PAX: What Gamers Think of Nvidia's GTX 480

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vestin

Distinguished
Dec 1, 2009
65
0
18,630
0
The way I see it (correct me if I'm wrong): Nvidia's cards are better for 3D gaming, ATI's are better for 3-monitor gaming... That's SOMEWHAT balanced.
 

znegval

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2009
99
0
18,630
0
I'm sorry but I'm not a "performance at any cost" guy. The power requirements for Fermi are absolutely ridiculous considering it doesn't deliver any significant improvement over the competing product (at least not as significant as it should). In my opinion, quality isn't measured by raw performance and I belive 5870 is a better quality product than the 480.

By the way, "I can't wait to grab a GTX 480, or even a dual-GPU version when it comes out". Good luck with that.
 

yose3

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2010
67
0
18,630
0
Nvidia even tho i dont blamee it because thay did thair best and i kow it.

but i dont think is balanced...

3D Vision,Physicx, ect


is more like Nvidia = Quality vs ATI = Performance

for now..... -.-
 

TemjinGold

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2007
143
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]znegval[/nom]I'm sorry but I'm not a "performance at any cost" guy. The power requirements for Fermi are absolutely ridiculous considering it doesn't deliver any significant improvement over the competing product (at least not as significant as it should). In my opinion, quality isn't measured by raw performance and I belive 5870 is a better quality product than the 480.By the way, "I can't wait to grab a GTX 480, or even a dual-GPU version when it comes out". Good luck with that.[/citation]

I can't wait to grab a GTX 480 myself... when a dual-GPU version comes out... ;)
 

matchboxmatt

Distinguished
Mar 19, 2009
129
0
18,680
0
Outside of that tessellation demo, Fermi has kind of been disappointing, especially considering how late they are to the DX11 party. I was really hoping for a heavy hitter that would drive ATI's 5xxx series prices down, but it looks like things are gonna be staying the same.
 

eodeo

Distinguished
May 29, 2007
717
0
19,010
22
Both ati and nvidia have 3 gaming monitor options, while nvidia requires 2 cards and another month to get the drivers ready. (dont forget you actually need 3 monitors for this to make any sense)

nvidia cards are not better for 3d gaming, but they are impressive nonetheless. The thing they are indisputably better is for CUDA, and thats not a negligible thing for me. I'm having hard time deciding should i trade my 4850 for 5850 or gtx 470. 5850 would be a clear winner if it could run CUDA apps, like vReveal and upcoming Mercury player for Adobe Premier cs5...

Since games run the same on both and I can live without CUDA support for at least another year, the only thing that will sway me in either direction right now is what card runs Quicksilver, the newest renderer for 3ds Max, better. Autodesk won't come forward with the results on which is faster, since they are partnered with both ATi/nVidia, so I would love it if Tom's did a review of this.

To me a heavy 3d user, Quicksilver is the single most important piece of software coming out this year. iray would likely take the crown if 3ds max was supporting it in the upcoming release.
 

shadow187

Splendid
Well if the GTX480 uses over 250Watts, there won't be a dual version of that.
If the GTX470 uses over 215Watts, there won't be a dual version of that.
What're we left with? The unknown. GTX460? GTX450? Or will nVidia be the first to break the 300W PCI-E sig spec? Will the GTX490 (512Shader version) compete with the HD5890? Will there be an HD5930 or an HD5950?

Stay tuned!
 

smartkid95

Distinguished
Sep 2, 2009
153
0
18,710
12
Uhh... well I can't call this one really the dx11 performance makes Nvidia quite alluring right now the heat issue is scaring me away and nvidia says power consumption doesn't matter is bull dookie MORE POWER = MORE MONEY + BIGGER COSTLY PSU. I think ati dx11 performance is pitiful for the main selling point of the card give it more than 20s fps really? In all seriousness a 5970 looks rather attractive after seeing some benchmarks.
 

RogueKitsune

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2009
78
0
18,630
0
I agree with JackNaylorPE. Yes the GTX 480 is a BEAST of a card, but I don't see how nVidia can justify the power consumption on that thing. The GTX 470 competes perfectly with the 5870 in my opinion. However, it is too bad that AMD doesn't see nVidia as a threat right now because i wanted to see a price drop so i could pick up a 5870 on the cheap :p
 

Burodsx

Distinguished
May 31, 2009
250
0
18,780
0
The people asked probably don't know about the temperature, noise, and power requirements... Hell if you let me play a game using a 480 without knowing those 3 factors I too would be on the Nvidia bandwagon.
 

kelemvor4

Distinguished
Oct 3, 2006
469
0
18,780
0
Wow, calm down AMD fanboys. You're acting like nVidia has hurt your feelings personally by releasing a better card. If you like 5870, the QQ and go play a game...

You always pay a premium for the best card that's out at any given time, just as you have with 5870 for a while. $100 more than 5870 and only $100 more? I doubt you'll find any other $100 upgrade that would affect performance as much.

[citation][nom]t2couger[/nom]I am a Nvidia fanboy for 1 reason i can always count on them having better drivers than AMD/ATI[/citation]
I buy nvidia because the last ATI card I bought (believe it was a rage fury pro with video capture or something like that). I took it home for around $300 (the most I'd EVER spent on a video card at the time by a long shot). Couldn't find drivers for win2k (which had been out for about 6 months at the time) and when I called ati support they told me literally "too bad, we don't make drivers for that card and we aren't going to because we just released a newer card". The attitude was unacceptable, as was their view on product support/drivers. I got a refund from the local store, and went and got a 3dfx. From then on I decided I'd never buy from them again; although I have to admit I seriously considered 5870 until I saw the 480 reviews. I have nothing against AMD (used their cpu's until my last build); the recent reports of some of the ati folks getting high ranking positions at AMD make me think twice about buying amd products for sure.
 

shin0bi272

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2007
1,103
0
19,310
12
[citation][nom]znegval[/nom]I'm sorry but I'm not a "performance at any cost" guy. The power requirements for Fermi are absolutely ridiculous considering it doesn't deliver any significant improvement over the competing product (at least not as significant as it should). In my opinion, quality isn't measured by raw performance and I belive 5870 is a better quality product than the 480.By the way, "I can't wait to grab a GTX 480, or even a dual-GPU version when it comes out". Good luck with that.[/citation]

The power requirements are the same for the 295 and the recommended psu according to nvidia's site is 600w. But I do agree that the requirements are quite steep for a dx11 enabled 295 on 1 gpu. Quality is measured in several ways, one of them being performance. others are price, availability, production numbers, durability, and ease of use. I think I remember someone saying in one of the many articles RE: the launch of the 480 that a dual gpu version would come by combining 2 (possibly lower clocked) 470's.

[citation][nom]ronch79[/nom]but I'd rather plug in an ATI/AMD video card on my AMD chipset-based motherboard. It just feels like the right thing to do. Same way I wouldn't feel like putting in an ATI/AMD video card if I had an Nvidia chipset-based board. [/citation]

The word youre looking for is interoperability. Try asking the older system builders what happened when you put an ATI card in a socket A amd mobo. Here's a hint you couldnt boot it at all... after post you get a black screen ... cant even get to a prompt to boot from CD to install windows. Nvidia never had that problem IIRC.
 
G

Guest

Guest
The thing is that the 480 is performance-wise between the 5870 and 5970 and priced accordingly. What would really make the 480 pay off for early adopters would be devs picking up on massive amounts of tessellation, where the ATI cards fall flat. The 470 is definitely more bang per buck, but doesn't have the same performance as the 480 in GPU-intense situations.

Personally, I'm going to be picking up a 480. The slight boost over the 5870 is really just a bonus IMO. The real reason I've been bearing towards nVidia for the most part is the extra features: CUDA, better compute architecture, PhysX (however rare, can't stand having options I can't enable), 32xAA with little performance impact is pretty sweet too.

And about the heat/power "issues": if you are even considering a 5870 or GTX 480, you're likely to have above a 600W PSU. They're enthusiast level cards for a reason, don't expect them to sip gas. It's not like running either of them will suddenly add 40 bucks to your bill. And as for the heat, the 295 got roughly that hot, and I've seen friends with 4870x2s that have had 90C and up under load. High performing parts get hot, what a shocker.

The only real issues here, in my opinion, is whether or not the slight performance increase and other features are worth the ~$80 more for the 480. For many, there are other things they could spend the $80 on that are needed more. Personally, I'll spend it on the 480, simply because with an nVidia chipset mobo, I'd not be able to do Crossfire with an ATI card whenever I wanted to, which sucks. I'm also kind of intrigued with the numbers in SLI scaling that the 480's been getting. Once I up my PSU from a 850W to a 1.2KW, and move on to the i7 or next gen CPU, I might pick up a second one.

Both companies have good products though. I see this as only being good for gamers, as each company will keep trying to push out higher and higher performing parts, giving us better and better hardware to play with. Whether you're green or red, PC gaming is far from dead!
 

kelemvor4

Distinguished
Oct 3, 2006
469
0
18,780
0

Interoperability and backwards compatibility have always been problems for ATI. You can't teach an old dog new tricks, I guess.
 

SchizoFrog

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2009
416
0
18,790
1
I am a fanboy... but not of ATi or nVidia... I am a fanboy of £'s. For that reason alone I see no reason for the now to buy the latest generation product from either company. The cost of the cards is outragously high for the performance return. I am quite happy to sit on what I have until I feel it no longer keeps pace, and as current games are so console dependant I do not see anything changing in the near future. Maybe I'll just go for sub £100 upgrade from one of the clearance ranges.
 
G

Guest

Guest
as if u guys have 30" lcd..for 19" & 22". 5850 and 470 should be more than enough..unless ur using CUDA..lol
 

pratkal

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2009
50
0
18,630
0
eodeo


nvidia cards are not better for 3d gaming, but they are impressive nonetheless. The thing they are indisputably better is for CUDA, and thats not a negligible thing for me. I'm having hard time deciding should i trade my 4850 for 5850 or gtx 470. 5850 would be a clear winner if it could run CUDA apps, like vReveal and upcoming Mercury player for Adobe Premier cs5...

HD 5850 is ati stream ready which make it able to run Mercury player and adobe premier cs5 on gpu
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS