GeForce GTX 480 And 470: From Fermi And GF100 To Actual Cards!

Benchmark Results: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat (DirectX 10)

In revamping the benchmark suite for this story, we added a number of DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 titles. Of course, testing DirectX 10-capable cards in a DirectX 11 game gives those boards a distinct advantage, since they’re forced down a previous-generation code path. So, while we have to address this in the next few tests, we ran the latest version of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. using DirectX 10, just to get an idea of how the latest cards compete against previous-generation hardware.

Similar to what we saw in Call of Duty, the GeForce GTX 480 begins by trailing the dual-GPU Radeon HD 5970 and GeForce GTX 295 boards, slightly outpacing ATI’s Radeon HD 5870 and the old 4870 X2. Shifting to 1920x1200, three dual-GPU boards beat the GTX 480. And by the time we’ve hit 2560x1600, the Radeon HD 5870 also turns in better numbers.

There’s a rub, though. While scaling with anti-aliasing mirrors the no-AA numbers at 1680x1050, ascending the resolution scale shows the dual-GPU cards incurring a bigger hit to the point where Nvidia’s new flagship actually takes second place at 1920x1200 (with a playable average frame rate, no less) and 2560x1600.

Similarly, the GeForce GTX 470 retains more of its performance at 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 than the Radeon HD 5870 or 5850, despite its placement on the chart.

  • restatement3dofted
    I have been waiting for this review since freaking January. Tom's Hardware, I love you.

    With official reviews available, the GTX 480 certainly doesn't seem like the rampaging ATI-killer they boasted it would be, especially six months after ATI started rolling out 5xxx cards. Now I suppose I'll just cross my fingers that this causes prices for the 5xxx cards to shift a bit (a guy can dream, can't he?), and wait to see what ATI rolls out next. Unless something drastic happens, I don't see myself choosing a GF100 card over an ATI alternative, at least not for this generation of GPUs.
  • tipoo
    Completely unimpressed. 6 months late. Too expensive. Power hog. Performance not particularly impressive. The Radeon 5k series has been delivering a near identical experience for 6 months now, at a lower price.
  • tpi2007
    hmmm.. so this is a paper launch... six months after and they do a paper launch on a friday evening, after the stock exchange has closed.. smart move by Nvidia, that way people will cool off during the weekend, but I think their stocks won't perform that brilliantly on monday...
  • not at all impressed
  • Godhatesusall
    high power consumption, high prices along with a (small, all things considered) performance edge over ATI is all there is. Are 100$ more for a gtx 480 really worth 5-10% increase in performance?

    Though the big downside of fermi are temps. 97 is a very large(and totally unacceptable) temperature level. IMO fermi cards will start dying from thermal death some months from now.

    I just wanted competition,so that prices would be lower and we(the consumers) could get more bang for our buck. Surely fermi doesnt help alot in that direction(a modest 30$ cut for 5870 and 5850 from ATI and fermi wont stand a chance). It seems AMD/ATI clearly won this round
  • Pei-chen
    Wow, it seems Nvidia actually went ahead and designed a DX11 card and found out how difficult it is to design. ATI/AMD just slapped a DX11 sticker on their DX10 card and sells it as DX11. In half a year HD 5000 will be so outdated that all it can play is DX10 games.
  • outlw6669
    Kinda impressed :/

    The minimum frame rates are quite nice at least...
    Lets talk again when a version with the full 512 SP is released.
  • djtronika
  • The way we're meant to be dismayed, gg infirmi
  • randomizer
    I'll keep my GTX275.