. Remember how AMD delivered Athlon at same performance as Pentium 4 but requiring less power to run?

Yeah - that's the holy grail - the GTX 480 is the hottest and most power hungry single GPU ever seen! The GTX 470 is not too far behind.
March 28, 2010 4:32:09 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
The the 5850 has been the best card on the market, with tons of posibilities as far as ocing goes. Just to make sure, I am not saying that the 5850 is bad in anyway I just giving the 470 justice to people who dont want it to be good.
I do agree that if the GTX 470 can get a wide spread amounts for it, esp. less than 350, cause the 5850 is above asking price and is higher than it was when it came out, so they definetly should be lowering there prices even more, and on top things are going to keep changing cause there going to keep getting better so we all win in the end, and the next set of 5870-6's and doulbe gpu cards should be quite interesting.
All in all every body is going to need something different, like if you want 3D then your going to get the nivida. If your looking for a great deal on a card that can OC and catch up to his older bother then you got the 5850.
I think it is funny that the lower cards from the top are getting all the attention, and are more liked by the people.
Can you guys vote, cause I thought I made it so everyone could vote so we could see the ultimate winner by choice of the mass, if I did it wrong let me know, cause I would like to get it working.



1/2 a year and they deliver this???? Can't wait for that AMD die shrink to 28nm in June/July.
March 28, 2010 4:35:00 AM

To be comletely honest I have been planning a rig and I wanted to get the asus 5850 cause it is solid, and good performer all around esp. for OCing. So today I have been reading nvidia reviews and most of them were leaning a little towards nvidia. I guess all the benchmarks could be false, does someone know of a fully legit review and benchmarks?
Cause all I really want is to get the best for my money, not have some half mixed over compulsive choice for a card. I was having a little fun but it was a bit overboard, my bad, but lets get back to the task at hand.
The 5850 fact is out now with tons of results that are positve and is good priced and evga has the 470 on there site now for 350, and the link to the egg has the 5850 for 279. I thought most were around 330, but at prices like 279 and lower, its going to be hard to not to pick op a couple of these.
What I failed to mention was that you got to think about the hardware that comes with what your getting, like nvidia card is all intel, and ATI is spreaded across the board so if you want X58 or AM3 your cool.
So in terms of price, reliabilty, drivers, performance, and funtionality which one would prevail? **Big marker is that price cause your going to get a card for 280 or less and OC it and you have an uper 500 5870 stats.
GTX 470 from what is supposive benchs are stating that the new cards are to be some what faster, but a what cost, dependabiltiy, longevity and my favorite practicality. Is a +200F(92c*1.8+32) card that is 9.5 inchs stand a chance against a 2 cards that have already redemed acknoledgement through out the enthusiast world as the premeir card(s). Or has nvidia already sacrificed so much that there picking up the pieces and dust where ati left them, I think I should of stopped writing awhile back on the cue, but 470 vs 5850, five thousand eight hundred and fifty is alot higher than four hundred and seventy.
March 28, 2010 4:42:16 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
To be comletely honest I have been planning a rig and I wanted to get the asus 5850 cause it is solid, and good performer all around esp. for OCing. So today I have been reading nvidia reviews and most of them were leaning a little towards nvidia. I guess all the benchmarks could be false, does someone know of a fully legit review and benchmarks?
Cause all I really want is to get the best for my money, not have some half mixed over compulsive choice for a card. I was having a little fun but it was a bit overboard, my bad, but lets get back to the task at hand.
The 5850 fact is out now with tons of results that are positve and is good priced and evga has the 470 on there site now for 350, and the link to the egg has the 5850 for 279. I thought most were around 330, but at prices like 279 and lower, its going to be hard to not to pick op a couple of these.
What I failed to mention was that you got to think about the hardware that comes with what your getting, like nvidia card is all intel, and ATI is spreaded across the board so if you want X58 or AM3 your cool.
So in terms of price, reliabilty, drivers, performance, and funtionality which one would prevail? **Big marker is that price cause your going to get a card for 280 or less and OC it and you have an uper 500 5870 stats.
GTX 470 from what is supposive benchs are stating that the new cards are to be some what faster, but a what cost, dependabiltiy, longevity and my favorite practicality. Is a +200F(92c*1.8+32) card that is 9.5 inchs stand a chance against a 2 cards that have already redemed acknoledgement through out the enthusiast world as the premeir card(s). Or has nvidia already sacrificed so much that there picking up the pieces and dust where ati left them, I think I should of stopped writing awhile back on the cue, but 470 vs 5850, five thousand eight hundred and fifty is alot higher than four hundred and seventy.



I'm also a little concerned that NV did not release drivers for their 3 monitor setup... problems?
March 28, 2010 4:51:29 AM

Well how do we know on a wide scale if the drivers are work or if it will be total meltdown acroos the western hemisphere of agitated gamers that have waited so long and then waited so more than so on and so on till this weekend now they go to wait till april 12, which has put nvidia so far behind its scary.
5870-6's eyefinity 6 (screen) is probably in the midst of release by Q3, so nvidia is where ATI was so many months ago and in the computer indusrty one quarter can do a lot of damage.
March 28, 2010 5:08:57 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
Well how do we know on a wide scale if the drivers are work or if it will be total meltdown acroos the western hemisphere of agitated gamers that have waited so long and then waited so more than so on and so on till this weekend now they go to wait till april 12, which has put nvidia so far behind its scary.
5870-6's eyefinity 6 (screen) is probably in the midst of release by Q3, so nvidia is where ATI was so many months ago and in the computer indusrty one quarter can do a lot of damage.



I guess NV has nothing to worry about - they have a full 4 months to try and convince people to buy these before AMD upgrades arrive. If AMD plays their cards right then they will have NV where they want them.
March 28, 2010 5:20:44 AM

This is one war ATI is not going to give up. Just as a company they are more prominate, and nvidia is like the black sheep brother that dose not get anything done. How can you trust a company that took that long to release, its not professional at all, what if they were a software company and they were suppose to have the software built next week, then they push it off until halloween, its not attractive at all, its actually pushs away bad. How can you trust them to deliver the next driver? The customer probably won't see that 3 monitor driver till after the 4th of july if there lucky.
You got to have backbone and pride if they are to sell pieces of equipment that costs 500+.
March 28, 2010 5:39:15 AM

http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rid=191924
Here is the new 5850 thats suppose to come out, its only ten bucks more than its original verison, it also comes with the voltage tweaker and is made readily for OCers. I found an asus web video where the guy took the regular asus 5850 and oced it and it was up where the 5970 is on the benchmarks. I can't find the video buy I will look for it.
I haven't though about this till now cause I don't think it was ever mentioned,
whats the story on the 470 and ocing it, is it already as high as it can go or what, cause who wants a board that you can't play with.
March 28, 2010 10:53:37 AM

notty22 said:
These were posted with a article at Daily Tech. http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=17945
Needless to say alot of ATI fans are spazzing out in the discussion section.
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/14039_large_GF100-1.JPG
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/14040_large_GF100-2.JPG

Green VS Red !



notty22, do you know anything about econometrics? These graphs are horrendously misleading; they are purposely modified to give the illusion of better performance and scaling.
March 28, 2010 1:50:00 PM

ElMoIsEviL said:
Blah Blah Blah I Love nVIDIA.

Seriously man... you've left your NV blinders on. Any Reasonable, Logical and Rational person will tell you that the GTX 480 is too little too late and that the GTX 470, although an interesting product for sure, is not as good a purchase as either a 5850 or 5870. The only way you could think otherwise is if you have a predisposed emotional preference for nVIDIA. Yes emotions are powerful that way (they can skew perception).


I know, Even I consider myself an Nvidia loyalist/customer, and I can't even find a bright spot with Fermi.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 2:14:07 PM

Not sure where you guys are getting that 20w more than the 5870 for the 470...

(from Guru3D)

GeForce GTX 470
System in IDLE = 205 Watts
System with GPU in FULL Stress = 419 Watts
Difference (GPU load) = 214Watt (TDP = 215W)

GeForce GTX 480
System in IDLE = 209 Watts
System with GPU in FULL Stress = 463 Watts
Difference (GPU load) = 254 Watt (TDP = 250W)

(From techPowerUp who have very accurate power measurements:) 
I Got the 470 figures from Guru3D's 470 difference to 480 then reduced from techPowerUp's 480.

Idle:
5850 18w
5870 19w
470 50w
480 54w

Peak Gaming:
5850 108w
5870 144w
470 213w
480 257w

Max with Furmark:
5850 150w
5870 212w
470 270w - bit of a guess on this one as no Furmark type numbers from Guru3D
480 320w

So during Peak gaming the 470 draws 69w more than the 5870 and 105w more than the 5850.
Not the end of the world, but a fair difference with a lot more heat.

In all honesty I was starting to get quite impressed with the 470 from Guru3D's review - OC quite nicely. But the Comment I saw of something like - "even on light 3D loads the fan spins up (60%)" kinda put me off - I like my quiet 5850.
Even OC'd to 875/4800 1.2v I only hit 37% fan speed which is almost not noticable ^^

Would love to see some gaming OC comparsons between some of these cards :) 

Trouble is really with the 470 here in the UK - Price... We are getting properly shafted here on it :ouch: 
(Asus are cheapish - not cheapest, need Powercolor or Sparkle for that and not that much in it)

(£'s from www.overclockers.co.uk)
Asus 5850 £224.99 $335.24
Asus 5870 £319.99 $476.79
Asus 470 £319.99 $476.79
Asus 480 £448.99 $669
Asus 5970 £540.99 $806.08

Here the 470 is £95 $141.55 more than the 5850 - or the same price as a 5870!

So for me, my Asus 5850 was a good choice...
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 3:23:18 PM

Pailin said:
Not sure where you guys are getting that 20w more than the 5870 for the 470...

(from Guru3D)

GeForce GTX 470
System in IDLE = 205 Watts
System with GPU in FULL Stress = 419 Watts
Difference (GPU load) = 214Watt (TDP = 215W)

GeForce GTX 480
System in IDLE = 209 Watts
System with GPU in FULL Stress = 463 Watts
Difference (GPU load) = 254 Watt (TDP = 250W)

(From techPowerUp who have very accurate power measurements:) 
I Got the 470 figures from Guru3D's 470 difference to 480 then reduced from techPowerUp's 480.

Idle:
5850 18w
5870 19w
470 50w
480 54w

Peak Gaming:
5850 108w
5870 144w
470 213w
480 257w

Max with Furmark:
5850 150w
5870 212w
470 270w - bit of a guess on this one as no Furmark type numbers from Guru3D
480 320w

So during Peak gaming the 470 draws 69w more than the 5870 and 105w more than the 5850.
Not the end of the world, but a fair difference with a lot more heat.

In all honesty I was starting to get quite impressed with the 470 from Guru3D's review - OC quite nicely. But the Comment I saw of something like - "even on light 3D loads the fan spins up (60%)" kinda put me off - I like my quiet 5850.
Even OC'd to 875/4800 1.2v I only hit 37% fan speed which is almost not noticable ^^

Would love to see some gaming OC comparsons between some of these cards :) 

Trouble is really with the 470 here in the UK - Price... We are getting properly shafted here on it :ouch: 
(Asus are cheapish - not cheapest, need Powercolor or Sparkle for that and not that much in it)

(£'s from www.overclockers.co.uk)
Asus 5850 £224.99 $335.24
Asus 5870 £319.99 $476.79
Asus 470 £319.99 $476.79
Asus 480 £448.99 $669
Asus 5970 £540.99 $806.08

Here the 470 is £95 $141.55 more than the 5850 - or the same price as a 5870!

So for me, my Asus 5850 was a good choice...


During actual gaming the difference is not that far at all, I can't play Furmark therefor it is irrelevant.
March 28, 2010 3:25:29 PM

AMW1011 said:
During actual gaming the difference is not that far at all, I can't play Furmark therefor it is irrelevant.


What about Idle?

Can you play Idle?
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 3:28:23 PM

builderbobftw said:
What about Idle?

Can you play Idle?


That is different, my point about Furmark is nothing but Furmark, a benchmark, will make the cards go that high. Idle is a concern if you pay the electric, but its not that bad.
March 28, 2010 4:19:33 PM

AMW1011 said:
That is different, my point about Furmark is nothing but Furmark, a benchmark, will make the cards go that high. Idle is a concern if you pay the electric, but its not that bad.


My electricity bill is just Insane.

And even with games, like( Crysis, Metro, Farcry 2, BC2) the power usage of the Fermi chips is rather Insane and disproportional to their power and speed.

Of corse, the diffrence is only 20W if you play Hello Kitty Island adventure, or Modern Warfare 2, or Starcraft or some other untaxing game wher the GPU is running at 3% load.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 4:39:51 PM

builderbobftw said:
My electricity bill is just Insane.

And even with games, like( Crysis, Metro, Farcry 2, BC2) the power usage of the Fermi chips is rather Insane and disproportional to their power and speed.

Of corse, the diffrence is only 20W if you play Hello Kitty Island adventure, or Modern Warfare 2, or Starcraft or some other untaxing game wher the GPU is running at 3% load.


Dude... the difference between the 5870 and the GTX 470 won't cost you much at all.

If your electric bill is absolutely terrible and you pay the highest, 20 cents/kilowatthour, then you will spend a total of $15 a month. If you pay the average rate of 11 cents/kilowatthour then you will pay $8.50 a month.

Now lets compare the price of a 5870, it would be $13 a month at the highest and $7 at the average. Assuming you pay the maximum rate, you will save a total of $24 a year with the 5870 over the GTX 470.

This is all calculated with you having your computer at LOAD for 12 hours a day, this is impossible.

http://www.handymath.com/cgi-bin/electric.cgi

Calculate for 360 hours and the wattages, 180 for the 5870 and 220 for the GTX 470.

Now, lets assume you game 5 hours a day and have nothing in your life at all and you pay the maximum rate, worst case scenerio.

The GTX 470 will cost $6.50 for all of these sessions, the rest of the time at idle would cost you $2. That is a total of $8.50, worst case scenerio and assuming you have no life whatsoever.

Now for the 5870, it will cost you $5.50 worst case scenerio for your gaming usage in one month. and $1.25 for the idle time in one month totaling out to $6.75.

In a year you will save $21 with the 5870.

To check this, calculate 150 hours per month for your gaming, and 210 for idle. Have the GTX 470 at 220w load and 40w idle. Then have the 5870 at 180w load and 28w idle. All at 20 cents per kilowatt per hour.

So no it wont do anything to your electricity bill.
March 28, 2010 4:46:20 PM

See you're proble, is comparing the Eletric use of the GTX 470 to the 5870, instead of the 5850, the card it performs most like.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 4:49:08 PM

builderbobftw said:
See you're proble, is comparing the Eletric use of the GTX 470 to the 5870, instead of the 5850, the card it performs most like.


No, given more mature drivers and its advantage in heavy tessellation, it is closer to the 5870 than the 5850. Right now, it is right between, but it will gain on the 5870 in time.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 4:49:52 PM

Well you yourself said FurMark doesn't matter, since it's not a game.
So here's Crysis:

You pegged the delta between the GTX 470 and 5870 at 40W, while it's actually 89W.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 4:51:50 PM

AMW1011 said:
No, given more mature drivers and its advantage in heavy tessellation, it is closer to the 5870 than the 5850. Right now, it is right between, but it will gain on the 5870 in time.

Objective arguments are based on what IS happening, not what CAN happen, as you saw with the release of Cat 10.3 even 6 months after the release there were still huge gains to be had, so I could argue the 5870's driver potential is just as great.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:11:51 PM

sabot00 said:
Objective arguments are based on what IS happening, not what CAN happen, as you saw with the release of Cat 10.3 even 6 months after the release there were still huge gains to be had, so I could argue the 5870's driver potential is just as great.


I could argue that the GTX 480 will play Crysis 2 at twice the framerates that a 5970 will, but thats just as useless.

If you want to paint everything in a light that just reflects your bias, then fine.

It is generally accepted that release day cards gain performance from better drivers, up to 5-10% within a few months of release. ATI has had 6 months.

Your right I'm guessing, but it is an educated guess based on history. It is extremely likely that the GTX 4xx cards that just came out will gain 5-10% more performance than the 5xxx series with driver updates, there are no reasons to think otherwise while all evidence supports it as does history. I know this, you know this, so what is the problem?
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:19:36 PM

AMW1011 said:
I could argue that the GTX 480 will play Crysis 2 at twice the framerates that a 5970 will, but thats just as useless.

If you want to paint everything in a light that just reflects your bias, then fine.

It is generally accepted that release day cards gain performance from better drivers, up to 5-10% within a few months of release. ATI has had 6 months.

Your right I'm guessing, but it is an educated guess based on history. It is extremely likely that the GTX 4xx cards that just came out will gain 5-10% more performance than the 5xxx series with driver updates, there are no reasons to think otherwise while all evidence supports it as does history. I know this, you know this, so what is the problem?


Everyone expected the 5830 to have huge performance/price, I was one of the few who said don't recommend cards that aren't here yet.
As it turns out the 5830 failed, so did the 8600GT when everyone expected 64 cores.

The only thing that history confirms is that the future is unpredictable.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:21:38 PM

sabot00 said:
Well you yourself said FurMark doesn't matter, since it's not a game.
So here's Crysis:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/nvidiageforcegtx480launch_032610115215/22204.png
You pegged the delta between the GTX 470 and 5870 at 40W, while it's actually 89W.


Mathfail, 366-319 = 47 so Delta 47w in Crysis.



Delta is 30w here. Using the 3dmark benchmark



Delta is 50w here using the Furmark benchmark that squeezes the most out of a video card.

30+50+47 = 127 / 3 = 42.33

Happy now?
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:24:14 PM

sabot00 said:
Everyone expected the 5830 to have huge performance/price, I was one of the few who said don't recommend cards that aren't here yet.
As it turns out the 5830 failed, so did the 8600GT when everyone expected 64 cores.

The only thing that history confirms is that the future is unpredictable.


That has nothing to do with the progressive nature of drivers, stop deflecting.

Everyone thought the Persians would defeat the Athenians at the battle of Marathon, but that didn't happen. Does that have any reflection on the progression of drivers?
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:25:48 PM

nVidia has had cards to work on drivers for over six months - these aren't new cards in those terms.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:29:43 PM

eyefinity said:
nVidia has had cards to work on drivers for over six months - these aren't new cards in those terms.


If nVidia was lucky, they had since November. They likely had even less time, that's 4 months max. It took 6 months for ATI to release the 10.3 drivers.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:37:26 PM

eyefinity said:
nVidia has had cards to work on drivers for over six months - these aren't new cards in those terms.

This is desperate. So Fermi is not a new card, its just a new card. Nvidia does internal testing, quality control , debugging,driver development and your saying ATI doe not. Maybe that explains the 2d situation , grey sreening, flickering etc.
a c 126 U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:37:40 PM

IMO the GTX470 isn't a bad buy depending on where you live.

If you live in the UK its terrible as its £320 where as a HD5850 is £220, not worth the 10% performance increase when you factor is the extra heat and power usage aswell

Same applies for the GTX480, just too expensive. Its a shame because people wanted a price war and now that looks unlikely.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:41:56 PM

notty22 said:
This is desperate. So Fermi is not a new card, its just a new card. Nvidia does internal testing, quality control , debugging,driver development and your saying ATI doe not. Maybe that explains the 2d situation , grey sreening, flickering etc.


What I'm saying is don't expect miracles from future driver releases. nVidia will have been bursting their balls to get the very best result they could for Friday, that's why they released a new driver not so long ago.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 5:49:58 PM

eyefinity said:
What I'm saying is don't expect miracles from future driver releases. nVidia will have been bursting their balls to get the very best result they could for Friday, that's why they released a new driver not so long ago.


5-10% is far from a miracle.
March 28, 2010 6:45:52 PM

They need 10% to make the GTX 470 a good buy compare dto the 5850. (280$, or 310$ with a free 60$ game)
March 28, 2010 7:07:40 PM

Personally, I was pleasantly surprised with the GTX 480 and GTX 470. Sort of like being pleasantly surprised that a building hit by a tornado was at least not occupied. They did actually get released. They aren't actually slower than the earlier generation. So far the test units did not catch on fire and kill or irradiate anyone. The worst thing about them is that they run too hot. I read that 480 runs at around 95 C on a load. 100 C is the boiling point of water. There is no way a product can run at that temperature and have a decent lifespan. If I were to get a GTX480 I would also have to invest in a water cooling system, a hidden cost that would void the warranty. Not cool.

My GTX295 (which I purchased at less than $300 as it was an allegedly defective return) only runs at 66 to 70 on a load and around 41 to 44 Idle. Of course I have a ton of fans in my system and replaced the internal thermal compound with Arctic Silver. I've never had good experience with CPU's or GPU's that run hot. I like my parts to live a long time. So far, I have seen nothing to encourage me to invest in a GTX480 or GTX470. The silliest thing about them is that some are apparently designed to be overclocked. But that would raise the temperatures! I would imagine that if you have something in your PC that runs at the boiling point of water whenever you open a web browser or play a game, it would warp the PCB and cause caps to pop.

I think there is a little bit of bias against Nvidia, but it is understandable due to the consistently bad decisions the company has been making. Their CEO tends to attempt political solutions for technological problems. They successfully fought against the adoption of many of the DX11 standards that were originally part of DX10, and they didn't invest R&D into making sure they had mastered those technologies so that when DX11 came out they would have something ready.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 7:16:40 PM

majesticlizard said:
Personally, I was pleasantly surprised with the GTX 480 and GTX 470. Sort of like being pleasantly surprised that a building hit by a tornado was at least not occupied. They did actually get released. They aren't actually slower than the earlier generation. So far the test units did not catch on fire and kill or irradiate anyone. The worst thing about them is that they run too hot. I read that 480 runs at around 95 C on a load. 100 C is the boiling point of water. There is no way a product can run at that temperature and have a decent lifespan. If I were to get a GTX480 I would also have to invest in a water cooling system, a hidden cost that would void the warranty. Not cool.

My GTX295 (which I purchased at less than $300 as it was an allegedly defective return) only runs at 66 to 70 on a load and around 41 to 44 Idle. Of course I have a ton of fans in my system and replaced the internal thermal compound with Arctic Silver. I've never had good experience with CPU's or GPU's that run hot. I like my parts to live a long time. So far, I have seen nothing to encourage me to invest in a GTX480 or GTX470. The silliest thing about them is that some are apparently designed to be overclocked. But that would raise the temperatures! I would imagine that if you have something in your PC that runs at the boiling point of water whenever you open a web browser or play a game, it would warp the PCB and cause caps to pop.

I think there is a little bit of bias against Nvidia, but it is understandable due to the consistently bad decisions the company has been making. Their CEO tends to attempt political solutions for technological problems. They successfully fought against the adoption of many of the DX11 standards that were originally part of DX10, and they didn't invest R&D into making sure they had mastered those technologies so that when DX11 came out they would have something ready.


To me the GTX 470 is better, but the GTX 480 has a huge radiator that's exposed to the case at 95C, that's really going to affect the ambient even with something like 4 x 120mm fans.
March 28, 2010 7:18:25 PM

I think everybody here can agree that the GTX 470 has more poetential than the GTX 480, the 480 is just to close to the 5970 in price.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 7:36:45 PM

builderbobftw said:
They need 10% to make the GTX 470 a good buy compare dto the 5850. (280$, or 310$ with a free 60$ game)


WTF...

10% would make it tied with the 5870, still having the extra 10-20% or more over the 5870 with heavy tessellation and it would cost $70 less. How the hell do you get that it can only compete at that point? At that point it is raping the 5870. It competes with the 5870 not the 5850, why don't you get that?

The 5850 is the best card for the money, nothing above that is worth it including the 5870, GTX 480, or 5970. However, if you can get 5870 performance plus an advantage with tessellation for only $50 (not counting a weekend special deal like you are), then I call that a decent value, but still not as good as a 5850 or dual 5770s.
March 28, 2010 7:42:29 PM

It uses a sh@tload of power, produces massive amounts of heat, and we don't k now pricing yet. If you want to call the GTX 470 350$, I want to call the 5850 250$.

And Fermi card are like factory overclocked, you can't overclock them any more withou turning the fan to 100%, and gettign 100C temps.

The Fermi cards are just factory overclocked 5850s 5870s with insane power draws and a high, high price.
March 28, 2010 7:59:49 PM

Quote:
...we don't k now pricing yet. If you want to call the GTX 470 350$, I want to call the 5850 250$...
The cheapest price on most sites, like Newegg, for the GTX470 is $350. The cheapest price for the HD 5850 on newegg is is $280.

What I would like to see are some credible benchmarks that show that the 470 is faster than the 5850. I've just not see that. From what I've seen its actually slower. Maybe I missed something. Links would be nice though.

I don't think the Fermi cards are factory overclocked. I think their problem is that useless features of their architecture that were originally intended for non-consumer uses (ECC) require a bit more horsepower per clock cycle. There are some super-clocked versions already being put out that are significantly faster than the stock 480; a water cooled one by EVGA even.

a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 8:01:01 PM

builderbobftw said:
It uses a sh@tload of power, produces massive amounts of heat, and we don't k now pricing yet. If you want to call the GTX 470 350$, I want to call the 5850 250$.

And Fermi card are like factory overclocked, you can't overclock them any more withou turning the fan to 100%, and gettign 100C temps.

The Fermi cards are just factory overclocked 5850s 5870s with insane power draws and a high, high price.


http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
Quote:
Overclocking Results

In order to overclock our GTX 470, we used EVGA’s new GTX 400-series Precision tool while stress testing was done using the upcoming EVGA OC Scanner that provides an artifact scanner. If an overclock passed 30 minutes of artifact scanning, it was considered stable. Fan speed was set to 70% for the duration of these tests.

Also note that the fixed function stage clock (core clock) is directly linked to the speed of the processor clock (CUDA cores / shaders) and as such, you cannot overclock each one individually as you could do on the GT200 series. Basically, the fixed function clock is ½ that of the processor clock.

Final Overclocks:

Core: 721Mhz
Processors: 1442Mhz
Memory: 3974Mhz (QDR)


Our GTX 470 sample simply overclocked like the dickens and screamed its way past the clock speeds used on a stock GTX 480. The memory speeds also saw a significant increase with full stability. Considering the perceived limitations of the architecture, these clock speeds on a lower-end part are simply stunning in our opinion.


Try to base your points off of fact, it helps.
March 28, 2010 8:29:21 PM

majesticlizard said:
Quote:
...we don't k now pricing yet. If you want to call the GTX 470 350$, I want to call the 5850 250$...
The cheapest price on most sites, like Newegg, for the GTX470 is $350. The cheapest price for the HD 5850 on newegg is is $280.

What I would like to see are some credible benchmarks that show that the 470 is faster than the 5850. I've just not see that. From what I've seen its actually slower. Maybe I missed something. Links would be nice though.

I don't think the Fermi cards are factory overclocked. I think their problem is that useless features of their architecture that were originally intended for non-consumer uses (ECC) require a bit more horsepower per clock cycle. There are some super-clocked versions already being put out that are significantly faster than the stock 480; a water cooled one by EVGA even.


Can you show me any Fermi cards for reatil prices?

thought so....
      • 1
      • 2 / 4
      • 3
      • 4
      • Newest
!