Nvidia Benchmarks GTX 480 Against Radeon 5870

[Hardin]

Tessellation itself is a great feature. Have you guys played Call of Pripyat? I don't get the fastest framerates in it, but they are normally above 30. I would like to see them benchmark this game and not just a tech demo.

 

[baris_]

I know, and a lot of enterprise environments actually use a lot of the features and efficiencies.

Why would they unless it beat it? Thats a 2 GPU card vs a 1 GPU card.

I mean, they are bringing a card out half a year or more after ATI does and it doesnt even match the 5970. Yawn @ nvidia.

 

[ratbuddy]

I'm honestly curious where them thought process came from, because it certainly isn't based on basic logic. If the cards are priced in the same ball park (which some rumors hint at being correct) than it is the perfect comparison. It wouldn't matter if one card was made out of solid gold and the other had a fusion reactor on board, all that matters is how much performance you get for the price you pay.

It is as if nVidia did a huge marketing campaign and conned a bunch of people into thinking that price points do not matter.

News flash, we don't know the GTX 480 pricing yet. Noone does except maybe some people at Nvidia. The rumors are just that, rumors.

 

[EarthDog]

I mean, they are bringing a card out half a year or more after ATI does and it doesnt even match the 5970. Yawn @ nvidia.

And???? ATI did this for the last two gens... not that I care either way. Im just not sure how six months post 5 series release automatically equates to beating out their TWO(2) GPU card with a single card....

 

[720x770]

And???? ATI did this for the last two gens... not that I care either way. Im just not sure how six months post 5 series release automatically equates to beating out their TWO(2) GPU card with a single card....

if ATI upped the cypress 5870 die size to match the 480's die size, ATI's chip would still run cooler, use less energy, and provide nearly 200% the performance, while probably costing the same or less than a 480. 'nuff said.

 

[EarthDog]

LOL, ok man...

 

[Bobnova]

if ATI upped the cypress 5870 die size to match the 480's die size, ATI's chip would still run cooler, use less energy, and provide nearly 200% the performance. 'nuff said.

It'd have about the same number of transistors, consume about the same amount of power, and be way faster then the current cypress core. And, of course, it would have had the same huge delays the gf100 is having.

The top two factors in energy consumption are number of transistors and transistor size.
From there it goes down to voltage applied.

Both using 40nm transistors on the same process means that both should require about the same amount of voltage.

The only reason the ATI card is almost certainly going to consume less energy is that it has fewer transistors, ATI doesn't have a magic wand of energy sippage developed yet.

 

[EarthDog]

Thanks Bob... Im glad you posted what I thought was obvious I just had to snicker...

 

[baris_]

I'm not claiming a single gpu should be better than a gpu with two cores. I claim (or at least, I expected...) that nvidia could at least come with a card that's superior to any ATI card after showing up 6 months late. That is what I meant. I shall retire from saying more things that apparently make no sense ^^ <3

 

[ratbuddy]

I'm not claiming a single gpu should be better than a gpu with two cores. I claim (or at least, I expected...) that nvidia could at least come with a card that's superior to any ATI card after showing up 6 months late. That is what I meant. I shall retire from saying more things that apparently make no sense ^^ <3

Indeed it makes little sense. The GTX 295 came out something like 8 months before the 5870. By the logic seen above, the 5870 is a failure because it didn't beat the 295, and that's clearly not the case.

 

[Bobnova]

It all boils down to the price point. Will nvidia launch at the usual sky high prices? Or have they really learned from past "mistakes"?

They certainly haven't learned from their design mistakes, the gf100 huge die size and resulting terrible yields and high energy consumption are a mirror image of the 260/280 huge die size and resulting terrible yields and high energy consumption.

What were the prices for 295s and 5870s at launch?

 

[EarthDog]

Energy shmenergy....I have a 4cyl sipper (07 Sentra SER SpecV) and a V6 that gets 29MPG (03 TL Type S). Im good with 50W+ out of a card I think... (wow was that analogy useless or was it just me??? hehe!!)

295 was obnoxious IIRC, and 5870 were only like $430 at newegg when they were available, not much over MSRP really on that.

 

[baris_]

Energy shmenergy....I have a 4cyl sipper (07 Sentra SER SpecV) and a V6 that gets 29MPG (03 TL Type S). Im good with 50W+ out of a card I think... (wow was that analogy useless or was it just me??? hehe!!)

295 was obnoxious IIRC, and 5870 were only like $430 at newegg when they were available, not much over MSRP really on that.

i7 860 @ 3.8Ghz, 1.25v (for now)

Newbie, 3.8GHz. Want my advice?

kidding. What's the default voltage?

 

[Bobnova]

Yeah you confused me with the car thing, heheh.

I seem to remember 295s going for like $500 or so at 5870 launch time, am i out in left field?

 

[EarthDog]

Oh at 5870 launch time... I still think $500+. At the 295 launch time, I recall $599 for some reason. Hell they are still $500+!!!!!

I guess what Im saying is that I dont care about power consumption and heat being under water and I can afford a $5 jump in my electric /month if I run it 100% 24/7. I know as far as the heat goes Im in the minority though.

 

[baris_]

Indeed it makes little sense. The GTX 295 came out something like 8 months before the 5870. By the logic seen above, the 5870 is a failure because it didn't beat the 295, and that's clearly not the case.

I see

 

[FishDog3]

News flash, we don't know the GTX 480 pricing yet. Noone does except maybe some people at Nvidia. The rumors are just that, rumors.

Of course, and I completely understand that. But the statement works both ways. Since we don't know the price yet, we can't say that the 480 should not be compared to the 5970. And even if we don't know the price, you can still be completely justified in comparing the 480 to the 5970 just from the standpoint of the level of hype from nVidia, and the fact that it is it's flagship model. It wouldn't be very relevant to anything other than e-peen measuring, but isn't that what nVidia is doing anyway? I'd say that is exactly what they are doing so they've opened themselves up to it.

Nothing that nVidia talking head said was relevant to anything, at all. Because we don't have the information to make it relevant (3rd party benches, price, ect). It's just marketing hearsay.

 

[FishDog3]

ATI doesn't have a magic wand of energy sippage developed yet.

And if it came out, it'd get nerfed anyway haha.

 

[Bobnova]

See now that's what makes the 5870 so cool, it was cheaper then nvidias dual GPU card, and matched it in power.

 

[ratbuddy]

See now that's what makes the 5870 so cool, it was cheaper then nvidias dual GPU card, and matched it in power.

Almost matched it in power. There's always a fairly hefty price premium for the fastest card on the market, no matter how much faster it is. Until the 5970, the 295 was still the fastest card, and was/is $100-$200 cheaper than 5970.