Is GTX 480 / Fermi a game changer for you?

[Wile E]

I'm simply not going to buy a 1200W PSU, so yeah for me that leaves the fermi out, although it certainly isn't a bad thing spec-wise
Although I must say that even if it was drawing less power the next stumbling block would be the price, I have several old graphics cards that I paid a lot for and are not worth what you'd pay for a paperweight, and although that is a natural progressions I was hoping that when the ATI 4850 set a new standard for affordable it would not go back to the old 400-500+ prices at least, but here we are, back to paying an arm and a leg for something that relatively quickly is outdated in respect of why you paid all that money.
That price thing applies to both companies though and isn't fermi specific, and perhaps some genius will find a way to get good yields from 40nm and things will get more reasonable eventually, so there s a glimmer of hope.

Don't need a 1200W psu. My 4870X2 actually draws more, and ran just fine on my 620W Corsair.

 

[Wshlist]

Don't need a 1200W psu. My 4870X2 actually draws more, and ran just fine on my 620W Corsair.

Well I use an i7 CPU, if you OC that it starts to draw plenty of power and that leaves a certain amount left for the GPU (and the PSU also needs to supply chipset and various add-in cards and USB ports and HD's too), and a fermi would make a setup run at near-max on a 600'ish PSU in certain circumstances meaning it gets hot and lifetime is reduced.
As a sidenote I can tell you the PSU is actually the item I had fail most on my various systems (and I use brandname stuff), rivaling HD's in failure-risk, although a PSU you can simply replace and you are back in the running, so HD's are way more annoying when they fail of course
Also the powerdraw profile on a fermi might be quite different from ATI, it has that CUDA stuff and so on and that runs simultaneously with graphics so in some games, especially future ones that also push that tessellator, it might be much worse peaking in games than a HD4870x2 , hard to predict.
And finally my use of 1200 was more illustrative, point being that I think it's all going too far for my taste, but I can imagine other people have a different attitude; and one isn't more right than the other, I'm just sharing my personal PoV and for me it's too much.

 

[johnnyfiive]

No.

 

[Mr McC]

Fermi is excessively hot, unbearably noisy and, in all honesty, not sufficiently faster than the corresponding ATI counterparts to warrant its price, whilst the power requirements are nothing less than astounding. In short, I think the 480 and 470 are failures on a number of levels. The heat produced by the 480 and its adverse effect on the entire system over time represents no small concern and I wouldn't recommend either the 480 or 470 over the 5870/5850. Indeed, whilst I understand that many people, and I include myself, were initially awaiting these cards with a great deal of anticipation, the arrival of the product has given rise to widespread disappointment. Even considering buying either of these cards seems to defy belief and I can only explain it as the result of some misplaced sense of brand loyalty or listening too keenly to the various marketing agents who are now in damage control overdrive. This is all very unfortunate for the consumer as I believe both the 5850 and 5870 are currently overpriced; however, in the absence of any serious competition, ATI has no incentive or need to lower prices. We waited and hoped that Fermi would deliver, but for the reasons outlined above, I couldn't recommend Fermi, in either of its current incarnations, to anyone and feel that I had given good advice. Benchmarks cannot be considered in isolation of all other factors and, for me at least, Nvidia needs to carry out extensive revision of this architecture before I would even consider it as a viable option.

 

[Wile E]

Well I use an i7 CPU, if you OC that it starts to draw plenty of power and that leaves a certain amount left for the GPU (and the PSU also needs to supply chipset and various add-in cards and USB ports and HD's too), and a fermi would make a setup run at near-max on a 600'ish PSU in certain circumstances meaning it gets hot and lifetime is reduced.
As a sidenote I can tell you the PSU is actually the item I had fail most on my various systems (and I use brandname stuff), rivaling HD's in failure-risk, although a PSU you can simply replace and you are back in the running, so HD's are way more annoying when they fail of course
Also the powerdraw profile on a fermi might be quite different from ATI, it has that CUDA stuff and so on and that runs simultaneously with graphics so in some games, especially future ones that also push that tessellator, it might be much worse peaking in games than a HD4870x2 , hard to predict.
And finally my use of 1200 was more illustrative, point being that I think it's all going too far for my taste, but I can imagine other people have a different attitude; and one isn't more right than the other, I'm just sharing my personal PoV and for me it's too much.

It runs fine under Furmark on the 620w Corsair. Only mild clocking tho. 3.6Ghz on the cpu @ 1.3V and maxed CCC overdrive on the card.

I know that's pushing it a little, just saying that 1200W isn't really needed to run Fermi. It does draw quite a bit, and I probably would want a 750W tho.

 

[sneekypeet]

delays delays, Im getting bored with it already. Erocker pointed out also, evga cards just went up $20 a card

 

[Wile E]

delays delays, Im getting bored with it already. Erocker pointed out also, evga cards just went up $20 a card

It needs to go in the opposite direction price wise to become a good purchase. $450 wouldn't be bad, I don't think.

 

[sneekypeet]

$500 is steep but I need a furnace to test coolers on, so it was part of the job so to speak, but damn they just dont make it easy at all. I'm pondering the EVGA Bog listed for $500, as it seems to be the cheapest and only EVGA for sale.

 

[Wile E]

$500 is steep but I need a furnace to test coolers on, so it was part of the job so to speak, but damn they just dont make it easy at all. I'm pondering the EVGA Bog listed for $500, as it seems to be the cheapest and only EVGA for sale.

I'm either waiting for some serious price drops, or a refresh of the lineups. Just too pricey right now. That's the downside of buying a top end video card, it makes upgrading much more difficult. lol.

 

[sneekypeet]

I thought thats why they made it so you can has 4

 

[Wile E]

I thought thats why they made it so you can has 4

lol. I no has enough radiator for fourz of dem.

 

[sneekypeet]

you need to get with erocker and see if he can pull a F-150 rad or similar

 

[Delta6326]

lol i love seeing those poll results, i happy im with the 3k+ people

 

[R_1]

GTX 480 is like playing poker with open hand. The 58XX/59XX are out the price is known the performance is known. So the price that NV set for 480/470 is not derived from the cost of designing and manufacturing the card but from the performance/price comparation. And as I assumed NVIDIA did not attack ATI`s pricing and intentionally went for higher prices and lower price/performance ratio. So would not make ATI drop prices that they could easy do because of how cheaper is to manufacture 58xx gpu. GTX 480/470 fail for NV. Not because of the performance or the price but because of the cost of building that card. So when I say fail I mean for NVIDIA not for the consumer side of view.

+1

 

[erixx]

+1 for the pricing policy
-1 for the fail theory

the more i read, the more i feel the nv bashing is totally unfounded.
and sincerely, I only bought my 5850 based on price/performance forgetting driver quality and ease of use. Next time, in 2 years, nvidia will be my first choice. (if the company exists then lol)
15 years ago i had an Ati Rage3D and it sucked, this is my second Ati and it's still a mess. In 15 years with nvidia I never had to mess with settings, just play 'as it is meant' (except some weird game that had sli issues, ah, I remember: WWII Online, great still fresh oldie game btw)

 

[boracoral]

The gtx 480 has awesome tesallation and rocks over ATI 5870. Check out the video link from nVidia. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpdPSZB8A8E

 

[Mr McC]

The gtx 480 has awesome tesallation and rocks over ATI 5870. Check out the video link from nVidia. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpdPSZB8A8E

That's all fine and well, but in the real world it seems it's only about 10% faster, where it is faster, and actually loses to the 5870 in Crysis. The problem is that tesselation does not take place in isolation and the cards are simultaneously taxed in other areas, so a synthetic benchmark focusing on tesselation (who did you say released the video?) proves little. In Metro 2033, a game sponsored by Nvidia, it appears that the 480 is only differentiated from the 5870 due to its ability to enable slightly higher levels of AA at "extreme" settings, but both cards are stressed by this title and there is little between them. In any event, there are excellent reviews and comparisons of each card available on this site.

The card's tesselation capacity and overall performance were never open to question, but it's too hot and too noisy for the relatively small performance gain it offers.

 

[erixx]

dont be like politicians.... to say it is or only is 10% is a gross simplification, your favourite game may see 0% or 50%.

Also when checking, you better look at the benches for your resolution, who cares how it is at 800x600 or 25.000x23.000????

 

[Mr McC]

dont be like politicians.... to say it is or only is 10% is a gross simplification, your favourite game may see 0% or 50%.

Also when checking, you better look at the benches for your resolution, who cares how it is at 800x600 or 25.000x23.000????

50%? Where are you seeing that? Politicians are vague and ambiguous creatures, I thought I was quite clear. In any event, the exact percentile figure is not the issue, although I think 10% overall is more or less the general consensus, but it's not worth arguing over: 5870 is close enough in terms of performance, although I grant that, unlike the 480, it does not also serve as a hair dryer and a steak grill. My resolution is 1920x1080 and I have looked at all published benches, but I'm clearly not seeing what you're seeing. Again, 50% seems more in keeping with the questionable figures offered by politicians and seriously compromises your credibility.

The only positive feature of the 480, in my eyes, is the potential it points to that may or may not be fully realised in future revisions, but as it stands, it's a seriously flawed piece of hardware, but God knows that it needs its champions in the face of so many detractors, so I salute you for your brave and lonely stand. Have you seen the poll?

 

[erixx]

I really don't want to overanalize what you or I or John Doe says. Just that it depends of the game so a single figure is not the full story.
Example: 5850 loads BC2 very slowly, but not Farcry2... a GF9600 loads BC2 very quickly but not FC 2...
Real world is not "N %", that's all I wanted to say

 

[Mr McC]

I really don't want to overanalize what you or I or John Doe says. Just that it depends of the game so a single figure is not the full story.
Example: 5850 loads BC2 very slowly, but not Farcry2... a GF9600 loads BC2 very quickly but not FC 2...
Real world is not "N %", that's all I wanted to say

Of course the fps advantage varies from title to title (the 480 actually looses to the 5870 in Crysis), but the variation seems to be pretty close to the 10% I suggested when considered collectively; however, I was by no means attempting to imply that this is the full story or claiming that this figure has been scientifically calculated, it was simply a rough estimate. In any event, I have to ask you again, where have you seen figures that support your claim that the 480 is up to 50% faster than the 5870?

When I stepped in to qualify the claims of a contributor with a single post who stated that the 480 "rocks over the 5870" due to its tesselation performance, offering a video released by Nvidia as evidence, you popped up in his/her defence with this figure of up to 50% performance gains when compared to the 5870. No offence, but I find it hard to take you seriously after that.

 

[erixx]

Indeed, you are right, a one post 480 praise is strange... must be a green agent
BTW, I didn't invent but don't remember what, where, how, i saw 50%... could be irrelevant or not, or comparing apples to pcs or maybe the 470 with a Voodoo1... It's subjective.

 

[Mr McC]

Indeed, you are right, a one post 480 praise is strange... must be a green agent
BTW, I didn't invent but don't remember what, where, how, i saw 50%... could be irrelevant or not, or comparing apples to pcs or maybe the 470 with a Voodoo1... It's subjective.

You probably saw it in a tesselation performance comparison released by Nvidia.

 

[EarthDog]

I bought it, done deal. I am an off and on folder so thats a solid reason in itself. The power concerns are completely irrelevent to me (if I can afford a $350 card, I can afford the $3 difference /month if I ran it 24/7 over my GTX 285).

The heat issues, while real, are blown way out of proportion by a lot of sites, especially that yutz Charlie. Just turn the fan to 75% or adjust your 'ramp up' curve more agressively, and you wont break 83C (Note Im overclocked to 750/1500/900 on stock voltage in a 23C room inside the not so air cooling friendly Obsidian 800D).

As far as the noise, yeah thats there, but I cant hear it when playing games with or without headphones, and on idle its at 40% which is inaudible inside my case.

If I could afford a 5870, I would have bought that. If I could afford a 480, I would have bought that.

 

[1nf3rn0x]

TBH the GTX 480 isn't that bad. Nvidia have made the most powerful single gpu, though who cares for a little heat or loud fan noise. TBH most of our cases are louder and you won't even hear the fan noise. The power consumption is quite large but it's on par with the 5970 and gives almost similar performance. A nice 1200w psu, 2 gtx 480's and a i7-980x will beat a a 5970 in the same configuration. The 5970 is dual gpu, so it's only fair when comparing the two to use SLi with the 480's and they provide a good increase in performance over the 5970. The 5970 ALSO puts out similar temperatures and similar fan noise! I don't see what they are complaining about!

In Australia a 5970 is roughly-~$900
A GTX 480 costs roughly-~$650 The increase in performance isn't much comparing the extra $250 you have to pay for a 5970.

TBH in my opinion Nvidia have created the better card, I don't care for heat- the card is made to handle it. I don't care for fan noise-My case is louder.
I don't care for power consumption- just get a good psu. After reading what I have written please place your vote