I know nobody really knows but is a GTX480 going to be faster then a HD5970

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Enrico_be

* Asus may show Dual GPU Fermi on Compute 2010.



--

If what they think it could imply is correct, then yes a single GTX 480 could be faster or at least come close to a HD5970

Nah,ROG cards like that custom HD 5970 asus is going to release are likely limited edition cards,as they use their own PCB and power regulation circuitry,not to mention 4GB of ram and even 3 PCI-e power connectors....Basically a card that has no chance in hell to pass the PCI-e consortiums 300 watt power consumption limit needed for mass volume production.


These cards are for people like Sampsa,Kinc and all the other extreme high end users that are aiming to break benchmark records and are backed by hardware companies in order to be finance this very expensive hobby,and they'll buy a pair of these,likely costing the same as the GTX295 MARS cards did,strip the cooler than comes with it,and overvolt to hell and use liquid nitrogen cooling to keep temperatures under control and see what they can really do,even if only it's 5 minute runs.


Whatever the real answer ATI has for Fermi,has to be much more affordable and pass the PCI-e power standard limit at the very least for mass production...Assuming they need to do it of course,but the good thing is that it seems Nvidia will finally unveil the actual clock speeds for Fermi at Cebit afterall,so we can get a better idea then.


Whatever happends with Fermi in terms of performance,at least it'll go into the guiness world record book as the most drawn out launch in history...

[Johnny C]

Ok,

Here's what I'm betting:

The GTX 480 will be about 10%-15% faster than a single 5870 1GB overall. However in extremely tessellation limited situations, AKA the Heaven Demo, it will actually be as fast or slightly faster than the 5970 dual card. However in your average gaming situation it will not be anywhere near the 5970 unless x-fire isn't functioning. Fermi will also have some issues with driver/game support similar to the 8800GTX at launch.

The GTX 470 will be about as fast as the 5870, again faster in some situations or in specific games yet slower in others. In some situations it will be bested by a 5850 at stock or slightly overclocked.

If/when AMD releases the 5890 2gb(I'm betting 2gb frame buffer) it will include a larger tessellation block and some manufacturing tweaks and will be at least 10% faster than the GTX480 in all but very limited situations. Also there will be more availability of the 5970 with some cards being in stock at most major retailers. AMD will shift their marketing to this card...and defend the performance crown until we see a dual Fermi card.

As far as availability goes: the GTX 470 will be available shortly after launch in low but existent quantities...however the GTX 480 will be scarce and they will be at a premium price until June.

Dual GPU Fermi Card: not gonna see it till yields improve and either a complete re-spin is done (B1 revision) or 28nm solves some of the transistor leakage and defect issues.

I've been contemplating starting a thread here titled:

"My GTX 480/470 is overheating" but I think that may be jumping the gun and would be considered trolling despite the humor associated with it.

After all is said and done everyone will realize that Fermi is not a Graphics chip at all, it designed for something different, it's made for GPGPU and has been pulled off the bench to do double duty against AMDTi's truly dedicated graphics chip.

I believe Fermi really is a giant step forward....but that we won't see the tangible benefits to the gaming community until it's next gen.....and/or a die shrink.

DISCUSS

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Johnny C

Ok,

Here's what I'm betting:

The GTX 480 will be about 10%-15% faster than a single 5870 1GB overall. However in extremely tessellation limited situations, AKA the Heaven Demo, it will actually be as fast or slightly faster than the 5970 dual card. However in your average gaming situation it will not be anywhere near the 5970 unless x-fire isn't functioning. Fermi will also have some issues with driver/game support similar to the 8800GTX at launch.

The GTX 470 will be about as fast as the 5870, again faster in some situations or in specific games yet slower in others. In some situations it will be bested by a 5850 at stock or slightly overclocked.

If/when AMD releases the 5890 2gb(I'm betting 2gb frame buffer) it will include a larger tessellation block and some manufacturing tweaks and will be at least 10% faster than the GTX480 in all but very limited situations. Also there will be more availability of the 5970 with some cards being in stock at most major retailers. AMD will shift their marketing to this card...and defend the performance crown until we see a dual Fermi card.

As far as availability goes: the GTX 470 will be available shortly after launch in low but existent quantities...however the GTX 480 will be scarce and they will be at a premium price until June.

Dual GPU Fermi Card: not gonna see it till yields improve and either a complete re-spin is done (B1 revision) or 28nm solves some of the transistor leakage and defect issues.

I've been contemplating starting a thread here titled:

"My GTX 480/470 is overheating" but I think that may be jumping the gun and would be considered trolling despite the humor associated with it.

After all is said and done everyone will realize that Fermi is not a Graphics chip at all, it designed for something different, it's made for GPGPU and has been pulled off the bench to do double duty against AMDTi's truly dedicated graphics chip.

I believe Fermi really is a giant step forward....but that we won't see the tangible benefits to the gaming community until it's next gen.....and/or a die shrink.

DISCUSS

Honestly i don't know anymore,as there's been so many predictions made so far,covering the entire performance envelope,that someone will get it right and and "I told you so"...


Having said that though,and keeping Guru3D's own comments into consideration,which the author really has to know the actual performance by now,even though he can't reveal exact numbers,he simply stated it isn't going to be a knockdown blow relative to the HD5870 and he seems certain of it,so i'm i'm guessing that it'll be close to the same performamce difference that happened between the HD4870 and the GTX 280,or the HD4890 versus the GTX285 cards....In short,about 10~15% better for Nvidia in this case on average.


If that is the case though,will it be enough to keep it from getting roasted on reviews,given the delays and much higher power consumption though?,or that ATI can lower prices on the HD5870 cards,still make money on them given the smaller cypress dies and 256 bit memory bus,which needs less memory modules and uses a simpler PCB?,or even really require them to release a refresh card at all?


I'm sure that they can release a refesh of cypress,and for all we know,they could be stockpiling cypress chips that can clock higher than 850mhz,and do it reliably,to quickly recover on that 10~15% performance difference anyhow,by releasing an HD5890 card,with no other changes required to keep it a tight race in actual games,rather than synthetic benchmarks using polygon budgets we won't see in actual games for a couple more years,as consoles are still stuck with DX9 level GPU's will make sure of that,and pretty much all new game releases are multiplatform these days,with maybe a few quick DX10/DX11 tweaks added for the PC version at most....Hardly anything that will put the tesselator to the test in either Fermi's or Cypress chips as it is,even if Fermi's has more performance there.


Then there's the 28nm bulk process happening late this year,or early next,which an updated Fermi card with even more hardware resources is being developed right now for sure,and ATI is also doing the same with their next generation as well,regardless if it's still based off Cypress or using a new architecture built from scratch....That's the common point between both companies,the actual fabrication process for their GPU's,which comes from the same company for the last 10+ years(TSMC),and the design rules are same for both,hence why the competition in terms of performance has pretty much always been pretty tight overall.



I see this competition as being fairly over in realistic terms,as by the time Fermi is out in decent volumes for both the GTX470 and GTX480 cards,we should be hearing the first rumors on the next generation products built at 28nm anyhow,maybe even news about those next generation GPU's already gone thru the tapeout phase already,which usually means 6 months from that point to retail launch if nothing screws up too badly.

[Trademark]

Originally Posted by Enrico_be

Hehe, the Fermin card I recently had a debate with some members there because they were claiming semiaccurate.com is a very reliable source ... after some discussion they actually convinced me Few days later, the Fermin article appeared and I only read some specs and was so euphoric that I immediately copy pasted some stuff en started posting on some fora (like tweakers.net) ... because I like to bring the latest news I made a big mistake not actually reading it ... yea, I thought it was real :x I won't make that mistake again

The tweaker site is a very good news site and they have a very big dutch community And same, also not a superactive member You will find most of my posts in the latest Nvidia thread and a few in the Flight simulator thread

Haha, yeh I saw some of it in the NVIDIA thread. You edited your post to say something like "//fake" Yeh tweakers is pretty much the site to go if you're interested in anything related to computers and other stuff. Great site.

[Rollo]

Here's my prediction:
Q2/Q3/Q4 see a 66% NVIDIA/34%ATi desktop marketshare ratio like we had last year.

Some will buy/keep ATi cards because they'll be cheaper. Most will buy NVIDIA cards because a. they do anyway due to name recognition b. even more so due to feature set.

ATi can go on about "open standards" for things like AA, PhysX, and 3d, but the public doesn't care about that- they just want the stuff.

Personally I'm counting the days till 3d Surround drivers are available- I just want to have it after playing with it at CES. I don't especially care ATi has opened up the drivers so 3rd party firms can develop for it- I want the tech NOW not in some hoped for future.

Same with PhysX. I want the option to use it NOW, not in the hoped for future. Even if they do some OpenCL physics games, I'll be able to use them as well. I want ALL physics accelerated games because they look better. The Terminator Salvation vid on YouTube pretty much nails why people should want PhysX:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWukRISu8cg

It's pretty obvious which looks better and would be more fun to play.

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Here's my prediction:
Q2/Q3/Q4 see a 66% NVIDIA/34%ATi desktop marketshare ratio like we had last year.

Some will buy/keep ATi cards because they'll be cheaper. Most will buy NVIDIA cards because a. they do anyway due to name recognition b. even more so due to feature set.

ATi can go on about "open standards" for things like AA, PhysX, and 3d, but the public doesn't care about that- they just want the stuff.

Personally I'm counting the days till 3d Surround drivers are available- I just want to have it after playing with it at CES. I don't especially care ATi has opened up the drivers so 3rd party firms can develop for it- I want the tech NOW not in some hoped for future.

Same with PhysX. I want the option to use it NOW, not in the hoped for future. Even if they do some OpenCL physics games, I'll be able to use them as well. I want ALL physics accelerated games because they look better. The Terminator Salvation vid on YouTube pretty much nails why people should want PhysX:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWukRISu8cg

It's pretty obvious which looks better and would be more fun to play.

Actually it's pretty much split 3 ways between intel/Nvidia and ATI overall....Even though by modern standards,Intel built in graphics within it's chipsets suck hard on both performance and features,and the last dedicated video card intel relased was the i740 way back in the Nvidia Riva 128 days(NV 3 GPU i think).


Anyhow,the main reason for open standards for me isn't just so that i can use any video card to enjoy it,but mainly for developers to use that feature on all games,knowing full well they'll work with all hardware....Keeping it closed to one brand will absolutely make sure it'll never reach the popularity it could otherwise,as Nvidia isn't the only player in the market,and developers know this full well.


Assuming of course,we weren't largely playing tweaked console ports on our PC's anyhow,so the consoles did win the overall battle,as i haven't seen a PC exclusive title in quite a while now.

[Johnny C]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Here's my prediction:
Q2/Q3/Q4 see a 66% NVIDIA/34%ATi desktop marketshare ratio like we had last year.

Some will buy/keep ATi cards because they'll be cheaper. Most will buy NVIDIA cards because a. they do anyway due to name recognition b. even more so due to feature set.

ATi can go on about "open standards" for things like AA, PhysX, and 3d, but the public doesn't care about that- they just want the stuff.

Personally I'm counting the days till 3d Surround drivers are available- I just want to have it after playing with it at CES. I don't especially care ATi has opened up the drivers so 3rd party firms can develop for it- I want the tech NOW not in some hoped for future.

Same with PhysX. I want the option to use it NOW, not in the hoped for future. Even if they do some OpenCL physics games, I'll be able to use them as well. I want ALL physics accelerated games because they look better. The Terminator Salvation vid on YouTube pretty much nails why people should want PhysX:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWukRISu8cg

It's pretty obvious which looks better and would be more fun to play.

I wouldn't consider Physx to be an argument to wait for Fermentation. Using a single card with physx reduces performance, however using a dedicated physx card you can use either AMD or nV and since AMD's on the shelf right now, offers kickass performance and many people were wondering what they were going to to with that old 9800GT anyway, it's a no brainer get a 5000 series card for video, and use that old nV card as dedicated physx. Win on both fronts. DX11 and Physx....now that's awesome.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Johnny C

I wouldn't consider Physx to be an argument to wait for Fermentation. Using a single card with physx reduces performance, however using a dedicated physx card you can use either AMD or nV and since AMD's on the shelf right now, offers kickass performance and many people were wondering what they were going to to with that old 9800GT anyway, it's a no brainer get a 5000 series card for video, and use that old nV card as dedicated physx. Win on both fronts. DX11 and Physx....now that's awesome.

A guy with a Phenom and a Radeon doesn't think a lot of PhysX?! No way!

Unfortunately, NVIDIA doesn't QA ATi products for PhysX, so there are no official drivers for such an arrangement.

YMMV, significantly, by trying to use hacks and bathtub drivers. Hopefully people won't take your advice and think they can use an ATi cards with a dedicated PhysX card. Even if it works one day, it may not the next, and who knows if everything will be rendered as it should when using unofficial drivers?

As for PhysX reducing performance, why yes Johnny, most things that greatly enhance image quality do. People should watch that Terminator Salvation video I linked to and notice how the game is going to look like an Xbox game on their Radeon, and like cutting edge tech on their GeForce.

[Iruwen]

Originally Posted by Rollo

People should watch that Terminator Salvation video I linked to and notice how the game is going to look like an Xbox game on their Radeon, and like cutting edge tech on their GeForce.

Of course it does, since it's an NV promo video.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by shadow001

Actually it's pretty much split 3 ways between intel/Nvidia and ATI overall....Even though by modern standards,Intel built in graphics within it's chipsets suck hard on both performance and features,and the last dedicated video card intel relased was the i740 way back in the Nvidia Riva 128 days(NV 3 GPU i think).

ATi fans always want people to think ATi is a big player in the market, and that whenever ATi releases a new card "NVIDIA is doomed!"

And then when the dust settles after all this ATi p3wning, we see that ATi is just a bit player in the market (like their owner AMD):

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...market-share/1

So after 9 months of supposed ATi "triumph" due to GTX2XXs being "too hot, too expensive" and "WTF?! Rebrand!", NVIDIA cards were still outselling ATi cards over 2:1.

And then of course there was Q4 2009, where even though ATi had good supply of DX11 parts, 5770 and below, sporadic good supplies of 5850/5870s, and highly competive DX10.1 products, they lost discrete marketshare again.

http://www.techeye.net/chips/nvidia-...-without-fermi

So it looks like no matter WHAT ATi does, people don't seem to care.

My theory is this is why we see people like you on the forums working so long and hard to prop up ATi and post FUD about NVIDIA. It's all they can do. Now after Fermis launch we'll surely be treated to "But ...but..they cost more to make! I want a chip that's efficient to manufacture!" or "But they cost too much! Radeons are a darn good deal".

While this lament goes on, NVIDIA will dominate the market as usual.

[Rollo]

Originally Posted by Iruwen

Of course it does, since it's an NV promo video.

Which doesn't really matter at all because it's just captured game play. ATi owners can't turn on the effects that make the NVIDIA version look so much better.

A few years back when Havok and Ageia were up for sale, ATi didn't have any money to buy them so they left current day ATi owners out in the cold for accelerated physics effects.

[Iruwen]

Originally Posted by Rollo

Which doesn't really matter at all because it's just captured game play. ATi owners can't turn on the effects that make the NVIDIA version look so much better.

A few years back when Havok and Ageia were up for sale, ATi didn't have any money to buy them so they left current day ATi owners out in the cold for accelerated physics effects.

Which means the games (or tech demos) shown simply don't render any effects without PhysX capable hardware, not that it cannot be done without PhysX. Especially Havok has shown that much of this can be done without any hardware support (of course, anything can be done in software).
This list of PhysX supporting games (though it may not be complete, but it even includes PS3 exclusives like Heavy Rain and titles which aren't even released yet) shows how relevant PhysX really is and how interested game developers are in limiting the full game experience to just a part of their customers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhysX#Games
This also includes titles like Cryostasis which was a total ressource hog and almost implayable on any system.