AT's latest video card testing results

[Grooveriding]

It's still pulling it's weight.


Actually I have played games with both 3D and PhysX enabled. As for 3 monitors I still stand by what I said way back. Bezels suck.


I could be like you and put an ATI card in my sig (I do have some older ones) and then do nothing but bitch about the company. But I'm no hypocrite. :thumbsdown:

A gtx 260 cannot run any modern game with BloatX and 3D, unless you are playing at 800x600, which I don't even think is possible as you need to use the monitor's native resolution.

I'm not surprised you see it as being hypocritical to own nvidia cards and still be able to see the flaws in them. I bought the cards for the framerates not the useless fluff. If they were like cars and physx and 3d were options, I'd of passed on the options to reduce the cost.

I don't get why you waste the effort of typing out the nonsense, you're sort of the forum jester, taken seriously by no one except the other few members of the jester troupe.

 

[evolucion8]

I have said many times before that GTX470 is crap for 2560x1600 since it's texture fill-rate limited. Also posting Dirt 2 benches at 35 fps average is meaningless since that's completely unplayable in a racing game.

In my honest opinion, if a person intends to use 2560x1600 at good frames, then neither GTX470 or 5850 is adequete. Plus 2560x1600 is not intended for $270 graphics cards, so why test a high end card in Ultra high end resolution intended for $400+ setups? If I had a 2560x1600 monitor, then I certainly wouldn't at all be considering a GTX470. 5870 is a far more consistent performer for that resolution, as are GTX480 and GTX460 SLI setups.

I agree with you, but bear in mind that at such high resolutions, the multi GPU scaling diminish somewhat due to the SLI overhead (Same goes for Crossfire which has worse scaling) and I doubt that 1GB is enough for such resolution.

 

[toyota]

It's still pulling it's weight.


Actually I have played games with both 3D and PhysX enabled. As for 3 monitors I still stand by what I said way back. Bezels suck.


I could be like you and put an ATI card in my sig (I do have some older ones) and then do nothing but bitch about the company. But I'm no hypocrite. :thumbsdown:

you have not played a game smoothly on your 192sp gtx260 with both 3D and full hardware physx at the same time. heck a 192sp gtx260 is not even strong enough for just 3D or handling full hardware physx in most games.

 

[GaiaHunter]

I have said many times before that GTX470 is crap for 2560x1600 since it's texture fill-rate limited. Also posting Dirt 2 benches at 35 fps average is meaningless since that's completely unplayable in a racing game.

And is there a difference between 55 min or 65 min?

In my honest opinion, if a person intends to use 2560x1600 at good frames, then neither GTX470 or 5850 is adequete. Plus 2560x1600 is not intended for $270 graphics cards, so why test a high end card in Ultra high end resolution intended for $400+ setups? If I had a 2560x1600 monitor, then I certainly wouldn't at all be considering a GTX470. 5870 is a far more consistent performer for that resolution, as are GTX480 and GTX460 SLI setups.

That of certain resolutions requiring certain price points is irrelevant - you buy what plays at that resolution.

3 years ago 2560x1600 would require over $500 and probably more like $700 and 1920x1200 would require you to pay $400.

 

[RussianSensation]

And is there a difference between 55 min or 65 min?

Yes in a racing game. 60 fps min. It's interesting that you dismiss 10 fps minimum framerate difference in Dirt 2 (+18% difference) and also the fact that 5870 and GTX470 perform almost identically in that game yet 5870 costs $100+ more.

PNY GTX470 with 2 games: Just Cause 2 and Mafia 2 on sale at Newegg for $250, after using coupon code HARDOCP825A

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboD...t=Combo.456554

5850 was the best card ATI has made for 9 months, but with $250 GTX470 and $200 GTX460, it's almost impossible to recommend a 5850 imo.

Also it's ironic some people say 5850s can overclock to 950-1000, and claim GTX470's power consumption is unacceptable: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/gpu-power-consumption-2010_4.html#sect0

:\

 

[toyota]

I like how they inflate the game prices to $59.99 to make it look like a better deal. really that is just outright lying because neither of those games ever had an msrp of $59.99. lol

 

[MrK6]

I have said many times before that GTX470 is crap for 2560x1600 since it's texture fill-rate limited. Also posting Dirt 2 benches at 35 fps average is meaningless since that's completely unplayable in a racing game.

In my honest opinion, if a person intends to use 2560x1600 at good frames, then neither GTX470 or 5850 is adequete. Plus 2560x1600 is not intended for $270 graphics cards, so why test a high end card in Ultra high end resolution intended for $400+ setups? If I had a 2560x1600 monitor, then I certainly wouldn't at all be considering a GTX470. 5870 is a far more consistent performer for that resolution, as are GTX480 and GTX460 SLI setups.

*Looks at sig*, nope, incorrect, it holds its weight fine. And the 5850 = 5870, clock for clock they are practically identical (within 1-2% the majority of the time), and the 5850 is actually a more efficient overclocker.

I can't imagine a situation where the price performance categorization of cards fails harder than between the GTX480/70 and the 5870/50. Having actually, personally, used a GTX 470 for two solid weeks, I would have to say I would NEVER buy that card over an equally priced 5850, minimums and all that BS be damned.

Yes its a fast card, but the heat and noise are NOT overblown factors. People's idea of whats tolerable (especially if they just bought a $300 dollar videocard and don't want to feel bad about it) might be giving the impression that its tolerable, but its really not, especially if you keep your case on your desk next to you (which many people do).

Knowing what I know now, if someone literally gave me a 470 for free, I'd turn around and sell it on Ebay and pick up a GTX 460 1GB and pocket the change. For me, the 460 had factors alongside price/performance going for it: Its cool, its relatively quiet (although nothing has touched my MSI 4850 for silence thus far), its TINY, and MSI offered it with their Cyclone cooler.

The 5850 should come down in price, but because of the GTX460, not the GTX470.

Was there ever a comparison between the GTX 460 @ 900MHz or something vs. the 5850 @ 1GHz? I'd be interested to see how they stacked up then. In either case, I agree, the GTX 470 is rubbish, it's no wonder they had to drop the price almost $100 from MSRP and add two free games to even sell them.

 

[RussianSensation]

I rest my case. The fact that GTX470 beats 5850 in almost every DX11 game doesn't matter, the fact that GTX470 gets higher min frames over 5850 doesn't matter, the fact that GTX470 overclocked = GTX480 which 5850 overclocked can hardly match <2560x1600 doesn't matter, the fact that 5850 overclocked power consumption is 100 watts more than at stock doesn't matter, and the fact that GTX470 ships with games like Mafia 2 and Just Cause 2 for free doesn't matter either, the fact that everything from 4850, 4870, 4890 idled much higher than GTX470 doesn't matter either cuz they were made by ATI.

*5850 wins*

5970 is $1200: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...tem=14-150-500

It seems ATI die-hard customers will buy anything.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Yes in a racing game. 60 fps min. It's interesting that you dismiss 10 fps minimum framerate difference in Dirt 2 (+18% difference) and also the fact that 5870 and GTX470 perform almost identically in that game yet 5870 costs $100+ more.

If I get 55 min in a game I will even dismiss 100000 fps advantage from another card.

5850 was the best card ATI has made for 9 months, but with $250 GTX470 and $200 GTX460, it's almost impossible to recommend a 5850 imo.

IMHO it is almost impossible to recommend either a 5850 or a GTX 470 over a GTX 460.

But mate, if you don't mind the power consumption of your card and the heat/noise associated with it, it is a great buy in terms of performance.

No one is calling you nuts for buying a 470.

Also it's ironic some people say 5850s can overclock to 950-1000, and claim GTX470's power consumption is unacceptable: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/gpu-power-consumption-2010_4.html#sect0

:\

So lets look at this, from the same site, http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/gigabyte-gf-gtx400_6.html#sect0

So basically, a stock 5850 consumes 123-127 W in a game. A stock 470 consumes 197 W.

With 164 W you can get a 925/1000 5850 and have 33 W change.

I think that OC might be enough to be faster than a 470.

 

[Xarick]

I rest my case. The fact that GTX470 beats 5850 in almost every DX11 game doesn't matter, the fact that GTX470 gets higher min frames over 5850 doesn't matter, the fact that GTX470 overclocked = GTX480 which 5850 overclocked can hardly match <2560x1600 doesn't matter, the fact that 5850 overclocked power consumption is 100 watts more than at stock doesn't matter, and the fact that GTX470 ships with games like Mafia 2 and Just Cause 2 for free doesn't matter either, the fact that everything from 4850, 4870, 4890 idled much higher than GTX470 doesn't matter either cuz they were made by ATI.

*5850 wins*

5970 is $1200: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...tem=14-150-500

It seems ATI die-hard customers will buy anything.

Yet I would still recommend the 460 for power, noise and heat and a savings of nearly $50.

 

[golem]

Yea, but the 470 and 5850 can overclock as well. I don't know what the 470 overclocks to on average, but it seems like most 5850's can do 900+ Mhz with ease. Many happily live above 1GHz. All the benches we are using are with a 725MHz 5850 unless they state otherwise...

Wasn't there a link a while back to someone who tested overclocked cards? If I remember correctly, there's something about the architecture in ATI cards where performance scales less than Nvidia cards with OC.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Wasn't there a link a while back to someone who tested overclocked cards? If I remember correctly, there's something about the architecture in ATI cards where performance scales less than Nvidia cards with OC.

Yeah, but some of those OC are quite crazy.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2091834

 

[golem]

Yeah, but some of those OC are quite crazy.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2091834

Yeah, they are sort of high and it seems only 1 rez was tested, but still pretty interesting. Thanks for the link and Russian for finding it in the first place also.

 

[RussianSensation]

You are welcome golem

My greatest worry regarding the videocard market is once HD6000 series launch, and NV will not have anything reasonable to compete with it. If this happens, then we will again experience 6 months+ of ATI's $399+ pricing for their high-end parts with no price drops. *I hope this won't be the case* and NV gets their shit together.

 

[MrK6]

I rest my case. The fact that GTX470 beats 5850 in almost every DX11 game doesn't matter, the fact that GTX470 gets higher min frames over 5850 doesn't matter, the fact that GTX470 overclocked = GTX480 which 5850 overclocked can hardly match <2560x1600 doesn't matter, the fact that 5850 overclocked power consumption is 100 watts more than at stock doesn't matter, and the fact that GTX470 ships with games like Mafia 2 and Just Cause 2 for free doesn't matter either, the fact that everything from 4850, 4870, 4890 idled much higher than GTX470 doesn't matter either cuz they were made by ATI.

*5850 wins*

5970 is $1200: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...tem=14-150-500

It seems ATI die-hard customers will buy anything.

Why do you state things that are incorrect and then get upset when people correct you? There are strengths in the Fermi architecture, but all cards based on the GF100 chips have some serious flaws that do not stack up well to the competition (be it Cypress or GF104). GaiaHunter brings up some excellent points and it would be a waste for me to repeat them. Simply put, A 5850 at 900MHz is faster, cooler, and quieter than a GTX 470. A GTX 460 offers similar benefits in a lower performance bracket (and therefore is not suitable for the resolution I game at). I see you have a GTX 470 and I imagine you have you reasons for buying it, just the same as I have my reasons for not buying it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Why do you state things that are incorrect and then get upset when people correct you? There are strengths in the Fermi architecture, but all cards based on the GF100 chips have some serious flaws that do not stack up well to the competition (be it Cypress or GF104). GaiaHunter brings up some excellent points and it would be a waste for me to repeat them. Simply put, A 5850 at 900MHz is faster, cooler, and quieter than a GTX 470. A GTX 460 offers similar benefits in a lower performance bracket (and therefore is not suitable for the resolution I game at). I see you have a GTX 470 and I imagine you have you reasons for buying it, just the same as I have my reasons for not buying it.

What are the strengths?

What are the serious flaws?

 

[bryanW1995]

Just as a friendly reminder guys, don't forget about our brand-new GPU Bench section of the site. You'll always find our latest data in there.

I added up all the scores for 5850 and got 1771.9. ditto for gtx 460 and got 1493.3. that's about an 18 percent advantage for 5850 according to AT across a very wide gamut of games.

and yes, I have no life.

 

[golem]

You are welcome golem

My greatest worry regarding the videocard market is once HD6000 series launch, and NV will not have anything reasonable to compete with it. If this happens, then we will again experience 6 months+ of ATI's $399+ pricing for their high-end parts with no price drops. *I hope this won't be the case* and NV gets their shit together.

Well the thing that really hurt last time was if you wanted *DX11* and really high end performance you only had 2 choices 5850 or 5870, which allowed ATI to charge what they wanted (well maybe 5770CF also). This time there are already DX11 cards out with pretty decent performance. If worse comes worse (competition wise) and HD6000 is a technological leap and Nvidia stumbles again, there will be options if ATI prices HD6000 sky high.

 

[SirPauly]

Simply put, A 5850 at 900MHz is faster, cooler, and quieter than a GTX 470. .

I would say not in everything though and not every AIB GTX 470 Sku.

 

[bryanW1995]

Maybe AMD can't afford to sell the cards cheaper, they did take another loss last quarter. Maybe the cards are expensive to make, they are a lot bigger than the 460. Maybe they are not getting enough product from TSMC. Maybe their fans like to be price gouged. In the end they are free to sell it for whatever they want, however it's a horrible recommendation at it's current price.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/19242/2

hmm, so ~ 4.4 percent larger is "a lot bigger". considering how badly a 5870 pastes a gtx 460 then I don't think that 4.4 percent larger die area is necessarily a bad thing in this case, and even with 5850 you're getting more than a 4.4 percent improvement in perforance. I can't believe that you haven't been perma-banned yet.


whoops, looks like my die size estimates were a bit off, plus russian beat me to the punch anyway:

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...s-exposed.aspx

GTX460 = 331.54 mm2
Cypress = 337 mm2.

The sizes are almost identical.

 

[bryanW1995]

A gtx 260 cannot run any modern game with BloatX and 3D, unless you are playing at 800x600, which I don't even think is possible as you need to use the monitor's native resolution.

I'm not surprised you see it as being hypocritical to own nvidia cards and still be able to see the flaws in them. I bought the cards for the framerates not the useless fluff. If they were like cars and physx and 3d were options, I'd of passed on the options to reduce the cost.

I don't get why you waste the effort of typing out the nonsense, you're sort of the forum jester, taken seriously by no one except the other few members of the jester troupe.

bullshit, gtx 260 runs plenty of modern games for me at 1680x1050 just fine. I have both 192 and core 216 btw.

You are welcome golem

My greatest worry regarding the videocard market is once HD6000 series launch, and NV will not have anything reasonable to compete with it. If this happens, then we will again experience 6 months+ of ATI's $399+ pricing for their high-end parts with no price drops. *I hope this won't be the case* and NV gets their shit together

yeah, amd did their part to keep gtx 260/80 prices under control, but nvidia came too late to the table with gtx 460 to do much damage to 5xxx dominance this round. hopefully they'll be more competitive vs SI.


@mrk6: russian paid $205 apiece for his gtx 470's during the mad price drop right after gtx 460 launched. to my eyes he's trying to justify anything, in fact if he was he would have mentioned that fact earlier in this thread. I don't care how much heat/power/etc the gtx 470 throws out, if you have a strong enough psu then one of those for $205 is a very good deal, especially for what he uses them for.

 

[Grooveriding]

bullshit, gtx 260 runs plenty of modern games for me at 1680x1050 just fine. I have both 192 and core 216 btw.

Really ?

What kind of frames are you getting with 3d vision and physx enabled with your 260 ? What games ?

 

[evolucion8]

You are welcome golem

My greatest worry regarding the videocard market is once HD6000 series launch, and NV will not have anything reasonable to compete with it. If this happens, then we will again experience 6 months+ of ATI's $399+ pricing for their high-end parts with no price drops. *I hope this won't be the case* and NV gets their shit together.

I hope so. Competition benefits both.

 

[golem]

@mrk6: russian paid $205 apiece for his gtx 470's during the mad price drop right after gtx 460 launched. to my eyes he's trying to justify anything, in fact if he was he would have mentioned that fact earlier in this thread. I don't care how much heat/power/etc the gtx 470 throws out, if you have a strong enough psu then one of those for $205 is a very good deal, especially for what he uses them for.

They're great if you fold@home.

 

[MrK6]

What are the strengths?

Very scalable, especially with overclocking. It also has components that will help (I'd imagine anyway) in future games, like it's tesselation capabilities.

What are the serious flaws?

The GF100 is an engineering failure. It requires way too much power (and the heat and noise that comes with it) to do what it does, not to mention the size of the chips and needless complexity. NVIDIA needs to decide what they want to do with the chip and stick to it, as obviously making a "Jack-of-all-trades" on 40nm isn't happening. They got a lot corrected their second time through with the GF104, now they need to scale that up to the high-end.

I would say not in everything though and not every AIB GTX 470 Sku.

Well, definitely quieter and using less power, however it will be faster almost always. The only situation I can think of it not being is with something with heavy tesselation.

@mrk6: russian paid $205 apiece for his gtx 470's during the mad price drop right after gtx 460 launched. to my eyes he's trying to justify anything, in fact if he was he would have mentioned that fact earlier in this thread. I don't care how much heat/power/etc the gtx 470 throws out, if you have a strong enough psu then one of those for $205 is a very good deal, especially for what he uses them for.

I've said many times (if it wasn't this thread, sorry, they blend for me) that the GTX 470 @ $250 is a good deal from a price/performance perspective. However, to me at least, you have to give up way too much to get that performance and therefore it isn't worth it for me. As long as the 5850 is on the market, I wouldn't buy a GTX 470. If the GTX 475 comes to be, then I'll reevaluate.

You are welcome golem

My greatest worry regarding the videocard market is once HD6000 series launch, and NV will not have anything reasonable to compete with it. If this happens, then we will again experience 6 months+ of ATI's $399+ pricing for their high-end parts with no price drops. *I hope this won't be the case* and NV gets their shit together.

If the 6870 offers more of the same as the 5870 did, I will gladly buy one for $400. Better yet would be a 6850 that was just a downclocked 6870 for even less. High-end GPU's used to be $500+, this crap economy is doing wonders for my hobby.