does the GTX 465 run hotter than the 470?

[Anarchist420]

I was going to get the galaxy GTX465 with special cooler. What idle temps should I expect? Also, what's the idle temps with reference cooler?

I have one panaflo U1A exhaust fan and that's the only case fan in my Antec 300. I need to get another cable for my other panaflo as the bare wire snapped.

 

[Genx87]

From the reviews it sounds like a crap shoot. I think in order to maximize their ability to sell the 465 they upped the voltage. But I dont think it is universal either. In the anandtech I think the 465 actually drew more power at laod than the 470. But you may get one with a lower voltage? And thus less power consumption.

 

[RussianSensation]

Relative to the performance, the load power consumption of the 465 is horrendous: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce-gtx-465_5.html#sect0

There is practically 0 reason to buy the GTX 465 given:

1) the pricing of 5830 and 5850;
2) imminent release of GTX460 with lower pricing and lower power consumption and similar performance;
3) the significant performance increase you get with GTX470 for not much more $.

You can always get a GTX260 216 with aftermarket cooling: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-464-_-Product

That should easily hold you over until Fermi II and overclocked should be pretty close to the 465 for $100 less.

 

[Anarchist420]

Well that sucks.

I really want a Fermi, but the pricing is an issue.

I don't like ATi; nvidia has better texture filtering overall plus CUDA and PhysX and ATi won't do RGSS in Dx10 and 11, they're missing some essential GL extensions, and they don't do 24 bit Z-buffer in Shadowman.

 

[Janooo]

Well that sucks.

I really want a Fermi, but the pricing is an issue.

I don't like ATi; nvidia has better texture filtering overall plus CUDA and PhysX and ATi won't do RGSS in Dx10 and 11, they're missing some essential GL extensions, and they don't do 24 bit Z-buffer in Shadowman.

Get 470.

 

[Skurge]

Yes, just get a 470, there is no reason to get a 465.

 

[tweakboy]

Same maybe a tad difference, but pretty much same my friend...

 

[happy medium]

Well that sucks.

I really want a Fermi, but the pricing is an issue.

I don't like ATi; nvidia has better texture filtering overall plus CUDA and PhysX and ATi won't do RGSS in Dx10 and 11, they're missing some essential GL extensions, and they don't do 24 bit Z-buffer in Shadowman.

SHame you missed the gtx 470 deal on Newegg for 296$ shipped and a free copy of Just cause 2.

There will be more sales, just look around some.

 

[happy medium]

Anarchist420, what resolution you game at?

Edit: Furmark stress test (way hotter then gaming) that Galaxy model is 79c and 40c idle.

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=18715&page=4

Which means is should get no hotter then 75c in normal gaming mode.
Thats about as hot as a reference 5850,which no one complained about.

Performance at 1650x 1050 is 8% slower then a 5850.
at 1900x1080 it's 11% slower then a 5850.

quote:
We opened this article stating that the “sweet spot” for NVIDIA was 93%. The GeForce GTX 465 is 93% of the price of the average Radeon HD 5850, so NVIDIA would want to deliver at least 93% of the performance. All told they come very close to this at 1920 and 1680, coming within 89% and 93% of a Radeon HD 5850 respectively, showcasing just how good of a job NVIDIA is doing positioning their cards as of late.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3745/nvidias-geforce-gtx-465/15

With the Galaxy card it runs much cooler and quieter, so the negatives of the reference gtx 465 are negligible.
The only bad part of the GALAXY model is that is uses 50 more watts then a 5850.

another good read about the Galaxy card..
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=928&type=expert&pid=12