Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Gtx 465 reviews

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

Best solution

a b Î Nvidia
June 1, 2010 9:45:35 AM

Well, do you mean PhysX features disabled in game? Because none of those games support PhysX, and even if any of them did, enabling PhysX would probably cause too much of a performance hit for a card like the GTX 465.
Share
June 1, 2010 11:03:25 AM

yes, do you mean will increase the performance alot if enabled ?
Score
0
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
June 1, 2010 12:58:28 PM

No the exact opposite, phsyX decreases performance when enabled, But none of those games in that review use physX.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 1:17:39 PM

can I ask then what is the use of phsyX ?
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
June 1, 2010 1:41:10 PM

Add some extra effects like particle effects E.g smoke.

Just google physX or go on youtube....
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
June 1, 2010 5:32:29 PM

PhysX is a proprietary (owned by nVidia) ability that game producers can enable in their games to provide better visuals for things like smoke, and particle affects (useful for when glass or objects blow up for instance). In my personal experience, it's really not that big of a deal anyhow. And it ONLY works with nVidia graphics cards, and very few games actually utilize it well.

Because it adds more calculations to your GPU's already heavy work load, it WILL DECREASE PERFORMANCE but 'should' improve visual appeal. For a single GPU it's not a great idea. It works best if you have two GPUs installed. This way a single card can do all your normal graphics, while the secondary card does all the PhysX calculations.

With a GTX 465 it would be silly to enable PhysX in most cases.

If you haven't already purchased a GTX 465, I'd suggest you skip on it. Buy an ATI 5850 instead. Only slightly more money, but much better performance. (This is coming from a long time nVidia user).
Score
0
June 1, 2010 7:51:28 PM

Agreed with Jerreece, again i'm a long time NVidia user but with what they're putting out at the minute its financially logical/sensible to go with ATI's offerings.

There is no review i have read of the 465 that catagorically says it is worth buying over something you could get from ATI. It makes me kinda sad really because Nvidia are so much better than this.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 8:55:59 PM

looking at nvidia gtx 465, it consumes more power than the ati 5850, gets hotter, and has about the same performance as a 4890 am i right? Seems like i will never buy from Nvidia ever, if they continue on the road they're going down lol. I was quite looking forwards to a very competative card at least from Nvida, i mean let alone actually beating ATI at performance per watt and heat emissions, but no lol.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:06:46 PM

Its not a matter of not buying from Nvidia ever, they're simply on the backfoot this round. You'll see trends like this where the two companies take turns in having the favour of the gamer and enthusiast market.

We're only currently seeing the first generation of DX 11 cards from both companies, a few years ago when DX 10 made its debut we'd have all been talking about the 8 series from NV and the 2 series from ATI and you only have to look at the excellent grade of cards they were producing by the end of DX 10, i.e the GT-200 series and 4 series (respectively).

We can only hope that NV stops this silly bravado that their cards are actually good and put a refined version of Fermi on a smaller MP. But considering NV's troubled past of die shrinking and switching to new MP's that is a massive uncertainty.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:15:18 PM

it's almost like an unlucky turnout, like amd bring out phenom ii to face intel's i7 for multitasking and processor intensive applications which i don't know much about but Intel certainly acheive much better performance clock for clock. But i know AMD do quite well, praiseworthy for gaming though. it seems like a long time before nvidia finally bring out something very competetive ragarding gpu clean technology not just brute force. It's like with AMD where they used to be good with single cores in performance, and now they're not soo good, but with Nvidia it's regarding energy efficiency etc. Yeah but i have always had this feeling that Nvidia have been overated, all games that do advertise graphics have "nvidia the way it's meant to be played" shot at me, i know it's because Nvidia have payed for that to be displayed in the loading up of a game, but you get the impression that they are really good. But then i buy an nforce board, i don't even get the options in nvidia control panel that i should really like voltage options, and cpu multiplier options to change. But then i buy an AMD board for the same price and i get amd overdrive with guaranteed voltage options to edit and an number of other great options which really make my overclocking experience soo much easier. I bought a stupid GTS 250 as well lol, which is not overclockable at all really to be honest, and i find out that the 9800gtx+ is better because it uses 141 watts which is 9 watts less than the GTS 250 and it uses two pci-e power sockets, implying possible overclocking possibilites, me thinking what!! you just made a newer card worse of than an older card lmao. I have an ati 4870 now, but not happy about the temps anyway.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:24:11 PM

Yeah AMD's CPU's are always overshadowed by Intel but thats the way of the world. To be honest in a considerable amount of games you won't see a massive difference between a quad core phenom and the Intel I5/7 equivalent in games since they rely on GPU's more.

I've always seen ATI as efficient, well priced, cooler running GPU's while NV has all this cool but mostly useless technology that gets used in a few poster boy games (example - tessellation in Metro 2033) and brute force that manages to win it the performance crown.

From that ATI would seem the obvious choice, but all NV has to do is price their products better and soon an enthusiast/gamer may think "to hell with heat and power consumption, that things a beast and the cost is worth it". Well that would certainly be my thought process if they brought down the 480's by about £70 lol.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:32:26 PM

the 4870 did well thoguh against the gt 200 series. Surely. The GTX 260 looks almost twice the size, uses 176 watts isn't it or is it more compared to less of the ati 4870. I don't know if it's cooler or not. More power consumption doesn't necesarilly mean more heat does it? Because the 4870 only uses 10 more watts than the gts 250 but it gets massively hot. Whereas the GTS 250 stays cool - an idle of 40 degrees with it's stock cooler and without having to turn the fan on loud. That's the only thing i suppose i miss about the gts 250. Could more power actually mean better graphics card stability? Probably given the 4870 5 more watts or so and it would have been cooler? i don't know i'm just guessing.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:39:47 PM

Higher clocks and therefore higher power throughput is sometimes needed to stop certain ATI cards from crashing in 2D mode. The 4870 was meant to be competing with the 280/285 i think, cant quite remember.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:42:44 PM

gtx 280, but the gtx 280 is slightly better isn't it. But it's alot bigger, uses alot more power i'm guessing, i really don't know anything aobut this card lol, i thought it was better than the gtx 275 simply because it was a larger number name card. Found out it wasn't. Only familiar with gtx 260, gtx 275, gtx 285 and 295. But i don't know the gtx 295 power consumption jsut that it is 2 gtx 260s.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 9:49:21 PM

The 280 was first generation, much like the 480 now. They then phased that out, replacing it with two iterations, the 275 and the 285. The 275 was slightly not as good as the 280 but the difference was fairly negligable and the 285 was better by a fair margin. I think this was to increase the number of access points customers had into the GT-200 range. Late on, the 260 had a die shrink but the name was kept the same, the same concept went for the 295 shrink as well. The GTS 250 was released but that was basically a revamped 9800 GTX.

I had an XFX 280 and it was very good, peaked at about 80 degrees on load but the case airflow could handle that fine.

My new 5970 gets just as hot as my old 280 but im not sure about specific increases in power consumption.
Score
0
June 1, 2010 11:04:38 PM

wow that's very impressive of an 5970 card, again i know not much about it, but i think i heard it actually uses less power than a GTX 480 and doesn't get that hot, that looks embarrassing for Nvidia also seeing how the 5970 is a dual chip graphics card. you know looking at these stock coolers it's also humiliating lol; paying soo much for a graphics card and getting free stuff in the package like a copy of futuremark and a game you would expect them to put on a decent fansink cooler onto the card at least. I took of my ati 4870 cooler and i was thinking no wonder why it gets soo hot, an intel stock cpu cooler is much bigger and probably better than the heatsink that was being used to cool my 4870. i'm looking forwards to getting my arctic axcellero twin turbo pro cooler tomorrow to put on the hd 4870, i do hope the graphics card actually fits into the case depth-wise since it's a matx case with a matx mainboard, but it's actually rather big, it's a cooler master elite 342 so it's a gaming matx case.
Score
0
June 2, 2010 12:15:34 AM

thanks alot guys for these useful info

I am afraid of the ATI catalyst drivers as many of my friends had problems like data loose and problems with graphics software like 3D Max
Score
0
June 2, 2010 12:32:21 AM

ati catalyst control panel is a lot more of a user friendly control system than nvidia control panel is by far. nvidia sticks everything onto one control system yes that's good, but their options are really basic. They're rubbish as well because most of the time unless you don't spend alot on the most expensive nvidia motherboard all the real time overclocking options will not be there for you and a number of options showing on nvidia control panel will not be available for you to edit. This is a big bother as it is hard trying to find another third party in-windows realtime overclocking utility. Whereas with an AMD motherboard am2 and am3 you are guaranteed with realtime overclocking capabilities with AMD overdrive, and testing your system without having to reboot to change voltage and frequency of cpu is soo much more convenient. ATI control panel shows you diagrams anyway of the anti-aliasing options and aniso-tropic filtering options that you are editing, therefore you can actually see how aa and af is making the moving picture look better without actually having to load up an application. It cuts out half the crap that Nvidia has in 3d display options, like trillnear optimizations, just gives you quality soo much easier to adjust with slide options.
Score
0
a b Î Nvidia
June 2, 2010 1:39:26 AM

Nashsafc said:
wow that's very impressive of an 5970 card, again i know not much about it, but i think i heard it actually uses less power than a GTX 480 and doesn't get that hot, that looks embarrassing for Nvidia also seeing how the 5970 is a dual chip graphics card. you know looking at these stock coolers it's also humiliating lol; paying soo much for a graphics card and getting free stuff in the package like a copy of futuremark and a game you would expect them to put on a decent fansink cooler onto the card at least. I took of my ati 4870 cooler and i was thinking no wonder why it gets soo hot, an intel stock cpu cooler is much bigger and probably better than the heatsink that was being used to cool my 4870. i'm looking forwards to getting my arctic axcellero twin turbo pro cooler tomorrow to put on the hd 4870, i do hope the graphics card actually fits into the case depth-wise since it's a matx case with a matx mainboard, but it's actually rather big, it's a cooler master elite 342 so it's a gaming matx case.


Nashsafc said:
ati catalyst control panel is a lot more of a user friendly control system than nvidia control panel is by far. nvidia sticks everything onto one control system yes that's good, but their options are really basic. They're rubbish as well because most of the time unless you don't spend alot on the most expensive nvidia motherboard all the real time overclocking options will not be there for you and a number of options showing on nvidia control panel will not be available for you to edit. This is a big bother as it is hard trying to find another third party in-windows realtime overclocking utility. Whereas with an AMD motherboard am2 and am3 you are guaranteed with realtime overclocking capabilities with AMD overdrive, and testing your system without having to reboot to change voltage and frequency of cpu is soo much more convenient. ATI control panel shows you diagrams anyway of the anti-aliasing options and aniso-tropic filtering options that you are editing, therefore you can actually see how aa and af is making the moving picture look better without actually having to load up an application. It cuts out half the crap that Nvidia has in 3d display options, like trillnear optimizations, just gives you quality soo much easier to adjust with slide options.


Please, take your medication. What does any of this rambling walls of text have to do with the GTX 465 ? Your jumping from cpu's to software, to who knows what !
Score
0
June 2, 2010 7:49:08 AM

thanks for all info I get the picture
Score
0
Anonymous
June 2, 2010 8:09:56 AM

This topic has been closed by Fihart
Score
0
June 2, 2010 8:44:28 AM

Best answer selected by mdk4ever.
Score
0
!