Read more.Quote:
Le roi est mort, vive le roi.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Le roi est mort, vive le roi.
Nice review Tarinder, a shame most etailers are charging more than the RRP already. Hopefully just early adopter price.
Naming this card the 580 is such a cynical move by NVIDIA. This isn't a next-gen card, it's just a tweak on the 480. This should have been called the 490. But I guess the same could be said of the 6870 from AMD. Oh well. Yawn. Next please.
After being delayed The GTX480 must be Nvidia's most short lived high-end card.
I'm not sure that I would want anything in my PC which can reach almost 100C during a game....
how long do we have to wait for the 69xx release?
I'll take two, please.
Couldn't agree more. This naming convention is nothing more than "Bigger is better" marketing, and leaves the average consumer clueless if they don't follow the technology on a daily basis. This eeks of GTX 8800/9800/260 marketing, but I admit with "tweaking" under the hood. Looking at the PCB close-ups, I'd guess that GTX 480 water blocks wont fit it, so I for one will be sticking with my dual GTX 480's with EK blocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivor Crayon
Any chance of some folding benchmarks?
Which one(s) would you like?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tattysnuc
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4008/33849.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by Tattysnuc
The reviews and their comparison tables are the reason I first came to Hexus. Nice work.
I'm not sure 88C (the gaming temperature reading) counts as almost 100C ;) Although the 94C it hits during furmark is a shocking 10C hotter than my 8800GTX, and it certainly doesn't count as cool. Sounds like you could probably tweak the fan profile up a little though and still have a quiet card that's cooler than a GTX480...Quote:
Originally Posted by ehhhhhhh
heh - in my Blue Peter ducting adventures I just saw 92C on my CF 5870s
One thing I do like about this card is that all the memory chips are on one side. That will make water-blocks more effective. To this end, it's about time some partners started to sell cheaper options without the stock cooler. This would allow enthusiasts to add there own water-blocks without having to bin the stock cooler. Every time I remove the stock cooler to add a water-block to a modern graphics card, I get a sick feeling that I paid hard cash for that useless lump of metal!
I’m also a little concerned about the new power management system. This is now current-dependent and not temperature-dependent and will likely kick-in despite advanced water-cooling.
Hmmm.. Well I still look at 2 x 460 as a better bet from nVidia - downside being twice the waterblocks for me and that i'd have to 'hack' my PC to get SLI to work (thanks nVidia!) - upside being cheaper, less heat and just as quick.
So.. seeing as nothing actually waxes my system i'm going to wait for the new AMD card and see what that's like before I jump. Grr.
Am I the only one who's not getting page 2 loading properly? http://prntscr.com/15v0v
Well, it's still a toaster. But what surprises me is how well it does in the bang for buck table compared to other high end cards.
Firstly I'd like to add my thumbs up for a top review! Excellent in structure and layout.
Regarding the additional information....
I think that Bit-Tech did it quite eloquently when they covered which was the best card for folding, when they used the metrics:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarinder
Points per day
Points per watt
Points per £
Likewise, some sort of indication about the heat likely to be achieved under 24/7 folding.
Also, what are EK etc doing about companion products such as blocks for watercooling them? I assume that these are these all reference designs pesently.
Please keep up the excellent work!
Something wasn't quite right. All fixed now though.Quote:
Originally Posted by TooNice
Works fine in Firefox 3.6.9 in a resolution of 1440x900 on W7Quote:
Originally Posted by TooNice
My record is 105 on CF 4870s :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Sadly, it shut down before I could do any better.
wonder how long it'll be before we see a card that beats 460 SLIs for the same price
I don't see the problem with heat at 90c+. Even if it didn't exhaust the hot air out of the case, it's not like it's pumping 90c around your case - it'll be more like 40-50c when it leaves the heatsink. Probably a 2-5c raise above case ambient when it hits your next hot-running component. Say the the ambient of most cases will be around 30c, by the time it melts into that ambient air temp it would hardly heat your case up at all. Given that not cleaning your intake filters for a week or 2 will raise you temp by 5c or so, in the grand scheme of things, it makes sod all difference.
I've never bought into that particular theory.
If you'll have a full-height card blocking the fan intake, then you've a valid reason for pausing before you hit the 'checkout' button, but otherwise, I think it's a lot of hot air... pardon the pun.
I've said this about ATI cards in the past, and it holds true here too. In my opinion, if it's stable, it's fine. That's all that matters.
Long-term, it's a bit of a concern though. Nobody wants their card to burn out after the warranty period ends.
Apparently they haven't fixed the idle issue when running dual monitors at different resolutions. In this scenario the card, just like the gtx480, runs in full performance mode consuming an extra 70watts and producing 20c more heat at idle (which means the fan spins faster and louder). I doubt this is a driver problem, as they would have fixed the gtx480 by now.
£400??!? The 6970 will almost certainly retail for ~£350, with the 6950 coming in at ~£300. Granted, we don't yet know the performance difference, but power/heat/noise are clearly going to be in AMDs favour.
The core temp is rather meaningless tbh. It could run at 200c and still produce less heat inside the case than a card running at 50c. The figure to be concerned about is power consumption, as most of this is turned to heat.
Well, the hotter the component, the less you'd expect it to live, yes, but it's not like it's the first card to run at such an extreme. It's not even the first from Nvidia. Just look the FX/5-series.Quote:
Originally Posted by snootyjim
How long do you judge the life of a card before the warranty becomes irrelevant? My old ATI 9800 is still in use in a system I built for someone else, and it was hardly frugal. The fan died a couple of years ago due to it getting clogged up, but even with that (despite zero thermal management on the R300 to my knowledge) once the fan was replaced it still runs fine to this day.
Manufacturers have always pushed the boundaries. It's not like they've suddenly started pushing them a bit further, just that the boundaries have moved as the materials, processes and tolerances have improved.
AMD is fairly irrelevant, since their product isn't even out yet. If nVidia need to re-evaluate once the 6970 is out, I'm sure they will do.Quote:
Originally Posted by sadbuttrue
Unless I'm being completely ignorant, surely this will drop down too the GTX 480 price sooner rather than later as they're still buying the same amount of chips/wafers as before hand?
If so, where would that leave it in relation too performance/pound if it were to drop too around £330 ?
Strange how you ommited the 6870 crossfire as 2 x 6870's are cheaper and FAR Faster then the 480 , 580 and 5970.
The real winner here is the 6870x2 as it scales much higher then even 2 5870's for less then
Even 2 GTX 470's out perform the GTX 580
I think we already knew that the 5970, 6870CFX and 470SLi would outperform the GTX 580...
Not really, look at the 8800 > 9800 > 250 (all pretty much the same card, few extra knobs on and but renamed)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivor Crayon
That doesn't mean nVidia aren't cynical. It just means they're always cynical.
And that, my friends, it something we call "a fact".
Walmart GTX 499 :lol:
Note: (in American this company always makes their prices end with .99p, they call it a bargain... the joke is funny, apply it to Tesco or Argos)
Well it isn't funny anymore since I had to explain it, now is it? Maybe it wasn't funny to begin with, but it made me smile, so it was worth it and I'd do it again!
Most of us figured that a balls-to-the-wall 460gtx Press Edition would beat the 6800's, but that didn't stop them from being included in reviews.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
There is a very disturbing lack of consistency around right now.
I don't think it was guaranteed that a GTX 460 O/C would be faster (fast as) than a 6870 - but your right, some sites can't seem to settle on a test bed at the minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo75
Anandtech did a 6850 O/C card round-up but the didn't include a O/C 460 - the mind boggles :mrgreen:
They did not include the overclocked GTX460 as many people were annoyed they had included an overclocked GTX460 in the original HD6850 review.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
I know, but if you were to include an O/C 460 in any review surely it would be against other O/C'd cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
They already included the O/C 460 vs non-overclocked cards, that's what the fuss is all about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
I don't see any O/C 5970's vs the 580 either.
I know what the fuss was about, but in this case its perfectly logical - even the moaning posters from the stock 68xx review can't deny that, IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo75
This poster on AT got it right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
Quote:
Comparing stock-clocked cards from a LAUNCH article of a new series to OC variants is questionable (again the key word being launch), but I believe that few of us were asking to not have any factory OC cards included (especially when this review focuses solely ON factory OC cards).
Just keep the comparisons consistent; that's all most of us readers without an agenda are advocating.
The funny thing is that an HD6850 1GB overclocked from around 775MHZ to around 940MHZ to 960MHZ for the core and a RAM overclock still consumes less power than a GTX460 1GB at stock clockspeeds:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4002/a...asus-xfx-msi/8
Conversely it would be consistent to maintain the use of Brand X O/C'd 460 in the review.
Without trying to deviate away from the thread, apparently the Asus 580 is capable of hitting 1000+ on the core :shocked2:
The HD4890,HD5850 and HD5870 have reached 1GHZ on the core with air cooling. Even the HD6870 has reached over 1GHZ with air cooling too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terbinator
This is a ~200MHz jump though from stock and quite a feat given the original GF100 O/C problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
IMO of course.
I don't think anybody would argue that nVidia has done a decent rescue job here, and at current prices you'd take one of these before a 5970 any day. Should be interesting to see how the 6970 competes.
Great review and really pleased to see you taking cards apart. A couple more pics of the cooler block would be nice close up. I like that kind of thing!
Ummmm I think there's something wrong with this graph on page 5
http://img.hexus.net/v2/graphics_car...Graphs/3D3.png
Esp as you list the 580 in a table as -3% compaired to the 5970Quote:
GTX 580 is significantly faster than GTX 480 and HD 5870 and is only a little slower than the twin-GPU HD 5970.
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=27307&page=5
EDIT: and it's nice to see nvidia finally get the real fermi card out not the respun bodge job that was the gtx480, ok this probably is still based mainly on the respun silicon and finally addressed some of the real issues, unless it's just a matter of some very careful silicon binning.
Pob255,
Thanks for that. The percentage difference is based on the GPU score and not on feature test 4. Quoting from the article:
'Going by the GPU score, here's how it breaks down:'