GTX 460 rumored on the way...

Alanstein said:
And who cares if a 480 uses more/less power than a 5870 xfire setup? Did I miss the part where we started comparing a single GPU's power consumption to two of the competitor's to make the power draw less ridiculous?

I'm honestly missing something here.
Click to expand...
because thats what keeps being brought up here. all I did was look at all other reviews and knew that it wasnt possible. I then went back and looked at the H review again and something is clearly wrong. we all know that an additional 5870 would not add just 45 watts to system load. another 5870 would add at least close to 150 watts or more under full load.
 
Lookin at some of those websites you linked make no sense cannon.

Hardocp shows 367 watts for a single 5870, but techreport shows 319w

To be honest with you. I really do not care who is right who is wrong with watts, because it looks like we will never know who is right and who is wrong.

They all seem wrong to me now
 
okay I see the problem in the H review now. even the second gtx480 only added 115 watts to its single gpu usage. the test H are running is not fully loading the second gpu in the 5870 crossfire or gtx 480 sli setup.

this screws up the results if you are trying to compare the single cards usage to the multi card usage because only the single cards were ever really fully loaded.

people need to take the time to look at that chart closely because it clearly cannot be used to accurately compare single card power usage to mult card card usage.
 
I have to agree with Canon. [H] is my favorite tech forum by far but there whole testing of the power draw of the Fermi cards & the HD5000 carfds for hat matter have come into question from a lot of different PC enthusiast communities that I'm apart of. It leaves the question of who is right & who is wrong.

By the way, don't give me that " can't afford 1KW PSU " BS. Most people can afford a handful of them with how much cash they dump into their rigs. I do read sigs to see what hardwware people have =P.
 
DarkLegacy said:
I have to agree with Canon. [H] is my favorite tech forum by far but there whole testing of the power draw of the Fermi cards & the HD5000 carfds for hat matter have come into question from a lot of different PC enthusiast communities that I'm apart of. It leaves the question of who is right & who is wrong.

By the way, don't give me that " can't afford 1KW PSU " BS. Most people can afford a handful of them with how much cash they dump into their rigs. I do read sigs to see what hardwware people have =P.
Click to expand...
read my above post. it was just the way they were testing that wasnt fully loading the second gpus.

at least I took the time to try and figure it out instead of posting nonsense saying a 470 uses more power than a 5870 crossfire setup like some people here. I knew that was ridiculous so mystery solved. lol
 
cannondale06 said:
okay I see the problem in the H review now. even the second gtx480 only added 115 watts to its single gpu usage. the test H are running is not fully loading the second gpu in the 5870 crossfire or gtx 480 sli setup.

this screws up the results if you are trying to compare the single cards usage to the multi card usage because only the single cards were ever really fully loaded.

people need to take the time to look at that chart closely because it clearly cannot be used to accurately compare single card power usage to mult card card usage.
Click to expand...


I did and i looked at all the charts. I just cannot believe anyone. The results Vary so much between 3-4 websites....i mean fuck who to believe now right?

Well we can all agree the 480 GTX uses up more watts then a 5870.....and we dont bee graphs to tell us that.
 
DASHlT said:
I did and i looked at all the charts. I just cannot believe anyone. The results Vary so much between 3-4 websites....i mean fuck who to believe now right?

Well we can all agree the 480 GTX uses up more watts then a 5870.....and we dont bee graphs to tell us that.
Click to expand...
its real simple. H just didnt fully load the systems in the sli or crossfire tests. so again you cant compare the sli or crossfire numbers because only the single cards seemed to have gotten fully loaded. ;)
 
cannondale06 said:
its real simple. H just didnt fully load the systems in the sli or crossfire tests. so again you cant compare the sli or crossfire number because only the single cards seemed to have gotten fully loaded. ;)
Click to expand...

To me you cant compare any the websites, [H] included.

Some of the graphs are like 50-80w difference on the websites...its like WTF?

I admit [H] is wrong, but to me so are all the websites....I honest have no idea who has a proper Watt graph.

But lookin at that 480 GTX SLI review on guru3d....man Nvidia does it again with great scaling is all im going to say :)
 
DASHlT said:
To me you cant compare any the websites, [H] included.

Some of the graphs are like 50-80w difference on the websites...its like WTF?

I admit [H] is wrong, but to me so are all the websites....I honest have no idea who has a proper Watt graph.

But lookin at that 480 GTX SLI review on guru3d....man Nvidia does it again with great scaling is all im going to say :)
Click to expand...
well on H you can sorta compare sli to crossfire and you certainly can compare single 5870 to single 480 but thats it. you cant compare the single card results directly to the multi card results because its clear the multi card systems were not fully pushed. sorry for getting hostile earlier but I knew something was not right somewhere. anyway thats over and its sleepy time here...:cool:
 
cannondale06 said:
well on H you can sorta compare sli to crossfire and you certainly can compare single 5870 to single 480 but thats it. you cant compare the single card results directly to the multi card results because its clear the multi card systems were not fully pushed. sorry for getting hostile earlier but I knew something was not right somewhere. anyway thats over and its sleepy time here...:cool:
Click to expand...

Thats not being hostile its called a debate :).

Trust me man, we both have gone back and forth debating hardware before, as long as names aren't thrown im cool with it (And I still want that green shit you are smokin lol).

Anyway, I mean i guess you can kinda compare, but the thing is every single websites uses a different way to measure the Watts. So it would be kind of hard to compare (at least i think so).

I am kinda shocked that Furmark didnt fully load those 2 5870 in crossfire with [H].....Might be a bug no idea, but I know it maxes out my 5870 :)
 
It's absolutely ridiculous that the card can even be in the same range of the crossfired variant of its main competitor. Whoever wins, the GTX 480 loses.

Also;
Alanstein said:
I like how nVidia fan-boys can't refute my claim that when overclocking, the value, heat, power consumption, and feature-set with eyefinity all go towards the red team. ATi wins every single price bracket when factoring in overclocking.

And face it... If you're buying a 500$ videocard... wouldn't you want to push it? If you're on [H]ard... don't you want to push it?

For a serious or novice GPU overclocker, the 470 offers nothing. You have to watercool it or deal with a jet engine in your case to even match an OC 5850 performance at a higher cost.

Unless you're talking about bleeding edge type individuals, in which case quad 480s do beat xfire 5970s. But I think it's safe to say at that point, higher FPS really is going to be negligible.
Click to expand...
 
cannondale06 said:
well if you want to believe that 2 188 watt cards consume less power under load than a single 215 watt card then go ahead. again H tends to have some wacky numbers that just dont add up. I could probably go back and find some other numbers in other H reviews that make no sense either but its not worth the trouble.
Click to expand...

Those TDP numbers don't mean much. The GTX 470 can draw up to 230w and the GTX 480 blows right past the 300w mark and hits 320w: http://techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_470/28.html

Granted it seems [H]'s CF/SLI numbers are off, but the GTX 470 can still draw up to 60w more than a 5870 - which is just crazy.
 
Just thought Id jump into this scrap. Since both cards are being utilized to render graphics, isnt it safe to assume that the work load of both cards is reduced since rendering duties are shardeb between both cards? Unless a game is fully optimized to identify and utilize SLI and Cossfire setups, then I have to believe that work loads are reduced to each core.

Yes, two cores and memory sets use more power, but I cand imagine each card is completely under full load. But Im likely wrong.

Sometimes, I just like to say some shit to say some shit. :D

Edit: i could personally care less about individual power consumption. all that matters is wall draw and [H] does present a clear reading of wall draw.
 
Alanstein said:
It's absolutely ridiculous that the card can even be in the same range of the crossfired variant of its main competitor. Whoever wins, the GTX 480 loses.
;
Click to expand...

Stuff if it Alan, you haven't been around as long as most former ATI users. I started on a Radeon 64MB DDR, then Radeon 8500 64MB,(Skipped 9700 because of the revised silicon problem) 9800XT, X800 Pro because ATI couldn't manufacture the damn 850XT for shit and was back ordered for 2-3 months, then the short lived X1800(short lived 3 month span there) to X1900 which gave me my final ATI card. Drivers Drivers Drivers. I switched to an 8800GTS 640MB back then and now a GTX 260 216 and can honestly say after 6-7 long years with ATI, I don't have 1/10th the problems with drivers or Broken Hardware with a driver wrap around.

Your precious fucking ATI just broke Crossfire for Shatterd Horizon, Street Fighter 4, and problems are still abound with BFBC2 even after the patch fixed issues Nvidia users were having. Every day a new game pops up on "Whats broke on this Catalyst Release?" Tomorrow there will be a "Quick, we have to fix this shit now!" Driver release in the 10.5 Beta or 10.4a, 10.4b.
And don't pull the " I haven't had an issue like these yet!!" I use to put my hands over my eyes and blindly post too in favor of ATI, till I woke the hell up. Look close at the games you play, missing textures? Jaggies look warped. Windows turn to black or shimmer when riding past in any building in any game? Any full purple screens there?

Alan, what I am saying is don't jump on someone elses ass that put up with this shit from ATI for a looooooooooooooooong time because they fully support nVidia regardless of needing a Nuclear Power Plant to run their latest and greatest. Besides, Nvidia's drivers are brand new and still outshine ATI's on the 5800 launch now, don't they? ;) I too will be joining the Fermi Power Plant support team, not just cause of hardware.

And the nightmare continues:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...=crossfire+broken+in+10.3+&+10.4+cats&spell=1

No, I will not be back to get in a little "pissing match". Point is made, and stand firm on what I say.
 
SnowBeast said:
Stuff if it Alan, you haven't been around as long as most former ATI users. I started on a Radeon 64MB DDR, then Radeon 8500 64MB,(Skipped 9700 because of the revised silicon problem) 9800XT, X800 Pro because ATI couldn't manufacture the damn 850XT for shit and was back ordered for 2-3 months, then the short lived X1800(short lived 3 month span there) to X1900 which gave me my final ATI card. Drivers Drivers Drivers. I switched to an 8800GTS 640MB back then and now a GTX 260 216 and can honestly say after 6-7 long years with ATI, I don't have 1/10th the problems with drivers or Broken Hardware with a driver wrap around.

Your precious fucking ATI just broke Crossfire for Shatterd Horizon, Street Fighter 4, and problems are still abound with BFBC2 even after the patch fixed issues Nvidia users were having. Every day a new game pops up on "Whats broke on this Catalyst Release?" Tomorrow there will be a "Quick, we have to fix this shit now!" Driver release in the 10.5 Beta or 10.4a, 10.4b.
And don't pull the " I haven't had an issue like these yet!!" I use to put my hands over my eyes and blindly post too in favor of ATI, till I woke the hell up. Look close at the games you play, missing textures? Jaggies look warped. Windows turn to black or shimmer when riding past in any building in any game? Any full purple screens there?

Alan, what I am saying is don't jump on someone elses ass that put up with this shit from ATI for a looooooooooooooooong time because they fully support nVidia regardless of needing a Nuclear Power Plant to run their latest and greatest. Besides, Nvidia's drivers are brand new and still outshine ATI's on the 5800 launch now, don't they? ;) I too will be joining the Fermi Power Plant support team, not just cause of hardware.

And the nightmare continues:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...=crossfire+broken+in+10.3+&+10.4+cats&spell=1

No, I will not be back to get in a little "pissing match". Point is made, and stand firm on what I say.
Click to expand...

You sound as if you are arguing over a woman. It's a videocard don't get so emotional. I use ATi and I use Nvidia. I've been having a pretty much trouble free experience with ATi cards/drivers since the 4800's. I did have issues with some of my older cards, but I've also had a bunch of issues with stuff from the green team. Neither team's card/drivers are perfect.

Also, if you were having all of these problems why would you continue to buy an ATi card? Why not just go with what's best for you at the time of purchase and not just get the ATi card. Use both and be happy.
 
SnowBeast said:
Stuff if it Alan, you haven't been around as long as most former ATI users. I started on a Radeon 64MB DDR, then Radeon 8500 64MB,(Skipped 9700 because of the revised silicon problem) 9800XT, X800 Pro because ATI couldn't manufacture the damn 850XT for shit and was back ordered for 2-3 months, then the short lived X1800(short lived 3 month span there) to X1900 which gave me my final ATI card. Drivers Drivers Drivers. I switched to an 8800GTS 640MB back then and now a GTX 260 216 and can honestly say after 6-7 long years with ATI, I don't have 1/10th the problems with drivers or Broken Hardware with a driver wrap around.

Your precious fucking ATI just broke Crossfire for Shatterd Horizon, Street Fighter 4, and problems are still abound with BFBC2 even after the patch fixed issues Nvidia users were having. Every day a new game pops up on "Whats broke on this Catalyst Release?" Tomorrow there will be a "Quick, we have to fix this shit now!" Driver release in the 10.5 Beta or 10.4a, 10.4b.
And don't pull the " I haven't had an issue like these yet!!" I use to put my hands over my eyes and blindly post too in favor of ATI, till I woke the hell up. Look close at the games you play, missing textures? Jaggies look warped. Windows turn to black or shimmer when riding past in any building in any game? Any full purple screens there?

Alan, what I am saying is don't jump on someone elses ass that put up with this shit from ATI for a looooooooooooooooong time because they fully support nVidia regardless of needing a Nuclear Power Plant to run their latest and greatest. Besides, Nvidia's drivers are brand new and still outshine ATI's on the 5800 launch now, don't they? ;) I too will be joining the Fermi Power Plant support team, not just cause of hardware.

And the nightmare continues:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...=crossfire+broken+in+10.3+&+10.4+cats&spell=1

No, I will not be back to get in a little "pissing match". Point is made, and stand firm on what I say.
Click to expand...

:eek:

Time to lock my doors I guess...

I had a GTS 250 before I had a 5850, and have less problems than when I had the 250. I'm sorry you don't like my anecdotes, but I can't offer any experience other than my own. I play at a high resolution, so jagged textures are hard to spot. I don't have problems with windows. etc.

And i really could care less about power draw, but I value silence in my system. Because of the heat generated and fan noise, the 5850 is a clear winner for me.

People's opinions are different. I respect your stand, and if I had that many problems with a particular company, it would take me a while to go back to that manufacturer. I can understand the distrust of ATi.

However, I'm not going to recommend the 470 or 80 due to the overwhelmingly pleasant experience I've had with the 5850. Will the same mentality be true 3 generations down? Who knows. But for right now, my stand is slightly biased towards ATi.

BTW, I respect your non-commitment to the refusal of a pissing match. Your point was well made, and well received. Enjoy your Fermi when it gets to you, because it will surely beat my 5850 ;) .
 
SnowBeast said:
Stuff if it Alan, you haven't been around as long as most former ATI users. I started on a Radeon 64MB DDR, then Radeon 8500 64MB,(Skipped 9700 because of the revised silicon problem) 9800XT, X800 Pro because ATI couldn't manufacture the damn 850XT for shit and was back ordered for 2-3 months, then the short lived X1800(short lived 3 month span there) to X1900 which gave me my final ATI card. Drivers Drivers Drivers. I switched to an 8800GTS 640MB back then and now a GTX 260 216 and can honestly say after 6-7 long years with ATI, I don't have 1/10th the problems with drivers or Broken Hardware with a driver wrap around.
Click to expand...

I ran a 9700 Pro for a couple of years, worked *GREAT*. Never had a problem with that card, damn fine piece of engineering.

As for BFBC2, go ask a Fermi user how they like the slow load times. You know, a problem that people loved to claim was an ATI problem that ATI fixed, only it now affects Fermi as well? Yeah, funny how that shit can come around and bite you in the ass.

Look close at the games you play, missing textures? Jaggies look warped. Windows turn to black or shimmer when riding past in any building in any game? Any full purple screens there?
Click to expand...

No, everything looks perfect. If there were *any* graphical errors like you mention, places like [H] would be all over it.

In fact, most recently it was your precious Nvidia that had graphical bugs and it was in a TWIMTBP game, not ATI: http://hardocp.com/article/2010/04/06/metro_2033_image_quality_followup/

Besides, Nvidia's drivers are brand new and still outshine ATI's on the 5800 launch now, don't they? ;)
Click to expand...

Not really. Lot of people posting about Fermi driver problems, not to mention that Surround View still isn't here despite Nvidia posting on their website that it would be available in April. Wonder if you'll have to wait 6 months for that, too.
 
kllrnohj said:
I ran a 9700 Pro for a couple of years, worked *GREAT*. Never had a problem with that card, damn fine piece of engineering.

As for BFBC2, go ask a Fermi user how they like the slow load times. You know, a problem that people loved to claim was an ATI problem that ATI fixed, only it now affects Fermi as well? Yeah, funny how that shit can come around and bite you in the ass.



No, everything looks perfect. If there were *any* graphical errors like you mention, places like [H] would be all over it.

In fact, most recently it was your precious Nvidia that had graphical bugs and it was in a TWIMTBP game, not ATI: http://hardocp.com/article/2010/04/06/metro_2033_image_quality_followup/



Not really. Lot of people posting about Fermi driver problems, not to mention that Surround View still isn't here despite Nvidia posting on their website that it would be available in April. Wonder if you'll have to wait 6 months for that, too.
Click to expand...
Lol, excellent post. Also, NVIDIA's drivers actively killed their cards - can we let the "NVIDIA/AMD has better drivers" debate die now? Both companies have their fair share of driver issues.
 
Note to nVidia, have this perform at least as fast as the 5830 and sell it for $200 and I will get it for my nVidia machine...otherwise, I'll wait for the 5830's to get down to $150-$175 to replace my 8800GT-SLI set up...Please don't disappoint me nVidia, I want a 3870 from you (2900XT was hot and not impressive compared to competition, but the refresh was much better).
 
DarkLegacy said:
It doesn't matter what brand GPU you buy, they both have cons & pros. The HD5830, HD5850 & HD5870 all run slower than the Fermi cards in there respected catagories. They however run cooloer, draw less power & cost less. The Fermi cards are the fastest single GPU cards on the market. It's cost you more to purchase & also run hotter. The whole power cunsumption is a mute areguement to me as the hardward to support it has exist for years now.
Click to expand...

It's arguable whether the ATI cards run slower than the Fermi cards in there respected categories as you claim. It really get's confusing because all the prices are staggered.

5850: $300
470: $350
5870: $400
480: $500

If you look at it, the 5870 is competing against the 470 as much as the 5850 is considering they have the same price gap between them.

Comparing the 5850 to the 470:

470 wins in: Performance
470 loses in: Price, features available (until 3d surround works), heat, power

If you look at the 470 to 5870 comparison:

470 wins in: Price
470 loses in: Performance, features, heat, power.

People for some reason assume that the 480 competes with the 5870 but really the 470 and the 5870 are the closest competition and I would argue that the ATI lineup doesn't run slower than the Fermi lineup here when you consider this.

The other comparison is the 480 to the 5870 or the 5970, the 5870 is the closer pricepoint but still $100 is a significant jump in price and I would fully EXPECT it to outperform, maybe even by more than it does.

Now as you can see in my sig I have a fairly budget build and I picked up my 700W power supply for 69.99 with 30mir = $39.99 after rebate. This power supply may not be able to handle a 470 and definitely wouldn't trust it with a 480 especially with my cpu overclock in my system. A 1KW PS would probably be around $60-120 more than mine cost depending on brand. So yes I could afford a better power supply, but then I could only have afforded a 470 or 5850 instead of my 5870 within the budget of my build. So on a budget build the extra power required really does make a difference.
 
Rauelius said:
Note to nVidia, have this perform at least as fast as the 5830 and sell it for $200 and I will get it for my nVidia machine...otherwise, I'll wait for the 5830's to get down to $150-$175 to replace my 8800GT-SLI set up...
Click to expand...


...it will be $200 like next year. :( NV is trying to make a profit, I think. lol.
 
Xzyrus said:
Latest Rumour:
http://www.nordichardware.com/en/ne...28www.nordichardware.com+News+%26+Articles%29

Price looking more positive than previous rumours. I can't remember how the hardware specs compare to previous rumours though.
Click to expand...

Interesting. So competitor to the worst bang/buck of the 5000 series and it costs a bit more? I hope it retails for less than the 5830 if it is competing directly with it. Especially since the 5830 is considered a bit of a dud where it is.
 
Well it's down from the earlier $299 rumours but still high at 250. However if it is >= 5830 like the GTX470 is >= to 5850 (disregarding temp/power) then it'll fair better since pricing is really well staggered as Elox has mentioned for the higher end cards. I'd still prefer the 5850 though I wish the price would come down a bit :(
 
erasure said:
if it 250$, then we SLI :)
GTX460 SLI 512sp (500$) > GTX480 480sp (500$)
Click to expand...

Ooo I hadn't noticed that since that would be out of my budget anyhow, but if you also look at how the new rumour is speculating a less cut down version than initially rumoured (352 SP), it doesn't look like the new rumour seems likely when you compare SLI'd 460s to a 480.
 
Xzyrus said:
Ooo I hadn't noticed that since that would be out of my budget anyhow, but if you also look at how the new rumour is speculating a less cut down version than initially rumoured (352 SP), it doesn't look like the new rumour seems likely when you compare SLI'd 460s to a 480.
Click to expand...
oh my fault
they have a 704sp
 
erasure said:
oh my fault
they have a 704sp
Click to expand...

I checked back at the earlier rumours. They were saying 384SP initially when they mentioned the 299 price tag.

352SP is possible since each GPC contains 4 Stream Multiprocessors (SM) and each SM contains 32 cores (SPs) and 4 TMUs. 352 is divisable by 32 so scaling to that number is possible. Basically NordicHardware is hinting at a more scaled down version so we have 2 rumours of what the GTX 460 will be floating around.
 
ELox said:
People for some reason assume that the 480 competes with the 5870 but really the 470 and the 5870 are the closest competition and I would argue that the ATI lineup doesn't run slower than the Fermi lineup here when you consider this.
Click to expand...

I'd argue the same, the 480 (in the UK at least) is priced closer to the 5970 than the 5870, from a completely unbias perspective these cards really sit between each other in price and generally in performance as well, but the Nvidia cards have the problem of a lot more power draw, heat and noise.
 
"They insinuate that the disabled CUDA cores are locked on a software level, which in theory makes them unlockable." interesting...;):D
 
Their low, midrange, and mobile DX11 GPUs will all be 3B transistor discards from the Fermi pile. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top