• 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.

GTX580 reviews thread

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I must ask though.. What is the point of the memory clock of 1002? Why not just set it at a nice round 1000..

Does their binning really have that fine of a resolution? Neat if it does, I'd love to see their simulations to get to those stock clocks.
 
Very impressive. If nvidia had come out with this card at their 480 launch like they were supposed to, it could have made up for them being nearly half a year late. It's still a welcome boost, though.
 
A fully funcioning A1 512 shader original Fermi design. Does this mean that no "perfect" A3's were harvested and tuned for use here? All new spin?

Hope I'm terming this right, I just game with em. 🙂

Edit: Just realized, fewer transistors so the answer is no.
 
Last edited:
Silverforce11 said:
It's a good improvement on the 480, lower power use and ~15% perf gains. Fermi done right.

Why did they add the current limiter? The new coolers should be able to handle 300W TDP load surely. Its artificially lowering the max TDP, to be in line with NV's claims of ~250W. Not cool and very sneaky like the AMD driver throttling in furmark awhile back. These stunts should not be accepted.
Click to expand...

Oh geez.....

Who cares? If performs how it is supposed to, then it isn't a problem.



Overall this looks like a win for nV.
 
tviceman said:
Anywhere from 12-20% faster than gtx480, consumes less power than a gtx480, and quieter than an hd5870.

EDIT: Nvidia has implemented, for better or worse, power draw limiters like AMD did with cypress. Max power load under furmark is 226w, and average power load under gaming is 197w (vs. 223w with gtx480 when gaming). So basically it's 13% less power draw when gaming and 15-20% better performance at the same time.
Click to expand...

Note really on subject, but just noticed the 4870x2 consumed 381w of power!, the most ever and funnily enough cant remember anyone getting there knickers in a twist about the power consumption either..??
 
i have to admit there are some interesting comparisons to the 5970, especially using the 10.7 drivers which have crossfire more or less broken on the card. I've been a 5970 owner since march and would like to say that the card easily clocks to 1ghz on each core and 1200mhz mem. Anything over 900mhz on this card simply results in a substantial leveraging of gfx power (20-40% increase over stock across the board). The ATI crossfire 5970 driver issue is a different matter all together, i haven't found reasonable performance since 10.5 hotfix. I was very surprised to see the 580 GTX closer to the 5970 stock performance although i was hoping for more like 5870 cf (5970 oc) performance. We'll have to wait till SLI reviews come up to see what types of numbers this new GPU can leverage.

If you're into overclocking the sapphire 5970 just dropped to < 500$ on newegg, which is less then you'll be paying for a 580gtx on release with 30% more performance...
 
OCGuy said:
Oh geez.....

Who cares? If performs how it is supposed to, then it isn't a problem.



Overall this looks like a win for nV.
Click to expand...

WHy do you feed it? and please try not to feed the others , they are comming. 🙂

On topic: the gtx 580 is to the gtx480 ,like the gtx285 was to the gtx 280. give or take.
 
SolMiester said:
Note really on subject, but just noticed the 4870x2 consumed 381w of power!, the most ever and funnily enough cant remember anyone getting there knickers in a twist about the power consumption either..??
Click to expand...

Say what?

4870x2_power.gif
260-270w 3d Load <-- within PCIe specifications.
 
james 1 said:
That's a very good improvement over the 480 on average about 14%, i wish i could get one but $500 sounds a bit rich for me i guess i will have to stick with my 4870x2 🙁
Click to expand...

Does your 4870x2 use 380w of power as shown on TPU?...do you have any issues with it being over the PCIe standard?
 
That is pretty impressive. But not sure if it will be enough to beat AMDs 6000 series. But still a solid refresh product from Nvidia. Performance up, power and noise are down.
 
themodernlife said:
i have to admit there are some interesting comparisons to the 5970, especially using the 10.7 drivers which have crossfire more or less broken on the card. I've been a 5970 owner since march and would like to say that the card easily clocks to 1ghz on each core and 1200mhz mem. Anything over 900mhz on this card simply results in a substantial leveraging of gfx power (20-40% increase over stock across the board). The ATI crossfire 5970 driver issue is a different matter all together, i haven't found reasonable performance since 10.5 hotfix. I was very surprised to see the 580 GTX closer to the 5970 stock performance although i was hoping for more like 5870 cf (5970 oc) performance. We'll have to wait till SLI reviews come up to see what types of numbers this new GPU can leverage.

If you're into overclocking the sapphire 5970 just dropped to < 500$ on newegg, which is less then you'll be paying for a 580gtx on release with 30% more performance...
Click to expand...

Really 30% more performance then a gtx580?
 
Daedalus685 said:
nah, the throttling is done the same way AMD implemented it, overcurent and what not. The drivers merely enable or disable this feature.
Click to expand...
Why would you want to disable it? And IIRC, you cannot disable through drivers the thermal protection on the AMD hardware. Nvidia is using per application detection, which I think is dumb, like what AMD did with their 48xx cards. I much prefer a hardware only thermal implementation.
 
happy medium said:
WHy do you feed it? and please try not to feed the others , they are comming. 🙂

On topic: the gtx 580 is to the gtx480 ,like the gtx285 was to the gtx 280. give or take.
Click to expand...

This is much better than that. The GTX285 was just a GT200b, with higher stock clocks. You could take a 280 and clock it to a 285.

GTX580 is a larger performance jump.
 
SolMiester said:
Does your 4870x2 use 380w of power as shown on TPU?...do you have any issues with it being over the PCIe standard?
Click to expand...

The drivers very shortly after release were changed to throttle during furmark on the entire 4000 series. It would not happen any longer in that fashion.

However, the 380 in the 4870x2 review at TPU includes the full system which is NOT how TPU currently does the testing, which is card only.

The 4870x2 was still a monster power consumer though, at least in furmark.
 
OCGuy said:
My debit card is burning a hole in my pocket......!!!!

Hopefully Anand's review is up at midnight.
Click to expand...


Based on these numbers, would you really upgrade a 480 for that? It's certainly faster, but hardly the type of difference that I think you'd really notice over a 480.
 
Thank you!

A review that finally includes 1280x1024 on the new hardware! So very helpful to my situation. Really really really really wish Anand would do the same! Ya know, we aren't all enthusiasts out here =P

Looks like a great card to stir the competition! Keep it comin' red and green =)
 
OCGuy said:
This is much better than that. The GTX285 was just a GT200b, with higher stock clocks. You could take a 280 and clock it to a 285.

GTX580 is a larger performance jump.
Click to expand...

It is definitely a larger bump (9% compared to 15%).. but the comparison to gtx285 seems good to me.

The difference is that the 480 had disabled cuda cores which the 280 did not. It is very much just an improvement on the gf100. Likely more striking only for the fact that the 480 was not as solid of a product as the 280.

Though the node shrink to the 285 was likely more about better cost margins and lower power, than anything else.

Other than the marketing reasons to keep in line with AMD there is no reason this card should not be the GF100b and the GTX485. For that matter there is little reason for the 6000 series from AMD to be released yet either, as we will have cards in that series all with vastly different architectures.
 
i find this part the most interesting......

"NVIDIA's GF110 graphics processor is still based on the Fermi architecture and the architecture diagram looks exactly the same as the 512 shader GF100 version. However, GF110 can certainly be described as built from ground up. NVIDIA is said to have made improvements to key components at the level of transistors, making sure that there are lower latencies between components on the GPU, and electrical leakages are minimized. In a 3 billion transistor chip that draws over 200W of power, leakages are the main enemy to power efficiency and overall chip stability. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top