NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Full Specs and Release Date

[erocker]

I think you meant "GTX485"? I think that would be a more appropriate name, certainly. The GTX 280/285 was this kind of product refinement.

Ah, you're quite right, definitely reminds me of that.

 

[the54thvoid]

Given that the leaked Heaven shot is using normal tesselation when NV tout how good the Fermi architecture is for tesselation - that strikes me as a bit odd. I dont think the pic is genuine.
If it is genuine, i'm underwhelmed.

 

[boredgunner]

Given that the leaked Heaven shot is using normal tesselation when NV tout how good the Fermi architecture is for tesselation - that strikes me as a bit odd. I dont think the pic is genuine.
If it is genuine, i'm underwhelmed.

I'm not too surprised. Slightly better performance with 32 more CUDA cores, four more TMUs, higher clock speeds and 300 million less transistors.

 

[boredgunner]

Ok fair bench this time. I underclocked my i5 760 to 3.2 GHz. Results are nearly the same. Not good for the GTX 580.

Compared System:

OS: Windows 7 64-bit
CPU: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3.2 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580

My System:

OS: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
CPU: Intel Core i5 760 @ 3.2 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480

I tested my GTX 480 using stock clocks (700/1401/925) and an overclock to 863/1726/1000. The settings used in Heaven are as follows.

Now the performance results...

GTX 580

GTX 480

GTX 480 OC

So the GTX 580 outperformed my stock GTX 480 by about 1 FPS average. It was beat by my overclocked GTX 480 in all areas.

 

[Lionheart]

Ballz sack, wish they just called it the GTX 485, for the past 2yrs nvidia have really screwed up the naming scheme of their products

 

[qubit]

Ballz sack, wish they just called it the GTX 485, for the past 2yrs nvidia have really screwed up the naming scheme of their products

+1 It's really pissing me off too. They should try investing in their staff and putting out fabulous new technology instead of these endless rehashes and minor improvements.

@boredgunner: I'm not surprised they're showing the same. The benchie is CPU limited, so a card with 10 times the power will give the same result.

Let's wait for the official reviews done on hardware that can drive this baby to show up the differences.

 

[f22a4bandit]

Ballz sack, wish they just called it the GTX 485, for the past 2yrs nvidia have really screwed up the naming scheme of their products

I agree. I don't understand why'd they only release one card under the 5xx name instead of just saying it's a 485, especially when they said it's an improvement on GF100 and not new architecture. It boggles the mind.

They messed up using a 5xx series if this is supposed to be the high-end card, especially if those benches can turn out reliable.

 

[erocker]

I agree. I don't understand why'd they only release one card under the 5xx name instead of just saying it's a 485, especially when they said it's an improvement on GF100 and not new architecture. It boggles the mind.

They messed up using a 5xx series if this is supposed to be the high-end card, especially if those benches can turn out reliable.

Because their competitor is releasing new cards with a new numbers in their names and Nvidia has to do something to keep their investors invested. Plus, most of these investors have no idea about graphics cards.

 

[f22a4bandit]

Because their competitor is releasing new cards with a new numbers in their names and Nvidia has to do something to keep their investors invested.

I suppose

I really did think this had something to do with AMD releasing the 6xxx series, I mean naming wise at least. Pretty lame IMO, as I said, if the benches turn out correct.

 

[jaydeejohn]

More of the same
No new node, no nice perf increases

 

[20mmrain]

I saw some articles about the GTX 580 claiming that the card was supposed to be two times as fast as a 5870... That is just plain bullchit I don't care how much you try to twist the truth. This same article claims that it will be faster then the 6870 Xfire and 5870 Xfrie. Again... I smell bullchit.

Man O' Man Nvidia is really stretching the truth. I mean I expect that card companies will stretch the truth in order to get people to buy their cards. But this is ridiculous!!!

Here is were I found this....Sorry if people have already addressed this....
http://wccftech.com/2010/11/06/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-detailed-specs-revealed/

You can also check out the Benchmarks below which show that this card even outperforms 2 x HD 5870 is crossfire meaning that it will easily outperform the HD 5970 which is based on two of the HD 5870 cores. Another Benchmark is also posted below in which it is compared to a HD 6870/ HD5870/ GTx 480 and it tops all of them

Read more: http://wccftech.com/2010/11/06/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-detailed-specs-revealed/#ixzz14Y2pWxnz

Do I believe the GTX 580 will be faster.... hell yes. Do I believe that the GTX 580 will have better tessellation then the 480.... Hell yes.
Do I think it will perform as well as the graph in the article says it will..... Hell no! Will it compete with Cayman.....Possibly. Will it compete with Antilles......Hell and God No!

Of course it will be a great card and a great buy for who ever wants to buy one. But these claims of it's performance I find very very hard to believe.

 

[jaydeejohn]

nVidia needs a new node
Not having one hurts them
Add tesselation improvements seen in the 6xxx series, many of those numbers change, just using a 6870 xfire setup, where it scales better plus tesselation perf is greatly improved

As always, from whatever vendor, take with salt, as its always shown in its best light

 

[alexsubri]

:shadedshu nVidia should just call it 490 not 580 ... it seems a little far fetch'd that a 480 was their flagship card and now they are skipping a new generation too soon.

ATI's name changing was wierd as well, but it made more sense. The 580 doesn't seem to have that wow factor, just another updated 4xx series

 

[jaydeejohn]

It worked in the past, with lil competition
If the competition shows great improvement over their last gen, and comes close or surpasses nVidia, it doesnt look as good

 

[Radi_SVK]

Here is a direct comparison between my GTX 480 and a GTX 580. The system specs are as follows.

Compared System:

OS: Windows 7 64-bit
CPU: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T @ 3.2 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580

My System:

OS: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
CPU: Intel Core i5 760 @ 4.2 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480

So as you can see I have a CPU advantage. I tested my GTX 480 using stock clocks (700/1401/925) and an overclock to 863/1726/1000. The settings used in Heaven are as follows.

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/5885/settingsa.jpg​

Now the performance results...

GTX 580
http://www.ozone3d.net/public/jegx/201011/gtx580_unigine_heaven_score.jpg

GTX 480
http://img602.imageshack.us/img602/3986/bb1.jpg

GTX 480 OC
http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/9275/bb2a.jpg

http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/4573/benchfps.jpg

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/1168/benchscores.jpg​

Despite my CPU advantage the GTX 580 was able to pull slightly ahead against a stock GTX 480, but could not outperform my overclocked GTX 480.

After seeing your Heaven Benchmark results left me a bit worried(honestly purely worried,not jealous),cos on the same benchmark settings,with same card(GTX 480) I've only got like 790 points with card @ 800/1600/2000 on 161.00 driver,and with my i7 920 @ 4GHz.....Please someone give me a hint,why is that and where should I look for solution.

Edit:I see you are here erocker,always so helpful and I meant the ForceWare 261.00,not 161.00

 

[erocker]

After seeing your Heaven Benchmark results left me a bit worried(honestly purely worried,not jealous),cos on the same benchmark settings,with same card(GTX 480) I've only got like 790 points with card @ 800/1600/2000 on 161.00 driver,and with my i920 @ 4GHz.....Please someone give me a hint,why is that and where should I look for solution.

Edit:I see you are here erocker,always so helpful

Well, thank you. What is this 161.00 driver?

 

[Radi_SVK]

Well, thank you. What is this 161.00 driver?

sorry,I meant 261.00 LOL

 

[Radi_SVK]

After seeing your Heaven Benchmark results left me a bit worried(honestly purely worried,not jealous),cos on the same benchmark settings,with same card(GTX 480) I've only got like 790 points with card @ 800/1600/2000 on 161.00 driver,and with my i7 920 @ 4GHz.....Please someone give me a hint,why is that and where should I look for solution.

Edit:I see you are here erocker,always so helpful and I meant the ForceWare 261.00,not 161.00

Even after turning off the forced On Vsync in Nvidia control panel I've got only 971 points

 

[boredgunner]

Other settings in the NVIDIA control panel can impact performance such as AA, AF, texture filtering, ambient occlusion (if supported) and more.

 

[Radi_SVK]

Other settings in the NVIDIA control panel can impact performance such as AA, AF, texture filtering, ambient occlusion (if supported) and more.

Yeah I know that,thats why I reseted the Control Panel settings and run Unigine Heaven..still only 971 points...will try to remove the 261.00 beta driver and do a fresh install of the 260.99 WHQL(the one you have) and we will see

 

[qubit]

GTX 580 £399 launch price

This seems quite a reasonable price to me and is likely because this is just a tweaked up GTX 480. Note the 30% faster claim in Vantage. It's a shame it doesn't have a full 512-bit bus like the old GTX 280 & 285. I wonder how much extra performance that would give it? That would also allow for a "proper" amount of memory, like 1GB or 2GB.

To see the full promotional email that I've just received from Yoyotech, click here:

http://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=f2a73349acbfb62a29e558540&id=62b81d8da7&e=eb4334dbbd

 

[wahdangun]

+1 It's really pissing me off too. They should try investing in their staff and putting out fabulous new technology instead of these endless rehashes and minor improvements.

@boredgunner: I'm not surprised they're showing the same. The benchie is CPU limited, so a card with 10 times the power will give the same result.

Let's wait for the official reviews done on hardware that can drive this baby to show up the differences.

are yoiu sure it was CPU limited ?

 

[wahdangun]

http://img.techpowerup.org/101107/GTX580_HDO_Offer.jpg​

This seems quite a reasonable price to me and is likely because this is just a tweaked up GTX 480. Note the 30% faster claim in Vantage. It's a shame it doesn't have a full 512-bit bus like the old GTX 280 & 285. I wonder how much extra performance that would give it? That would also allow for a "proper" amount of memory, like 1GB or 2GB.

To see the full promotional email that I've just received from Yoyotech, click here:

http://us1.campaign-archive.com/?u=f2a73349acbfb62a29e558540&id=62b81d8da7&e=eb4334dbbd

wow its just, fully enabled GTX 480, thats explain the very limited availability, even TPU doesn't have it

really not worth new generation name

 

[qubit]

are yoiu sure it was CPU limited ?

I reckon so, yeah. We know for sure that the new card has to be measurably faster than the old one and it was being tested on that slower AMD system, which is likely to be CPU bottlenecked.

wow its just, fully enabled GTX 480, thats explain the very limited availability, even TPU doesn't have it

really not worth new generation name

Yeah, exactly.

 

[wahdangun]

I reckon so, yeah. We know for sure that the new card has to be measurably faster than the old one and it was being tested on that slower AMD system, which is likely to be CPU bottlenecked.



Yeah, exactly.

can ytou give me a reviewr link where it was CPU bound ?