Thursday, February 25th 2010

GeForce GTX 400 Series Performance Expectations Hit the Web

A little earlier this month, NVIDIA tweeted that it would formally unveil the GeForce GTX 400 series graphics cards, NVIDIA's DirectX 11 generation GPUs, at the PAX East gaming event in Boston (MA), United States, on the 26th of March. That's a little under a month's time from now. In its run up, sources that have access to samples of the graphics cards seem to be drawing their "performance expectations" among other details tricking in.

Both the GeForce GTX 480 and GTX 470 graphics cards are based on NVIDIA's GF100 silicon, which physically packs 512 CUDA cores, 16 geometry units, 64 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and a 384-bit GDDR5 memory interface. While the GTX 480 is a full-featured part, the GTX 470 is slightly watered-down, with probably 448 or 480 CUDA cores enabled, and a slightly narrower memory interface, probably 320-bit GDDR5. Sources tell DonanimHaber that the GeForce GTX 470 performs somewhere between the ATI Radeon HD 5850 and Radeon HD 5870. This part is said to have a power draw of 300W. The GeForce GTX 480, on the other hand, is expected to perform on-par with the GeForce GTX 295 - at least in existing (present-generation) applications. A recent listing by an online store for a pre-order, put the GTX 480 at US $699.Source: DonanimHaber
Add your own comment

114 Comments on GeForce GTX 400 Series Performance Expectations Hit the Web

#1
Bundy
Yellow&Nerdy? said:
So this confirms that the Fermi cards will just be a hot, expensive, power hungry piece of junk. The 470 was listed for 499$ and let's say that it soon drops to 400. The problem is, it's slower, more expensive AND more power hungry than the 5870, which is 399$ now, but will probably drop in price a little, as ATI toughens competition. And the 480. More expensive and power hungry than the 5970, but loses in performance by about 15% (GTX295 vs. 5970). So what's the conclusion? Nvidia is taking it in the butt, atleast in this generation of GPUs. And I'm not a fanboy of either.
What I conclude is that most opinions on this new card are not based on solid evidence.

OBR said:
in original article, is NO WORD about GTX 295, there is GTX 480 has performance as a HD5970!
Well picked up.

Perhaps Bta can clarify whether this is correct?
Posted on Reply
#2
OnBoard
"the GeForce GTX 470 performs somewhere between the ATI Radeon HD 5850 and Radeon HD 5870."

No way that's true. GTX 470 is almost twice the card my GTX 280 and I lose 12% to 5850 and 23% to 5870. If they don't get 25% more performance out of it, then it's a driver problem.
Posted on Reply
#3
Benetanegia
OnBoard said:
"the GeForce GTX 470 performs somewhere between the ATI Radeon HD 5850 and Radeon HD 5870."

No way that's true. GTX 470 is almost twice the card my GTX 280 and I lose 12% to 5850 and 23% to 5870. If they don't get 25% more performance out of it, then it's a driver problem.
Agreed. Also the link is not saying that anyway, idk where did bta's numbers come from, but it's not from the link he provided. Even with Google translate is easy to understand they are comparing the 480 with the HD5970 performance wise and they are saying the 470 will be 20-25% faster than a GTX285, or as fast as the HD5870. Two members (OBR and cool recep) have confirmed that.
Posted on Reply
#4
Bundy
OnBoard said:
"the GeForce GTX 470 performs somewhere between the ATI Radeon HD 5850 and Radeon HD 5870."

No way that's true. GTX 470 is almost twice the card my GTX 280 and I lose 12% to 5850 and 23% to 5870. If they don't get 25% more performance out of it, then it's a driver problem.
It might be true if the newer cards don't clock as fast.
Posted on Reply
#5
Benetanegia
Bundy said:
It might be true if the newer cards don't clock as fast.
Yeah, but not even Charlie Demerjian, always the most "pesimistic" :laugh: regarding Nvidia, is clocking Fermi below 600 Mhz. 625 mhz and 650 mhz is what most are saying. The GTX285 is clocked at 648 Mhz and GTX280 was clocked at 602 Mhz, so 625-650 is not bad at all and Fermi should be close to 2x the performance of a GT200. It should be closer to 100% faster than closer to 25% faster at least.
Posted on Reply
#6
xrealm20
Benetanegia said:
Yeah, but not even Charlie Demerjian, always the most "pesimistic" :laugh: regarding Nvidia, is clocking Fermi below 600 Mhz. 625 mhz and 650 mhz is what most are saying. The GTX285 is clocked at 648 Mhz and GTX280 was clocked at 602 Mhz, so 625-650 is not bad at all and Fermi should be close to 2x the performance of a GT200. It should be closer to 100% faster than closer to 25% faster at least.
Remember that nVidia's stream processors clock differently than the GPU --- so, fermi may have lower stream processor clocks ---

I'd imagine that the 470 will be between the 5850 and 5870 and the 480 in some bmarks will be on par with the 5970 and in other bmarks it will be around GTX295 performance.

But both cards are going to be power hogs, without a doubt.

my 2 cents.
Posted on Reply
#7
Bundy
Benetanegia said:
Yeah, but not even Charlie Demerjian, always the most "pesimistic" :laugh: regarding Nvidia, is clocking Fermi below 600 Mhz. 625 mhz and 650 mhz is what most are saying. The GTX285 is clocked at 648 Mhz and GTX280 was clocked at 602 Mhz, so 625-650 is not bad at all and Fermi should be close to 2x the performance of a GT200. It should be closer to 100% faster than closer to 25% faster at least.
Fair enough. We shall find out for sure soon:).

Given the specifications, and thinking hypothetically, there would also be plenty of room for nvidia to offer heavily downclocked cards for mid-range performance? I guess it all depends on what we don't know, how these chips are binning.
Posted on Reply
#8
Arrakis+9
im surprised there ist a ton of nvidia hating ati fanbois here bashing and laughing at this
Posted on Reply
#9
DanishDevil
Me too, but it's such unestablished evidence, I think everybody's a bit skeptical.
Posted on Reply
#10
troyrae360
Arrakis+9 said:
im surprised there ist a ton of nvidia hating ati fanbois here bashing and laughing at this
Thats some troll bate if ever i seen it :laugh:

I think ATI fanboys got that out of there system 6 months ago when the other firmi thread was started, besides that are all probley too busy being immersed in DX11 and pushing GPUs to new limits, or prehaps they are just content that they alredy own the most powerfull GPU's on the market todate :)
Posted on Reply
#11
sneekypeet
Unpaid Babysitter
They were in another thread that already got closed down, please dont bring any flaming or trolling into the news section too.
Posted on Reply
#12
shevanel
this cannot be true...

if the 470 was like a 5870 and the 480 fell between a 5870 and a 5970 then it would a but make more sense.. but as it stands the price/performance (which is speculated) is just plain ruh-tarded...

@ $699 msrp this means they'll probbaly sell for 749+ if the supply suffers as ati's did at launch
Posted on Reply
#13
troyrae360
shevanel said:
this cannot be true...

if the 470 was like a 5870 and the 480 fell between a 5870 and a 5970 then it would a but make more sense.. but as it stands the price/performance (which is speculated) is just plain ruh-tarded...

@ $699 msrp this means they'll probbaly sell for 749+ if the supply suffers as ati's did at launch
I personally think NV have always charged more for there product than what its worth price/performance wise, ATI/AMD ahve always been the better Bang for your Buck, I beleave it will stay that way, NV will always overcharge and people will still buy there stuff becouse they are commited to that brand
Posted on Reply
#14
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
none of these rumors make sense and they all seem self contradictory. let's say for the sake of argument that fermi is a big bag of fail. nvidia would simply sell them FOR LESS than the ATI cards. so if they are less poweful than what ATI has out NVIDIA's strategy would be to low ball and steal ATIs money maker of midrange cards. all the while NVIDIA would be working on a completely new series of cards done right that wont hit the market for another 15 months. fan boys often forget that money is what these companies try and get the most of, not the approval of tech geeks and hardware nerds.
Posted on Reply
#15
johnnyfiive
Just wait for the real benchmarks people...all this damn speculation talk. Who cares? Wait til we see Wizz's review and the rest of the reviews.
Posted on Reply
#16
shevanel
^ +1 of course

but.. coming so late in the game when the competition has already spread through the market like a virus and availibility is now + the price is great why come out into game slinging a hot hot hot power hungry $700.00 card?

hmm maybe they just know people are going to buy them regardless then the entry level mainstream dx11 cards arrive later... LOL NV is smart!
Posted on Reply
#17
Benetanegia
shevanel said:
@ $699 msrp this means they'll probbaly sell for 749+ if the supply suffers as ati's did at launch
It's not MSRP, it's the (probably fake) pre-order price on one etailer. If anything, that hints to a $550 MSRP according to your logic. But it's fake, I'm sure, they are listed as 2GB cards and both 479 and 480 have 512 SPs. Not to mention that most relieable sources are saying that most partners didn't even got their samples yet, how come an etailer knows the price?

TBH I can't believe that so many people are taking that number so seriously. But every rumor about Fermi is being taken seriously isn't it? That's something I can't understand and has never happened before tbh.
Posted on Reply
#18
shevanel
well when your only given so much info about something your imagination is the only thing that will fuel the topic of discussion which apparently is something people want to talk about

im sure around april we will all be truly informed... this is all just hype before the big show.. just like before the ATi stuff was released then the "5800 series below expecatations" thread was birthed
Posted on Reply
#19
Easo
Need benchmarks of course, but imho my side of upgrade will be ATI, i simply cant believe Fermi's will be at the ATI price range.
Posted on Reply
#20
Bundy
troyrae360 said:
I personally think NV have always charged more for there product than what its worth price/performance wise, ATI/AMD ahve always been the better Bang for your Buck, I beleave it will stay that way, NV will always overcharge and people will still buy there stuff becouse they are commited to that brand
Given that Nvidia/ATI card designs differ from each other in many ways, I don't expect it will be so easy to compare them. There will probably be big variations in relative performance, depending on the benchmark/comparision used. Then there will probably be even bigger fanboi wars.

I do agree that the Nvidia card I use now was overpriced at the time compared to ATI in terms of say FPS. I have had heaps of fun from it though.
Posted on Reply
#21
aj28
I think that nVidia will be price/performance competitive plus about a 10% premium. This will keep the green camp in line as well as general consumers thanks to the skew and overall illiquidity of retail sales prices. That said, much like last generation, they will bleed a lot of money until 6-12 months in when they produce a revamped GTS250.
Posted on Reply
#22
Completely Bonkers
ATI did a "surprise" on nV by under-speccing the cards prior to launch. Then boom! the cards had double the shaders people were expecting.

This strategy worked well for ATI. Perhaps nV actually scrapped their whole design in 2009 and have something new up their sleeve and hence the protracted delay.

Let's hope something exciting is launched in May and those 300W figures are bogus.
Posted on Reply
#23
eidairaman1
Bundy said:
Given that Nvidia/ATI card designs differ from each other in many ways, I don't expect it will be so easy to compare them. There will probably be big variations in relative performance, depending on the benchmark/comparision used. Then there will probably be even bigger fanboi wars.

I do agree that the Nvidia card I use now was overpriced at the time compared to ATI in terms of say FPS. I have had heaps of fun from it though.
that 8800 Ultra is a stronger chip than the G92 in the 8800 range- reliability atleast. It took Nv a revision of the G92 to get it reliable.
Posted on Reply
#25
TheMailMan78
Big Member
I guess I shouldnt post in this thread as everything I say seems to piss SOMEONE off. Anyway remember ATI had thier 2900 before its 3xxx series. It looks as if Nvidia is just laying the ground work for something much better in the next two years.

Anyway as a GPU fan I cannot wait to see what this thing can do. Its fun to make fun of Nvidia but who knows how this puppy will do. It could be epic for all we know.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment