
Let's face it. The situation has been less than ideal for Nvidia over the past few months.
The first thing that comes to mind was the successful launch of AMD's new DirectX 11-ready Radeon HD 5000-series. Nvidia doesn't yet have its DirectX 11 answer ready. Admittedly, though, with scant availability of AMD's high-end Radeon HD 5870 and 5850 cards, this isn't the root of Nvidia's problems. The real thorn in the company's side is the fact that AMD has proven twice now, without a doubt, the smaller, scalable GPU and GDDR5 route it took with the Radeon HD 4000- and 5000-series is a winner from a price/performance/profitability standpoint.
As a result of AMD's success selling low-cost graphic cards with modest 3D performance, Nvidia has been forced to squeeze high-end GPUs into service as sub-$100 trench fighters. Take, for example, the GeForce 9600 GSO, 9600 GT, and 9800 GT, none of which were ever originally intended for the sub-$100 market. Complex GPUs and memory buses keep costs high, power usage is usually abysmal compared to the efficient Radeon HD 4670, and performance can't quite approach the Radeon HD 4850. The newer G96 version of the GeForce 9600 GSO helped cut costs a bit with its narrower 128-bit memory interface, but the majority of sub-$100 GeForces likely remain more expensive to manufacture than their Radeon counterparts.
With Nvidia's next-generation DirectX 11 flagship 'Fermi' delayed until next year, its prospects for wowing video card buyers in the near future are looking pretty dim. We had hopes that the recently-released GeForce G 210 and GT 220 would shake things up a little. And while the combination of 40nm lithography and DirectX 10.1 support helps the GeForce GT 220 bring a fight to ATI's Radeon HD 4650, the Radeon HD 4670 remains unchallenged when it comes to price/performance and low power usage.
Unchallenged, that is, until today.
The company is now officially unveiling its GeForce GT 240, the most powerful reference card that doesn't require an auxiliary PCIe power connector. It doesn't have DirectX 11 support, but it has exactly what Nvidia needs right now in the sub-$100 category: low production costs, low power usage, and better-than-Radeon HD 4670 performance. Should it matter that ATI has a pair of entry-level DirectX 11 GPUs planned for Q1 of next year? Only if you're willing to wait. Let's see what Nvidia is offering today.
- Introduction
- GeForce GT 240 Specifications And Hardware
- Zotac's GeForce GT 240 512MB AMP! Edition
- Palit's GeForce GT 240 1GB Sonic Edition
- GeForce Vs. GeForce? The Sub-$100 Market
- The Competition, Cont.’d
- Test System And Benchmarks
- Synthetic Benchmarks: 3DMark Vantage
- Game Benchmarks: Crysis
- Game Benchmarks: Far Cry 2
- Game Benchmarks: World In Conflict
- Game Benchmarks: Resident Evil 5
- Game Benchmarks: Fallout 3
- Game Benchmarks: Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X.
- Game Benchmarks: Left 4 Dead
- Game Benchmarks: Anti-Aliasing And Anisotropic Filtering
- Game Benchmarks: Video RAM
- Game Benchmarks: PhysX
- Power And Temperature Benchmarks
- Conclusion
The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.
The memory on the Diamond Radeon HD 4670 is clocked 200Mhz below reference speeds.
Looking at what cards people actually have (8800gt mostly), I think there are very few that would want to upgrade to this. Give us something better, Nvidia! The only reason why Ati doesn't have a 90% market share right now is that they can't make 5800s and 5700s fast enough.
So, which one was used? Reference is 750/1000 (2000 eff.) Diamond had two versions, I believe, one at the reference speed and one at 750/900 (1800 eff.)
Just trying to understand you pick so we could better understand the results.
From the benchmarks the change in performance isn't worth that large ramp up in price.
BTW I have a 4650 going in my HTPC
and 2 XFX4890s in my desktop/gaming computer
The GT 240 isn't a rebadge, it's a new GPU based on the same architecture as the GTX 200 series.
Absolutely right, fixed!
I totally agree with you, however launch pricing is always high.
Remember, we don't get to see the actual launch pricing until you do. The article was written before the GT 240 was for sale, and we were told it was a sub-$100 card.
The reason I've been positive about this card is that production costs should be low enough for Nvidia to compete on price very quickly. For example, look at the GeForce GT 220: $80 at launch a couple weeks ago, it's already down to the low $60 range.
You'll need to use common sense. At $110, the Radeon 4850 is the obvious winner, and at $90 the 8800 GT is the way to go.
But pricing should fall into place with the DDR3 GT 240 at Radeon 4670 prices, and the GDDR5 GT 240 just under 9600 GT prices. That's where the new card is a recommended buy.
yes , indeed.
I found it for only $11 over the sub $100 range.
The performance difference would DEFINITELY be worth $11.
http://www.eworldsale.com/powercolor-ax4870-1gbd5-pph-pcs-radeon-hd-4870-1gb-gddr5-pci-express-20_5882_29335.html
At that price its competing with the 4770s not the 4670. But this is an Nvidia article, gotta make them look good by omitting certain facts.