GTX 480 Official Reviews Thread!! Post links here

[ratbuddy]

Seriously? What engine does it run on? Playable maxed at 1920x1200?

Not even close. No idea what engine but it's a nasty one.

 

[don'tknow]

Seriously? What engine does it run on? Playable maxed at 1920x1200?

It's run by the 4A engine (some people confuse it to be the same as the X-Ray engine used in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.), which is new and not used by any other game yet afaik. Not playable maxed out 1920x1200 when you include everything; PhysX, Tessellation, AA.. unless you run SLI 480's or HD 5970/2x 5870's.

 

[Marshmallow64]

It's a crazy engine and it is the new crysis. =(

 

[ratbuddy]

It's run by the 4A engine (some people confuse it to be the same as the X-Ray engine used in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.), which is new and not used by any other game yet afaik. Not playable maxed out 1920x1200 when you include everything; PhysX, Tessellation, AA.. unless you run SLI 480's or HD 5970/2x 5870's.

5970 can't come close to maxing it.

 

[don'tknow]

5970 can't come close to maxing it.

Hm, think most review sites are using DoF off, that's how they got playable fps. The ones where you see ridiculously low numbers even with multi-GPU systems is with DoF on.

Just this one feature, Advanced Depth of Field, cuts fps in half regardless of your GPU so pretty much everyone playing the game has it turned off.

 

[ratbuddy]

Hm, think most review sites are using DoF off, that's how they got playable fps. The ones where you see ridiculously low numbers even with multi-GPU systems is with DoF on.

Just this one feature, Advanced Depth of Field, cuts fps in half regardless of your GPU so pretty much everyone playing the game has it turned off.

From what I hear, it uses some kind of crazy DoF setup through OpenCL (or was it DirectCompute?) that looks amazing but takes a ton of GPU compute power. The 480 can almost run it with at 2560x1600 with AAA (not a typo) on but not quite. At 1920x1200, it's over 30fps which is playable in my book. At both 1920x1200 and 2560x1600, with AAA enabled, no ATI 5-series card gets over 1fps. I'm going by the numbers at http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-480,2585-12.html

I know this game is just an exception to the overall performance situation, but if more games like it are released, the extra compute power in the 470/480 is going to really set the cards apart from the competition, either through higher frame rates or the capability to run higher settings and thus look better in screen shots.

It's really the only ray of light in the whole launch IMHO.

 

[don'tknow]

From the screenshots I see though DoF isn't worth it with that kind of fps loss IMO. Can't be sure how well optimized it is. Still, at least one game is significantly pushing top end PC hardware. I really don't care which brand performs better, as long as they start pushing out more games that utilize the latest generation of GPU's properly, and not tons of console ports. Though, Metro 2033 is multi-platform, it was not made strictly around consoles, seems to be the other way around for once.

 

[lordkosc]

GTX470 looks tempting even if it is abit warm , but I am wondering if my CPU will be a bottleneck then?

only reason I don't want to go 5850 ATI is I'd be losing PhysX support, and I know the next Batman game this summer is gonna use it like the last one did.

 

[Neuromancer]

From the screenshots I see though DoF isn't worth it with that kind of fps loss IMO. Can't be sure how well optimized it is. Still, at least one game is significantly pushing top end PC hardware. I really don't care which brand performs better, as long as they start pushing out more games that utilize the latest generation of GPU's properly, and not tons of console ports. Though, Metro 2033 is multi-platform, it was not made strictly around consoles, seems to be the other way around for once.

Yeah it is good to have software that pushes this powerful new hardware. There is a trade-off though where... something that does not run well on current high end hardware may just be poorly coded.

Considering it is a console port, I would assume the latter.

 

[Hardin]

Except it's not a console port.

 

[ratbuddy]

Add Neoseeker to the list of 'DNF due to horrible review practices.'

They used drivers 195.62 and 10.1, and each game seemed to be benchmarked by a different person. Some games showed 1680x1050, 1920x1200, and 2560x1600, some showed 1280x1024, 1680x1050, and 1920x1200, and at least one just showed a single FPS chart without even bothering to mention what resolution it was.

Add that to their auto-expanding video ads that pop up every 3 seconds and you've got yourself a total fail review.

 

[baris_]

Get the 980X instead

!!!!!!!

 

[ratbuddy]

Interesting results at http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24000&page=14

Maybe these things will not start to shine until you load them up with 3 monitors or run in 1080p 3D?

Anyway, only 5 more sites to enter..

 

[Dragonprince]

Seriously? What engine does it run on? Playable maxed at 1920x1200?

A really poorly coded one if thats what it pumps out using recent video cards...there simply no excuse for a company to release a game people cant play with modern gpu hardware...what is the point besides angry customers and a bunch of tech support headaches ?

 

[nightelph]

A really poorly coded one..

Oh. That kind of engine.

 

[ratbuddy]

A really poorly coded one if thats what it pumps out using recent video cards...there simply no excuse for a company to release a game people cant play with modern gpu hardware...what is the point besides angry customers and a bunch of tech support headaches ?

As with Far Cry and Crysis when they were released, no hardware can max out the game.... Yet. They built in some future proofing so the game will still look up to modern standards a few years from now. As with Far Cry and Crysis, people will try to run it at higher settings than their rigs can handle, and cry 'poor coding!' when it's really just 'dumb user.'

 

[mjw21a]

Lol, it will be funny if in a few years the features don't actually make it look better.... Then it'll still just be poor coding.....

 

[4GHZ_or_bust]

You mean Crysis still isn't maxed out on pair of SLI'd GTX 480?

 

[wingman99]

You mean Crysis still isn't maxed out on pair of SLI'd GTX 480?

That's some serous future proofing, LOL.

 

[wingman99]

Guys, if you notice, you remember how after 1-2 years your current generation card didn't do good with new games. Now, a 8800GT like I have runs decently any game. I blame consoles. I remember how upgrades in DirectX translated to better looking games. But since DirectX 9 I haven't seen much difference. Is like games are bounded to consoles (DirectX 9) and we aren't getting the goodies anymore. You can see what Im saying by looking at reviews, cards are being pushed to insane resolutions because showing resolutions like 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 won't show a difference. Is like instead of graphics they are just upgrading video cards so you can play at higher res, but not higher graphics. This tendency began IMO when the XBOX 360 and PS3 arrived, after that, next generations of video cards can run any game. (8000 series, HD 2000) I say until next gen consoles arrived, we'll see the same level of graphics with no major improvements save 2-3 games. So, in the end, buying a GTX480 just makes your e-pennys bigger, and that's it.

I don't agree. I can max out mass effect 2 and mw2 and they look great, but I can't max out bad company 2 or call of pripyat. I can get close, but if I tried to max it out I wouldn't even get 30 fps.

I know what he is saying the games are only slightly better than direct x 9

here is Metro 2033 - Demo Gameplay

Bad Company 2 Demo Tutorial Video

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat Atmosphere Trailer

Im not missing nothing with my 8800gt 1600X1200

I've been with pc's from the begging and game progress was ramped up till direct x 9 I know there trying hard. however by now I was hoping for blue ray video games LOL.