Nvidia GeForce GTS 450: Hello GF106, Farewell G92

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am glad that I took advantage of early pre-release benchmarks and aoivded this card even though I have had a week already to buy it so instead I bought a GTX 460 1gb for $225 from Gigabyte.

Hugs my older cards, G92 is my all time favorite and is the most dependable. As for ATI I still keep my trusty x1900xt and 3870 handy.
 
[citation][nom]The_King[/nom]So I guess the $140 some odd million loss was not enough for them. I think they hurting their image by releasing this and expecting people to buy it.I'm sure someone will buy them out if this continues.....Intel[/citation]
Funny seeing this and then the forums, as everyone mentions that people should buy a 450/60 over a 5770. The 450's overclock well and usually give 2-5fps more than a 5770 in games.
All the people saying this card fails, I honestly see it as a great price/performance card and Nvidia starting to sell decent mid ranged cards.
 
[citation][nom]dalta centauri[/nom]Funny seeing this and then the forums, as everyone mentions that people should buy a 450/60 over a 5770. The 450's overclock well and usually give 2-5fps more than a 5770 in games.All the people saying this card fails, I honestly see it as a great price/performance card and Nvidia starting to sell decent mid ranged cards.[/citation]

This card only beats the 5770 when overclocked, yet costs about the same. Techpowerup rates the 5770 8-12% faster than the GTS 450 at reference. Furthermore, the 5770 can be overclocked as well. Regardless of whether Nvidia has a decent lower tier mid range card, the fact that the 5770 is year old and still beats it is rather telling. Furthermore, this card comes right as AMD is planning to launch a new series of cards. Not a good look.
 
[citation][nom]super_tycoon[/nom]you guys ought to do an article about SLI _and_ CF scaling. Compare it across different architectures and see if it'd really be worth getting another 4000 or 9000 series card versus buying into a more recent generation (it makes sense if you subtract from the cost of the card the money you can get from selling your older card)it is also worth noting that newegg's stock of last gen performance cards is tiny (just six gtx 200 cards left!) and perhaps this should be taken into consideration as well[/citation]
They did that article a few months ago I think.. SLI scaled better.
 
[citation][nom]Googoo24[/nom]This card only beats the 5770 when overclocked, yet costs about the same. Techpowerup rates the 5770 8-12% faster than the GTS 450 at reference. Furthermore, the 5770 can be overclocked as well. Regardless of whether Nvidia has a decent lower tier mid range card, the fact that the 5770 is year old and still beats it is rather telling. Furthermore, this card comes right as AMD is planning to launch a new series of cards. Not a good look.[/citation]
Then you get a 460 768mb version, which beats the 5770 for the same price point. Radeon wants to tackle Nvidia's mid ranged cards at first, which is why their releasing their 6750/70 models at the start.
As well, the 450 shows that it has heavy overclock potential.
Don't forget physx, which isn't worth much but still adds a bit of lead on a 5770 with features. Overall it shows promise that Nvidia might be planning to release good cards at a lower price point.
 
Regardless of what ATI offers. This is disappointing just compared to the G92 cards. There are more cores and a higher frequency and less performance? I would be embarrassed if I were nvidia.

Before reading this I was thinking, maybe this could do well in my HTPC.....NOPE. Still sitting on the 4890 I got for a low $150 (new) last summer in there.

The sad thing is, this is essentially going to be the Mobile GTX 460m.....which will get stomped by the Radeon equivalent there too
 
I still dont get it. The 450 has more cores than a 250. 192 vs 128. It ought to be 4870ish fast. Same with the 460. 356 cores. Should be about as fast as a 5850. It just barely manages to ebat the GTX275. With 240 cores. Is the new architecture actually worse than the old ones core for core, clock for clock? I dont get it....
 
[citation][nom]dalta centauri[/nom]Then you get a 460 768mb version, which beats the 5770 for the same price point. Radeon wants to tackle Nvidia's mid ranged cards at first, which is why their releasing their 6750/70 models at the start.As well, the 450 shows that it has heavy overclock potential.Don't forget physx, which isn't worth much but still adds a bit of lead on a 5770 with features. Overall it shows promise that Nvidia might be planning to release good cards at a lower price point.[/citation]

What? The GTX 460 768mb isn't the same price as the 5770.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=40000048&IsNodeId=1&Description=5770&name=Desktop%20Graphics%20%2f%20Video%20Cards

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&Description=gtx%20460%20768mb&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=20

And if you could get a GTX 460 768mb, why would you even bother with a 5770 or GTS 450? It goes both ways.

Furthermore, Even overclocked the 450 barely beats the 5770 in some instances. And PhysX is a gimmick, only a small percentage of games utilize it, and the effects are negligible. Plus, this card would take a hit in performance with PhysX turned on.
 
Interesting read. Optimistically, I was hoping for something with the HD5670's power use (i.e. no aux power needed) and price, but with HD5750 performance. Nope. Priced at $99-$109, it becomes viable for those few who want PhysX, otherwise there is a better choice either a little higher or a little lower. Pass.
 
erhm is this even an upgrade from the g92?? more like a downgrade...192 shaders with higher clocks but the 250 gts beats it =)) lol nvidia worthless card
 
[citation][nom]Googoo24[/nom]This card only beats the 5770 when overclocked, yet costs about the same. Techpowerup rates the 5770 8-12% faster than the GTS 450 at reference. Furthermore, the 5770 can be overclocked as well. Regardless of whether Nvidia has a decent lower tier mid range card, the fact that the 5770 is year old and still beats it is rather telling. Furthermore, this card comes right as AMD is planning to launch a new series of cards. Not a good look.[/citation]

Worse still A GTS250 often trades places with it and is beaten by the GTX260. The 48x0 except for maybe the 4830 is a better value bang for buck than any of them. Why even bother with any of them if one can go on the second hand market and land a 4850 for $80 that is good as new. I rather live with out DX11 and have a 4850/4870 instead since both are cheaper. The 5770 And the GTS450 are overpriced at this time and the same applies to much of ATI's offerings in the 5k series. A few months ago while every one was paying $70+ for their 46x0s I got me a dirt cheap 3870 for next to nothing and it still outperformed them. The second hand market is such a bargain, more so when I landed a working 8800gtx for $32 :)
 
Anyone else curious to see how this, and more specifically, the likely gf108 part do as PhysX add-in cards (particularly PhysX 3.0 once released)?
 
If this card is not for high demanding gamers, then, can't be priced far over 100us, a casual gamer don't give a rat's ass if the card games on dx9 or dx11. And there for, why would anyone pay 200us for a card that does not manage to completely kill a HD4850.
Casual gamers usually play 2-3 titles which most of the time are old, or not really demanding. And also own consoles and use them more than the PC.
My Point is: 200us for a pumped up 9800GTX or GTS250 is not a good deal.
 
Yeah, you can pick up an old GTX or 4xxx series card for dirt cheap now, and some of them beat both the 5770 and GTS 450 for $20-50 less. Unless you just gotta have Dx11.
 
[citation][nom]takeapieandrun[/nom]You would think Nvidia would learn from the success of the GTX 460...[/citation]
It's not always so easy to translate great performance to other hardware derivatives. At the $100-$150 price point there's just no way Nvidia could've gone with a further striped down gf104, it simply wouldn't have been remotely cost effective. So the only choice was gf106, and unfortunately it seems as though the performance potential of a 192 SP Fermi isn't quite as high as many people were hoping for.

I have to agree with others in saying that the primary value in purchasing a GTS450 is in SLI. With two cards it does provide very good performance for the price.
 
Two GeForce GTS 450s will cost about $260. Are you taking a value hit by going the SLI route, or is it better to save up and buy a single GeForce GTX 460 1 GB for $220 now?
Click to expand...

Or how about get a GTX 470 on sale with a rebate for $260 to $280 and have the same or better performance?

Frankly, these benchmark results for a single GTS 450 are underwhelming. To be beat by the ATI 5770 (even 5750!!) is sad in my opinion. Now, granted these are benches done with "release" drivers, and have some maturing to do I'd imagine. So things 'should' get better.

But if nVidia intentionally aimed the GTS 450 at being sub 5770, that was a mistake in my book. And quite frankly, aside from DX11 ability (which would game horribly on a single GTS 450 as we've seen) why would anyone upgrade from a GTX 260 that already performs better?
 
I can't believe there are no mentions of the Radeon HD 5830. I have seen the 5830 1GB model selling for $149-$199 a lot lately and even have rebates on them. The 5830 is a little hotter card, but for the price tears up the 5770 and even bests the 460 in a lot of tests. HD5830 1GB HDCP PCI-E Video Card $154.99AR. Several of these out and about vs the 460 768MB for around the same price.
 
Disappointed.

No price war here until the HD6xxx cards show up and vendors start dropping 5750/5770 prices.

I'll be waiting patiently... barely.
 
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Interesting read. Optimistically, I was hoping for something with the HD5670's power use (i.e. no aux power needed) and price, but with HD5750 performance. Nope. Priced at $99-$109, it becomes viable for those few who want PhysX, otherwise there is a better choice either a little higher or a little lower. Pass.[/citation]


I was hoping for the same thing. Instead we'll be getting a crippled GT 440 taking on the HD5670 at the $100+ price range. I was also hoping for better pricing. But as long as NVidia releases new cards with capibilities like this in these price ranges, then AMD has no pressure to lower prices. It's sad that NVidia's R&D and manufacturing process is so inefficient to have to charge these kinds of prices against older and still superior AMD cards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom