1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

More GeForce GTX 465 Details Surface

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, May 17, 2010.

  1. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,646 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,830
    With the GTX470 peaking at 170w, I wouldn't think so...

    However, the board partners are left to design this card themselves, so I wouldn't be surprised if they screw it up totally like they did with the HD5830...
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  2. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    470 peaks at 230W.

    Either way, it's gonna pull way more than 80w he was hoping for.
  3. ..'Ant'..

    ..'Ant'.. New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    294 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    163
    Location:
    █♣█
    The card seems to be a disappointment. :ohwell:
  4. RONX GT

    RONX GT New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    Messages:
    50 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Location:
    Dhaka,Bangladesh.
    Like many said Fermi is failing to deal with the Evergreen...SOOOO TRUE.

    I think it'll be like the 5830 not the 5850.

    150/160 watt peak for my guess on the consumption. Though i dont think disabling 5 SM will make it any where near to "GREEN".

    Kinda wish that Fermi Derivatives would be lot more interesting in price/performance and
    Watt/performance ratio.
    Last edited: May 18, 2010
  5. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    The GTX 465 is most likely to be less efficient than a 470, since manufcature tends to cheap out with power circuitry on "no so high-end" cards like these.
    The 465 do run at pretty much the same clocks as a 470, so my bet is that it will be closer to 199W :p
    Last edited: May 18, 2010
  6. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,646 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,830
    Notice the word "Peak" at the top of the graph and the 171w next to the GTX470:
    [​IMG]

    I couldn't care less what the power usage is when the card is pushed beyond what it will ever see in real world use, which is where that 230w number comes from I'm sure. The highest it will ever see in real world use is 171w, so that is what the card peaks at.

    And yes, it is going to be way higher than the 80w he is hoping for.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  7. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    If I bench Kombuster or Furmark, 230W is very real world for me. My point stands.

    [​IMG]
  8. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,646 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,830
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  9. RONX GT

    RONX GT New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    Messages:
    50 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Location:
    Dhaka,Bangladesh.
    I dont think many people will ever gonna try that(FURMARK is nightmarish kinda software to test the stability of the GPU not regular benching software).
  10. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,777
    Benchmarking is real world if that's what you like to do. It's very real for me.
  11. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,646 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,830
    Ok, I'll give you that. However, as it pertains to this discussion and everyone else in the world, power consumption under furmark doesn't matter.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  12. Imsochobo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    514 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    I live in Norway, in the province Buskerud.
    I can load a card as much as furmark, just not over same timespan.

    The point stands, they are ineffecient....
    465 uses more power than 5850 ?
    470 uses more power than 5870, meaning its not really good at all.
    480 uses more power than two 5850.

    sooo... Fermi(100) isnt going to be anything good before the refresh is out.
    By then ati have come with a new lineup with die scrink.

    Nvidia may survive with the other DIE's like GF104( meaning no GF100)
    Last edited: May 18, 2010
  13. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,425 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    872
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    225 pounds!? That's freakin expensive for such shoddy card. For such price i'd expect nothing less than HD5850 performance across the board if not closer to HD5870...
  14. Imsochobo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    514 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    I live in Norway, in the province Buskerud.
    It does cost the same as 5850. so yes. power consumtion is higher, overclock gain is less, sound level is most likely higher, and no bitstream sound ? and no DP/trihead support ?
    Last edited: May 18, 2010
  15. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,198 (11.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,569
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Benchmarks:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Core i7 920 (stock), Windows 7 x64, 6 GB memory.
    wahdangun says thanks.
  16. yogurt_21

    yogurt_21

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    4,302 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    541
    Location:
    AZ
    I think he's forgetting that the 480 itself is a disabled gpu. the liklihood here is that the 470 is a more efficient combination because it was designed to be a disabled version of the 480, the 465 looks more like an after though put together based on chips that couldn't run at 480 or 470 levels.

    I'm still finding it funny that a mere 5 less in name equals a 20% performance drop though. Seems like some kid's going to buy it thinking it's "almost as good" as the 470 and get disappointed with the actual numbers.

    we'll see though.
  17. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,646 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,830
    Yeah, that is pretty obvious. 170w over 4 hours and 230w over 3 hours is about the same power usage, but that doesn't mean the card uses 230w just because we run it for 4 hours...

    They are very inefficient compared to ATi's offering. We already know that. But we also know that compared to graphics card history, they are very good performance per watt, just not as good as ATi.

    There will be no die shrink from either side for the next generation. ATi's next lineup will still be 40nm, as will nVidia's.

    I'm not worried about nVidia surviving, I'm more worried about nVidia getting weak enough that someone larger can buy them up, like ATi did when they were down, and I'm even more worried it will be Intel...
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  18. JrRacinFan

    JrRacinFan Served 5k and counting ...

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    19,414 (7.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,483
    Location:
    Youngstown, OH
    I really wouldn't call the card "crap", just would wish it would be less in the consumption area. Awaiting a W1zz review before I comment further.
  19. ToTTenTranz

    ToTTenTranz New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    865 (0.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    167
    Location:
    Porto
    Wow, it's uber-fast in the Far Cry 2's Dunia engine!

    That's like, totally relevant because there are lots of popular games using that Dunia engine, like Far Cry 2, Avatar... erm.. and Far Cry 2!
    And Far Cry 2 is a totally demanding game, it's totally important to get 200fps in Far Cry 2!

    j/k
  20. $immond$ New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    394 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Location:
    Edmonton
    We will have to await the benches from Wizz before we draw a conclusion that the card is crap.
    Maybe it OC's like no tomorrow?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page