From what I've read, dfan does have it more or less right. Now, Nvidia's new cards DO seem to do fine as far as performance per dollar is concerned. They do more or less match Ati's cards from what I've read, so the increase in performance for a GTX480 over a Radeon HD 5870 will pretty much equal the price difference (they're actually remarkably well matched). In general, I've found that the margin or error between sites can come out slightly in favor of either card. For instance, Techspot showed at average 16% gain for a 20% price hike (keeping in mind that the entire performance advantage came out of only two titles: Farcry 2 and Crysis Warhard), so that goes to AMD/ATi's favor, but as I recall, another review site I read went about the same amount in the other direction. That said, there's more to GPUs than just straight up performance, especially if it's only remarkable on one or two titles.
The GF400 cards might plausibly match The Radeon HD 5000 cards in performance per dollar, but they lose sorely in performance per watt. Techspot's Furmark testing showed a total system difference of about 60 watts at idle, and 110 watts at load. In their own words, "Power consumption figures for the GeForce GTX 480 are truly terrifying. With a total system consumption of 506 watts under load, it was 22% more power hungry than the Radeon HD 5870. Despite being a single GPU graphics card it used slightly more power than the dual-GPU Radeon HD 5970 at both idle and load, and was comparable to a pair of Radeon HD 5870 graphics cards in Crossfire mode." Technically, that stated figure isn't correct. The GTX480 system was 22% more power hungry, so the difference between cards was vastly more, and, as they note, such that just one GTX480 consumes as much as a pair of 5870s in CrossfireX.
Of course, I would expect that everyone here knows what happens when a piece of electronics with less than 100% efficiency (namely, everything, everywhere) consumes more power: it puts off more heat, and vastly so for the Geforce GTX480. That same Techspot review showed load temps at a shocking 97C in their Furmark test, 11% more than the Radeon HD 5870, and that was with a "truly deafening" fan running (their words). At idle, the GTX280 reaches 65C, which is hotter than my pair of Radeon HD 5770s (as well as the 4870 they replaced) usually get under full load!
While I haven't been able to confirm it from any really reputable source, I've also read a lot of people saying Nvidia isn't pulling a profit on these things, either, and really, that would come as no surprise given that these are just vastly inferior, technologically, to the Radeon HD 5000 series cards, and only achieve greater speed because Nvidia just pumped more and more transistors into their cards until they made them faster, hence the ridiculous power consumption and heat.
Is this really the best Nvidia can do to compete with a six month old card? I'm unimpressed, to say the least. I suppose I could give a tirade on how much Nvidia deserves this given their sleezy methods of competing with Ati, that relied more on bullying the market than actually having better technology (no surprise, then, that that approach would catch up to them as they fell further and further behind). Honestly, though, it wouldn't be any revelation to anyone, as we all know plenty about that story, so I'll just leave it at saying Nvidia's new cards leave much to be desired, and are hardly the product that will revive the company that hasn't had a viable product in six months (or a truly viable produce since the Geforce 9 series).
Originally posted by Karmakazi The new Nvidia cards were just basically made to handle tesselation better than ATI. . that's about the only thing that they're better at. I'm not much of an Nvidia fan but I do give credit where it' due and so far they appear to handle tesselation a fair bit better.
I think it's slightly more nuanced than that. The new Nvidia cards weren't actually made to handle tessellation better than ATI, they were made to be more adaptive, so that their execution units can be used for different tasks rather than having fixed functions.
They don't use fixed function tessellation unit and instead use the geometry units to handle all the old duties plus tessellation. It should have a higher max tessellation performance when all units are available for tessellation BUT worse tessellation performance if those units have to do too much else.
ATI's approach always has a certain number of tessellators available to do work.. Nvidia's approach has a variable amount, with higher max units and lower minimum. It will depend on how a game is designed as to how well tessellation will work on each.
Heaven is a tech demo very heavy on tessellation and not much else so GTX 480 does tessellation quite well on that. Metro 2033 unfortunately can't really be used to compare yet for 2 reasons, 1st it's a TWIMTBP title and ATI didn't get to optimize drivers for the game before its release, the next driver release is suppose to have huge performance boost for ATI, and 2nd Metro 2033's image quality on GTX 4xx cards is terrible right now so there is something the card is skipping and probably getting a perfomance boost in doing so.
The days of ATI being inferior to NVidia are long gone. The ATI 5000 series gpu's are as good as, and in the case of the 5870 and 5970, better than the NVidia cards and often costing less. The new 400 series cards from NVidia are slightly better than the ATI offerings but they cost more (around $100 more than the 5870).
Actually, new nvidia cards lose to ati in almost every aspect. The only title they have is that 480 is the fastest single gpu atm.
The new Nvidia cards were just basically made to handle tesselation better than ATI. . that's about the only thing that they're better at. I'm not much of an Nvidia fan but I do give credit where it' due and so far they appear to handle tesselation a fair bit better. Also to add, if they didn't atleast do something better than ATI I'd be dissapointed being they had an extra 6 months to develop them. But yeah Ginaz is right, actually since the 4xxx series they've been right on Nvidias tail. Ofcoarse they didn't beat out the 285 or anything, but their 4850 and 4870 were competitive with the cards they were made to compete with; which was the 9800GTX (now GTS 250) and the GTX 260.
Tesselation has very small part in gaming, heaven and other benchmark softwares give twisted image of the reality.
Its been said before, they should of skipped this batch and waited for revision 2, they know they were going to have issues with power/heat right from the early stages when they had the horrendous failure rates. (Not in final product, failure rate in manufacturing process, I must stress that so not to confuse the issue).
The revision2 should look better when compared againest ATi,(less power usage and heat) but by then, the old release to early gremlin is well and truely out.
A lesson that is refusing to be learnt by most companies dispite constant high profile examples, its ok to want to have your presence felt in the market place, but not when that presence is wearing clown shoes has bright ginger hair, and smells funny, it kind of works againest you.
The revision2 should look better when compared againest ATi,(less power usage and heat) but by then, the old release to early gremlin is well and truely out.
A lesson that is refusing to be learnt by most companies dispite constant high profile examples, its ok to want to have your presence felt in the market place, but not when that presence is wearing clown shoes has bright ginger hair, and smells funny, it kind of works againest you.
The first will never happen, just look at the differences. Nvidia can lower the power usage, but can't get anywhere near ati.
The revision2 should look better when compared againest ATi,(less power usage and heat) but by then, the old release to early gremlin is well and truely out.
A lesson that is refusing to be learnt by most companies dispite constant high profile examples, its ok to want to have your presence felt in the market place, but not when that presence is wearing clown shoes has bright ginger hair, and smells funny, it kind of works againest you.
The first will never happen, just look at the differences. Nvidia can lower the power usage, but can't get anywhere near ati.
Not exactly the point i was making, and as for whole debate about whats best, I,m not bothered, all cards are quite over powered for whats being produced game wise, if thats the sole purpose for which you want compare them by.
But if you want to drag me out to make a comment , I will say ive own both companies cards and Ive been happy with both, only times I lost my cool with either has been over driver support, and stupid descions within that frame.
Also I am somewhat dubious of most claims of bench marking as in genera,l they are prone to many issues, this applies to both cards, with drivers written just for bench marking programs in mind and many many more little reasons, such as site bias, site plain incompetence to name just a few.
The point I was making was about rushing things, never buying first of anythings, software and hardware, its a good rule thats served me well, and with some interest and I mean some as in small, I would like to see the revision 2 results after they put more time in, have have no interest in buying the product, the card i have will serve me for another 14 months with ease, and then some.
But getting your epeen out and waving around in support of a bit of hardware, is more worrying as it,s well its hardware, its like getting turned on by a shovel, its a tool, it either performs the task its designed for well, or ok but its hardly a trouser tent moment.
Well what's more, saying "Nvidia's next revision will compare more favorably" is, for complete lack of a better word, just utterly silly. OF COURSE a newer card is going to compare more favorably to a given competitor than an older card; that just goes without saying.
The problem with this logic is that it assumes dynamic development from Nvidia and static development from Ati, when it's demonstrably the reverse that's true. Put simply, yes, Nvidia's next revision of these cards will compare to present Ati cards more favorably, but it's not like Ati has stopped developing, which means by the time Nvidia gets that next revision out, Ati will be that much closer to their next revision, which will then leave Nvidia's cards in the dust again.
The fact that Nvidia needs to wait for a future revision of their cards just to compete favorably with present Ati cards that were released six months ago cannot be seen as a favorable thing, no matter how much you try to spin it.
Well what's more, saying "Nvidia's next revision will compare more favorably" is, for complete lack of a better word, just utterly silly. OF COURSE a newer card is going to compare more favorably to a given competitor than an older card; that just goes without saying.
The problem with this logic is that it assumes dynamic development from Nvidia and static development from Ati, when it's demonstrably the reverse that's true. Put simply, yes, Nvidia's next revision of these cards will compare to present Ati cards more favorably, but it's not like Ati has stopped developing, which means by the time Nvidia gets that next revision out, Ati will be that much closer to their next revision, which will then leave Nvidia's cards in the dust again.
The fact that Nvidia needs to wait for a future revision of their cards just to compete favorably with present Ati cards that were released six months ago cannot be seen as a favorable thing, no matter how much you try to spin it.
Did you actually read what was said at all, before you went off, and did you read back because last poster cropped me when quoting, which is a sign of bad forum habits, as it takes someones whole post out off context, or can.
I was hardly spinning anything, I was saying not to buy any of them unless you need to (ie your card is dead or older than 2 years), and not to consider the nvidia big time till revision 2 because of its currant power and heat.
If you want to join in to a thread, at least read more than the first and last post, its a discussion and is constantly evolving, unlike some people.
The days of ATI being inferior to NVidia are long gone. The ATI 5000 series gpu's are as good as, and in the case of the 5870 and 5970, better than the NVidia cards and often costing less. The new 400 series cards from NVidia are slightly better than the ATI offerings but they cost more (around $100 more than the 5870).
Actually, new nvidia cards lose to ati in almost every aspect. The only title they have is that 480 is the fastest single gpu atm.
The new Nvidia cards were just basically made to handle tesselation better than ATI. . that's about the only thing that they're better at. I'm not much of an Nvidia fan but I do give credit where it' due and so far they appear to handle tesselation a fair bit better. Also to add, if they didn't atleast do something better than ATI I'd be dissapointed being they had an extra 6 months to develop them. But yeah Ginaz is right, actually since the 4xxx series they've been right on Nvidias tail. Ofcoarse they didn't beat out the 285 or anything, but their 4850 and 4870 were competitive with the cards they were made to compete with; which was the 9800GTX (now GTS 250) and the GTX 260.
Tesselation has very small part in gaming, heaven and other benchmark softwares give twisted image of the reality.
i much agree,tessallation wont be in game for years ,dont get me wrong most of the other feature of dx11 will be in game very quick because it give a performance boost but all ressource hog teckno like tessalation will be ignored!
guys !if push come to shoves in august(no not before then)i bet ati can afford to lower the price of their cards by a lot and still delay or polish their new product against nvidia .intel as already catched ati (yes using completelly alternate technology
there was achinese show not long ago they showed what sandy bridge could do .lets just say if they arent at the same speed as ati with those i would be very surpised but since they go at it in a diferent way we ll have to wait when real world test come.
Did you actually read what was said at all, before you went off, and did you read back because last poster cropped me when quoting, which is a sign of bad forum habits, as it takes someones whole post out off context, or can.
I was hardly spinning anything, I was saying not to buy any of them unless you need to (ie your card is dead or older than 2 years), and not to consider the nvidia big time till revision 2 because of its currant power and heat.
If you want to join in to a thread, at least read more than the first and last post, its a discussion and is constantly evolving, unlike some people.
Funny that I actually did, and you know what? My point still stands.
If Nvidia waited for a future revision of the cards to even release, two things would happen: First, because they'd have to wait even longer to have something to show for their development costs, they'd be in even worse shape to make a profit from these cards (which would only necessitate a higher price on this "newer revision"), and secondly, as I said, they'd then only be competing with Ati cards that were superior to the present generation of Radeon HD 5000 cards, because Ati would already have their next revision out, especially given that Ati is 6 months ahead of Nvidia. I don't see how that's going to gain Nvidia net ground here, though given how long it would require them to sink money into development without a release (face it, people will buy the GTX480 no matter what), I could see how it would certainly lose them ground.
For all intents and purposes, this release seemed to be about saving face for Nvidia, and maybe recouping some of their development dollars. No, having a vastly inferior card doesn't help them, but it's not like a "revision" of a vastly inferior card being pitted against a newer version of the cards they already can't compete against is going to be a source of strength for their position on the market.
So, to come back to what I said originally, it goes without saying that a newer card will compete more favorably with present technology than what any company is presently putting on the market, but your logic is still completely contingent upon Ati being static in all of this, when, in fact, they'll likely meet or even preempt Nvidia's next revision with a new revision of their own, hence, again, my point stands, regardless of sorry ad hominem attacks on your part.
Comments
From what I've read, dfan does have it more or less right. Now, Nvidia's new cards DO seem to do fine as far as performance per dollar is concerned. They do more or less match Ati's cards from what I've read, so the increase in performance for a GTX480 over a Radeon HD 5870 will pretty much equal the price difference (they're actually remarkably well matched). In general, I've found that the margin or error between sites can come out slightly in favor of either card. For instance, Techspot showed at average 16% gain for a 20% price hike (keeping in mind that the entire performance advantage came out of only two titles: Farcry 2 and Crysis Warhard), so that goes to AMD/ATi's favor, but as I recall, another review site I read went about the same amount in the other direction. That said, there's more to GPUs than just straight up performance, especially if it's only remarkable on one or two titles.
The GF400 cards might plausibly match The Radeon HD 5000 cards in performance per dollar, but they lose sorely in performance per watt. Techspot's Furmark testing showed a total system difference of about 60 watts at idle, and 110 watts at load. In their own words, "Power consumption figures for the GeForce GTX 480 are truly terrifying. With a total system consumption of 506 watts under load, it was 22% more power hungry than the Radeon HD 5870. Despite being a single GPU graphics card it used slightly more power than the dual-GPU Radeon HD 5970 at both idle and load, and was comparable to a pair of Radeon HD 5870 graphics cards in Crossfire mode." Technically, that stated figure isn't correct. The GTX480 system was 22% more power hungry, so the difference between cards was vastly more, and, as they note, such that just one GTX480 consumes as much as a pair of 5870s in CrossfireX.
Of course, I would expect that everyone here knows what happens when a piece of electronics with less than 100% efficiency (namely, everything, everywhere) consumes more power: it puts off more heat, and vastly so for the Geforce GTX480. That same Techspot review showed load temps at a shocking 97C in their Furmark test, 11% more than the Radeon HD 5870, and that was with a "truly deafening" fan running (their words). At idle, the GTX280 reaches 65C, which is hotter than my pair of Radeon HD 5770s (as well as the 4870 they replaced) usually get under full load!
While I haven't been able to confirm it from any really reputable source, I've also read a lot of people saying Nvidia isn't pulling a profit on these things, either, and really, that would come as no surprise given that these are just vastly inferior, technologically, to the Radeon HD 5000 series cards, and only achieve greater speed because Nvidia just pumped more and more transistors into their cards until they made them faster, hence the ridiculous power consumption and heat.
Is this really the best Nvidia can do to compete with a six month old card? I'm unimpressed, to say the least. I suppose I could give a tirade on how much Nvidia deserves this given their sleezy methods of competing with Ati, that relied more on bullying the market than actually having better technology (no surprise, then, that that approach would catch up to them as they fell further and further behind). Honestly, though, it wouldn't be any revelation to anyone, as we all know plenty about that story, so I'll just leave it at saying Nvidia's new cards leave much to be desired, and are hardly the product that will revive the company that hasn't had a viable product in six months (or a truly viable produce since the Geforce 9 series).
yep its the best nvidia could do against the ati 9 month old card that is the ati 5xxx and still ati is the top dog
i dont think ati will bother a reply against nvidia.instead they ll probably concentrate on where they lack
an auto update for all their stuff !come on isnt it time.nvidia is years ahead in that front!
biy the way guys dont know if you checked on ati or amd site but they have new driver fro mobo
they had one for my achi setted hard drive
do i have good news for you my hd speed went from 65 mb per second to 100 mb per second
on ms scale it went from 5.8 to 6.3 performance thats a huge jump for just a tweak from ati
if you can use those driver i urge you to update!its not a ssd but at 100mb/sec i can live with that speed!
I think it's slightly more nuanced than that. The new Nvidia cards weren't actually made to handle tessellation better than ATI, they were made to be more adaptive, so that their execution units can be used for different tasks rather than having fixed functions.
They don't use fixed function tessellation unit and instead use the geometry units to handle all the old duties plus tessellation. It should have a higher max tessellation performance when all units are available for tessellation BUT worse tessellation performance if those units have to do too much else.
ATI's approach always has a certain number of tessellators available to do work.. Nvidia's approach has a variable amount, with higher max units and lower minimum. It will depend on how a game is designed as to how well tessellation will work on each.
Heaven is a tech demo very heavy on tessellation and not much else so GTX 480 does tessellation quite well on that. Metro 2033 unfortunately can't really be used to compare yet for 2 reasons, 1st it's a TWIMTBP title and ATI didn't get to optimize drivers for the game before its release, the next driver release is suppose to have huge performance boost for ATI, and 2nd Metro 2033's image quality on GTX 4xx cards is terrible right now so there is something the card is skipping and probably getting a perfomance boost in doing so.
Tesselation has very small part in gaming, heaven and other benchmark softwares give twisted image of the reality.
Its been said before, they should of skipped this batch and waited for revision 2, they know they were going to have issues with power/heat right from the early stages when they had the horrendous failure rates. (Not in final product, failure rate in manufacturing process, I must stress that so not to confuse the issue).
The revision2 should look better when compared againest ATi,(less power usage and heat) but by then, the old release to early gremlin is well and truely out.
A lesson that is refusing to be learnt by most companies dispite constant high profile examples, its ok to want to have your presence felt in the market place, but not when that presence is wearing clown shoes has bright ginger hair, and smells funny, it kind of works againest you.
The first will never happen, just look at the differences. Nvidia can lower the power usage, but can't get anywhere near ati.
Not exactly the point i was making, and as for whole debate about whats best, I,m not bothered, all cards are quite over powered for whats being produced game wise, if thats the sole purpose for which you want compare them by.
But if you want to drag me out to make a comment , I will say ive own both companies cards and Ive been happy with both, only times I lost my cool with either has been over driver support, and stupid descions within that frame.
Also I am somewhat dubious of most claims of bench marking as in genera,l they are prone to many issues, this applies to both cards, with drivers written just for bench marking programs in mind and many many more little reasons, such as site bias, site plain incompetence to name just a few.
The point I was making was about rushing things, never buying first of anythings, software and hardware, its a good rule thats served me well, and with some interest and I mean some as in small, I would like to see the revision 2 results after they put more time in, have have no interest in buying the product, the card i have will serve me for another 14 months with ease, and then some.
But getting your epeen out and waving around in support of a bit of hardware, is more worrying as it,s well its hardware, its like getting turned on by a shovel, its a tool, it either performs the task its designed for well, or ok but its hardly a trouser tent moment.
Like stated earlier, B1 will change it to better but it won't happen anytime soon.
Well what's more, saying "Nvidia's next revision will compare more favorably" is, for complete lack of a better word, just utterly silly. OF COURSE a newer card is going to compare more favorably to a given competitor than an older card; that just goes without saying.
The problem with this logic is that it assumes dynamic development from Nvidia and static development from Ati, when it's demonstrably the reverse that's true. Put simply, yes, Nvidia's next revision of these cards will compare to present Ati cards more favorably, but it's not like Ati has stopped developing, which means by the time Nvidia gets that next revision out, Ati will be that much closer to their next revision, which will then leave Nvidia's cards in the dust again.
The fact that Nvidia needs to wait for a future revision of their cards just to compete favorably with present Ati cards that were released six months ago cannot be seen as a favorable thing, no matter how much you try to spin it.
Did you actually read what was said at all, before you went off, and did you read back because last poster cropped me when quoting, which is a sign of bad forum habits, as it takes someones whole post out off context, or can.
I was hardly spinning anything, I was saying not to buy any of them unless you need to (ie your card is dead or older than 2 years), and not to consider the nvidia big time till revision 2 because of its currant power and heat.
If you want to join in to a thread, at least read more than the first and last post, its a discussion and is constantly evolving, unlike some people.
i much agree,tessallation wont be in game for years ,dont get me wrong most of the other feature of dx11 will be in game very quick because it give a performance boost but all ressource hog teckno like tessalation will be ignored!
guys !if push come to shoves in august(no not before then)i bet ati can afford to lower the price of their cards by a lot and still delay or polish their new product against nvidia .intel as already catched ati (yes using completelly alternate technology
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/pcw/docs/361/133/html/05.jpg.html
there was achinese show not long ago they showed what sandy bridge could do .lets just say if they arent at the same speed as ati with those i would be very surpised but since they go at it in a diferent way we ll have to wait when real world test come.
Funny that I actually did, and you know what? My point still stands.
If Nvidia waited for a future revision of the cards to even release, two things would happen: First, because they'd have to wait even longer to have something to show for their development costs, they'd be in even worse shape to make a profit from these cards (which would only necessitate a higher price on this "newer revision"), and secondly, as I said, they'd then only be competing with Ati cards that were superior to the present generation of Radeon HD 5000 cards, because Ati would already have their next revision out, especially given that Ati is 6 months ahead of Nvidia. I don't see how that's going to gain Nvidia net ground here, though given how long it would require them to sink money into development without a release (face it, people will buy the GTX480 no matter what), I could see how it would certainly lose them ground.
For all intents and purposes, this release seemed to be about saving face for Nvidia, and maybe recouping some of their development dollars. No, having a vastly inferior card doesn't help them, but it's not like a "revision" of a vastly inferior card being pitted against a newer version of the cards they already can't compete against is going to be a source of strength for their position on the market.
So, to come back to what I said originally, it goes without saying that a newer card will compete more favorably with present technology than what any company is presently putting on the market, but your logic is still completely contingent upon Ati being static in all of this, when, in fact, they'll likely meet or even preempt Nvidia's next revision with a new revision of their own, hence, again, my point stands, regardless of sorry ad hominem attacks on your part.