GTX 480: Worst GeForce card ever? - Page 5

**Roadhog** · 11-19-10, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grey_1

I hate how hot this card runs.

bad j/k

Because an a non-oem heatsink is obviously the same as oem.

11-19-10, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadhog

Because an a non-oem heatsink is obviously the same as oem.

You obviously missed the little "bad j/k

" at the bottom, no?

Bah! · 11-19-10, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

Note the bolded part... so I guess that mean no one is buying NV right, since last I checked the price/perf metrics all favored ATI by a country mile. Also, "just performance" is still held by a year old ATI 5970. Just sayin'.

What county mile would that be?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...TX_580/29.html

Just sayin'.

**lee63** · 11-19-10, 06:39 PM

Weren't the 7900GTX's pretty bad ? or was it just the OCed ones from EVGA...I remember returning about six of them.

I'll be getting two 580's sometime the beginning of next year, maybe three depending how demanding some of the new games will be.

Spyke · 11-19-10, 08:32 PM

Nothing wrong with 480's. I have all 3 of mine in SLI watercooled and they run really cool and damn near silent.

I'm easily good for the next year and a half at the very least for running the latest games fully maxed in 1080p. (I play on my TV)

No need for me to upgrade to 580's, wait until next generation when theres a real upgrade. Most of the advantages of the 580's are nulled with watercooling. Sure they run faster, but my 3 480's are clocked at 900Mhz core.

**AdamK47** · 11-19-10, 09:17 PM

The only "bad" series of nVidia cards were the FX series. Fermi is doing well, even the GTX 480.

Slytat · 11-19-10, 10:06 PM

Most people who rag on 480s (if not all of them) have never even owned them and are basing their opinions on SA FUD etc.

They are great cards.

Many enthusiasts don't care about TDP (that whole $5.00 or whatever) etc and I never had an issue with heat with my 480s. The 480's only real crime was being late, and that lateness was hurt even more by Nvidia's questionable PR, but as far as the actual hardware goes, they were the fastest single GPU's when they were released and they held that crown until their successor (the 580) arrived. I just don't see any fail there.

Of course, haters will hate, while the rest of us enjoy the best hardware, regardless of who manufactures it

Rollo · 11-19-10, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

Note the bolded part... so I guess that mean no one is buying NV right, since last I checked the price/perf metrics all favored ATI by a country mile. Also, "just performance" is still held by a year old ATI 5970. Just sayin'.

LOL do you even believe that, or has it stopped mattering?

Sazar · 11-19-10, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bah!

What county mile would that be?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...TX_580/29.html

Just sayin'.

For what it's worth, he spoke of PURE performance when comparing the 580 to the 5970. Your quoted chart shows nothing to change that.

Slytat · 11-19-10, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sazar

For what it's worth, he spoke of PURE performance when comparing the 580 to the 5970. Your quoted chart shows nothing to change that.

Fair enough, but as always, let's not forget that the 5970 is 2 GPUs and if we pit 2 5870s against 2 480s, we know what the outcome will be.

Of course, that's if we are talking about pure performance (and let's face it, that's what enthusiasts care about), regardless of price, tdp et al.

It's no different than comparing a 295 to a 4890.

Ninja Prime · 11-19-10, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bah!

What county mile would that be?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...TX_580/29.html

Just sayin'.

Maybe you should read your own link smarty pants... All but one bracket is won by ATI. Mid-high end = 6870 winnar. Mid range = 6850 winnar. Low mid range = 5770 winnar. Low end = 4850 winnar. The only one you can even argue is the top end 5970 vs 580 match up, which of course this was made before the price dropped on 5970, which right now at newegg are $469, making them win that one too.

Thanks for playing though brah!

Bah! · 11-20-10, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

Maybe you should read your own link smarty pants... All but one bracket is won by ATI. Mid-high end = 6870 winnar. Mid range = 6850 winnar. Low mid range = 5770 winnar. Low end = 4850 winnar. The only one you can even argue is the top end 5970 vs 580 match up, which of course this was made before the price dropped on 5970, which right now at newegg are $469, making them win that one too.

Thanks for playing though brah!

You still using that stupid "brah"? Welcome to 1990! Seriously, do you live in the mid-west or a foreign country or something where they are still a couple decades behind?

Anyway, even with the leads it's far from a "country mile" which is what the link shows.

11-19-10, 06:39 PM	#52
lee63 Classified Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Murrieta, U.S./Taunton, U.K. Posts: 4,263	Re: GTX 480: Worst GeForce card ever? Weren't the 7900GTX's pretty bad ? or was it just the OCed ones from EVGA...I remember returning about six of them. I'll be getting two 580's sometime the beginning of next year, maybe three depending how demanding some of the new games will be. __________________

11-19-10, 08:32 PM	#53
Spyke Foxie Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 618	Re: GTX 480: Worst GeForce card ever? Nothing wrong with 480's. I have all 3 of mine in SLI watercooled and they run really cool and damn near silent. I'm easily good for the next year and a half at the very least for running the latest games fully maxed in 1080p. (I play on my TV) No need for me to upgrade to 580's, wait until next generation when theres a real upgrade. Most of the advantages of the 580's are nulled with watercooling. Sure they run faster, but my 3 480's are clocked at 900Mhz core. __________________ Gaming: Intel i7 980X @ 4GHz \| ASUS Rampage III Extreme \| GTX 480 3Way SLI @ 900Mhz \| Koolance VID-NX480 \| Corsair Obsidian 700D Corsair H70 CPU Cooler \| EK-FB RE3 \| Corsair AX1200 \| Black Ice SR1 360 \| 240GB OCZ Revodrive X2 SSD \| Windows 7 Ultimate 12GB Corsair Dominator GT @ 8-8-8-24-1T DDR3-1600 \| Onkyo TX SR-707 \| 70" Sharp Aquos LCD \| KEF Audio 5.1 C3/C6LCR/C7 Workstation: Intel i7 920 D0 @ 4GHz \| ASUS Rampage II Extreme \| GTX 480 @ 800Mhz \| Koolance VID-NX480 \| Lian-Li V1200B \| Corsair HX1000 EK NB ASUS HP \| Watercool HeatKiller 3.0 \| Feser Extreme X-360 \| 2x160GB Intel X25-M SSD RAID0 \| 4x2TB WD20EARS RAID10 12GB Corsair Dominator @ 8-8-8-24-1T DDR3-1600 \| Creative X-Fi Titanium \| Pioneer DVR-212D \| Gentoo Linux Dell 3008WFP \| JohnBlue JB3 \| CityPulse DA2.03e II DAC \| KingRex T20U w/ Modded Auricaps & PSU \| Glow Audio Sub One Server: Quad Socket Opteron 8356 (16 cores) @ 2.3GHz \| Supermicro H8QMi-2 \| Supermicro 2U Chassis \| Redundant 1200W PSU 32GB 2GBx16 DDR2-667 ECC \| 4x 300GB Cheetah SAS RAID10 \| Adaptec 5805 512MB w/BBU \| Colocated \| Gentoo Linux

11-19-10, 09:17 PM	#54
AdamK47 Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Cinci, OH Posts: 984	Re: GTX 480: Worst GeForce card ever? The only "bad" series of nVidia cards were the FX series. Fermi is doing well, even the GTX 480.

11-19-10, 10:06 PM	#55
Slytat Registered User Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 354	Re: GTX 480: Worst GeForce card ever? Most people who rag on 480s (if not all of them) have never even owned them and are basing their opinions on SA FUD etc. They are great cards. Many enthusiasts don't care about TDP (that whole $5.00 or whatever) etc and I never had an issue with heat with my 480s. The 480's only real crime was being late, and that lateness was hurt even more by Nvidia's questionable PR, but as far as the actual hardware goes, they were the fastest single GPU's when they were released and they held that crown until their successor (the 580) arrived. I just don't see any fail there. Of course, haters will hate, while the rest of us enjoy the best hardware, regardless of who manufactures it