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

Features

Test Setup And Benchmarks

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Test Hardware
ProcessorIntel Core i7-980X Extreme (Gulftown) 3.33 GHz, 6.4 GT/s, 12MB L3 Cache, power-saving settings enabled
MotherboardGigabyte X58A-UD5 (LGA 1366) X58/ICH10, BIOS F5
MemoryKingston HyperX T1 Series 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3-2000 8-8-8-24 @ 1,600 MHz
Hard DriveIntel SSDSA2MH160G2C1 160GB SATA 3 Gb/s
NetworkingRealtek RTC8111D, 1 Gb/s
Graphics CardsNvidia GeForce GTX 480 1.5GB
Row 6 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 470 1.25GB
Row 7 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 295 1.79GB
Row 8 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 285 1GB
Row 9 - Cell 0 ATI Radeon HD 5970 2GB
Row 10 - Cell 0 ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB
Row 11 - Cell 0 ATI Radeon HD 5850 1GB
Row 12 - Cell 0 ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB
Power SupplyCooler Master UCP 1100W
CPU CoolerIntel DBX-B Thermal Solution
System Software And Drivers
Operating SystemMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64
DirectXDirectX 11
Platform DriverIntel INF Chipset Update Utility 9.1.1.1019
Graphics DriverNvidia GeForce 197.17 (GTX 480/470)
Row 20 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce 197.13 (GTX 295/285)
Row 21 - Cell 0 AMD Catalyst 10.3a
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Games
CrysisVery High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1900x1200 / 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Patch 1.2.1, 64-bit executable
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of PripyatExtreme Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, DX10 Rendering, Benchmark Tool
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Second Sun, 45 second sequence, FRAPS
DiRT 2Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 4xAA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, In-Game Benchmark (Demo), Forced DX9 Rendering
Metro 2033High Quality Settings, AAA / No AF, 4x MSAA / No AF, vsync off, PhysX off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Chapter 1: Chase, 150 second sequence, FRAPS
Battlefield: Bad Company 2Custom (Highest) Quality Settings, 1xAA / No AF, 8x MSAA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, opening cinematic, 145 second sequence, FRAPS
3DMark VantagePerformance Default, High Quality, Extreme Quality; PPU Disabled
Chris Angelini
Chris Angelini
Chris Angelini is an Editor Emeritus at Tom's Hardware US. He edits hardware reviews and covers high-profile CPU and GPU launches.
444 Comments Comment from the forums
  • 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.
    Reply
  • 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.
    Reply
  • 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...
    Reply
  • not at all impressed
    Reply
  • 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
    Reply
  • 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.
    Reply
  • 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.
    Reply
  • djtronika
    yawn
    Reply
  • The way we're meant to be dismayed, gg infirmi
    Reply
  • randomizer
    I'll keep my GTX275.
    Reply