Here's a snippet from an article criticizing GF100 as "too little, too late, too hot, too expensive":
We ran benchmarks in a variety of current titles and, on the whole, the Fermi cards narrowly outperformed their ATI equivalents. In Crysis at 1,920 x 1,200 and Very High settings, the GTX 480 averaged 40fps to the HD 5870’s 38fps; the GTX 470 scored 33fps to the HD 5850’s 32fps. Higher settings saw similar margins. World in Conflict had the two Nvidia cards consistently ahead by just under 20%, and in Stalker: Call of Pripyat that margin was around 5%. Other games had ATI’s cards ahead by a whisker, and if we average all the results, Nvidia’s edge looks to be between 5% and 10%.
And that’s not all. First, these Fermi cards suck at the teat of your PSU ferociously, with a GXT 480-based test rig sucking upwards of 400W when stressed, compared to around 270W for ATI’s fastest single-GPU card. All this power causes a secondary problem - heat. The reports that the GF100 GPU can hit 98°C/208°F. I seriously have concerns as to how long a GPU pushed to this sort of level can last. And while the GPU is working this hard, you have to put up with annoying racket of the fan going flat out.
After waiting so long and all the hype, the result is disappointing I think.
I had waited on these before I made my next GPU upgrade, but it will probably be ATI for me this time unless something changes here really fast.
Reight now I am more excited for ATI next gen. ATI did a bang up job on the 5800s. They overclock really well, look really cool, and the performance is outstanding. NVidia cards should get a penalty for being so damn late.
Unfortunately, we consumers can't afford Nvidia to become like Voodoo and die. This is because as nice as ATi is right now, if they are the only video card manufacturer, we will be seeing 8800Ultra $700 and up price tag.