PAX: What Gamers Think of Nvidia's GTX 480
There is a lot of positive energy on the PAX East show floor regarding the new Nvidia hardware. “It’s good to finally see Nvidia with a new series of video cards. It’s been too long, but I think it’s been worth the wait," said one bystander at the Nvidia booth (he did not want to give me his name). "I haven't had a chance to sit down at look at reviews," said John S, while playing the StarCraft II beta at the Nvidia booth, "but if the rocket sled demo is any indication, Nvidia has some impressive hardware on their hands."
Brandon, a passer-by at the Alienware booth emphatically stated "I can't wait to grab a GTX 480, or even a dual-GPU version when it comes out. AMD is going DOWN!"
Sure, new hardware is always exciting, but there's a flip-side to every coin. "I don't claim loyalty to AMD or Nvidia, but why would I pay $500 for a GTX 480 when a 5870 from AMD is $100 less for only a minor dip in performance?" said Mike G., also at the Nvidia booth. Another negative reaction came from Brian R, near the Rockstar Games booth. "I bought my 5870 about a month ago, and after seeing what Nvidia is bringing to market in a few weeks, I think I made the right choice."
And of course, to keep things even, admitted AMD fanboy Kelby said, "AMD took the price-performance crown with the 4000 series, and after looking at the reviews online, things won't be any different with the 5000 series. Plus, why get a GTX 480 when the 5970 uses roughly the same amount of power but offers much better performance?"
My two cents: competition is great, if not an absolute necessity, so Nvidia finally showing up to the DX11 party can only be good for PC enthusiasts. After witnessing the press conference here at PAX East and reading Chris Angelini's review, it looks like AMD does indeed have the performance per dollar edge for now (full disclosure: I am using a 4870 X2 right now, but I claim no loyalty to either company). However, some of what Nvidia is showing off is pretty cool, like the new raytracing demos. I'll leave it to the commenters to battle over which is better.
By the way, "I can't wait to grab a GTX 480, or even a dual-GPU version when it comes out". Good luck with that.
If the GTX470 uses over 215Watts, there won't be a dual version of that.
What're we left with? The unknown. GTX460? GTX450? Or will nVidia be the first to break the 300W PCI-E sig spec? Will the GTX490 (512Shader version) compete with the HD5890? Will there be an HD5930 or an HD5950?
Stay tuned!
By the way, "I can't wait to grab a GTX 480, or even a dual-GPU version when it comes out". Good luck with that.
but i dont think is balanced...
3D Vision,Physicx, ect
is more like Nvidia = Quality vs ATI = Performance
for now..... -.-
I can't wait to grab a GTX 480 myself... when a dual-GPU version comes out...
nvidia cards are not better for 3d gaming, but they are impressive nonetheless. The thing they are indisputably better is for CUDA, and thats not a negligible thing for me. I'm having hard time deciding should i trade my 4850 for 5850 or gtx 470. 5850 would be a clear winner if it could run CUDA apps, like vReveal and upcoming Mercury player for Adobe Premier cs5...
Since games run the same on both and I can live without CUDA support for at least another year, the only thing that will sway me in either direction right now is what card runs Quicksilver, the newest renderer for 3ds Max, better. Autodesk won't come forward with the results on which is faster, since they are partnered with both ATi/nVidia, so I would love it if Tom's did a review of this.
To me a heavy 3d user, Quicksilver is the single most important piece of software coming out this year. iray would likely take the crown if 3ds max was supporting it in the upcoming release.
If the GTX470 uses over 215Watts, there won't be a dual version of that.
What're we left with? The unknown. GTX460? GTX450? Or will nVidia be the first to break the 300W PCI-E sig spec? Will the GTX490 (512Shader version) compete with the HD5890? Will there be an HD5930 or an HD5950?
Stay tuned!
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/30321-nvidia-geforce-gtx-470-review-32.html
You always pay a premium for the best card that's out at any given time, just as you have with 5870 for a while. $100 more than 5870 and only $100 more? I doubt you'll find any other $100 upgrade that would affect performance as much.
I buy nvidia because the last ATI card I bought (believe it was a rage fury pro with video capture or something like that). I took it home for around $300 (the most I'd EVER spent on a video card at the time by a long shot). Couldn't find drivers for win2k (which had been out for about 6 months at the time) and when I called ati support they told me literally "too bad, we don't make drivers for that card and we aren't going to because we just released a newer card". The attitude was unacceptable, as was their view on product support/drivers. I got a refund from the local store, and went and got a 3dfx. From then on I decided I'd never buy from them again; although I have to admit I seriously considered 5870 until I saw the 480 reviews. I have nothing against AMD (used their cpu's until my last build); the recent reports of some of the ati folks getting high ranking positions at AMD make me think twice about buying amd products for sure.
The power requirements are the same for the 295 and the recommended psu according to nvidia's site is 600w. But I do agree that the requirements are quite steep for a dx11 enabled 295 on 1 gpu. Quality is measured in several ways, one of them being performance. others are price, availability, production numbers, durability, and ease of use. I think I remember someone saying in one of the many articles RE: the launch of the 480 that a dual gpu version would come by combining 2 (possibly lower clocked) 470's.
The word youre looking for is interoperability. Try asking the older system builders what happened when you put an ATI card in a socket A amd mobo. Here's a hint you couldnt boot it at all... after post you get a black screen ... cant even get to a prompt to boot from CD to install windows. Nvidia never had that problem IIRC.
Personally, I'm going to be picking up a 480. The slight boost over the 5870 is really just a bonus IMO. The real reason I've been bearing towards nVidia for the most part is the extra features: CUDA, better compute architecture, PhysX (however rare, can't stand having options I can't enable), 32xAA with little performance impact is pretty sweet too.
And about the heat/power "issues": if you are even considering a 5870 or GTX 480, you're likely to have above a 600W PSU. They're enthusiast level cards for a reason, don't expect them to sip gas. It's not like running either of them will suddenly add 40 bucks to your bill. And as for the heat, the 295 got roughly that hot, and I've seen friends with 4870x2s that have had 90C and up under load. High performing parts get hot, what a shocker.
The only real issues here, in my opinion, is whether or not the slight performance increase and other features are worth the ~$80 more for the 480. For many, there are other things they could spend the $80 on that are needed more. Personally, I'll spend it on the 480, simply because with an nVidia chipset mobo, I'd not be able to do Crossfire with an ATI card whenever I wanted to, which sucks. I'm also kind of intrigued with the numbers in SLI scaling that the 480's been getting. Once I up my PSU from a 850W to a 1.2KW, and move on to the i7 or next gen CPU, I might pick up a second one.
Both companies have good products though. I see this as only being good for gamers, as each company will keep trying to push out higher and higher performing parts, giving us better and better hardware to play with. Whether you're green or red, PC gaming is far from dead!
Interoperability and backwards compatibility have always been problems for ATI. You can't teach an old dog new tricks, I guess.