GeForce GTX 570 Review: Hitting $349 With Nvidia's GF110

Features
By
published

A month ago, Nvidia launched its GeForce GTX 580, and it was everything we wanted back in March. Now the company is introducing the GeForce GTX 570, also based on its GF110. Is it fast enough to make us forget the GF100-based 400-series ever existed?

Test Hardware And Software

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Test Hardware
ProcessorsIntel Core i7-980X (Gulftown) 3.33 GHz at 3.73 GHz (28 * 133 MHz), LGA 1366, 6.4 GT/s QPI, 12 MB Shared L3, Hyper-Threading enabled, Power-savings enabled
MotherboardGigabyte X58A-UD5 (LGA 1366) Intel X58/ICH10R, BIOS FB
MemoryKingston 6 GB (3 x 2 GB) DDR3-2000, KHX2000C8D3T1K3/6GX @ 8-8-8-24 and 1.65 V
Hard DriveIntel SSDSA2M160G2GC 160 GB SATA 3Gb/s
GraphicsNvidia GeForce GTX 570 1.25 GB
Row 5 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 1.5 GB
Row 6 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 480 1.5 GB
Row 7 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 470 1.25 GB
Row 8 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 6850 1 GB (CrossFire)
Row 9 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 5970 2 GB
Row 10 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 5870 1 GB
Row 11 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 6870 1 GB
Power SupplyCooler Master UCP-1000 W
System Software And Drivers
Operating SystemWindows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
DirectXDirectX 11
Graphics DriverAMD Catalyst 10.10d
Row 17 - Cell 0 AMD Catalyst 10.10e (For Radeon HD 6850 1 GB in CrossFire)
Row 18 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce Release 263.09 (For GTX 570)
Row 19 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce Release 260.99 (For GTX 480 and 470)
Row 20 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce Release 262.99 (For GTX 580)
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Games
Lost Planet 2Highest Quality Settings, No AA / 16x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1900x1200 / 2560x1600, DirectX 11, Steam version
Just Cause 2Highest Quality Settings, No AA / 16xAF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Bokeh filter and GPU water disabled (for Nvidia cards), Concrete Jungle Benchmark
Metro 2033Medium Settings, AAA / 16x AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Built-in Benchmark, Steam version
DiRT 2Ultra High Settings, 4x AA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Steam version, Custom benchmark script, DX11 Rendering
Aliens Vs. Predator BenchmarkHighest Quality Settings, SSAO, No AA / 16xAF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600
Battlefield: Bad Company 2Custom (Highest) Quality Settings, 8x MSAA / 16xAF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, opening cinematic, 145 second sequence, FRAPS
3DMark VantagePerformance Default, PPU Disabled
HAWX 2Highest Quality Settings, 8x AA, 1920x1200, Retail Version, Built-in Benchmark, Tessellation on/off
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.
108 Comments Comment from the forums
  • thearm
    Grrrr... Every time I see these benchmarks, I'm hoping Nvidia has taken the lead. They'll come back. It's alllll a cycle.
    Reply
  • xurwin
    at $350 beating the 6850 in xfire? i COULD say this would be a pretty good deal, but why no 6870 in xfire? but with a narrow margin and if you need cuda. this would be a pretty sweet deal, but i'd also wait for 6900's but for now. we have a winner?
    Reply
  • nevertell
    Yay, I got highlighted !
    Reply
  • verrul
    because 2 6850s is pretty equal in price to the 570
    Reply
  • sstym
    thearmGrrrr... Every time I see these benchmarks, I'm hoping Nvidia has taken the lead. They'll come back. It's alllll a cycle.
    There is no need to root for either one. What you really want is a healthy and competitive Nvidia to drive prices down. With Intel shutting them off the chipset market and AMD beating them on their turf with the 5XXX cards, the future looked grim for NVidia.
    It looks like they still got it, and that's what counts for consumers. Let's leave fanboyism to 12 year old console owners.
    Reply
  • nevertell
    It's disappointing to see the freaky power/temperature parameters of the card when using two different displays. I was planing on using a display setup similar to that of the test, now I am in doubt.
    Reply
  • reggieray
    I always wonder why they use the overpriced Ultimate edition of Windows? I understand the 64 bit because of memory, that is what I bought but purchased the OEM home premium and saved some cash. For games the Ultimate does no extra value to them.
    Or am I missing something?
    Reply
  • reggieray
    PS Excellent Review
    Reply
  • theholylancer
    hmmm more sexual innuendo today than usual, new GF there chris? :D

    EDIT:

    Love this gem:
    Before we shift away from HAWX 2 and onto another bit of laboratory drama, let me just say that Ubisoft’s mechanism for playing this game is perhaps the most invasive I’ve ever seen. If you’re going to require your customers to log in to a service every time they play a game, at least make that service somewhat responsive. Waiting a minute to authenticate over a 24 Mb/s connection is ridiculous, as is waiting another 45 seconds once the game shuts down for a sync. Ubi’s own version of Steam, this is not.

    When a reviewer of not your game, but of some hardware using your game comments on how bad it is for the DRM, you know it's time to not do that, or get your game else where warning.
    Reply
  • amk09
    nevertellYay, I got highlighted !
    So you gonna buy it? Huh huh huh?
    Reply