Your opinion on the GTX 470 & 480

[Slytat]

Originally Posted by Xion X2

That PCPer bench is very odd. In no instance should a 285 ever be faster than a 5870 over a full benchmark. In one case, I even saw it faster than the 480.

Something strange is going on there.

I like to see minimums as well, but something to take into account is that higher averages usually mean higher minimums, also. What you see on a bar graph for a minimum represents a single frame--not so for the average. Going by minimums only can be tricky unless viewing a line graph that shows trending, because that minimum on a bar graph could have lasted for a single frame. And it could've been a hard drive access issue or something totally unrelated to GPU performance.

Any analysis on minimums really needs to be trended by a line graph to show a repeating pattern.

A graph like this is what's needed to view minimums. Here you can clearly see the difference over a period of time between 480 SLI and 5970 on Metro when tesselation is enabled. Seems to be hitting 5970 a lot harder right now.

You beat me to it, those PCper benches are not consistent with any of the others I've read this evening.

Another interesting point is that in that video that Ywap linked (HardOCP), the 480 is hitting 95c and it's not even in a case - that's really not good.

[Xion X2]

Originally Posted by Slytat

Another interesting point is that in that video that Ywap linked (HardOCP), the 480 is hitting 95c and it's not even in a case - that's really not good.

LOL. Crazy.

What a difference shown in that video. Great find. It's shocking how much longer it takes 5870 to heat up than 480. 1/4 of the way through that test 480 was already at 95c with the fan spinning out of control, and half way in 5870 was still only around 80c and quiet as a mouse by comparison.

[Slytat]

Originally Posted by Xion X2

LOL. Crazy.

I can only imagine what happens when they are in a closed case. Imagine more than one?

[Madpistol]

Originally Posted by ALien8ed

Months of fuss over this.

Very, very disappointing.

They're decent cards. Nvidia's just too late with the proclaimed performance though. If these cards had been released 6 months earlier, they would have been a much easier sell.

[lee63]

This is what has sold me so far....as I always run a multi card config.

From Kyle @ [H]

NVIDIA rules the schoolyard when it comes to multi-GPU scaling. CrossFire gets left with a black eye.

[CaptNKILL]

So, is there a reason that the Firingsquad review is totally messed up with incorrect pictures, broken links and results that are completely different from all other sites?

[Xion X2]

Originally Posted by lee63

This is what has sold me so far....as I always run a multi card config.

Meh. Not sure what he's talking about there. FiringSquad showed the exact opposite as 5870 Crossfire was out in front in nearly half of the benches, despite 5870 getting beat in almost every test by 480.

With this stuff, you really just have to consult several different reviews and then pass judgment. People's setups can differ a lot, causing lots of variation.

My 5xxx rig is still in build, but I've been back and forth between Crossfire and SLI over the past few years, and my impression is that they're nearly identical to each other. Scaling is very similar, as most of the benches show.

[jimmyjames123]

Originally Posted by KasuCode

Before you go judging min FPS look at frame by frame graphs from sites that did them. ATI would have one spot that dropped 10fps lower than any other part in the whole benchmark. MIN FPS doesn't mean as much as you think. Look at how many times it actually drops that low.

Did you actually read the PCPer review? They had charts of framerate over time.

Of course min FPS is important when it comes to real world gameplay. Large discrepancies between max and min framerates are noticeable to the eye as a disturbance.

Anywhoo, here you go:

With the Batman Arkham Asylum benchmark, GTX 470 is ~14% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate:



With the FarCry2 benchmark, GTX 470 is ~50% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate (and GTX 480 is ~100% faster!):



With the HAWX benchmark, GTX 470 is ~25% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate:



With the Resident Evil 5 benchmark, GTX 470 is ~15% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate:



With the World In Conflict benchmark, GTX 470 is ~25% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate:



With the Metro 2033 benchmark, GTX 470 is ~15% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate (although AMD says that the drivers are poorly tuned for this benchmark):

[KasuCode]

Originally Posted by jimmyjames123

Did you even bother to read the PCPer review??? They had charts of framerate over time.

Min FPS is hugely important when it comes to real world gameplay. How anyone could argue otherwise is beyond me.

Anywhoo, here you go:

With the Batman Arkham Asylum benchmark, GTX 470 is ~14% faster than HD 5870 in terms of minimum framerate:

I did not say minimum frame rate is not important. The way you judge it is. PCP review doesn't use frame by frame. If you down know what I mean never mind.

[nekrosoft13]

Originally Posted by lee63

Also..not forgetting there will be a step up with these.

does it even matter? like there is going to be something new within 90 days

[jimmyjames123]

Originally Posted by KasuCode

I did not say minimum frame rate is not important. The way you judge it is. PCP review doesn't use frame by frame. If you down know what I mean never mind.

Minimum framerate is by definition the lowest framerate achieved over a given period of time. PCPer shows min/max/avg framerates over a given period of time, in addition to the full graph showing frames per second over a given time period. What more could anyone ask for? The min framerates are not in any way misleading in conjunction with the frames per second graph over time. One can clearly see that the GTX 470 keeps it's framerate up in some areas where the HD 5870 dips. The GTX 470 is clearly as good or better than HD 5870 in all those benchmarks listed above, while being far and away superior to the HD 5850 too. Give some credit where credit is due, my goodness.

[Bah!]

Originally Posted by Xion X2

Meh. Not sure what he's talking about there. FiringSquad showed the exact opposite as 5870 Crossfire was out in front in nearly half of the benches, despite 5870 getting beat in almost every test by 480.

With this stuff, you really just have to consult several different reviews and then pass judgment. People's setups can differ a lot, causing lots of variation.

My 5xxx rig is still in build, but I've been back and forth between Crossfire and SLI over the past few years, and my impression is that they're nearly identical to each other. Scaling is very similar, as most of the benches show.

The 480's actually do scale a hell of a lot better in SLI than anything in Crossfire. In fact, that's the only way I would buy one of these new Nvidia cards, but that's just a waste of money at this point.


I was really hoping for either the 480 to be dramatically faster than the 5870 or for the price to be a bit cheaper (which i knew wouldn't happen). Unfortunately, neither of these things happened so it looks like I'll be keeping my 295 for another generation or so.

As far as the question of the thread, what is my opinion of the 470/480? As an exclusive Nvidia card user for well over a decade I'm completely and utterly disappointed. As far as I'm concerned it's the 5 series all over again. The cards basically fail in price/performance, heat and noise, with the one saving grace being the upper elite dual 480 setup which is more than I'm willing to spend to play a few games.

Total bummer. All this waiting and buildup only to be let down. I guess if these cards had come out before or even near the time of the Ati cards I wouldn't be nearly as annoyed, but to come out this late and with obvious issues it sucks.