Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Sep 12, 2010.
To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTS_450_TOP_DirectCU/
It's not looking good with the GTS 450. Even with the high "stock" overclocks with this card it's only 1% ahead of a reference 5770.
and that is huge ... since it is only suppose to compete with the 5750
It's a hotter, more power hungry not-quite 5770. Basically for the mid-range NVIDIA fanboy.
Folding could be nice for this at a decent price.
Nice review, I'm always impressed with the amount of information you provide.
Unfortunately for Nividia this doesn't look good. It's nearly been a year since the 5770 launched and the 450 offers virtually the same performance at the same price with slightly higher power consumption. Furthermore they just dropped the price of a 768M 460 down to $170 so you really have to wonder who the 450 is for.
Agreed. I change my statement to NVIDIA fanboy/folder.
It's supposed to compete with a cheaper card from ATi?
Performance/dollar graph, both GTS 450 TOP and reference HD 5750 at 100%.
Sir I declare you are trippin' balls! the 5750 over-clocks to around 5770 levels no hassle at all. : ]
So considering it's supposed to be competing with the 5750 it should be a better card, especially considering how long the 5750 has been out.
Sli scales like a beast on these 4-fidys though.
My trusty HD 4850 is on top of Perf/$ charts since forever... this GTS looks like it's made for those wishing "fast gameplay at 1280x1024", it takes a serious performance hit from 1680x1050 up. Just like Nvidia said in their press release.
Anyway... since all my little gaming is doing very good on the 4850 and e7200, it seems that I'll save even more money and see what will be up for the taking when Sandy Bridge and HD 6000 series are out.
I stagger it like this:
5750: Performs similar to 'stock' GTS450 at 700mhz. Overclocks to ~5770/Asus GTS450 at 925mhz. Does not have voltage adjustment, and is at ~1.05v, so that's your maximum potential without hard-modding that most people won't do. Still, it's also freaking $105 for three diff models after rebate at newegg.
Verdict: Similar performance, less power consumption, bargain basement price.
5770: Performs at stock 850mhz similar to GTS450 overclocked to 925mhz. Stock voltage overclocking will beat a GTS450 pushed to the edge of releasing magic smoke. It also uses 1.16v with similar voltage regulators to the GTS450, allowing anyone with a simple click of afterburner/something else to do what ASUS did with this card...and decimating it in the process. It's not tough to find reviews of 5770 at 1ghz using similar voltage to this product, and showing them around the speed, if not slightly faster than a 4890/5830. Did I mention you can find them starting at $125 for a 875mhz model (that would likely beat this card) sporting a free copy of Dirt 2 at newegg?
Verdict: Better performance on level playing-field, lower power consumption, similar price. WIN.
GTS450: At stock speeds competes with a year old product that launched for a similar/lower price and is now much cheaper. Stock overclocked with ridiculous voltage (1.28v) and clockspeed to match a year-old product clocked lower using less voltage and power, with that similar clock headroom left untapped. Has Cuda and PhysX that I doubt most are deeply passionate about. Certainly earns the wink/nod title of mainstream Fermi.
GTX460 768: Disproportionately less higher price for increased performance. Massive WIN.
I love TPU, I do. I much appreciate the disabled die diagrams and the % comparisons across the massive range of cards (usually with relevant ones sporting new drivers) but man, awarding this a 9 makes question if you have a scale out of 100 or if someone be smoking the crack.
My good old trusty Hd4850@700/1000 is till better than these so modern cards, it still runs most games @1680 like a charm with very few exceptions...
Bring on the HD6850 or whatever and we will see...
And even before that AMD will be out with new mainstream models that will put all these new green goblins to shame...
But the 460oc isnt a bad deal actually...
damn wizz you got a shitload of those, how bout me one
He never shares the loot with the fans...
hey w1zz how exctly does voltage change ork with these cards?? can it be done with afterburner, gputool, oc tool??
Quick question, why is the 5770 up there with the GTX 470 in terms of fan-noise when under full load? Is that accurate?
thats the noise of the hd 5770 reference design
Really? Pretty freakin atrocious.
Well, in my analysis of the results, it is truly neck and neck with the 5770, with the 5770 a small performance win (unnoticeable), a small power win (noticeable in long term use), and a large noise lose (noticeable every time you use it).
One could argue that with the twin DVI out, the nVidia 3D glasses, and CUDA and PhysX support, there is a feature win with the GTX450.
If you hunt around for the "BEST" non-reference 5770 card out there, you can do better. But if you are a retail consumer in a retail outlet, I think the GTX450 wins.
If I were in the market for a 5770 performance card, I would go for the 450 over the 5770 for the twin DVI or the 3D glasses options alone. I would be ready to lose 5% performance for the extra feature set.
Nonetheless, it is a shame that nV couldn't outperform the 5770 in performance per watt. I really hope that with the 6000 series and GTX500 series there is more gain on performance per watt. I'm tired of power hungry noisy cards. I want silent. (-ish).
Hmm...According to the reviews, at reference settings, the 5770 is 8-12% faster and about the same price as the 450. Also, according to Anandtech, depending on the model of the 5770, the noise levels are actually quite close. With the 450 being rated 43 and 5770 being rated 47.
PhysX is negligible and barely noticeable in most titles, 3d Vision (with this card) would turn games into a slide-show, and if you're going for CUDA, you'd get a Nvidia card regardless.
I dunno man. The GTX460 768mb looks like a much better value for folding to me.
On the low end, I can get a GTX 450 for around $110 and GTX 460 for $180. For 2 GTX 250, I only spend an extra $40, but I get 168 more processor cores.
$130 (MSRP) / 192 cores = $0.68 per core
$170 (Current) / 216 cores = $0.79 per core
Not to mention that every company has clearly shown the cards can be OCed fairly easily, but all put the price too close to the GTX 460. I am banking that the initial release will have very low sales numbers as most people will just go, "Zotac AMP for $160. For $10 I can get a GTX 460 which is 20 to 30% faster." Since this is true, they will be forced to either lower the price of the OCed units or release stock cards at around the $110 I mentioned before. Then you can just OC them yourself.
$110 (projection) / 192 cores = $0.57 per core
i think you mucked up your math there laughingman, the GTX460 has 336 cores, making it better value for folding.
$130 (MSRP) / 192 cores = $0.68 per core
$170 (Current) / 336 cores = $0.51 per core
and incidentally better than even the $110 projection of the GTS450 price.
If they can get the price down to $110 for the 450, then introduce a fully unlocked GTS455 at $130, that will be grand.
EDIT: for kicks I'll throw in some GTX470 numbers per core too, cheapest I saw on newegg was $270.
$270 (current) / 448 cores = $0.60 per core - not bad!
I havent looked at Anandtech's review. I was quoting this review.
The consumer in the shop isnt as sophisticated as the typical TPU reader. As I said, for similar performance, the nV is offering many more features.
I also disagree with your slideshow comment. GTX260 was very capable of driving nV 3D. And the GTX450 matches and beats the GTX260.
I'm not sure how that refutes the point I made, but okay.
If the average consumer doesn't know what CUDA is, how will it benefit him? Chances are he wouldn't fully comprehend PhysX or Eyeinfinity either.
Here's how a GTX 460, which is 30% faster than this card, performs in 3d Vision in both single and SLI setup:
Separate names with a comma.