|
|
| Page 2 of 2 |
|
|
 Posted: Sat, 13th Feb 2010 17:09 Post subject: |
|
 |
if you want to go for max performance without paying a single cent too much i would consider crossfiring the 5870 vapor x cards.
EDIT: Asus bringing out 2GB ram cards OCEd with custom cooling
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=115056
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 16th Feb 2010 12:43 Post subject: |
|
|
constant 40+ fps @ solitaire & tetris with 16x AA + high settings
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin317
Banned
Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 12:12 Post subject: |
|
|
| Slizza wrote: | March is months away?
GTX480 and GTX470 schedualed for March.
Where did you see the pricing, there has been no pricing mentioned that i have seen. |
March (and late march at that) is the soft-launch, meaning a few thousand chips, if that, will be sent out to partners. A good portion of that will end up with reviewers, and for the remaining bit you gotta be real damn lucky to get your hands on one. Expect to see them available in full force around late april/early may. Pricing comes from a distributor for the Benelux, who recently got that info from NVIDIA himself; I can't claim that this is 100% certain, but if you take 2 seconds to Google around, you'll see similar pricing mentioned on most forums.
Now here's the real problem with this chip though, and why a lot of people (those with a brain who don't buy into ATI or NVIDIA hypes) are sceptical: RV870 (5870) measures 334 square mm; 18.28 x 18.28 mm. Fermi is based on a 40nm process just like RV870, but with 3 billion transistors versus 2.154. Without boring you with the maths, that means Fermi is _AT LEAST_ 21.6 x 21.6 = 465 square mm, and according to several tech sites out there that did some (p)reviews on the chip and architecture, it's more along the lines of 575 square mm (which would be 24 x 24 mm)!
That is one massive chip, and will require a ton of cooling; hence NVIDIA's "Fermi certified" bullshit. It is unlikely we will see a Dual GPU version of this chip, it'll be of its refresh, if at all. It also means putting this card in SLI is gonna cost more money than most gamers will want to spend.
Meanwhile, ATI is getting ready to do the refresh on the Evergreen before they move on to their new architecture. Luckily for NVIDIA, having delayed Fermi doesn't mean they have to delay their refresh, so the real battle between these two will come late this year.
Unless everyone is wrong, and a GTX480 actually does perform faster than the 5970, which would be the only thing that could justify the added cost from PSU, case and the card itself.
And then last but not least, NVIDIA doesn't have a competitor ready for the 200 euro pricepoint. If ATI lowers their prices, you'll end up with the 5870 around that mark, at which point NVIDIA will really have to go much lower than they want to with Fermi 
Just check out some tech forums if you're still not sure, so far most people agree everywhere that NVIDIA has to pull a major bunny out of its hat to win over the tech community 
Edit: Good job editing your post while I'm typing this wall up 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 12:20 Post subject: |
|
|
haha yes sorry, i always post/read/edit... i'm terrible for it.
Corsair 750D :: 750W DPS-G:: Asus x370 PRO :: R7 1800X ::16gb DDR4 :: GTX 1070::525gb SSD::Coolermaster 240MM AIO::
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 14:06 Post subject: |
|
|
Hope the card (480GTX) fits in my Antec 900...also 700W PSU...¬¬;;;;;
ASUS X570 TUF GAMING PLUS, 32GB DDR4@2666 ,RYZEN 5800X3D (NO OC),GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Super GAMING OC, Western Digital Blue 4TB 5400RPM + SAMSUNG 860 EVO 500+1TB GB SSDs , OEM SATA DVD 22xNoctua NH-D15 Chromax Black, BenQ XL2420T Case: Be Quiet! DARK BASE PRO 901. PSU CORSAIR RM1200 SHIFT
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 14:07 Post subject: |
|
|
| Slizza wrote: | | Can't find anything on fermi certification. |
Already posted a link for that as well, statement comes from CM and TT engineers, says enough.
| Slizza wrote: | | I seen those pics before, they said they had Engineering samples at CES (source of photos) and not final product... |
Still, to get that kind of power usage down to acceptable levels on a chip that's very close to the final product is a hard task.
| Quote: | As for the shocking 300w..that's like 20-30w more than a HD5870 right.
Less then a GTX 285. |
Depends what numbers you go by. The 300W is the expected TDP (rated consumption). A 5870 sits at 188 TDP, GTX 285 at 204.
If you go by numbers under load, a 5870 goes up to roughly 220, a 285 to roughly 265.
If you go by absolute peak numbers (which is achieved by a full 100% load for a long period of time, and overclocking), a 5870 gets up to 270, 285 goes beyond 300
In ANY of these cases, 300W is a bad number, and even the GTX 285 is considered a ridiculous power eater by tech standards
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 14:22 Post subject: |
|
|
| pwerelds wrote: | | Slizza wrote: | | Can't find anything on fermi certification. |
Already posted a link for that as well, statement comes from CM and TT engineers, says enough.
| Slizza wrote: | | I seen those pics before, they said they had Engineering samples at CES (source of photos) and not final product... |
Still, to get that kind of power usage down to acceptable levels on a chip that's very close to the final product is a hard task.
| Quote: | As for the shocking 300w..that's like 20-30w more than a HD5870 right.
Less then a GTX 285. |
Depends what numbers you go by. The 300W is the expected TDP (rated consumption). A 5870 sits at 188 TDP, GTX 285 at 204.
If you go by numbers under load, a 5870 goes up to roughly 220, a 285 to roughly 265.
If you go by absolute peak numbers (which is achieved by a full 100% load for a long period of time, and overclocking), a 5870 gets up to 270, 285 goes beyond 300
In ANY of these cases, 300W is a bad number, and even the GTX 285 is considered a ridiculous power eater by tech standards |
The peak numbers are the only numbers you can use for TDP and 300w aint that shocking.
Seems to be alot of wild speculation, nothing more.
Nobody will mind if it eats up power like a GTX285.
Rumor mill also claims the gpu's are 38% faster than the HD5870 GPU.
You can't judge the product based on hearsay and speculation.
It's like some people are clutching at things gathering evidence to say these cards are magnificent wonder and other clutching at things to try put together a case against them.
End of day there is no evidence either way and everybody will just need to wait a bit longer (hopfully not too much longer) to find out how the cards actually stack up.
If you are in a position that you can wait and make a decision once both sets of cards are out then it's a good idea.
Buying a HD5870 right now based on hearsay and jumping to conclusion that it's not going to be worth the wait would be stupid.
Corsair 750D :: 750W DPS-G:: Asus x370 PRO :: R7 1800X ::16gb DDR4 :: GTX 1070::525gb SSD::Coolermaster 240MM AIO::
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 15:28 Post subject: |
|
|
| Slizza wrote: | The peak numbers are the only numbers you can use for TDP and 300w aint that shocking.
Seems to be alot of wild speculation, nothing more.
Nobody will mind if it eats up power like a GTX285.
Rumor mill also claims the gpu's are 38% faster than the HD5870 GPU.
You can't judge the product based on hearsay and speculation.
It's like some people are clutching at things gathering evidence to say these cards are magnificent wonder and other clutching at things to try put together a case against them.
End of day there is no evidence either way and everybody will just need to wait a bit longer (hopfully not too much longer) to find out how the cards actually stack up.
If you are in a position that you can wait and make a decision once both sets of cards are out then it's a good idea.
Buying a HD5870 right now based on hearsay and jumping to conclusion that it's not going to be worth the wait would be stupid. |
Wrong, TDP is NOT the peak, that's the average load figure. Like I said, a 5870's TDP is rated at 188W, nowhere near its peak of 270 and still less than its 220 load
Also, the "rumours" of it being 38% faster than the 5870 are all figures from NVIDIA themselves, not a single source outside their company has said anything yet. Even then, 38% faster puts it between the GTX295 and HD5970 - which is another hint that the price has to be around the 400 euro mark at MOST.
The rumours about the Fermi certificate and power consumption hold more truth than any rumours about performance, simply because the latter don't have a single source outside the green base themselves
I do agree though, buying a 5870 now based on the rumours would be stupid, but expecting Fermi to be competitive just because it's NVIDIA (which a lot of people do) is just as retarded.
End of the day, the situation is like I said: the real battle will come late(r) this year, when both companies introduce their refresh, especially for NVIDIA who have lost a lot of ground with the massive delay
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Wed, 17th Feb 2010 20:01 Post subject: |
|
|
| Slizza wrote: | They were billed for December launch at first were they not?
That makes it only a 3 month delay if they meet the March launch. |
Delayed from late Q3, to Q4, and on to Q1
| Slizza wrote: | | There was also Demos of single card running Farcry 2 infront of many journos showing better performance than a HD5870. |
Which doesn't say much on its own since FC2 is a CPU-heavy game, so you gotta know the rest of the system to make a fair comparison. It showed around 25-30% increase over a 5870 on a high-end system, but like I said, FC2 isn't that amazing of a benchmark. With my E8400 I score substantially lower in that game than an i7-920 does for example.
| Slizza wrote: | It doesn't look bad really, tiny things are being twisted and assumptions made here.
Assumption is never a good thing.
I think you might just be seeing what you want to see as you purchased a ATI card |
Not really, I only went ATI because I wanted to get rid of my piece of shit G92. Choosing between a 5850/5870 or paying more for a GTX 285 for less performance was an easy choice from there on 
I'm not assuming it will be bad, I'm fearing that it will be. I hope not, because that means there won't be any competition until next year, which is not good for the market (i.e. us gamers)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Thu, 18th Feb 2010 02:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Benchmarks you find online for FC2 are also using fast CPU, this is to eliminate it as a limiting factor.
So any gain over another card is down to GPU and not CPU, so you can expect the same percentage but not necessarily the same frame rate exactly.
The G92 chips were really good products?
Corsair 750D :: 750W DPS-G:: Asus x370 PRO :: R7 1800X ::16gb DDR4 :: GTX 1070::525gb SSD::Coolermaster 240MM AIO::
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 18th Feb 2010 10:57 Post subject: |
|
|
G92 is pretty much a G80 on a smaller fab process, and my first 9800 GTX (G92a - the 65nm version) broke down exactly like my 8800 GTS did (starting with random framedrops, followed by crashes, ending with artifacts all over even during boot).
And yeah, a high-end CPU is used, but some sites use a 965, where some use a 975, which still makes a difference of a few frames. And even at that point, it's still a limiting factor, as far as I know you still don't get a 100% GPU load even with a 975 at 4GHz in FC2
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 18th Feb 2010 14:04 Post subject: |
|
|
were u using stock cooling? if yes then that explains, nvidia unless it was someone who gave a crap, just like ati, used/using crappy cooling solutions for their products, i've never till gtx260 which has reasonable temps, used stock cooler that comes with gfx card for a long time, as soon as i see from first tests that temps are rubbish i get a custom cooler, beats rma the sucker and saves a lot of time as well
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Thu, 18th Feb 2010 15:14 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah I used the cooling that came with the card, but my temps were just fine. Not as fine as my 5870 now (which idles at 37 degrees with 15% fan speed  ), but the highest I've ever managed to push it was 68 degrees, with furmark. Was right before I installed my 5870, hence the deliberate burn test
I do remember the 8800GTS being hotter though, but that's to be expected from a chip nearly twice the size!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slizza
Posts: 2345
Location: Bulgaria
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 2 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
