• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

GTX 580 appears (briefly) on NVIDIA website

'If we were cynics, we'd think that this 'accident' was a move to draw attention away from AMD ahead of the launch of the Radeon 6000-series. While this - combined with the now confirmed GTX 460 and GTX 470 price drops earlier today - will certainly generate a fair bit of coverage, it's unlikely to deter the media storm that will surround the launch of the new family of Radeon GPUs.


Nonetheless, it's a sly move by NVIDIA that will, at the very least, have the fanboys salivating at the prospect of an ultra-powerful Fermi GPU.'


Get your raincoats and umbrellas out 🙂
 
Grooveriding said:
'If we were cynics, we'd think that this 'accident' was a move to draw attention away from AMD ahead of the launch of the Radeon 6000-series. While this - combined with the now confirmed GTX 460 and GTX 470 price drops earlier today - will certainly generate a fair bit of coverage, it's unlikely to deter the media storm that will surround the launch of the new family of Radeon GPUs.


Nonetheless, it's a sly move by NVIDIA that will, at the very least, have the fanboys salivating at the prospect of an ultra-powerful Fermi GPU.'


Get your raincoats and umbrellas out 🙂
Click to expand...

The question is, can the nation's power grid handle the 580?
 
If it's a fully enabled GF100 chip it makes more sense to call it a GTX 485 or 490 than a GTX 580. Either way, I'm personally not interested. Fermi isn't a bad chip (just warm), but with the 6-series launch imminent I just don't see why someone in the market for a high end card would want this.
 
I'm guessing it would have to be a tweaked core that will keep around the same power requirement as the recent batch of 480s on the mature 40nm process.
 
nitromullet said:
If it's a fully enabled GF100 chip it makes more sense to call it a GTX 485 or 490 than a GTX 580. Either way, I'm personally not interested. Fermi isn't a bad chip (just warm), but with the 6-series launch imminent I just don't see why someone in the market for a high end card would want this.
Click to expand...

Without seeing how either of them perform, how can you make a judgement either way?
 
Tsavo said:
The question is, can the nation's power grid handle the 580?
Click to expand...

I had to replace a section of the circuit my computer is connected to because of the three GTX 480s. It was a weak old section that burned up. Good thing it didn't start my house on fire.
 
chewietobbacca said:
*Nuclear reactor not included
Click to expand...

thermi.jpg
 
Taken from my post in the 6870 thread:

2. Very humorous: this is the backandforth email chain from NV and AMD to CNET about price drops. In these emails sent by NV and AMD, we learn that the SEP of the 6850 is definitely $179, but that's assuming no price gouging; in the meantime, the GTX460-1GB will fall to $199 SEP and the GTX470 falls to $259 SEP, with AMD claiming the drop is temporary and NV saying it's permanent: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20020318-1.html

3. Meanswhile, NV is posting its roadmap for later this year onto next year: http://www.electronista.com/articles/10/10/21/nvidia.geforce.gtx.580.nears.for.late.november/

Price war on! 🙂

Note the 384-shader part scheduled for next year.
 
I honestly don't see Nvidia making the same mistakes with a new high end part (i.e. too hot, too loud, too power hungry). I think it's a forgone conclusion that AMD won the performance/tdp metric for both the 5x00 and 6x00 series, but If GF110 is an extrapolated and tweaked GF104 then heat, noise, and TDP shouldn't be issues for it.
 
According to rumours it's 20% faster than GTX 480 which puts it right about Cayman level(also from assuming from leaks).
 
Hey Groove, you are like a masochist. You won't stop talking about the failure that GTX460/470/480 are but yet you own 2 yourself...🙂

Masochist: "Gratification gained from pain, deprivation, degradation, etc., inflicted or imposed on oneself, either as a result of one's own actions or the actions of others, esp. the tendency to seek this form of gratification."

You realize that GTX460 (esp.) /470 are actually reasonable cards in terms of power consumption?

I don't see how price drops on GTX460/470 are bad for the consumers? Competition is good for the market. We also don't know anything about GTX580, but personally I already hate the idea of the card being renamed to signify a next genreation product given that it's a GF110 chip.

badb0y said:
According to rumours it's 20% faster than GTX 480 which puts it right about Cayman level(also from assuming from leaks).
Click to expand...

I still don't understand how Electronista arrived at 20% faster given the 768 cores vs. 480 and TMUS going up from 64 to 128 +_512-bit memory interface. Is the chip going to run at 450 mhz then? Or these specs are completely made up.
 
Last edited:
blastingcap said:
Note the 384-shader part scheduled for next year.
Click to expand...

I'll take that roadmap with a large grain of sea salt. Also GF112 is not GF104, so GF112 could be an improvement over GF100/GF104 on a performance per core basis just like barts is likely to be over cypress. In other words, I still expect a fully unlocked GF104 within the next few weeks.
 
I agree about the naming of the card. Why the hell would it be a GTX580 and not some kind of GTX 4XX part? Kind of like the the 9800GTX? Why the hell was that a 9800 when the 800GTS 512 used the same basic core?
 
AdamK47 said:
Fake! I can tell because the grill patten on the food does not go in the direction of the grill pattern on the lid.
Click to expand...

Busted!

Your other post about your circuit made me chuckle. I've tripped the fuse for the room I have my main rig in a few times while gaming, but no burnouts as yet. I figured it was because we live in an older home!
 
lavaheadache said:
I agree about the naming of the card. Why the hell would it be a GTX580 and not some kind of GTX 4XX part? Kind of like the the 9800GTX? Why the hell was that a 9800 when the 800GTS 512 used the same basic core?
Click to expand...
By your logic, why the hell is HD 6870 not named HD 5890?
()🙂

And don't you all think we may see a GTX 460+ ?

Remember your history lessons ...

GTX 260 > GTX 260+ > GTX 275

now think 😛
 
Last edited:
tviceman said:
I honestly don't see Nvidia making the same mistakes with a new high end part (i.e. too hot, too loud, too power hungry). I think it's a forgone conclusion that AMD won the performance/tdp metric for both the 5x00 and 6x00 series, but If GF110 is an extrapolated and tweaked GF104 then heat, noise, and TDP shouldn't be issues for it.
Click to expand...
Doesn't the GTX 460 TDP rise significantly when overclocked? Would opening the disabled areas make it come more in line with performance without consuming more power?

I think the GF104 was a great part but to convert it into something over the GTX 480 they would still need some tweaking within the architecture (I am basing this on the fact that GTX 460 to match a GTX 470 comes within 40 watts of the GTX 480's TDP).
 
RussianSensation said:
Hey Groove, you are like a masochist. You won't stop talking about the failure that GTX460/470/480 are but yet you own 2 yourself...🙂

Masochist: "Gratification gained from pain, deprivation, degradation, etc., inflicted or imposed on oneself, either as a result of one's own actions or the actions of others, esp. the tendency to seek this form of gratification."

You realize that GTX460 (esp.) /470 are actually reasonable cards in terms of power consumption?

I don't see how price drops on GTX460/470 are bad for the consumers? Competition is good for the market. We also don't know anything about GTX580, but personally I already hate the idea of the card being renamed to signify a next genreation product given that it's a GF110 chip.
Click to expand...

Eh ? I was just making light of a speculation post. GTX 460 is an excellent card.

GTX 480 are monster performers, I wouldn't own them if I didn't think they were the best cards for me. I can still see their flaws, first hand no less. Every time I game for a while I can feel the flaws in the air around me as it warms up. :thumbsup:

I'm looking to upgrade an 8800GTS 512 I have in a system my wife uses. If the 6870 is not a nice bit faster than a 460, I'll be getting one and enjoying the price drop. I am willing to pay a $30-$50 premium for a 6870 if its a good 20% faster just to have a 'newer' toy to setup.
 
Last edited:
I woudln't be surprised if the GTX 580 spec wise is 50% spec wise in most areas compared to the G104 (384>576 Shaders, 256>384 membit bus, 64>96TMUs) since it is also using the GF110 monkier for the codename it will probably be tweaked again from the GF104 futher to get performance/effiency gains without making it too hot, but this is all assuming that the GF104s core is 334mm2 according to GPU-z and BSN.
 
Wow if nV pulls this off, it is going to take me at least an hour to go back and quote all the posts saying that AMD wont have any competition anymore, and nV is "dead", etc.

And again, nV PR deserves whatever $$ they get paid and more. Instead of talking about the AMD launch this week, this is now the top story.

6870 is a pretty boring lauch performance wise. Finally some news on high-end parts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top