Worth Getting a GTX 460 768/1gb over HD 5770?

[Cheezeit]

Hey guys,

Building a new rig and not sure what I should go for:

ATI 5770 1gb for $140
GTX 460 768mb for $195
GTX 460 1gb for $220

I'll be running on either 1600 or 1900 resolution and would like to have good performance that can last a few years. I'm also really trying to save money but I'll go for the best bang for the buck.

I've been hearing plenty of great things about the Fermi 1 gb and that the 768 is somewhat crippled, but is it really worth the extra $80 over the 5770?

Thanks in advance!

 

[faxon]

get the 1gb model definitely worth it @ 1900, and even more worth it if you want the card to last

 

[jvroig]

ATI 5770 1gb for $140
GTX 460 768mb for $195
GTX 460 1gb for $220

Your price range isn't exactly condensed - $140 vs $220 is a big jump.

If you are going to settle at playing @ 1600x900, that's 5770 territory.
Higher res than that and it's certainly worth $220.

About wanting it to last a few years - I suppose that is also worth $220.

 

[solofly]

Get the best you can afford, simple as that...

 

[Kakkoii]

$140? Cheapest 5770 I could find was $151.

But anyway, yeah it's worth it.

GTX 460 1GB vs 5770 1GB
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Prod...9.128.110.125.112.113.121.126.123.122.124.127

And especially if you go SLI GTX 460's, that's where they really shine, and will keep you set for quite a few years:

2x GTX 460 1GB vs ATI 5970 (which is 2x 5870's.)
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Prod...0.110.111.125.112.113.114.121.126.123.122.124

The 2x 460's would cost a little over $400, and the 5970 would cost $700.
Not to mention the 460's overclock very well, easily pushing the core past 820mhz, and the mem pretty well too. Giving a pretty fair performance boost on top of that.

 

[RaistlinZ]

I'd go for the 460 1GB. It has more legs than the 5770 does, especially at higher resolutions.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I don't see the 768 mb 460 being crippled. Looks to hold its own against the 1gb version. I keep hearing the 1gb is more future proof. A mid range graphics card future proof for games in the future. What a load of crap. Try running that mafia demo with physx turned up. It chewed up my i7 @ 3.4ghz and a gtx 470 and spit it out. If that's the future of games you better get a gtx 480 and hope it lasts till this time next year.

 

[Kakkoii]

I don't see the 768 mb 460 being crippled. Looks to hold its own against the 1gb version. I keep hearing the 1gb is more future proof. A mid range graphics card future proof for games in the future. What a load of crap. Try running that mafia demo with physx turned up. It chewed up my i7 @ 3.4ghz and a gtx 470 and spit it out. If that's the future of games you better get a gtx 480 and hope it lasts till this time next year.

Dual midrange. 460's in SLI. Trumps even the 5970.

 

[tweakboy]

That is weak numbers for SLI ,, get the 5750 .. gl

 

[Rifter]

That is weak numbers for SLI ,, get the 5750 .. gl

WTF is wrong with you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jvroig]

That is weak numbers for SLI ,, get the 5750 .. gl

 

[Phynaz]

Hey guys,

Building a new rig and not sure what I should go for:

ATI 5770 1gb for $140
GTX 460 768mb for $195
GTX 460 1gb for $220

I'll be running on either 1600 or 1900 resolution and would like to have good performance that can last a few years. I'm also really trying to save money but I'll go for the best bang for the buck.

I've been hearing plenty of great things about the Fermi 1 gb and that the 768 is somewhat crippled, but is it really worth the extra $80 over the 5770?

Thanks in advance!

If heat is a concern, get the 5770.

If $ is a concern, get the 5770.

If performance is a concern, get the 460.

Really only you can decide what is the right balance for you. I went with the 5770 due to heat and noise. Budget isn't really much of an issue for me.

 

[happy medium]

and would like to have good performance that can last a few years

That tells me you should get a gtx 460 1gb. It won't last a few years but it will last longer then a 5770.

 

[lambchops511]

I had to make the same decision 2 weeks ago, I went with the GTX 460 1 GiB ... definitely don't regret it.

Heat is definitely not an issue at all -- the thing runs really cool.

 

[Wreckage]

If heat is a concern, get the 5770.

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/19242/12

ORLY?

http://www.techreport.com/r.x/geforce-gtx-460/gpu-temps.gif

 

[Leyawiin]

If your budget is really tight an HD 5770 is a great choice. If you have a X-fire mobo you can slip in another down the road.

 

[DaveSimmons]

If heat is a concern, get the 5770.

If $ is a concern, get the 5770.

If performance is a concern, get the 460.

Really only you can decide what is the right balance for you. I went with the 5770 due to heat and noise. Budget isn't really much of an issue for me.

Please do your homework before making poor recommendations. The 460 is a different design from the 465, 470, 480 with much lower power use and heat generation.

It sounds like you bought the wrong card for yourself too.

<== (still happy with my 4870)

 

[Chiropteran]

The 460 is a different design from the 465, 470, 480 with much lower power use and heat generation.

It is lower power than the 470, 480 etc, this is true. Nevertheless, it still uses significantly more power and produces more heat than the 5770.

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/19242/12

Your link supports the poster who you seemed to be disagreeing with, as it shows the 460's power usage at load is significantly higher than the 5770.

 

[jvroig]

it still uses significantly more power and produces more heat than the 5770.

See below.

Your link supports the poster who you seemed to be disagreeing with, as it shows the 460's power usage at load is significantly higher than the 5770, and the fan has to work harder to keep it cool as shown by the load noise.

His link shows only a 2C difference between 5770 and a GTX 460 1GB.

 

[Wreckage]

Your link supports the poster who you seemed to be disagreeing with, as it shows the 460's power usage at load is significantly higher than the 5770.

What part of "heat" did you miss?

 

[jvroig]

Even AnandTech reports lower temps for the GTX 460 1GB compared to a 5770: link.

Load Temps - Crysis:
460 1GB : 73C
5770 : 77C

Load Temps - Furmark:
460 1GB : 74C
5770 : 77C


Even if you don't want to believe the Techreport link from Wreckage, it's impossible to argue about "heat considerations" versus the GTX 460.

 

[Chiropteran]

What part of "heat" did you miss?

The temperature of the card hasNOTHING to do with the heat it produces. Following your logic, a water-cooled i7 980X kept at a consistent 31C is producing less heat than an Atom that runs at 33C.

Uh, no. The reason the 460's temperature is lower is because it had a more powerful cooling solution. That heat, while dissipated from the GPU, isn't just vanishing into nothing. It still adds heat to your case. It's also possible that the ATI GPU can handle heat better, so ATI doesn't ramp up the fan speed until it gets hotter. But the basic physical constant is that using more watts produces more heat. As the 460 uses about 40 more watts at load, it produces that much more heat.

Also note this part of the article "First, the difference in sound levels between the GTX 460 768MB and 1GB cards comes from that noisy blower on our Zotac review unit." So, if you buy a cheap 460 you might end up getting a really noisy fan. If the noise level varies that much between manufacturers of the same model, than the whole graph is basically useless unless you are only comparing that exact manufacturer's 5770 to the exact manufacturer's 460.

 

[jvroig]

The GTX 460 power consumption is within the same class as the GTX 260, and far below the 5870. None of these cards, even the 5870, are treated as "hot and power hungry". I don't see what you are trying to do here. It certainly uses more power than a 5770, but the performance delta is worth it. The increase in power and heat is not unreasonable at all.

GF104 has solved the common points against GF100.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I'll correct myself slightly:

It's true to say that the 5770 use less power and generates less heat than every faster nVidia and ATI card. Slow card = less power. A 5450 uses less power too.

It's false to say that the 460 runs hot or is a power hog. It uses more power because it's a much faster card. Performance per watt or BTU is very good though, just like the 5770.

So: if you only want to use exactly as much power as the 5770 and don't mind that it's only about as fast as my 2-year-old 4870 then it's a good choice. If you want something faster then the 460 is a much better choice.

 

[jvroig]

It's true to say that the 5770 use less power and generates less heat than every faster nVidia and ATI card. Slow card = less power. A 5450 uses less power too.

If you had to break it down like that (given how obvious that is), then someone is splitting hairs for the sake of arguing, and probably wouldn't listen to you anyway, no matter what logic you bring.

It is quite clear in the context of this thread (460 vs 5770) that the pros and cons of each are the topic at hand, and citing "heat considerations" of any sort will imply that one produces a problematic amount of heat such that it becomes a valid advantage for the other.

No matter how you cook it, this is just not true. GTX 480, 470, and 465 failed at power and heat. GTX 460 did not. Whether you look at "temps" or "power consumption" charts, the GTX 460 is nowhere near "unreasonable" territory, and any "advantage" the 5770 may have in power consumption is lost in performance, so this "power/heat advantage" is no advantage at all - it merely shows that the 5770 is, in fact, a lower performing card, which is evident in the price segment it occupies.