Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Test Setup And Benchmarks

GeForce GT 430: The HTPC Crowd Gets Fermi On A Diet
By

The cards we chose for comparison can all be found within $5 of the GeForce GT 430’s MSRP of $79, including the GeForce GT 220 DDR3, the GeForce GT 240 GDDR5, the Radeon HD 5570 DDR3, and the Radeon HD 5670 GDDR5.

To better represent a level playing field (and to address some of the concerns we've seen in the comments section), all of these cards have been set to reference clock rates for testing.

  Test System
MotherboardAsus M4A785TD-V EVO
Socket AM3, AMD 785G, BIOS 0410
ProcessorPhenom II X4 970
3.5 GHz, Quad-Core, 6 MB L3 Cache
Overclocked to 4.0 GHz
CPU Cooler
Cooler Master Hyper TX3
MemoryCrucial DDR3-1333
Dual-Channel 2 x 2048 MB, 669 MHz,
CAS 9-9-9-24-1T
GraphicsGigabyte GV-N220OC-1GI (GeForce GT 220)
1 GB DDR3, 720/1566 MHz GPU/Shaders, 800 MHz Memory
Asus ENGT430 (GeForce GT 430)
1 GB DDR3, 700/1400 MHz GPU/Shaders, 800 MHz Memory
Gigabyte GV-N240D5-512I (GeForce GT 240)
512 MB GDDR5, 550/1340 MHz GPU/Shaders, 850  MHz Memory
Radeon HD 5570 Reference

1 GB DDR3, 650 MHz GPU, 900 MHz Memory
Radeon HD 5670 Reference
512 MB GDDR5, 775 MHz GPU, 1000 MHz Memory

***all clock rates set to reference specifications for the purposes of benchmarking***
Hard DriveWestern Digital Caviar Black 1000 MB
7200 RPM, 32 MB Cache SATA 3Gb/s
Software and Drivers
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 x64
DirectX Version
DirectX 11
Graphics DriversAMD Catalyst 10.9, GeForce 260.77 beta (GeForce GT 430), GeForce 258.96 (all others)
Benchmark Configuration
3D Games
Crysis
Patch 1.2.1, DirectX 10, 64-bit executable, benchmark tool
General Benchmarks: Low Quality, Textures, Shadows, Physics, Shaders, Water, and Sound to Medium
Anti-aliasing Benchmarks: Low Quality, Textures, Physics, Water, and Sound to Medium, Shaders to High
Just Cause 2
Version 1.0.0.2, in-game benchmark,
Low Settings, Shadows and Water to Medium, No AA, 2x AF
Aliens vs Predator
Benchmark Tool, Medium Settings,
SSAO Off, Dx11 tesselation and shadow sampling off, no AA, 8x AF
StarCraft II
Version 1.1.1, Custom Tom's Hardware Benchmark
High Quality Preset, No AA
DiRT 2
In-game benchmark
DirectX 11, High Quality Preset, No AA
Synthetic
3DMark Vantage
Version: 1.01, Total System score
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 71 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 21 Hide
    rohitbaran , October 11, 2010 1:59 PM
    Priced pretty high for its performance.
  • 21 Hide
    cknobman , October 11, 2010 1:28 PM
    Not impressed.....at all.

    Its not like Nvidia was racing AMD to the market here so I fail to see why they insist on pushing out a product that is not priced competitively.

    Heck Nvidia's new product isnt even priced appropriately against their last generation cards much less AMDs year old offerings.
  • 19 Hide
    tmk221 , October 11, 2010 1:42 PM
    imho it's not worth anything close to 79$
Other Comments
  • 13 Hide
    nforce4max , October 11, 2010 1:26 PM
    Just as I thought it is slower than a GT240.
  • 0 Hide
    fausto , October 11, 2010 1:27 PM
    Anybody use HTPC state side with a satallite/cable provider? cable card? are you able to decode OnDemand and Premium Channels in the United States?

    Because it seems like HTPC's primary options are services like Hulu and Netflix.
  • 21 Hide
    cknobman , October 11, 2010 1:28 PM
    Not impressed.....at all.

    Its not like Nvidia was racing AMD to the market here so I fail to see why they insist on pushing out a product that is not priced competitively.

    Heck Nvidia's new product isnt even priced appropriately against their last generation cards much less AMDs year old offerings.
  • 0 Hide
    christiangordon , October 11, 2010 1:38 PM
    faustoAnybody use HTPC state side with a satallite/cable provider? cable card? are you able to decode OnDemand and Premium Channels in the United States?Because it seems like HTPC's primary options are services like Hulu and Netflix.


    I have used the HTPC cards and they don't work with Sat/ATT companies for OnDemand. They are basically good for 720p 1080p formats
  • 19 Hide
    tmk221 , October 11, 2010 1:42 PM
    imho it's not worth anything close to 79$
  • -2 Hide
    rolli59 , October 11, 2010 1:50 PM
    Slots in next to HD5570 low profile for small form factor cases with limited size PSU!
  • 1 Hide
    neilnh , October 11, 2010 1:58 PM
    faustoAnybody use HTPC state side with a satallite/cable provider? cable card? are you able to decode OnDemand and Premium Channels in the United States?Because it seems like HTPC's primary options are services like Hulu and Netflix.


    I use my HTPC for OTA HD networks (Fox, ABC, NBC, etc), Hulu, ESPN3, Blu-ray, and DVD-rips. I get HD on most of the shows I watch, and Hulu doesn't look bad for the others. There are very few gaps, but some would care a lot about them... HBO, NFL network, ESPN content that isn't available on ESPN3. Overall though, no monthly fee for all my TV with HD DVR... I like it. Some people use cable cards, but my whole reason for going the HTPC route was to save money, not pay more.
  • 21 Hide
    rohitbaran , October 11, 2010 1:59 PM
    Priced pretty high for its performance.
  • 16 Hide
    ikefu , October 11, 2010 2:00 PM
    The only reason for this card is if you actually watch 3D Bluray, for anything else the 5670 seems way better.

    I have a 55" 3d TV but hate the glasses so much I can't ever see myself using 3D playback. I'd go for 5670 just for the occasional gaming session.
  • 15 Hide
    Onus , October 11, 2010 2:21 PM
    This just shows how good the HD5670 is. And, with GDDR5 versions of the HD5570 available, there's just no reason for this card at this price. Pass.
  • 3 Hide
    RazberyBandit , October 11, 2010 2:42 PM
    Page 1, in reference to GT 220 comparison:
    Quote:
    the new GeForce GT 430 has an obvious advantage over its predecessor in the form of one-third more shader cores and a 75 MHz-higher core clock

    96 shader cores is only one-third more than 48? Looks more like 100% more (or twice as many) to me...
  • 1 Hide
    cleeve , October 11, 2010 2:50 PM
    RazberyBanditPage 1, in reference to GT 220 comparison:96 shader cores is only one-third more than 48? Looks more like 100% more (or twice as many) to me...


    Thanks! Fixed.
  • -6 Hide
    sohaib_96 , October 11, 2010 3:01 PM
    its an htpc card what would you you expect from it??
  • 1 Hide
    jestersage , October 11, 2010 3:03 PM
    Still waiting for the price war... or Christmas... whichever...
  • 0 Hide
    f-14 , October 11, 2010 3:03 PM
    Quote:
    Here we see the new GeForce GT 420 keep pace with the Radeon HD 5570.


    i won't tell if you don't Don ;) 
  • 1 Hide
    cleeve , October 11, 2010 3:11 PM
    f-14i won't tell if you don't Don


    Doh! You just told!

    Fixed. :) 
  • 9 Hide
    megamanx00 , October 11, 2010 3:19 PM
    So, this new card is still crappy it's just less crappy than a GT 220. It would look alot better if the 5570 wasn't around to not only beat it but use less power at the same time.
  • -6 Hide
    chovav , October 11, 2010 3:23 PM
    how about doing some CUDA calculations? like converting video and checking the differences between the cards. The best will be ofcourse to do this with a program compatible with both CUDA and STREAM..
  • 5 Hide
    Onus , October 11, 2010 3:36 PM
    "The good news is that there are no bad GeForce or Radeon cards anymore; there are only inappropriate prices. "
    Bottom line, I think this is an entirely reasonable assessment. And this card is about $20 too high for what it offers.
  • 0 Hide
    Gekko Shadow , October 11, 2010 3:43 PM
    Sooo...it's a fermi why? *sigh* well i suppose for your average consumers this can work out ok, but i don't think this is something I'd buy for me. Maybe for one of my customers, lol.
Display more comments