Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!


Discussion on Article:
Nvidia GeForce GTX 480 - Our First Date

Started by: shadowfax | Date 04/05/10 11:11:33 PM
Comments: 32 | Last Comment:  11/29/16 08:39:32 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


nice review. xbit quality, been waiting for this.
0 0 [Posted by: shadowfax  | Date: 04/05/10 11:11:33 PM]

Thanks, really nice review..
0 0 [Posted by: Bo_Fox  | Date: 04/06/10 12:19:36 AM]

Meh.. the GTX 480 is a massive failure. Look at the HD5870.. it runs cooler, requires less power, less noise, is $150 cheaper than GTX 480 ($550 CDN right now), and betters the GTX 480 in half the benches. Gawd what a disaster for Nvidia!

I thought the whole point to a new GPU architecture was to totally best the competition's ultimate part? The GTX 480 doesn't remotely hold a candle to the HD5970 and barely tries to do much with the lower end HD5870. This is the Nvidia 5800 fiasco all over again..

What Nvidia always has going for it is stable Forceware drivers. ATi Catalyst has always been unreliable especially in video applications. ie. have two friends who work for Autodesk and they have so many horror stories with Catalyst users. Forceware.. never an issue of note. If anything, people want reliable hardware and drivers it talks to.
0 0 [Posted by: thudo  | Date: 04/06/10 08:21:19 AM]
- collapse thread

Yeah they are a failure but only in your tiny red only mind ...fanboys...gosh I hate them
0 0 [Posted by: shaolin95  | Date: 04/15/10 08:44:33 AM]

Finally, Nvidia cards are using High Quality removing all those optimizations. Thanks and I hope this trend continues. Also, nice touch on point out the IQ differences in Metro 2033. Although the Hawx results for the 5870 are a tad bit low. If Super-Sample AA is used shouldn't that be mentioned as a one of the games that actually uses it thus the performance penalty?
0 0 [Posted by: CPUGuy  | Date: 04/06/10 09:01:43 AM]

Any game results with the OC memory to 4780 MHz ?

Also i dont like to much the batman physx on test on radeons. If the whole game wouldnt run without it than i say nothing, but for some fog and particles.
Without the useles physx u can enjoy the same good game on radeons too. Its quite misleading.
0 0 [Posted by: Zool  | Date: 04/06/10 10:19:55 AM]
- collapse thread

Any game results with the OC memory to 4780 MHz ?

No, just in 3DMark 2006 the point whas high on 1600 scores (2560x1600). The ocerclocking results will be in some next articles about 480.

Without the useles physx u can enjoy the same good game on radeons too. Its quite misleading.

We test it early:
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 04/06/10 10:08:24 PM]

It also provides better AA as well as the PhysX, CUDA, and Tessellation advantages not to mention the slight performance edge, but it's heat and power are it's downside which can be partially compensated with underclocking if you don't really need the full performance out of the card anyway yet still want all the added features the card provides.

The way I look at it the Fermi and 5 series card both have their pro's and con's so it boils down to what the user cares about most, but that's how it always ends up being.
0 0 [Posted by: knowom  | Date: 04/06/10 02:17:52 PM]

Just a note. In Just Cause 2, the fermi is actually 20% faster than the hd 5870 if they had been running the same settings. For the GTX480, additional CUDA specific features like Bokeh filters and GPU Water Simulation are enabled at default. As denoted here.

All the other results seem consistent with other review sites.
0 0 [Posted by: lukesky  | Date: 04/06/10 03:43:20 PM]
- collapse thread

In Just Cause 2, the fermi is actually 20% faster than the hd 5870 if they had been running the same settings. For the GTX480, additional CUDA specific features like Bokeh filters and GPU Water Simulation are enabled at default.

Try to read more attentively:
Just Cause 2 (DirectX 11) - version, maximum quality settings, Background Blur and GPU Water Simulation off, a double sequential ruin of the Dark Tower demo.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 04/06/10 10:11:43 PM]

Just curious, did you use Catalyst 10.3 and added the latest Ati application profiles as well?

Not many reviewers have explicitly stated that they used the latest profile updates. HardOCP, Anandtech and Techreport did state it though. HardOCP: "Catalyst 10.3a Preview + Profile Update 3/19/2010" Anandtech: "For the AMD cards, we used AMD’s Catalyst 10.3a drivers along with the latest driver profile update." Tom's Hardware, Guru3D and Xbitlabs only mention the driver. Did they use the latest profiles?

According to Terry Makedon, the ATI Catalyst 10.3 CrossfireX Application Profiles (available since 19/3) added these new profiles to the Catalyst 10.3/10.3a Preview:
•Heaven – Crossfire profile
•Dark Void – Crossfire profile
•Singularity – Crossfire profile
•Unigine Heaven Demo – Crossfire profile
•Just Cause 2 -> Single GPU and Crossfire profile
•Battlefield Bad Company 2 -> Crossfire profile
•AvP -> Single GPU and Crossfire profile

In Xbitlab's test suite they would have affected performance only in Just Cause 2 and maybe Unigine, so no major impact if they were not used, but still, when it's not stated it makes me wonder if it's a minor oversight or (worse) an unawareness of this new Catalyst system with separate application profile updates?

Did Xbitlab's test use the newest profiles?
0 0 [Posted by: steelmartin  | Date: 04/06/10 04:57:25 PM]
- collapse thread

Did Xbitlab's test use the newest profiles?

Yes, naturally.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 04/06/10 10:12:58 PM]

I've been waiting for this Xbitlabs review of the GTX 480 because they seem to be the only site with the capabilities to single out the actual power consumption of the GPU from the full system. Most sites simply use a wall socket wattage measurement, but I thought Xbit had the capabilities to show us the actual power consumption of the GPU alone... Did I miss it? Am I crazy?

Otherwise, great review- way to get games across the spectrum- not just the "latest and greatest."
0 0 [Posted by: lh3nry  | Date: 04/06/10 05:17:57 PM]

The GTX 480 shines in tesellation and probably in video, image and 3d editing. I hope xbit also makes a benchmark review of these.I envied the tesellation performance of the GF100 series (but not the power draw, price and heat) I hope ATI/AMD southern and northern island can complete with the gf100 in tesellation (if tesellation is the future of gaming)
0 0 [Posted by: shadowfax  | Date: 04/06/10 06:10:23 PM]
- collapse thread

May be it will be in the next articles.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 04/06/10 10:13:55 PM]

No Bad Company 2 bench? Why would you leave this out when you dedicated an entire article to the game a few weeks ago. I know there are many of us out there dying to see how the 480 does vs the 5870 and 295.
0 0 [Posted by: LedHed  | Date: 04/06/10 09:29:00 PM]
- collapse thread

No Bad Company 2 bench?

Where is the bench in the Bad Company 2?
In this game there is no possibility to record and play demos for the correct benching.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 04/06/10 10:15:15 PM]
Just a standard FRAPS bench it's enough I think...
0 0 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 04/07/10 06:52:40 AM]

Sergey pls give them some critics about TDP and temperature which is abnormal on our green planet.
0 0 [Posted by: Blackcode  | Date: 04/07/10 01:47:12 PM]
- collapse thread

I don't understand you.
0 0 [Posted by: Jordan  | Date: 04/08/10 12:36:52 AM]
Sergey already said "Easy to see, the GeForce GTX 480 configuration needs about 130 watts more than the Radeon HD 5870 configuration under FurMark as well as under FurMark and Linpack x64 combined. Moreover, the GeForce GTX 480 configuration proves to require more juice than the configuration with the dual-processor Radeon HD 5970! That's a real hungry graphics card!"

Yeah, one could see from the graphs that a 40nm GTX 480 is almost even less efficient "per watt of consumption" than a GTX 295 in terms of performance, let alone a 5970!
0 0 [Posted by: Bo_Fox  | Date: 04/08/10 01:16:26 AM]

Good article
0 0 [Posted by: sanity  | Date: 04/09/10 04:40:44 PM]

The only suite of applications that would make me buy a GTX4XX series card is Adobe CS5.

This suite is heavily optimised for CUDA.

And it launches tomorrow - April the 12th!
0 0 [Posted by: Xer0  | Date: 04/11/10 04:49:32 AM]

CS5 support also OpenCL GPU+CPU that support ATI card,CUDA is only GPU or i am wrong ?
0 0 [Posted by: Blackcode  | Date: 04/11/10 09:03:41 AM]
- collapse thread

CS5 supports OpenCL - Yes. But it's been heavily optimised to perform well with CUDA.

Check out Nvidia website. As of today, they are showing off the exclusive support from Adobe.
0 0 [Posted by: Xer0  | Date: 04/12/10 01:45:08 PM]

Compared to the 295:

Same # stream processors.

Similar performance.

Similar heat or worse.

Similar power consumption.

Noise? Don't ask.

Higher price.

Such a deal!
0 0 [Posted by: Aristide1  | Date: 04/15/10 07:45:11 PM]

really wished there could have been a bench mark with two GTX 480's in SLI
0 0 [Posted by: DeathMark  | Date: 05/14/10 02:10:22 PM]


Back to the Article

Add your Comment