First benchmarks of GTX 470

[AT1st]

Hi,
Heise got their hands on the first benchmarks of a pre-version of the GTX470 today on cebit.
The whole article can be found here: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldu...lt-946411.html(german).

Summary:
3DMark Vantage (X-Mode): 7511 Points
Radeon HD 5870: 8730 Points
HD 5850: 6430 Points
GeForce GTX 285: 6002 Points

Performance-Mode: 17156
Radeon HD 5870: 17303
Radeon HD 5850: 14300

Unigine-Benchmarks (DirectX 11 & Tessellation):
GeForce GTX 470: 29 fps
Radeon HD 5870: 27 fps
HD 5850: 22 fps

with 8x AA:
GeForce GTX 470: 20 fps
Radeon HD 5870: 23 fps
Radeon HD 5850: 19 fps

Clockspeeds:
Shader: 1255 MHz
GDDR5 Ram: 1600 MHz (Read-Write-Clock)

So rather disappointing I guess...

Oh and I'm sorry, I just saw that those numbers were already posted in the gf100 preview thread. I missed the post when I looked there before making a new topic...

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by AT1st

Hi,
Heise got their hands on the first benchmarks of a pre-version of the GTX470 today on cebit.
The whole article can be found here: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldu...lt-946411.html(german).

Summary:
3DMark Vantage (X-Mode): 7511 Points
Radeon HD 5870: 8730 Points
HD 5850: 6430 Points
GeForce GTX 285: 6002 Points

Performance-Mode: 17156
Radeon HD 5870: 17303
Radeon HD 5850: 14300

Unigine-Benchmarks (DirectX 11 & Tessellation):
GeForce GTX 470: 29 fps
Radeon HD 5870: 27 fps
HD 5850: 22 fps

with 8x AA:
GeForce GTX 470: 20 fps
Radeon HD 5870: 23 fps
Radeon HD 5850: 19 fps

Clockspeeds:
Shader: 1255 MHz
GDDR5 Ram: 1600 MHz (Read-Write-Clock)

So rather disappointing I guess...

If there's any truth to that it means nVidia's 2nd tier part will compete with ATi's. The 480 will have to compete with the 5970. However, at that point nVidia isn't leaving themselves a lot of room for a dual GPU part. Maybe they don't plan one this gen?

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

If there's any truth to that it means nVidia's 2nd tier part will compete with ATi's. The 480 will have to compete with the 5970. However, at that point nVidia isn't leaving themselves a lot of room for a dual GPU part. Maybe they don't plan one this gen?

If those are accurate,the extra 14% in shader and 20% extra memory bandwith for the GTX480,by having the full 512 shaders and 384 bit bus,simply isn't enough to go after the HD5970 performance wise,and actually challenge it in a meaningfull way.


If the GTX480 really does use close to 300 watts as the leaks suggest,which is the maximum that the PCI-e spec allows power wise,then making a dual GPU variation using GTX480 chips is flat out of the question.


Even using GTX470 GPU's,it would already be pretty hard,as the HD5870 cards use 188 watts as it is,and the dual GPU variant clocks in at 294 watts,but only after the clocks were lowered to 750/1000(850/1200 is stock) and ATI uses cherry picked Cypress chips running at 1.05 volts to make the HD 5970 possible.


Available information suggests that the GTX470 clocks in at 220 watts power consumption,so a dual GPU card using those would need even more drastic mesures that ATI did with the HD5970 cards(disabling hardware inside the GPU),and at that point,would it still beat the HD5970 performance wise?


My own opinion is that Fermi needs 28nm in a big way to cut down on power consumption significantly,increase yeilds,potentially raise operating clock speeds for the core,and make it technically possible to make a dual GPU card and stay under that 300 watt limit....It's simply too big and power hungry to allow that while still built at 40nm.

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by shadow001

If those are accurate,the extra 14% in shader and 20% extra memory bandwith for the GTX480,by having the full 512 shaders and 384 bit bus,simply isn't enough to go after the HD5970 performance wise,and actually challenge it in a meaningfull way.


If the GTX480 really does use close to 300 watts as the leaks suggest,which is the maximum that the PCI-e spec allows power wise,then making a dual GPU variation using GTX480 chips is flat out of the question.


Even using GTX470 GPU's,it would already be pretty hard,as the HD5870 cards use 188 watts as it is,and the dual GPU variant clocks in at 294 watts,but only after the clocks were lowered to 750/1000(850/1200 is stock) and ATI uses cherry picked Cypress chips running at 1.05 volts to make the HD 5970 possible.


Available information suggests that the GTX470 clocks in at 220 watts power consumption,so a dual GPU card using those would need even more drastic mesures that ATI did with the HD5970 cards(disabling hardware inside the GPU),and at that point,would it still beat the HD5970 performance wise?


My own opinion is that Fermi needs 28nm in a big way to cut down on power consumption significantly,increase yeilds,potentially raise operating clock speeds for the core,and make it technically possible to make a dual GPU card and stay under that 300 watt limit....It's simply too big and power hungry to allow that while still built at 40nm.

I'm not GPU-architect-engineering-guru but...

It seems I recall the 7800GTX was under whelming, and the refresh, on the same process was leaps and bounds better (7900GTX). If nVidia managed it with the 7900- why couldn't they here? Who knows what is going on under the hood- maybe a lot of power leakage? I mean, there's a reason it's inefficient. It's possible, I'd imagine, they could fix this with a refresh? Maybe?

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

I'm not GPU-architect-engineering-guru but...

It seems I recall the 7800GTX was under whelming, and the refresh, on the same process was leaps and bounds better (7900GTX). If nVidia managed it with the 7900- why couldn't they here? Who knows what is going on under the hood- maybe a lot of power leakage? I mean, there's a reason it's inefficient. It's possible, I'd imagine, they could fix this with a refresh? Maybe?

Well for one,you're mentioning a GPU with about 350 million transistors in it,and those GPU's used a lot less power to begin with,so it was easier on the cooling front as well,while fermi is 3 billion transistor processor afterall,is much larger and looks to use a lot more power.


The only chip that was close to Fermi's size in Nvidia's history was the original G80 GPU,when built at the 65 nm process,at about 576mm^ and it also used a 6 + 8 pin PCI-e power connector arrangement,using about 225 watts,but even then,the G80 was about 780 million transistors,give or take.


Fermi is a 3 billion transistor monster,and while the 40nm process also allows to reduce power consumption to a nice degree and make the actual die size small enough(relatively speaking here),to allow it to be built in volume,there are limits to it in the end,and there is an 850 million transistor difference between it and ATI's Cypress chip used on that very same TSMC process.


Regardless of how Fermi ends upin terms of gaming performance,that's still 850 million extra transistors that are being powered up and generating heat as they operate,so power consumption is higher,yeilds are lower(even if 100% of the chips were good) and so are the problems with keeping it running cool,or trying to make a dual GPU version of it.


Transitioning from 40nm down to 28nm,would cut the die size of fermi to about 1/2 of what it is at 40nm,so we'd see it shrink to about 250mm^(assuming Fermi is slightly over 500mm^ at 40nm),wich is a large drop and allows for options that simply aren't feasable at 40nm,even if no other changes are made to the architecture itself,which there will be for sure.

[Maverick123w]

If it benches between the the 5850 and the 5870 and comes in at $300 it will be a real winner. If it comes in at $400 it won't be.

[hell_of_doom227]

Excellent Numbers. So GTX480 sits betwen HD5870 and HD5870 X2 and considering what joke is Crossfire and CCC crapola, Nvidia owns them.

Can't wait to replace this garbage i currently own.

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Maverick123w

If it benches between the the 5850 and the 5870 and comes in at $300 it will be a real winner. If it comes in at $400 it won't be.

And since ATI can drop prices as their chips are smaller and only use a 256 bit bus,and still make money on each one they sell?...Fermi being that large and using a 384 bit bus,doesn't lend itself quite as well to price drops while still making money.


It's the HD4870 versus GTX280 or the HD4890 versus GTX 285 fight all over again,only this time,unlike those previous examples,it seems Nvidia doesn't have a performance edge to charge a premium anymore.


Interesting times ahead to say the least.

[Ninja Prime]

Originally Posted by hell_of_doom227

Excellent Numbers. So GTX480 sits betwen HD5870 and HD5870 X2 and considering what joke is Crossfire and CCC crapola, Nvidia owns them.

Can't wait to replace this garbage i currently own.

Edited BY Muya Ninja can you stop with the personal attacks in this thread..

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by hell_of_doom227

Excellent Numbers. So GTX480 sits betwen HD5870 and HD5870 X2 and considering what joke is Crossfire and CCC crapola, Nvidia owns them.

Can't wait to replace this garbage i currently own.

Why am i not surprised you'd say that....


It would be more like slightly edging out the HD5870 and still being far away from the HD5970 cards,and i get the impression that once Nvidia does eventually release a dual GPU version of fermi,you won't be saying that SLI is crap or not having SLI profiles as soon as new games are released.


Just my 0.02 cents though....

[hell_of_doom227]

Originally Posted by shadow001

Why am i not surprised you'd say that....


It would be more like slightly edging out the HD5870 and still being far away from the HD5970 cards,and i get the impression that once Nvidia does eventually release a dual GPU version of fermi,you won't be saying that SLI is crap or not having SLI profiles as soon as new games are released.


Just my 0.02 cents though....

SLI owns Crossfire, scaling is much better and i never complained about it. And Nvidia is so good with drivers release that in most cases they have SLI profile before the game is even released. I don't say that HD5870 is bad hardware but its support sucks balls making it not useable as Nvidia cards are. Simply AMD fail with CCC big time. I miss game profiles with Forceware big time where i can nicely force AA and other settings for each profile. Also Nvidia is really good in SLI Profile Update releases.

Fermi SLI 2x480 here i come!!!!

[Maverick123w]

Originally Posted by shadow001

And since ATI can drop prices as their chips are smaller and only use a 256 bit bus,and still make money on each one they sell?...Fermi being that large and using a 384 bit bus,doesn't lend itself quite as well to price drops while still making money.

Yeah it may be difficult for Nvidia if AMD really gets agressive with the pricing. I'ts obvious ATI can really drop the prices on their cards and still be profitable.

Originally Posted by Ninja Prime

You're such an idiot. I can't fathom how any being with braincells can be this stupid.

Truest statement in the history of teh NVNEWZ?