Nvidia GeForce GTX 465 1 GB Review: Zotac Puts Fermi On A Diet

By Chris Angelini
published

We've already crowned Nvidia's GeForce GTX 480 the fastest (and most power-hungry) single-GPU card we've ever seen. Now the company is launching its GeForce GTX 465, based on the same massive GF100 GPU. Can such a complex part compete with AMD's value?

Test Setup And Benchmarks

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Test Hardware
ProcessorIntel Core i7-980X (Gulftown) 3.33 GHz, 6.4 GT/s, 12MB L3 Cache, power-saving settings enabled. Turbo Boost enabled
MotherboardGigabyte X58A-UD5 (LGA 1366) X58/ICH10, BIOS F5
MemoryKingston HyperX DDR3 (3 x 2GB) KHX2000C8D3T1K3/6GX @ DDR3-1333 7-7-7-24
Hard DriveIntel SSDSA2MH160G2C1 160GB SATA 3 Gb/s
Graphics CardsZotac GeForce GTX 465 1GB
Row 5 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 480
Row 6 - Cell 0 Nvidia GeForce GTX 470
Row 7 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 5870
Row 8 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 5850
Row 9 - Cell 0 AMD Radeon HD 5830
Power SupplyCooler Master UCP 1,100W
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 257.15
Row 17 - Cell 0 AMD Catalyst 10.5

You'll notice that we're using an unreleased driver from Nvidia. GeForce 257.15 is a beta release, and it is available on Nvidia's Web site; it's just not WHQL-certified yet.

Also, we didn't do any testing with Metro 2033 this time around. For some reason, on this particular platform with the 257.15 driver, the game consistently crashed on start-up.

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
Just Cause 2Highest Quality Settings, No AA / 16xAF, 4xAA / 16xAF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Bokeh filter and GPU water disabled (for Nvidia cards), Desert Sunrise Benchmark
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 2High / Ultra High Settings, No AA / No AF, 8xAA / No AF, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600, Steam version, Custom benchmark script, DX11 Rendering
Aliens Vs. Predator BenchmarkHighest Quality Settings, SSAO, 1xMSAA / 16xAF, 4xMSAA / 16xAF, vsync off, 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600
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, 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.
69 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Annisman
    Dang, it looks like Nvidia has almost no real answers for the AMD/ATI lineup of cards. However, if this card can drop in price a little it may be competitive because of some of it's Nvidia-only features. I mean, it runs cooler and uses a fair amount less power than the 470 and 480, maybe this will become the Phsyx card to get ? Espescially if they could manage a single slot version and drop the price. Anyways, no competition is bad for everyone and I hope Nvidia can get their act together asap.
    Reply
  • fatkid35
    i'll stick to my crossfire'd 5770s. same money and same power consumption.
    Reply
  • tacoslave
    fatkid35i'll stick to my crossfire'd 5770s. same money and same power consumption.Or a 5870 same thing less problems but thats just me. oh and that thing got pwnd by a 5830 and thats not saying much.
    Reply
  • welshmousepk
    wow, the pricing of this thing is all wrong. given how well the the 480 and 470 sit in the market, this just seems like a pointless card.
    Reply
  • liquidsnake718
    How many times do I have to say that this is nothing but a marketing gimmick for defective GTX480's and possibly 470's as well. Like the 5830 which was a cut/gimped/ or limited 5850
    Reply
  • liquidsnake718
    sorry 5870 on the above comment
    Reply
  • bombat1994
    make it 60 cheaper and you might have a good card but i would buy a 5850 over this thing everyday of the weel
    Reply
  • dco
    retail is messed up they charge you for a brand not the product by comparison. Whats worse is that people will buy it.
    Reply
  • rohitbaran
    The GTX4xx line is definitely not the way it is to be played and this latest crappy piece of hardware further proved it. Hot and expensive but poor on performance. The more cards they launch, the clearer ATI's victory becomes.
    Reply
  • km4m
    Fail, fail, fail...suitable words for Nvidia at this moment.
    Reply