# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Reference Design Graphics Card Pictured



## btarunr (Oct 28, 2010)

Here are the first pictures of what is touted to be the GeForce GTX 580 reference design graphics card by NVIDIA, by sections of the Chinese media. There are some interesting inferences that can be drawn just by the looks of the card. To begin with the cooler bears an uncanny resemblance to one of the earliest design iterations of the GeForce GTX 480 (pictured here and here). In its final iteration, NVIDIA gave the GTX 480 a more massive cooler, perhaps to keep up with its finalized clock speeds. If the design of the GTX 580 cooler is anything to go by, it means that either NVIDIA refined the GF100 architecture in the GF110 (on which GTX 580 is based) a great deal, increasing performance per Watt; or that since GTX 580 is in its development stage, its final version could look different. GeForce GTX 580 is being designed as a counter to AMD's Radeon HD 6900 series single-GPU graphics cards that are based on the new Cayman graphics core, which is slated for release in late November. It is expected to be 20% faster than the GTX 480. 



 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## assaulter_99 (Oct 28, 2010)

If it really comes out like that, it means that they have indeed refined that gf100, which had a massive cooler on the belly. Only time will tell though.


----------



## n-ster (Oct 28, 2010)

I prefer massive coolers... they tend to be quieter


----------



## pantherx12 (Oct 28, 2010)

I bet it's just a vapour chamber instead of a heatpipe cooler.

And is still hot as bs.


----------



## crow1001 (Oct 28, 2010)

Looks good, just think the 6970 could hold the " fastest single GPU on the planet " accolade for the shortest time ever.


----------



## KaelMaelstrom (Oct 28, 2010)

1(580) vs 2(6970)? this is interesting, they might have a voodoo spell to make it faster than 6970


----------



## Jiraiya (Oct 28, 2010)

http://bbs.expreview.com/viewthread.php?tid=37388&from=recommend_f


----------



## Kenshai (Oct 28, 2010)

KaelMaelstrom said:


> 1(580) vs 2(6970)? this is interesting, they might have a voodoo spell to make it faster than 6970



They stated it's set to compete with the single core Caymans so I highly doubt it will equal two. I would honestly look to what they're saying ~20% faster than a GTX480. Honestly if they improved the power consumption similar to they did with the GTX460 it could be a great card with relatively low heat generation (Compared to the 480).


----------



## Mistral (Oct 28, 2010)

OMG, I mush hold off on buying any AMD cards and wait for this awesome beast...


----------



## pantherx12 (Oct 28, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> Looks good, just think the 6970 could hold the " fastest single GPU on the planet " accolade for the shortest time ever.




Come now an over-clocked 5870 tangles with a 480(stock) ( except in tessellation) it would be an EPIC fail if AMD put out anything less than 30% better than 480 imo.

Hell I still wouldn't be happy with that.


----------



## BorgOvermind (Oct 28, 2010)

*580...right...*

580 is currently PR. And that's about it.
Showed there is a card case and nothing more. Could be anything inside.
A fully unlocked 480 is still unbuildable and would be sold at a loss. The 580 would have to be build on GF104's modified architecture to be good for something.


----------



## v12dock (Oct 28, 2010)

A GTX 480 cooler on a higher TDP card, hmm....


----------



## aCid888* (Oct 28, 2010)

If this doesnt turn in to a thread full of crap I'll be shocked lol


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Oct 28, 2010)

aCid888* said:


> If this doesnt turn in to a thread full of crap I'll be shocked lol


Id run for president


----------



## Kenshai (Oct 28, 2010)

BorgOvermind said:


> 580 is currently PR. And that's about it.
> Showed there is a card case and nothing more. Could be anything inside.
> A fully unlocked 480 is still unbuildable and would be sold at a loss. The 580 would have to be build on GF104's modified architecture to be good for something.



You should probably read the summary posted here.



> If the design of the GTX 580 cooler is anything to go by, it means that either NVIDIA refined the GF100 architecture *in the GF110 (on which GTX 580 is based)* a great deal, increasing performance per Watt; or that since GTX 580 is in its development stage, its final version could look different


----------



## BorgOvermind (Oct 28, 2010)

Yes...and GF110 should be closer to GF104 (shader / cluster arrangement, etc.)


----------



## JATownes (Oct 28, 2010)

I am an AMD fan (as most of you know), but if NV can pull this off, it could be what Fermi should have been in the first place...EPIC.  Refinement in the design and working the kinks out of the FAB process could have cured most of the early problems associated with Fermi.  The 460 is pretty damn impressive, and I don't think anyone can argue that, so this could be the "ace in the hole" that NV needs right now.  (As long as it isn't delayed until June )


----------



## jamsbong (Oct 28, 2010)

the GTX580 suppose to be 20% faster than 480? If that is true then the Cayman will still eat the 580 for breakfast.

http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/19873

Anyway, Nvidia is desperate. you can tell by the rapid price drops and almost silly announcement of the 580. I bet it will just be another paper launch. when it actually comes out, it will be full of problems and a power guzzler. 

FERMI is the hottest chip i've ever seen. This means durability and thus future reliability is in question. I just wonder how is the FERMI card gonna survive until when DX11 is readily available in all PC games? There is a good chance when all games are DX11, the FERMI chip is already broken.


----------



## sneekypeet (Oct 28, 2010)

I dont know what kind of math you do, but 20% over the number in your own link makes for a 6FPS gain on the 480 score, which matches your linked AMD score...so where is this stomping?


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Oct 28, 2010)

jamsbong said:


> FERMI is the hottest chip i've ever seen.



Yea like your 4890 is a cool running card, it was a monster for heat and power when it came out for ATI and isn't that far off fermi now


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 28, 2010)

This might be my next card depending on the price. I've dieing to go green lately.


----------



## f22a4bandit (Oct 28, 2010)

Like sheep lining up for the slaughter. Speculation is just speculation; hold out on praise/bitching until you hear the reviews.


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 28, 2010)

Even if NVIDIA pulls something spectacular, i don't think i'll be able to separate myself from Morphological AA function. So, until NVIDIA can offer something similar (decent antialiasing quality, low impact and works in every game without exceptions), i'm sold to AMD.


----------



## wahdangun (Oct 28, 2010)

hmm this card remind me about 9800GTX card its look really identical


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 28, 2010)

jamsbong said:


> the GTX580 suppose to be 20% faster than 480? If that is true then the Cayman will still eat the 580 for breakfast.
> 
> http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/19873
> 
> ...



To bad fermi isnt even that hot. I have a 470 and ive ran a 480 for a while. And they do not get that hot. I dont know why you guys get so butt hurt about things getting hot. we are PC Enthusiast we should expect to have things run hot. FERMI can run that hot to its not like its hurting it. my GTX480 ran at 75c gaming and my 470 ran at 65 to 70c gaming. Whats wrong with those temps. I had like 150mhz overclocks on them both to.


----------



## kid41212003 (Oct 28, 2010)

I suggest everyone should stop saying shit about GTX480 unless you do own one . FurMark and games are night and day. 

This will probably base on the newer revisions of GF100 like the news stated. A GTX460 with more shaders pretty likely.


----------



## mdm-adph (Oct 28, 2010)

And this won't be called the GTX 490 because...


----------



## sneekypeet (Oct 28, 2010)

I guess the same reason the 6850 isn't called the 6770


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 28, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> To bad fermi isnt even that hot. I have a 470 and ive ran a 480 for a while. And they do not get that hot. I dont know why you guys get so butt hurt about things getting hot. we are PC Enthusiast we should expect to have things run hot. FERMI can run that hot to its not like its hurting it. my GTX480 ran at 75c gaming and my 470 ran at 65 to 70c gaming. Whats wrong with those temps. I had like 150mhz overclocks on them both to.



Dude Fermi is hot. It kills your ambient case temps as an enthusiast you SHOULD care about that. Now I know you're a major fanboy but lets be realistic here. I ain't saying its a bad card mind you. But saying its not hot is just stupid.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Oct 28, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Now I know you're a major fanboy but lets be realistic here.



Lol how old are we, that we have to resort to using the word fanboy lol (p.s he's a n00b too  ) 

On a serious note, i have to agree and say that my 470 isn't that bad with heat whilst gaming, it sits at 46c idel at the aero desktop and runs mid 70's whilst gaming, if you want to play furmark thats a different story but I don't and I have no issues with ambient heat. 

I know the 480 is worse for heat than the 470 so thats maybe a different story but as far as I'm concerned the 470 is no hotter than my old 4890


----------



## filip007 (Oct 28, 2010)

Another empty shell like it was GTX 480 one year ago...and lets not forget 59XX Radeon is still coming.


----------



## sneekypeet (Oct 28, 2010)

Ok I'm just plain tired of the trolling.....

If you don't have anything to add, don't post. Everyone who doesn't have something good or productive to add will be given 5 points for each post from here on out.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Oct 28, 2010)

coolers still look nearly the same as fermi does, if nv still stick with 40mm and make 580 just like they said with 512 SP enabled. then it would be hot and gone to power disasters..

they could reconstruct the chip based on GF104 arrangement, so 580 can be more power friendly. but because we havent see fully enabled GF104 chip either, that construction will need more time, and that februari releases could be delayed..


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

I'm actually pretty pissed off at Nvidia.  Here's why:

Way back in 2009 i was eagerly awaiting the Nvidia masterpiece that was to be the GF 100 Fermi.  I had no love of ATI whatsoever, had come from GTX 295 - GTX 260 - 8800GTX - 8800GT (yes odd order!) - 7950 GT sli - 'can't recall', 6800 i think.  Last ATI was a 9800.

Fermi was hyped - i was like - YES!!!!!! Gimme gimme gimme!  Then the delays started seeping through and i was pretty disappointed.  Then i started reading reviews of the 5850's and 5870's and was surprised.  Knowing Fermi was a few months out (happened to be about 6!) I went out and bought 2 5850's.  And i have been a very happy ATI customer (for it was ATI back then).

Now this BS from Nvidia.  I dont't doubt they have a super powerful 580 coming but when?  There are NO specs - no certainty about what the arch is (is it GF 104 or fixed GF 100?).  All we have are these sodding pictures of a plastic toy.

If they managed to have this ready for the 6970 launch then i would seriously consider it as an option.  I am pissed because they are doing Fermi 2009 all over again.  Teasing with a couple of tactically leaked shots to try and place doubt in the minds of people like me about to jump to the 69xx series (if its any good that is).

I am pissed because we the consumers are not being given a fair choice here.  It stirs up all the blatant bullshit we see in the forums from both sides.  If only we had TWO products to weigh up against each other we could make a fair and informed decision - BUT WE CAN'T!

Why? Because Nvidia are doing the scaremongering again.  I would love to buy the best card but i wont know which one it is because one will be real come end of November and one will be 'marketed' as real without any real release date.

So - that is my reasoned and educated response to this thread.  I would happily buy Nvidia again - it's in my blood. But this pseudo tech porn teaser is such an obvious FUD tactic it makes me almost unreasonably determined to buy red again, almost like a protest to say, "Get your shit to market on time you muppets and stop spreading doubt".


----------



## Jiraiya (Oct 28, 2010)

Drivers 261.00 

http://developer.nvidia.com/object/cuda_3_2_toolkit_rc.html



> NVIDIA_DEV.0E22.01 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460"
> NVIDIA_DEV.0E23.01 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTS 455"
> NVIDIA_DEV.0E24.01 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 "
> NVIDIA_DEV.0E25.01 = "NVIDIA D12U-50"
> ...


----------



## arnoo1 (Oct 28, 2010)

*I like*

i like the design, by the looks of it the tdp went down, because ther is no massive cooler anymore, hopefully it is, and are the temps and noise a bit down, 93c on gtx 480 is just to high, I want a review so badly


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

Jiraiya said:


> Drivers 261.00
> 
> http://developer.nvidia.com/object/cuda_3_2_toolkit_rc.html



Umm, doesn't mean anything.  We *know* the card is happening.  We all want to know what it is under the hood and when it's coming.  Not speculation.

And what does this imply?

NVIDIA_DEV.0E3F.01 = "NVIDIA GF104-INT"
NVIDIA_DEV.1080.01 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580" 

Note all the strings are the same - OE'numberletter'.01
Why is the 580 '1080'?  Programmer somewhere help us out?


----------



## KashunatoR (Oct 28, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> Nice post, reporting it for outright idiocy. You're effectively stating ATI consumers are poorer than NV consumers.  Way to go you.




you didn't understand me. i wanted to say that if many of nvidia detractors can't afford to buy a gtx 470/480 and they start to talk about performance/watt and crap like that and exagerate over fermi temperatures. it is the same thing when you talk about cars: if you want a sport car you should't talk about mpg. if you call me an idiot maybe you're the one who should be reported but i am not that sissy. 
in the same way if you want a low budget alternative you choose amd over intel


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Oct 28, 2010)

I keep being tempted by AMD, but I really want that 2 GBs standard vram. I just have this reasonable feeling that the 6970 and 580 will be the same speed or within 5% of each other, but have a huge price difference. I mean haven't memory prices gone up? And having a bus twice the size of the 6970 as well. I just don't see how it can physically be price competitive.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Oct 28, 2010)

KashunatoR said:


> as the economy is going down more and more ati fanboys emerge. they seem to overlook the ridiculously bad drivers and they keep lying to themselves that fermi is too hot. i own the gtx 480 i even ran SLI for a while. at stock core  clock it hits 90 degrees in furmark but that is NORMAL. i keep mine overclocked 825/1650/4200 and it's running like new even if it is almost half a year old. i'm sure that gtx 580 will hold the crown for the fastest single gpu card, especially overclocked because nvidia's OC scaling is way better than ati's



90c is normal??  

in the future, more powerfull doesnt mean it dont have to be more efficient..



the54thvoid said:


> So - that is my reasoned and educated response to this thread.  I would happily buy Nvidia again - it's in my blood. But this pseudo tech porn teaser is such an obvious FUD tactic it makes me almost unreasonably determined to buy red again, almost like a protest to say, "Get your shit to market on time you muppets and stop spreading doubt".



_kicking off bad-naming scheme.._

one thing i like AMD because they can optimize their research and keep on their release date without too much delay. 

im feeling february release are bit too rushed for 580, and hope it doesnt come like gf100. hot and power hungry..


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 28, 2010)

Hopefully this is an awesome card.



sneekypeet said:


> Ok I'm just plain tired of the trolling.....
> 
> If you don't have anything to add, don't post. Everyone who doesn't have something good or productive to add will be given 5 points for each post from here on out.



It's an Nvidia thread, trolling is expected here on TPU unfortunately in that circumstance...


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

KashunatoR said:


> you didn't understand me. i wanted to say that if many of nvidia detractors can't afford to buy a gtx 470/480 and they start to talk about performance/watt and crap like that and exagerate over fermi temperatures. it is the same thing when you talk about cars: if you want a sport car you should't talk about mpg. if you call me an idiot maybe you're the one who should be reported but i am not that sissy.
> in the same way if you want a low budget alternative you choose amd over intel



This is not the place for an arguement.  Your initial post was clear

"as the economy is going down more and more ati fanboys emerge"

And now this

"i wanted to say that if many of nvidia detractors can't afford to buy a gtx 470/480"

You're not making much sense.  You clearly are saying ATI fans who can't afford NV cards slag them off for power.  Have you seen these cards my friend?

http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-ares-review/   - Asus Ares

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2010/05/11/sapphire/1   - Sapphire 5970 4GB

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...0-4gb-black-edition-limited-introduction.html   - XFX 5970 4GB Black Edition.

Before you talk about power consumption, economics and fanboys you ought to check which company makes the hottest and hungriest cards.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> Hopefully this is an awesome card.
> 
> 
> 
> It's an Nvidia thread, trolling is expected here on TPU unfortunately in that circumstance...



There be NV trolls here too.  You can't deny that.  See Kashunators post for details.


----------



## sneekypeet (Oct 28, 2010)

on topic, and less name calling. "Trolls" and "Fanboys" need not apply, nor do the names need to be slung at each other. Is it really so hard to get along?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 28, 2010)

sneekypeet said:


> on topic, and less name calling. "Trolls" and "Fanboys" need not apply, nor do the names need to be slung at each other. Is it really so hard to get along?



sneekypeet is a pipe smoking monkey loving fanboy troll.


----------



## crow1001 (Oct 28, 2010)

The 6970 is rumored to be 10% faster than a stock 480, if true the 580 should easily take the performance crown back. Interesting times ahead.


----------



## mdm-adph (Oct 28, 2010)

sneekypeet said:


> on topic, and less name calling. "Trolls" and "Fanboys" need not apply, nor do the names need to be slung at each other. Is it really so hard to get along?



You know, you guys could start filtering admittance to threads based upon what cards people list on their system specs -- no Nvidia or Intel owners in AMD threads, no AMD owners in Intel threads, etc.  

Matrox and Via owners could be permitted anywhere, of course.



crow1001 said:


> The 6970 is rumored to be 10% faster than a stock 480, if true the 580 should easily take the performance crown back. Interesting times ahead.



Seeing as how the 5970 is pretty much on par with a 480 right now, I certainly hope the 6970 isn't going to be AMD's new flagship card -- it's going to be the single core version, right?


----------



## sneekypeet (Oct 28, 2010)

mdm-adph said:


> You know, you guys could start filtering admittance to threads based upon what cards people list on their system specs -- no Nvidia or Intel owners in AMD threads, no AMD owners in Intel threads, etc.
> 
> Matrox and Via owners could be permitted anywhere, of course.



If only the vast interwebz were that easy

AFAIK the 6970 is the flagship single GPU solution, the dual will be under another name.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Oct 28, 2010)

6990 i can only guess


----------



## BorgOvermind (Oct 28, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> You're not making much sense.  You clearly are saying ATI fans who can't afford NV cards slag them off for power.


Your argument is flawed.
If you talk $ (aka you afford) the logical choice is the 5970. So Red Team still wins.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Oct 28, 2010)

Jonap_1st said:


> coolers still look nearly the same as fermi does, if nv still stick with 40mm and make 580 just like they said with 512 SP enabled. then it would be hot and gone to power disasters..
> 
> they could reconstruct the chip based on GF104 arrangement, so 580 can be more power friendly. but because we havent see fully enabled GF104 chip either, that construction will need more time, and that februari releases could be delayed..



They haven't enabled the full Gf104not because they can't but because it will cannibalize the GTX470 sales. You can see that in the many overclocked variations of the GTX460 1GB that are already as fast as the GTX470

The way I see it, the GTX580 just needs to take the performance king crown back. It doesn't matter how much power it will consume, how hot it will get or how big it will be as log as Nvidia's name gets out there. Nvidia doesn't really need the low margin consumer market anymore. They recently finished a deal with the Chinese government for a super computer with over 7000 tesla GPUs which resulted in the world's current record holdrer at over 2,5 PFLOPS.

For Nvidia the consumer market is just a way to get rid of all the cores that didn't make the binning process for Tesla and cut their losses.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

BorgOvermind said:


> Your argument is flawed.
> If you talk $ (aka you afford) the logical choice is the 5970. So Red Team still wins.



Eh?  I'm not arguing.  My point IS that ATI make the most expensive desktop cards and the loudest and the most power hungry.  The other guys post stated when economy struggles, i.e. people get poorer, more ATI people appear because "they can't afford 470's etc".

My post negated his declaration by stating ATI fans pay MORE for the MORE power hungry cards.  Thats not an ATI win.

and on topic so i dont get my ass kicked, if someoe has some solid specs of a GTX 580, that would be lovely because it'll stop all this poop from going round in circles.

Dont hit me Sneeky.  I can't not respond to a guy quoting me.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Oct 28, 2010)

What was the last high end nVidia GPU that wasnt hot? If you want a cool low power pc you get ATI if you want a power hungry monster you get nvidia. Its always been this way it will not change


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 28, 2010)

mdm-adph said:


> You know, you guys could start filtering admittance to threads based upon what cards people list on their system specs -- no Nvidia or Intel owners in AMD threads, no AMD owners in Intel threads, etc.
> 
> Matrox and Via owners could be permitted anywhere, of course.



That would suck, you shouldn't deny people a section of the forums based on what they have in their specs. I own an Nvidia card, but i should still be able to discuss AMD products as i wish, of course on the circumstance that there is no trolling or anything, i don't see why someone should be blocked off based on no reason besides what's in their specs.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Oct 28, 2010)

HalfAHertz said:


> They haven't enabled the full Gf104not because they can't but because it will cannibalize the GTX470 sales. You can see that in the many overclocked variations of the GTX460 1GB that are already as fast as the GTX470



let hope it have same arrangement with GF104, but looking GF110 (still picking the same process of 40nm) only to replace current gtx480 and GF112 that will update current gtx460. i dont know where power and heat issue would stack..

i love 460 for its power, performance, and temps. but the future 580 kinda look have the same ending with 480, take performance crown but forget to solve other problems.



HalfAHertz said:


> The way I see it, the GTX580 just needs to take the performance king crown back. It doesn't matter how much power it will consume, how hot it will get or how big it will be as log as Nvidia's name gets out there. Nvidia doesn't really need the low margin consumer market anymore. They recently finished a deal with the Chinese government for a super computer with over 7000 tesla GPUs which resulted in the world's current record holdrer at over 2,5 PFLOPS.
> 
> For Nvidia the consumer market is just a way to get rid of all the cores that didn't make the binning process for Tesla and cut their losses.



so now they have more focussed on bigger projects to make their name bigger than just selling a standard consumer card? 

from what you say, it seems that they starting to losing focus on standart market, especially low-segment. i hope they still have to get both sides. and optimized the whole. not just for sake of names..


----------



## DigitalUK (Oct 28, 2010)

this just looks like nvidia doing anything they can to steal AMD's thunder, and it seems to be working in afew small circles. show people a picture of a card that doesnt exsist and probably wont for probably 6-8 months then say its 20% faster than stuff out now "so it should be". and people put off buying a new 6950/6970 could also put people off buying a new GTX480


----------



## Xaser04 (Oct 28, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> That would suck, you shouldn't deny people a section of the forums based on what they have in their specs. I own an Nvidia card, but i should still be able to discuss AMD products as i wish, of course on the circumstance that there is no trolling or anything, i don't see why someone should be blocked off based on no reason besides what's in their specs.



Completely agree. 

I currently own both a single heavily overclocked GTX460 and two 460's in SLI, yet I am sorely tempted by a 6970 or 6990 as a replacement. My previous GPU's have been a mix of ATI and Nvidia in equal measure. 

Heck I am lining up a HD5750 for my wife's pc (to replace a GTX460 she gets lent on occassion) as there isn't anything from Nvidia that can match a HD5750 for performance per £. 

Why should I be prevented from discussing ATI products just because I have a nvidia card in my specs?


----------



## claylomax (Oct 28, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> To bad fermi isnt even that hot. I have a 470 and ive ran a 480 for a while. And they do not get that hot. I dont know why you guys get so butt hurt about things getting hot. we are PC Enthusiast we should expect to have things run hot. FERMI can run that hot to its not like its hurting it. my GTX480 ran at 75c gaming and my 470 ran at 65 to 70c gaming. Whats wrong with those temps. I had like 150mhz overclocks on them both to.



I've had my GTX 480 since May, idle 44c load 86c; I still have my reference HD4870 on my other system, idle 77c load 88c ; and how about HD4870x2 ... when talking about hot cards, some people suffer memory loss. :shadedshu


----------



## alucasa (Oct 28, 2010)

You know, these AMD vs Nvidia topics are really getting tiresome. I am not talking about the topics themselves, but attitudes found within.


----------



## ariff_tech (Oct 28, 2010)

I dont like this card, GTX 580. 
I dont like nVidia.
I dont like HD 6xxx. 
I dont like AMD and ATI.

I want matrox G-series back,
I want S3 Savage back.
I want 3DLabs Permedia back.
I want Trident Blade Back.

But what i really need, a *Voodoo* card.


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Oct 28, 2010)

Im surprised, 3 pages down and no one mentioned "Wood screw"


----------



## jamsbong (Oct 28, 2010)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Yea like your 4890 is a cool running card, it was a monster for heat and power when it came out for ATI and isn't that far off fermi now



There are many key differences between 4890 and fermi. 4890 is old and uses 55nm manufacturing. Of course, the most important thing is that the power consumption of FERMI is simply ridigulous compare to 4890. Put FERMI's cooler onto my 4890 and you'll get arctic temperatures. 

Honestly, I don't worry bout my 4890 going the distance as I watercooled it.


----------



## sneekypeet (Oct 28, 2010)

Bjorn_Of_Iceland said:


> Im surprised, 3 pages down and no one mentioned "Wood screw"



Its a shame you didnt read all 3 of those pages, namely, this post.


----------



## btarunr (Oct 28, 2010)

Jiraiya said:


> http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/9397/39113955.jpg
> 
> http://bbs.expreview.com/viewthread.php?tid=37388&from=recommend_f



Thanks. 384-bit memory, 8+6 pin power, display logic unchanged, similar VRM can be made out from that picture.

This is pure fud, but it looks like they took GF100, and burned its fat. Maybe they replaced the 32-core SM design with a more space-optimized 48-core one, reduced some redundant components that weren't having much of a positive impact on performance for the power draw, and made up for it with higher clock speeds. GF110 could be GF104's architecture, up-scaled. It's Fermi done right.



HalfAHertz said:


> They haven't enabled the full Gf104not because they can't but because it will cannibalize the GTX470 sales.



GF100 is larger than GF104. It always makes more business sense for them to clear GF100 inventory (GTX 470 and GTX 465 (which is already cannibalized)), and replace it with this high-clock 384-SP GF104. For this reason many sources pointed out that full-GF104 could end up getting the SKU name "GTX 475". So maybe there's some GF100 inventory to gulp down.


----------



## KainXS (Oct 28, 2010)

we don't know much of squat about cayman and we don't know much of squat about the 580 so why argue?

all we know is the memory bus thats it.

for all we know it could be a rebrand(for example) we don't know

don't the newer cores(104) have 48


----------



## Tatty_One (Oct 28, 2010)

BorgOvermind said:


> Your argument is flawed.
> If you talk $ (aka you afford) the logical choice is the 5970. So Red Team still wins.



Speaking from a UK perspective, I would suggest that your argument is flawed also, the cheapest GTX 480 that I can find in the UK is some £89 cheaper than the cheapest HD5970, thats a difference in price of 20.something percent, now seeing as the 5970 is 20% faster across the board in all resolutions that would suggest that in the UK at least, the 480 is at least on an equal footing as a "value for money" proposition at the high end.  If it was simply about performance then yes AMD win's, however, I would suggest to you that since the GTX 480 was released, it will have probably outsold the 5970 by some margin, simply because it IS more affordable, much why the GTX 470 has done so well against the HD5870.................. I love ATi but I regularily own both, it is Fail IMO to ignore both the strengths and weaknesses of each product.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 28, 2010)

My question is what would THIS guy buy??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkMsSIjQXxo&feature=player_embedded

Ill get what hes getting.


----------



## copenhagen69 (Oct 28, 2010)

when are the 580s suppose to be released?


----------



## wolf (Oct 28, 2010)

btarunr said:


> This is pure fud, but it looks like they took GF100, and burned its fat. Maybe they replaced the 32-core SM design with a more space-optimized 48-core one, reduced some redundant components that weren't having much of a positive impact on performance for the power draw, and made up for it with higher clock speeds. GF110 could be GF104's architecture, up-scaled. It's Fermi done right.



Definitely seems like GF104 architecture, makes for more CUDA cores in less die area, win win IMO, they just need to improve the memory controller.

And contrary to popular belief, FERMI is not hot, FERMI is an architecture, it's unfair to say it's inherantly hot because it's not, take the GTX460 or GTS450 as examples. GF100 is hot, there's no denying that, but FERMI, by definition, isn't.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Oct 28, 2010)

HalfAHertz said:


> *They haven't enabled the full Gf104not because they can't but because it will cannibalize the GTX470 sales.* You can see that in the many overclocked variations of the GTX460 1GB that are already as fast as the GTX470
> 
> The way I see it, the GTX580 just needs to take the performance king crown back. It doesn't matter how much power it will consume, how hot it will get or how big it will be as log as Nvidia's name gets out there. Nvidia doesn't really need the low margin consumer market anymore. They recently finished a deal with the Chinese government for a super computer with over 7000 tesla GPUs which resulted in the world's current record holdrer at over 2,5 PFLOPS.
> 
> For Nvidia the consumer market is just a way to get rid of all the cores that didn't make the binning process for Tesla and cut their losses.



ah but that means we may see a fully enabled gf104 in the 5XX series lineup then, whcih would be fine by me. 

now at 20% faster than the gtx480 we're looking at a hair better than 5970 performance which wouldn't be bad if it were priced right. This is especially true if it's lower power/heat than the gtx480.


----------



## erocker (Oct 28, 2010)

It looks like any other stock Nvidia card with GTX 580 shopped on it. Awesome. It will be interesting if we actually see these selling in mass within the next six months.



wolf said:


> Definitely seems like GF104 architecture, makes for more CUDA cores in less die area, win win IMO, they just need to improve the memory controller.
> 
> And contrary to popular belief, FERMI is not hot, FERMI is an architecture, it's unfair to say it's inherantly hot because it's not, take the GTX460 or GTS450 as examples. GF100 is hot, there's no denying that, but FERMI, by definition, isn't.



That's because when most people refer to Fermi, they are refering to GF100, GTX480/470/465.



Jiraiya said:


>



Strange looking! Are those VRM's on the backside of the GPU? Could just be empty spots too I guess..


----------



## RejZoR (Oct 28, 2010)

So was not the Preshott...


----------



## Yellow&Nerdy? (Oct 28, 2010)

Very interesting indeed. If this card is not a paper monster and is as good as Nvidia claims, it would help greatly in bringing down the prices of Cayman. Which is great for everybody, no matter which company you prefer. The next few months will be very interesting indeed.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

Oh dear...

If reports by Fudzilla are true, the 6970 is a hot little beast as the AMD engineers try and squeeze every once of power out of it.  I hope this is not true.  

I'll not buy a 6970 that's hot and loud and power crazy (just as i didnt buy a GTX 480 for those reasons).

Heaven forbid, maybe i'll hang onto my 5850's until that GTX 580 comes out after all, then i'll decide which side does the best perf per watt.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Oct 28, 2010)

only 20% faster, shame just want to beat new 6970 for a bit


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 28, 2010)

hayder.master said:


> only 20% faster, shame just want to beat new 6970 for a bit



Hopefully it ends up being a good amount faster then that while maintaining reasonable power consumption and heat. That's all i really ask personally.

At least a 30% and above increase with improvements in efficiency over the Fermi Architecture.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 28, 2010)

I'm sorry but I want this GPU to bring the heat! (No pun intended). I mean If the 580 kicks the 69xx series ass we all win! Plus Ill finally have a good excuse to go green!


----------



## erocker (Oct 28, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> If reports by Fudzilla are true



That's almost an oxymoron.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 28, 2010)

erocker said:


> That's almost an oxymoron.



How about???

True are Fudzilla reports if fake.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 28, 2010)

erocker said:


> That's almost an oxymoron.



In all fairness i did put "If", "Fudzilla" and "True" in one sentence.  As oppossed to "TPU" and "says".


----------



## erocker (Oct 28, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> In all fairness i did put "If", "Fudzilla" and "True" in one sentence.  As oppossed to "TPU" and "says".



Nah, I totally understand. Just a FUD jab.


----------



## Jiraiya (Oct 29, 2010)

http://bbs.expreview.com/viewthread.php?tid=37391&rpid=274471&ordertype=0&page=1#pid274471


----------



## bear jesus (Oct 29, 2010)

I so can't wait to see what the 580 can do, well the 6970 as well  i only recived my 6870's today but if either of the new top end cards really impresses me i think it will be time for a psu upgrade 

Although heat will play a major part in my choice as im being cooked alive as i type


----------



## N3M3515 (Oct 29, 2010)

all this talk.......and it will be:
GTX580 like 5% faster than 6970 and 100USD more
6950 equal or slightly faster than GTX480 for 300USD 
6990 kicking both of their asses(25% - 30%) for 150USD more (than GTX580)

HD 6950 300USD
HD 6970 400USD
GTX 580 500USD
HD 6990 650USD

PD: HD 6990 will be 2x HD 6950

It's not like a genius is needed to figure that out.


----------



## Jonap_1st (Oct 29, 2010)

Jiraiya said:


> http://bbs.expreview.com/viewthread.php?tid=37391&rpid=274471&ordertype=0&page=1#pid274471



why they were not try put cooler with sizeable fan just like on GF104? instead they back with a smaller fin. im afraid if they still use that kind of cooler it would be so noisy when it work at full load..

just hope when "paper launch" tested, its not hot as GF100 so the fin doesnt need to spinning on full speed.


----------



## douglatins (Oct 29, 2010)

Sexy saving for 2 of these babies!


----------



## Wile E (Oct 29, 2010)

Glad to see that, so far, they plan to keep all the display connectors in the first slot space. I can't stand the way ATI puts them across 2 slots. I water cool, and want the option to go single slot with a full cover block.

And, considering I water cool, I don't care about the stock cooler or heat output.

All I want to know is performance and price.


----------



## zithe (Oct 29, 2010)

Wow. 20% improvement is pretty good, imho. These cards get into the 100s of fps in most games out today. Nice little wave to be in. 

Creepy panda 'shop.


----------



## HammerON (Oct 29, 2010)

Wile E said:


> Glad to see that, so far, they plan to keep all the display connectors in the first slot space. I can't stand the way ATI puts them across 2 slots. I water cool, and want the option to go single slot with a full cover block.
> 
> And, considering I water cool, I don't care about the stock cooler or heat output.
> 
> All I want to know is performance and price.



Totally agree with you on this


----------



## mdsx1950 (Oct 29, 2010)

N3M3515 said:


> all this talk.......and it will be:
> GTX580 like 5% faster than 6970 and 100USD more
> 6950 equal or slightly faster than GTX480 for 300USD
> 6990 kicking both of their asses(25% - 30%) for 150USD more (than GTX580)
> ...



Fixed. 

And if the GTX 580 is powerful and doesn't heat up so much i might be going green.


----------



## N3M3515 (Oct 29, 2010)

mdsx1950 said:


> Fixed.
> 
> And if the GTX 580 is powerful and doesn't heat up so much i might be going green.



Good fix


----------



## Jiraiya (Oct 29, 2010)

*512 Core GTX580 complete exposure of the official detailed specifications*


----------



## TAViX (Oct 29, 2010)

KaelMaelstrom said:


> 1(580) vs 2(6970)? this is interesting, they might have a *voodoo* spell to make it faster than 6970



Did you just say VooDoo????  (no 3dfx related....or is it?!?)


----------



## N3M3515 (Oct 29, 2010)

Jiraiya said:


> *512 Core GTX580 complete exposure of the official detailed specifications*
> 
> http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2899/ad75e069660085ef.jpg



mmmm...

7% more shaders than the gtx 480
10% more core and shader clock
= memory clock
= bus width

:shadedshu, something is not right..


----------



## pantherx12 (Oct 29, 2010)

What's the shader core rate on 480?



Also if this turns out to be gf100 and not a refiddle of 460 then LULZ at paying for and overclocked 480 lol ( I know it has more shaders, but I think the overclocking potential of this new card will be crippled, so 580 vs 480 = pretty equal.

Infact

buy one of these chaps

http://techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/N480GTX_GTX_480_Lightning/31.html

20% improvement over a 480 XD


----------



## TAViX (Oct 29, 2010)

The 580 is hardly a new generation chip. It's not even an evolution one. It's just an enhanced 480. If any of you guys here doing professional 3D design or modelling knows what I'm talking about. the 580 is based on nvidia Quadro 6000, which is just a 5000 with some more CUDA cores and features (not so many...). 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/product-quadro-6000-us.html

Just compare Quadro 5000, 5800 and 6000, to notice the difference.


----------



## BorgOvermind (Oct 29, 2010)

N3M3515 said:


> mmmm...
> 
> 7% more shaders than the gtx 480
> 10% more core and shader clock
> ...


If true, it failed from start.


----------



## qubit (Oct 29, 2010)

I reckon those pictures are fake. nvidia is going to release a bigger, badder and inevitably hotter card than the GTX 480, yet the cooler looks like a prototype GTX 480?

Yeah sure. 

However, it wouldn't surprise me if the GTX 580 is actually _not_ severely delayed. After all, it's going to use a refined chip that nvidia have had a year to work on.

I'll be bookmarking bta's news post and compare the real product when it comes with these pictures.


----------



## HTC (Oct 29, 2010)

Dunno why you dudes are saying A card is hotter then B card.

Has anyone tried to put a 480 stock cooler on a 5870 card? If possible and the 5870 is hotter with the "newer" cooler, then the 480 is hotter the the 5870.

Anyone considered that it's the cooler that sucks and not the card that's hotter?

Personally, i would like to see someone putting a stock 5870 cooler on a 480 and vice-versa and compare temps: it would once and for all resolve this (if @ all possible, ofc).


----------



## Tatty_One (Oct 29, 2010)

HTC said:


> Dunno why you dudes are saying A card is hotter then B card.
> 
> Has anyone tried to put a 480 stock cooler on a 5870 card? If possible and the 5870 is hotter with the "newer" cooler, then the 480 is hotter the the 5870.
> 
> ...



Well yes, but if the card draws 60% more power from the wall it's pretty likely it's gonna get hot with any cooler TBH.


----------



## Benetanegia (Oct 29, 2010)

Tatty_One said:


> Well yes, but if the card draws 60% more power from the wall it's pretty likely it's gonna get hot with any cooler TBH.



Yep, but you also have to take into account die size. A bigger chip == bigger contact area == higher heat transmission == lower temps.

Of course in the case of GTX480 the bigger die area is not enough to make up the difference, because the power consumption difference is just too high. But in previous generations Nvidia cards used to be cooler despite consuming the same or a little more.


----------



## KashunatoR (Oct 29, 2010)

the pictures are accurate. i know that from a reviewer 
the overclocking potential depends a lot to the card temperature. for instance if you don't use watercooling you can't keep the 480 850/2100 daily use even in a highly ventilated case


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 29, 2010)

If they get the 580 to be faster than the 480 but run the same temp with lower consumption (or same) and can sell it at same or lower price, it will be a hit - I'd buy one if the opposing sides chip is worse in those regards.

I dont think Nvidia will make the same mistakes again.  I figure the GTX 580 rumours could be summed up as:

GTX 580 will be more efficient than GTX 480, be slightly faster (20% optimum in selected benches) and have a reasonably effective cooling solution.

Got a bad feeling the HD 6970 might well be just as fast (or faster) but unless the core architecture is very different from 6870 it may be louder and hotter.  

Hell, I'll buy the 6970 (if it's good enough) and if the 580 is substantially better - I'd then move up to that.  But again, thats NV's major malfunction, people will buy 6970 in a month or so with no 580 for competition.  And these folk wont shift from 6970 unless it's far inferior to the 580.

Roll on 28nm.

The GeForce GTX 580 is expected to release in November 2010,

Source of a source : http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-specifications-leaked/10184.html

oh, right, just read this part

"rumours suggest very limited to no availability on release, much like the GeForce GTX 470/480 release. "


----------



## Icon_211 (Oct 29, 2010)

This GTX580 gonna cost a bomb like GTX 480 which is equal to my entire rig. I skipped GTX200 series due to heavy price and so GTX400 series due to power n heat price wise its not bad in India when compared to 200 series pricing but still its high...hmmm im still stuck with GF9 series since i started to game in higher resolution. Will buy GTX460 when 500series started to surface so prices will come down a bit but when??? always 2 Gen behind... had 6200A while 8series now 9series while 400series are out


----------



## Kenshai (Oct 29, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> The GeForce GTX 580 is expected to release in November 2010,
> 
> Source of a source : http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-specifications-leaked/10184.html
> 
> ...



I don't recall much if any availability issues on either GF100 chip. Not like ATI's release at least, took me a few weeks to find a 5970 in stock for a build.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 29, 2010)

Kenshai said:


> I don't recall much if any availability issues on either GF100 chip. Not like ATI's release at least, took me a few weeks to find a 5970 in stock for a build.



I think the eventual release date was slated for April 10 sometime but there was no retail availability at launch. This was widely reported in most tech press.  It took a few weeks for the stock to come through in any significant numbers.  It was also delayed quite a bit.  Go and look through Fudzilla - they were superstars at getting all excited then let down


----------



## bear jesus (Oct 29, 2010)

Kenshai said:


> I don't recall much if any availability issues on either GF100 chip. Not like ATI's release at least, took me a few weeks to find a 5970 in stock for a build.



That's because the demand of the GF100 was so low 

I'm sorry i could not help myself, really there was yeild problems for both ATI and nvidia so both were having trouble keeping up with demand but of corse the effects of that would vary depending on where you are in the world and what company you buy from, in the uk scan normally had at least the sapphire 5970 in stock most of the time although i admit at times there was none of the board partners 5970's in stock.
But the GF100 launch was a little different to the 58xx cards as it was a paper lauch if im not mistaken (probably am )


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 29, 2010)

It's not about yield.  The  Fermi release was put back from when it was meant to be to tweak the cooler and bios.  It was running over hot at first.  This meant the actual release date stayed early April but the actual chance to buy it wasn't till later.  They got to wave it around and see, look here it is, coming soon.  It only took about 2 weeks or so, no biggie after months of delays.

The ATI release was on time (stock was in shops fo release) but was very limited due to high demand versus TSMC yield nonsense.  Wonder if GloFo will be better at 28nm?

May i also add, i will be very annoyed if they do a 'vague' release saying here's the card with full disclosure (NDA stuff all cool) yet the actual thing isn't available for weeks or months.  That would be very bad mr Huang!

I'd like very much this chance to put both cards up against each other - that would be ace.


----------



## bear jesus (Oct 29, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> It's not about yield.  The  Fermi release was put back from when it was meant to be to tweak the cooler and bios.



That makes a lot more sense, my comment was filled with assumption.



the54thvoid said:


> I'd like very much this chance to put both cards up against each other - that would be ace.



I was really looking forward to the 5870 and 480 going up against each other last year, it was a dissapointment that lead to me upgrading near a year late, if the 6970 and 580 can go up against each other this year and make things interesting i'm hopefull one of them will offer something that will make me want to upgrade again.


----------



## Animalpak (Oct 29, 2010)

mine at day one


----------



## arnoo1 (Oct 29, 2010)

Animalpak said:


> mine at day one



than you should change your system specs, instead gtx480 incoming, gtx580 soon xd<,

gtx580 is going to kick ass ati/amd, 128tmu's +512shaders that willl do the trick, only i think they should keep the 480 heatsink on it, it looks baddass


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 29, 2010)

arnoo1 said:


> than you should change your system specs, instead gtx480 incoming, gtx580 soon xd<,
> 
> gtx580 *I HOPE* is going to kick ass ati/amd, 128tmu's +512shaders that willl do the trick, only i think they should keep the 480 heatsink on it, it looks baddass



Fixed.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 29, 2010)

arnoo1 said:


> gtx580 is going to kick ass



You know what'll kick ass?

The look of disappointment on your face when you see how mediocre that card is going to be 

But seriously, this good for all.  Perhaps at last, high end competition that should start a price war, sorry a price bitch slapping contest.


----------



## Animalpak (Oct 29, 2010)

please stop fan... :shadedshu yes know that thing


----------



## p3gaz_001 (Oct 29, 2010)

Jiraiya said:


> http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/9139/96022500.jpg
> 
> http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/1309/37495949.jpg
> 
> ...



is that 4 real?


----------



## p3gaz_001 (Oct 29, 2010)

KashunatoR said:


> the pictures are accurate. i know that from a reviewer
> the overclocking potential depends a lot to the card temperature. for instance if you don't use watercooling you can't keep *the 480 850/2100* daily use even in a highly ventilated case



wich 480s? the reference? if so i agree, if not i'll not agree, till yesterday i was running my 480 amp on air @ 840/1700/2050 with no overvolt... from today.. thanking EK. things are changed


----------



## arnoo1 (Oct 29, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> You know what'll kick ass?
> 
> The look of disappointment on your face when you see how mediocre that card is going to be
> 
> But seriously, this good for all.  Perhaps at last, high end competition that should start a price war, sorry a price bitch slapping contest.



that's a good one, lol,

time will tell my friend


----------



## pantherx12 (Oct 29, 2010)

HTC said:


> Dunno why you dudes are saying A card is hotter then B card.
> 
> Has anyone tried to put a 480 stock cooler on a 5870 card? If possible and the 5870 is hotter with the "newer" cooler, then the 480 is hotter the the 5870.
> 
> ...


.
Unless nvidia screwed up somewhere I can't see with the 480 stock heat-sink, it is a better heat-sink than the 5870 sink.

It has a greater surface area, more heat-pipes and even has a "better" fan blowing on it.

the 480 is just hot


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Oct 30, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> You know what'll kick ass?
> 
> The look of disappointment on your face when you see how mediocre that card is going to be
> 
> But seriously, this good for all.  Perhaps at last, high end competition that should start a price war, sorry a price bitch slapping contest.


even if it wil be just 15% improvement over the 480, Id still score one 
to hell with money, I aint be bringing em when Im dead anyways , a hundred years from now, no one would care lol


----------



## HTC (Oct 30, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> .
> Unless nvidia screwed up somewhere I can't see with the 480 stock heat-sink, it is a better heat-sink than the 5870 sink.
> 
> *It has a greater surface area, more heat-pipes and even has a "better" fan blowing on it.
> ...



As proven by the whole battle nVidia VS ATI (die sizes), bigger doesn't mean better.

As a non related example, Real Madrid have many of the word's top players and yet they were held by Murcia when they last played for the King's cup: better "components" (players) don't necessarily make a better "whole" (team).


I may be totally wrong but, has anyone proved either way?


----------



## Mussels (Oct 30, 2010)

as much as i dont care about the 580, i wanted to comment on something a few pages back.


comment 1: fermi is hoooooot
comment 2: MY fermi doesnt run hot! its only *insert temp here*



your fermi does run hot. its temperature is NOT related to the heat output of the card. you slap a bigger heatsink on, and it makes the GPU cooler by spreading the heat out, NOT by reducing how much heat is put out in the first place.


TL;DR: the heat is being dumped into your case, instead of staying on the GPU where its being read by the sensors. doesnt mean its not a hot card, just means you've moved to heat elsewhere for something else to deal with.


----------



## mdsx1950 (Oct 30, 2010)

arnoo1 said:


> than you should change your system specs, instead gtx480 incoming, gtx580 soon xd<,
> 
> gtx580 is going to kick ass ati/amd, 128tmu's +512shaders that willl do the trick, only i think they should keep the 480 heatsink on it, it looks baddass



Let's hope it atleast beats my 5970 4GB or else it's going to be disappointing. Even if it beats it, it will only be like a 5% more better. :shadedshu


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

Mussels said:


> as much as i dont care about the 580, i wanted to comment on something a few pages back.
> 
> 
> comment 1: fermi is hoooooot
> ...



No doubt Fermi is a hot architecture(mainly GF100), though it's definitely not a bad as people put it out to be. I have owned both single and SLI'd 470's and they didn't run nearly as hot as i expected in my mid size case. Hell i ran a single HD 4870 that ran about as hot as my GF100 cards did. It's one of those things that you know is there, but it doesn't make as much of an annoyance as you'd expect it to, I don't think anyone is denying or would deny Fermi runs hot, but i do think people are always defending the heat constantly because it gets portrayed like it runs as hot as the surface of the sun.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 30, 2010)

v12dock said:


> A GTX 480 cooler on a higher TDP card, hmm....



Its actually about 70 to 80% of the GTX480 TDP and much much more refined and power leakage issues are fixed. Runs cooler. Overall seems like it may have a chance

They definitely fixed the memory controller issue they had with the GTX470 and 480. Look how much higher the memory is 2000 (1000 give or take a few effective) thats like 4GHZ memory compared to the 3.3GHZX memory the 470 and 480 had. The memory bandwidth is huge!

Is the 128tmu's official??


----------



## Mussels (Oct 30, 2010)

i never said other cards dont run just as hot or put out as much heat - i just wanted to clear up the silly misconception that GPU temps are related to heat output. that's just ridiculous. turn the fan from 20% to 100% and it doesnt lower the heat output at all, despite it lowering temps.


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

Mussels said:


> i never said other cards dont run just as hot or put out as much heat - i just wanted to clear up the silly misconception that GPU temps are related to heat output. that's just ridiculous. turn the fan from 20% to 100% and it doesnt lower the heat output at all, despite it lowering temps.



I agree with that, if the card is designed to throw out a bucket load of heat, it will do it regardless of what fan speed you have it on. All raising the fan speed does it push heat out, it has nothing to do with how much heat the GPU emits nor does it cure a GPU that gets overly hot by design. True..

But again, GF100 doesn't emit as much heat as expected is all i was saying.


----------



## N3M3515 (Oct 30, 2010)

mdsx1950 said:


> Let's hope it atleast beats my 5970 4GB or else it's going to be disappointing. Even if it beats it, it will only be like a 5% more better. :shadedshu



if the 580 beats HD5970 then it means at least 30% faster than 480, and that's not the case....

if the rumours says 20%, the very best i could think of is 25%, and that would put it even with HD 5970


----------



## KashunatoR (Oct 30, 2010)

it also depends on the OC potential of the 580. we all know that ati OC scaling simply isn't there. to sum it up, if the 580 runs cool enough to allow proper overclocking i think we have a winner


----------



## HalfAHertz (Oct 30, 2010)

Mussels said:


> i never said other cards dont run just as hot or put out as much heat - i just wanted to clear up the silly misconception that GPU temps are related to heat output. that's just ridiculous. turn the fan from 20% to 100% and it doesnt lower the heat output at all, despite it lowering temps.



Um technically it does. The lower the temperature, the more effective a conductor is. The more effective it is, the less resistance it has. The less resistance it is, the more efficient it is at transporting electrons, thus loosing less energy to heat. That's why we're still trying to find a super conductor working at room temp


----------



## Jonap_1st (Oct 30, 2010)

if the heat is reduce, it surely giving the component a stable and longer life..


----------



## AddSub (Oct 30, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> To bad fermi isnt even that hot. I have a 470 and ive ran a 480 for a while. And they do not get that hot. I dont know why you guys get so butt hurt about things getting hot. we are PC Enthusiast we should expect to have things run hot. FERMI can run that hot to its not like its hurting it. my GTX480 ran at 75c gaming and my 470 ran at 65 to 70c gaming. Whats wrong with those temps. I had like 150mhz overclocks on them both to.



I never understood this either, especially on TPU of all places. Everybody here is a PC hardware enthusiast in one way or another. As I always say when it comes to this topic: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. These people should take up some other hobby like stamp collecting or knitting.

Also, I noticed the "noise" always comes from the same faction, especially more so since AMD bought ATI.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

AddSub said:


> I never understood this either, especially on TPU of all places. Everybody here is a PC hardware enthusiast in one way or another. As I always say when it comes to this topic: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. These people should take up some other hobby like stamp collecting or knitting.
> 
> Also, I noticed the "noise" always comes from the same faction, especially more so since AMD bought ATI.



Ill just repeat myself.



TheMailMan78 said:


> Dude Fermi is hot. It kills your ambient case temps as an enthusiast you SHOULD care about that. Now I know you're a major fanboy but lets be realistic here. I ain't saying its a bad card mind you. But saying its not hot is just stupid.


----------



## mdsx1950 (Oct 30, 2010)

N3M3515 said:


> if the 580 beats HD5970 then it means at least 30% faster than 480, and that's not the case....
> 
> if the rumours says 20%, the very best i could think of is 25%, and that would put it even with HD 5970



Yeah your right.

So since the HD6970 is going to be the direct competitor to the GTX580. Will it be as powerful as a HD5970?  I'll just jeez my pants.  lol.

Imagine 4x GTX580s or HD6970s. DAMN.


----------



## motasim (Oct 30, 2010)

... if they lower heat/noise production ... if the length is less than 11 inches (so that it can fit in my case) ... if it performs better than the upcoming AMD 6970, and cost the same or less ... if I can buy it for $425 or less ... too many ifs  ...


----------



## mdsx1950 (Oct 30, 2010)

motasim said:


> ... if they lower heat/noise production ... if the length is less than 11 inches (so that it can fit in my case) ... if it performs better than the upcoming AMD 6970, and cost the same or less ...* if I can buy it for $425 or less* ... too many ifs  ...



Highly doubt that.


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

AddSub said:


> I never understood this either, especially on TPU of all places. Everybody here is a PC hardware enthusiast in one way or another. As I always say when it comes to this topic: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. These people should take up some other hobby like stamp collecting or knitting.
> 
> Also, I noticed the "noise" always comes from the same faction, especially more so since AMD bought ATI.



This is the point i have always tried to push accross, these are  high end cards, if you're an actual ''computer enthusiast'' you should have these percautions  taken care of already, a good PSU with a good amount of wattage, space in your case, good airflow etc. It's not rocket science to cool GF100, and people need to stop acting like it is.



TheMailMan78 said:


> Ill just repeat myself.



That's honestly not true, not doubt it emits a fair amount of heat, but not enough that a so called ''enthusiast'' can't handle.


----------



## wolf (Oct 30, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> This is the point i have always tried to push accross, these are  high end cards, if you're an actual ''computer enthusiast'' you should have these percautions  taken care of already, a good PSU with a good amount of wattage, space in your case, good airflow etc. It's not rocket science to cool GF100, and people need to stop acting like it is.
> 
> That's honestly not true, not doubt it emits a fair amount of heat, but not enough that a so called ''enthusiast'' can't handle.



the heat issue is blown ridiculously out of proportion.

ever since the 5000 series, when ATI got their first big break in a few years, the fans loved that, and so they should. but the love turned to an amlost 'name-calling' sort of attitude when it came to some competition.

yes GF100 was late, and hot, but the jokes take it too far, and make it seem much worse than it actually is. and all it is, is ATI/AMD fans rubbing in AMD's success.

I can think of a fair few HOT ATI cards, like a 2900XT, or a 4890 for example, right in the same ball park as a GTX480 (heat wise) that didn't even _nearly_ cop the same wrap as a GTX480 has, just because of the context, and the fanbase of this and the past few generations of cards.

It's a hot card, I'm not denying that, nobody will. they may tell you it's managable, which is also true. I'm just sick of people being so childish about the whole thing, and making lame-ass jokes. You can be proud that after a few generations of being behind, your favourite company is now on top again, just please don't abouse that pride into over-slandering what is essentially a good product.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Oct 30, 2010)

heat is not the same as temperature. if you cant grasp that this convo is over your head


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

The power draw on one of these card is huge. W1zz recommended a 600w PSU just for one! The heat that alone will produce will need WC unless you love the sound of a leaf blower. 96c under load? I mean come on guys! Its a beast of a card but for what it is the 580 better damn sure be cooler and quieter. Oh and before you go slinging about fanboy crap I am looking to buy a 480 here in the next month or so if they come off that price some.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 30, 2010)

Heat - not an issue if it's built with those tolerances in mind.  And i agree with CDdude, if you pay for that level of tech, the rest of your rig should be fairly decent.  My beef was never just about the power but the noise.

My crossfired 5850's consume less power than the 480 and produce better fps except in Unigine with heavy teselation (Metro 2033 evens up and thats a uber NV game).  So i wouldn't change to a 480.

The noise is my issue.  A 5850 is quiet, two at full pelt are definitely audible but not irritating.  My 2nd card reaches 80 degrees on some DX 11 games (unless i put V sync on) when i'm at ultra high settings.

How noisy is a GTX 480 at full pelt?  Thats my thing.

If neither the 580 or 6970 are acoustically acceptable (lower than mine) I'll stick with these until after market cooling comes about through the AIB's.


----------



## wolf (Oct 30, 2010)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> heat is not the same as temperature. if you cant grasp that this convo is over your head



It's an easy difference, and I am talking about heat. my point is there have been hot ATI GPU's in the past that have not copped nearly as much bs as the GTX480 has by AMD fans this time around.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

wolf said:


> It's an easy difference, and I am talking about heat. my point is there have been hot ATI GPU's in the past that have not copped nearly as much bs as the GTX480 has by AMD fans this time around.



Because the 480 was to knock out the 58xx series......and it did a lil' but at the cost of a MASSIVE amount of heat and a HUGE delay in release time.


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Because the 480 was to knock out the 58xx series......and it did a lil' but at the cost of a MASSIVE amount of heat and a HUGE delay in release time.



But you see the point he's trying to make right?, i've ran a HD 4870 that actually runs as hot(if not hotter) than my current GTX 470, and yet it didn't get near the amount of attention as GF100 has. Saying it emits a ''massive'' amount of heat is overstating the case. I've ran single and well as SLI'd 470's and i'm not crying about the heat because when i got them, i found out the people were grossly over complaining.

Good case with good airflow and a good power supply is all you need, nothing out of an ''enthusiasts'' reach imo.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> But you see the point he's trying to make right?, i've ran a HD 4870 that actually runs as hot(if not hotter) than my current GTX 470, and yet it didn't get near the amount of attention as GF100 has. Saying it emits a ''massive'' amount of heat is overstating the case. I've ran single and well as SLI'd 470's and i'm not crying about the heat because when i got them, i found out the people were grossly over complaining.



You see if the 480/470 would have came out BEFORE the 58xx series cards we wouldn't be having is converstaion. The fact it took so long to relese a hot ass card is what draws so much attention. That and W1zz said his room got hotter after using these things. Thats pretty epic if you think about it.


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You see if the 480/470 would have came out BEFORE the 58xx series cards we wouldn't be having is converstaion. The fact it took so long to relese a hot ass card is what draws so much attention. That and W1zz said his room got hotter after using these things. Thats pretty epic if you think about it.



That's where a lot of the critisism comes from, the fact that it was delayed so long and then when it finally came out it exceed in performance against the 5 series but failed in efficiancy. So we ended up getting a card that wasn't a whole lot faster then it's AMD counterpart but gave us a rise in temps and power consumption.

And i understand why people would get mad at that, but a lot of them are just fundementally wrong, the problem comes stems out of people getting upset by things that aren't actually there. Then when people who have owned the card say it's not that bad, everyone gets all uppity and claims it's as hot as the sun due to what they have read online. If you really want to find out how hot it gets and how people are easily dealing with it, ask some people who have owned it, go the source and ask them how they like it and what's the deal on the so called high power consuption and heat, they will give you the most honest anwser out of anybody.

And someone who as owned GF100 i can honsestly say it's not nearly as bad as people push it out to be.


----------



## dr emulator (madmax) (Oct 30, 2010)

i'm just curious as to when they are going to slap us all, and totally redesign everything,
lets face it graphics cards are getting heavier, heck i was even shocked at how much my i7 weighed, it's that heavy i could break windows with it 

but seriously, i do wonder when things will change and whether we'll need totally new cases 
as things won't fit the old ones anymore 

i was going to get myself an nvidia if it hadn't have been for the heat problem a few have pointed to

and yes heat is a problem, because unless they start using different materials to solder with, that brand new $600-$700 cards solder is going to dry and create dry joints, which will be an absolute disaster 

i also wonder how loud this new iteration will be, as my 5870 sounds like a hairdryer as it is and scares the crxp out of the cats it's so damned loud 

anyone have any data on the noise levels?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> That's where a lot of the critisism comes from, the fact that it was delayed so long and then when it finally came out it exceed in performance against the 5 series but failed in efficiancy. So we ended up getting a card that wasn't a whole lot faster then it's AMD counterpart but gave us a rise in temps and power consumption.
> 
> And i understand why people would get mad at that, but a lot of them are just fundementally wrong, the problem comes stems out of people getting upset by things that aren't actually there. Then when people who have owned the card say it's not that bad, everyone gets all uppity and claims it's as hot as the sun due to what they have read online. If you really want to find out how hot it gets and how people are easily dealing with it, ask some people who have owned it, go the source and ask them how they like it and what's the deal on the so called high power consuption and heat, they will give you the most honest anwser out of anybody.
> 
> And someone who as owned GF100 i can honsestly say it's not nearly as bad as people push it out to be.



I get what you are saying but look at it this way. W1zz doesnt have an investment in a 480. When people invest in something (even if it sucks) they defend it and make excuses. Now I'm not saying the 480 is that case. What I am saying is I trust a TPU review more then people who bought the card. That is until W1zz gets bought out


----------



## cheesy999 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I get what you are saying but look at it this way. W1zz doesnt have an investment in a 480. When people invest in something (even if it sucks) they defend it and make excuses. Now I'm not saying the 480 is that case. What I am saying is I trust a TPU review more then people who bought the card. That is until W1zz gets bought out



Exactly, I don't know much about the GTX 480's however i do know that my GTS 250 often runs above 80*c whilst gaming and can reach over 95*c running furmark -  if someone said the new amd 6970 did that I would consider it a fail, however I don't see anything wrong with my card doing it as it still works perfectly and I paid £90 for it.


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I get what you are saying but look at it this way. W1zz doesnt have an investment in a 480. When people invest in something (even if it sucks) they defend it and make excuses. Now I'm not saying the 480 is that case. What I am saying is I trust a TPU review more then people who bought the card. That is until W1zz gets bought out



It's a differant enviroment, the majority of the end users are the ones you need to talk to for a good analisys on real world performance. W1zz makes some awesome reviews, but if you want to see how they perform on average and a generally uncontrolled enviroment, you should always reach out to other people. Reviews are great for a look at peformance and a kind of ''top down'' look at overall temps. But everyones experiance is differant and that those temps don't always repreasent a relistic view of how hot they actually are in someones case.

It's not about making excuses or defending it, people like me always try and avoid defending any particuar cards or brand, but like i said, a lot of people are just died wrong on GF100 and consistantly spew out hate for the cards on something thats not even there in the first place, that's why some of us end up defending it. It has nothing to do with me owning the card, i'm just talking from my experiances with the cards.

I see what you're saying overall though...


----------



## mtosev (Oct 30, 2010)

doesn't look much different from the gtx 480. the only question is: will it deliver?


----------



## blibba (Oct 30, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> Come now an over-clocked 5870 tangles with a 480(stock)...



Very true, but most people who buy 480s are interested in the superior SLI scaling and ultra high resolution performance offered by the increased memory and bus width.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 30, 2010)

jeez, you guys are getting so butt hurt about the heat issue. just leave it alone. we all know fermi is a hot GPU. Im pretty sure nvidia knows that to and will be working on fixing that with the GTX580



now for those who think the GTX480 is still only a little bit better then the 5870? Well you wrong. now that nvidia has been pushing out performance like bunny off spring the GTX480 is quite a bit faster then a 5870 now and can play in HD5970 territory when overclocked. That being said even the GTX470s are now faster then the 5870 in almost every game other then Vantage and Crysis (Crysis by like 4%)

I would know this. i had a HD5870 it got 42FPS in crysis very high 4x AA at 1920 x 1200 while my 470 now gets about 39 to 40 at the same settings. Thats the average FPS. the minimum FPS goes to my 470 but almost 20% give or take. my 5870 got like 19fps and my 470 got 26


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> jeez, you guys are getting so butt hurt about the heat issue. just leave it alone. we all know fermi is a hot GPU. Im pretty sure nvidia knows that to and will be working on fixing that with the GTX580
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The GTX 480 is still overall only a slightly better card then the 5870, this of course mainly depends on the software you're trying to run, but most of the time the 480 comes on top by maybe 10% at most in the majority of software. The drivers have improved for both cards since they have launched so performance has changed for both depending on the drivers being ran. The GTX 470 is still in 5850 territory as proven by the recent benchamarks of the 6 series of cards. Overclocking is a differant story though.

I agree the heat issues are really a non issue imho.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> jeez, you guys are getting so butt hurt about the heat issue. just leave it alone. we all know fermi is a hot GPU. Im pretty sure nvidia knows that to and will be working on fixing that with the GTX580
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Proof? I mean 5890?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Proof? I mean 5890?



what??


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> what??



There is no way a 480 is playing in 5970? Please man. PLEASE.


----------



## Benetanegia (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> There is no way a 480 is playing in 5970? Please man. PLEASE.



Overclocked he said. And yes it does. Also the difference between GTX480 and HD5870 is indeed >20% now and <20% difference with HD5970. Have any of you paid attention to latest reviews at all?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> There is no way a 480 is playing in 5970? Please man. PLEASE.



I would show you the shootout NCspecV81 did over at overclock.net but i can't find the thread anymore


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

The drivers had improved, no doubt the performance has gone up..

The 5 series still only lags a bit behind.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Oct 30, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> The drivers had improved, no doubt the performance has gone up..
> 
> The 5 series still only lags a bit.



ATI drivers haven't really improved. they have been garbage since 10.4 and 10.5


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Oct 30, 2010)

Benetanegia said:


> Overclocked he said. And yes it does. Also the difference between GTX480 and HD5870 is indeed >20% now and <20% difference with HD5970. Have any of you paid attention to latest reviews at all?



Yeah I have and I havent seen anything like that. Maybe 10 fps more in some games but no where year a 5970.


----------



## CDdude55 (Oct 30, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Yeah I have and I havent seen anything like that. Maybe 10 fps more in some games but no where year a 5970.



Only recent review i could find of the 480 was the MSI Lighting review, that card only has a 50MHz overclock on the Core and 75MHz on the memory with improved power consumption and heat and it has shown to touch and in some cases beat the 5970. You'll see even the older reference 480 comes close. 5970 is still the best though.


----------



## Bo$$ (Oct 30, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> ATI drivers haven't really improved. they have been garbage since 10.4 and 10.5



how the hell would you know?
from your specs and name, you may seem to lack any recent ATI hardware to backup that claim....


----------



## erocker (Oct 30, 2010)

Bo$$ said:


> how the hell would you know?
> from your specs and name, you may seem to lack any recent ATI hardware to backup that claim....



Dude, he knows! I haven't seen a good Nvidia driver since 158's! Wait, oh this thread isn't about drivers... or ATi. This thread is about the super awesome GTX 580!!!

Anyhoo, I think that with these new Nvidia cards coming out, it may turn out to be alot the the GTX 2XX series when they did a rehash of it. A little better performance with a drop in power and temps. Then again.. What do any of us know? Nothing! How can we possibly come to any conclusions over a picture of a card that looks somewhat like a GTX 470 with a GTX 580 shopped on it? Well, speculation is always fun.


----------



## Wile E (Oct 31, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I get what you are saying but look at it this way. W1zz doesnt have an investment in a 480. When people invest in something (even if it sucks) they defend it and make excuses. Now I'm not saying the 480 is that case. What I am saying is I trust a TPU review more then people who bought the card. That is until W1zz gets bought out



You do realize that retail cards have a different bios than the ones w1z tested originally, and run much cooler than the review sample, right?

All that said, the king of heat and power consumption is still the 4870X2 anyway.

And besides, why are we bringing up power consumption on the top teir cards? Most people I know that buy top teir aren't exactly worried about pinching pennies, or else they would've gone with something with better price to performance.



nvidiaintelftw said:


> ATI drivers haven't really improved. they have been garbage since 10.4 and 10.5



You mean since 8.11. 8.10 was the last truly good release for me. I can't comment on 5k or 6k series performance tho. That's based on my experience with the 4k series.

In that same span, nVidia hasn't had any issues for me. But again, that's a limited viewpoint, as I only have G92 cards from nVidia from the same time span.

Barring an extreme cock up on their part, I think nVidia may be my next card, mostly based on my luck with drivers. CUDA also plays a small role in the decision, as I do use a few apps that are CUDA enabled if you have the hardware.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Oct 31, 2010)

wolf said:


> It's an easy difference, and I am talking about heat. my point is there have been hot ATI GPU's in the past that have not copped nearly as much bs as the GTX480 has by AMD fans this time around.



i wasnt speaking at you directly, just generally


----------



## Meizuman (Oct 31, 2010)

Don't know if posted yet but here goes:












http://www.tcmagazine.com/tcm/news/hardware/31375/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-cooler-seen-detail


----------



## entropy13 (Oct 31, 2010)

The evil, angry panda!!!


----------



## p3gaz_001 (Oct 31, 2010)

"never say NO to panda".....


----------



## Bo$$ (Oct 31, 2010)

entropy13 said:


> The evil, angry panda!!!



he will catch you in your sleep, he has taken over from pedo-bear


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 31, 2010)

This thread has become uber lame and has descended into childish nonsense.

It's about the GTX 580.  It's about something that might be decent - NOBODY knows yet.  It's about maybe some competition tha will benefit the consumer.

Can we cut the crap about shit ATI this (from people with obvious allegiances) and other posts that favour ATI.  

We'll all find out soon enough what's what and how silly these cards will be.

And one last time, for those who dont seem to grasp anything.  You'd expect the GTX 480 to perform better than a HD 5970 when it consumes more power.  The fact that it doesn't (on stock) is a pretty blatant indicator of the situation.  If my 'X' consuming device performs worse than your 'less than X' consuming device - then your device is NOT that great. http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/27.html

This is why we're talking about the GTX 580.  Because it's meant to redress that shitiness.  And if it does do better than a 5970 with less power - excellent - i may well buy one.  Unless 6970 is better.


----------



## Wile E (Oct 31, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> This thread has become uber lame and has descended into childish nonsense.
> 
> It's about the GTX 580.  It's about something that might be decent - NOBODY knows yet.  It's about maybe some competition tha will benefit the consumer.
> 
> ...


I don't. As long as my psu is up to the task, I don't care. I only care about it's performance, then price is next. Heat and power consumption on a top tier card mean absolutely nothing to me.

Now, go down a notch, and power becomes an issue, but If I'm paying over $400 for a card, it's no concern. Only performance.


----------



## the54thvoid (Oct 31, 2010)

Wile E said:


> I don't. As long as my psu is up to the task, I don't care. I only care about it's performance, then price is next. Heat and power consumption on a top tier card mean absolutely nothing to me.
> 
> Now, go down a notch, and power becomes an issue, but If I'm paying over $400 for a card, it's no concern. Only performance.



That's not my inference.  Of course you dont care about power consumption.  I'm not on an eco warrior rant here.  My PC parts are made by low paid chinese or taiwanese workers and the chemical mess from tech production is awful.  

My point is simply this.  
GF 100 = X power consumption and Y Performance.
HD 5970 = <X Power consumption and >Y Performance.
and to even it up 5970 costs a lot more so it's kinda uneven there in NV's favour.

The 480 underperforms on account of it's power requirement.  It SHOULD perform better.
That is the entire goal of the GF 110 - to make it perform better for lower power consumption.

And i shelled out £400 for 2 5850's, power and noise meant a lot to me so talking enthusiast and inferring 'we' dont care about power isn't accurate.  An enthusiast buys 'performance' parts but the factors each person takes into account when buying their chosen top level parts are very subjective.

Anyhow - quote from somewhere, lets see what happens...

"A fully working GF100, a first for Nvidia's desktop Fermi/GF1x0 line, would have 512 shaders and get about a 7% speed increase over GTX480. Another 6% comes from the clock speed, a generous assessment would say bug fixes add a little more. All told, 20% net speed increase over GTX480 isn't out of the question, nor is a pretty decent lowering of power."

"With that in mind, we are told GTX580's 'launch' will be pulled in to November 8"

"Nvidia is pulling the 580 launch in...to November 8....The problem is that won't be able to buy parts until late January..."

"The chip is a bug fixed GTX480/GF100"


----------



## Wile E (Oct 31, 2010)

You didn't pay over 400 for a single card. There is a big difference. And your 2 5850s consume more than a single 480 anyway. But enough about that.

You can't call Fermi a failure because it consumes more for the same performance, when it excels in other areas that AMD can't begin to compete, like GPGPU or heavy tessellation. i7 quads run hotter than Phenom X6 for similar performance, yet aren't considered a failure. You aren't taking into account all aspects of the cards.


----------



## motasim (Nov 1, 2010)

... November 8th is only a week away, I look forward to it (if it's true), and I really hope that it'll perform better than the GTX480 with a lower power requirement and at less temperatures ... I am quite anxious to see how it'll compare to the upcoming 6970 in all aspects (performance (fps), tessellation, power, temperature, noise)  ...


----------



## wolf (Nov 1, 2010)

wile e said:


> i don't. As long as my psu is up to the task, i don't care. I only care about it's performance, then price is next. heat and power consumption on a top tier card mean absolutely nothing to me.
> 
> Now, go down a notch, and power becomes an issue, but if i'm paying over $400 for a card, it's no concern. Only performance.



+1


----------



## pantherx12 (Nov 1, 2010)

Wile E said:


> You didn't pay over 400 for a single card. There is a big difference. And your 2 5850s consume more than a single 480 anyway. But enough about that.
> 
> You can't call Fermi a failure because it consumes more for the same performance, when it excels in other areas that AMD can't begin to compete, like GPGPU or heavy tessellation. i7 quads run hotter than Phenom X6 for similar performance, yet aren't considered a failure. You aren't taking into account all aspects of the cards.




Run milky-way @ home on an nvidia card and on a ati card.

Generally Ati come out on top. 

ATI just needs some dev support


----------



## the54thvoid (Nov 1, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> The 480 underperforms on account of it's power requirement.  It SHOULD perform better.
> That is the entire goal of the GF 110 - to make it perform better for lower power consumption





Wile E said:


> You didn't pay over 400 for a single card. There is a big difference. And your 2 5850s consume more than a single 480 anyway. But enough about that.
> 
> You can't call Fermi a failure because....



_Read my post again Wile E._  I didn't call Fermi a failure.  I'm saying it should perform better for it's power usage.  NVidia thinks the same that's why they're doing the GTX 580.  They knew there were power issues from the problems in it's manufacture.  Now they are going to fix it.

I chose not to buy a 5870 and go for two 5850's because i wanted super performance.  5870 wasn't enough.  I spent £400 on a gfx solution - don't think that doesn't make it any less than buying one single card.  You're logic is irrelevant.  If i bought 2 x 5770's then yeah, big diff.  But i bought 5850's in Nov 09 when they were the 2nd fastest single chip solutions.  I couldn't buy a GF 100 because well, someone forgot how to make them on time.

You seem to miss that I'm not slagging off GF 100.  I'm simply saying it should perform better and the GF110 is exactly that fix.  It's also where NV want to go with Kepler and Maxwell.  They have stated they want to produce 'x' times performance gains with a marked improvement in efficiency.

And on power - going by W1zz's readings:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/27.html
One 5850 = 150 Watts (two even doubled = 300)
One 480 = 320 Watts.
Comparison on max power.
Now i'm not arguing on that point anymore, take it up with W1zz.

As for i7's consuming more power than phenom x6:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/10
Yeah, my 920 conumes 2 Watts more on this test yet performs:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/9
3 wins for i7 920, 2 draws and one loss.
And we all know clock speeds mean jack between AMD and Intel.

I spent £1500 on my self built rig.  I get to call myself an enthusiast.  I'm not a water cooler or into shiny neon.  My money goes on quality for noise/performance optimisation as i watch TV through my PC.  For me, performance must be met with acceptable noise levels.  I had to use rivatuner on my GTX 295 to lower idle fan speeds.  I dont on my crossfire set up. People have different priorities - accept it, enthusiasts dont all care about pure power at the expense of everything else. 

So, if you're going to quote me again, quote this:

GF100 isn't a failure - _it should have performed better_, even JSH said so in his modest interview.  GTX 580 is to fix that.  That's what i've been posting all along.


----------



## mdsx1950 (Nov 1, 2010)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> now for those who think the GTX480 is still only a little bit better then the 5870? Well you wrong. now that nvidia has been pushing out performance like bunny off spring the GTX480 is quite a bit faster then a 5870 now *and can play in HD5970 territory when overclocked. *That being said even the GTX470s are now faster then the 5870 in almost every game other then Vantage and Crysis (Crysis by like 4%)



Are you talking about the 2GB HD5970? Because i highly doubt an overclocked GTX480 can reach the performance of a 4GB 5970.



Wile E said:


> I don't. As long as my psu is up to the task, I don't care. I only care about it's performance, then price is next. Heat and power consumption on a top tier card mean absolutely nothing to me.
> 
> Now, go down a notch, and power becomes an issue, but If I'm paying over $400 for a card, it's no concern. Only performance.



Agreed! You pay for performance! 
Except i do care about heat because i usually tend to pair up cards 



the54thvoid said:


> You'd expect the GTX 480 to perform better than a HD 5970 when it consumes more power.



Exactly what i thought when i heard about the power consumption of the GTX480.


----------



## Wile E (Nov 1, 2010)

the54thvoid said:


> _Read my post again Wile E._  I didn't call Fermi a failure.  I'm saying it should perform better for it's power usage.  NVidia thinks the same that's why they're doing the GTX 580.  They knew there were power issues from the problems in it's manufacture.  Now they are going to fix it.
> 
> I chose not to buy a 5870 and go for two 5850's because i wanted super performance.  5870 wasn't enough.  I spent £400 on a gfx solution - don't think that doesn't make it any less than buying one single card.  You're logic is irrelevant.  If i bought 2 x 5770's then yeah, big diff.  But i bought 5850's in Nov 09 when they were the 2nd fastest single chip solutions.  I couldn't buy a GF 100 because well, someone forgot how to make them on time.
> 
> ...



The fact that you brought up an ATI card as a comparison in the original post I quoted suggested to me you were comparing the two in terms of power consumption, painting NV in a negative light.

I think I would've understood your point better if ATI was left out of the original comment altogether.

Meh. Whatever. It's over and done. Point taken.



mdsx1950 said:


> Agreed! You pay for performance!
> Except i do care about heat because i usually tend to pair up cards



Meh. I water cool. Total non-issue for me.


----------



## Benetanegia (Nov 1, 2010)

mdsx1950 said:


> Are you talking about the 2GB HD5970? Because i highly doubt an overclocked GTX480 can reach the performance of a 4GB 5970.



The 4GB HD5970 are a bad comparison. They're nothing but overclocked HD5970 with more vram, and he was talking about a OC GTX480 being close to reference HD5970. When OCed nothing can touch the HD5970, but with a drawback, I think that power consumption scales horribly, even more so than the GTX480. 4GB HD5970 consume 50% more than reference HD5970, in Wizzard's review the Asus ARES consumed 436 Watts!


----------



## mdsx1950 (Nov 1, 2010)

Benetanegia said:


> The 4GB HD5970 are a bad comparison. They're nothing but overclocked HD5970 with more vram



Not exactly true. The VRAM plays a part when it comes to high resolutions. And the 4GB HD5970 has more room to OC.



Benetanegia said:


> and he was talking about a OC GTX480 being close to reference HD5970. When OCed nothing can touch the HD5970, but with a drawback, I think that power consumption scales horribly, even more so than the GTX480. 4GB HD5970 consume 50% more than reference HD5970, in Wizzard's review the Asus ARES consumed 436 Watts!



That's the ARES. Not all 4GB HD5970s consume so much. Anyways i don't care about the power consumption as I only care about the performance.


----------



## Benetanegia (Nov 1, 2010)

mdsx1950 said:


> That's the ARES. Not all 4GB HD5970s consume so much. Anyways i don't care about the power consumption as I only care about the performance.



Well I've been looking at reviews of the Sapphire and XFX ones and they also consume like 100++ watts more than the 2 GB version, but I don't want to argue about this. You are right, people buying such high-end cards don't care about power consumption anyway, but my comment was just following the context in which Fermi and now this GTX580 are mostly judged: performance-per-watt.


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 1, 2010)

We should be seeing much better efficiency from GTX 580, Nvidia is already aware of the power and heat complaints that have been perpetually complained and whined about since Fermi's launch. I have no doubts that the 580 should have much better performance per watt and a decent decrease in heat output.(or at least i hope)


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Nov 1, 2010)

Ive got a gut feeling this would perform very much like a gtx 460 1GB sli


----------



## mdsx1950 (Nov 2, 2010)

Benetanegia said:


> ... but my comment was just following the context in which Fermi and now this GTX580 are mostly judged: performance-per-watt.



Fermi (mainly GTX 480) is a great card, yet it couldn't deliver HD5970 performance with the same or lower power consumption. If there was no HD5970 card, there wouldn't have been so many complaints about the GTX480 and it's power consumption.


----------



## Jiraiya (Nov 3, 2010)

*GTX 580*

















http://itbbs.pconline.com.cn/diy/12074471.html​


----------



## HTC (Nov 3, 2010)

mdsx1950 said:


> If there was no HD5970 card, there wouldn't have been so many complaints about the GTX480 and it's power consumption.



Quoted for truth.


----------



## mdsx1950 (Nov 3, 2010)

HTC said:


> Quoted for truth.



Thanks bro!


----------



## motasim (Nov 3, 2010)

mdsx1950 said:


> Fermi (mainly GTX 480) is a great card, yet it couldn't deliver HD5970 performance with the same or lower power consumption. If there was no HD5970 card, there wouldn't have been so many complaints about the GTX480 and it's power consumption.



... using your same reasoning; if nVidia did their job on Fermi properly in the first place, and weren't in rush to send their product to the market regardless of its clear issues, "*there wouldn't have been so many complaints about the GTX480 and it's power consumption*" ... nVidia should have waited a bit further and issued the proper GTX 480 (i.e. GTX 580), but this is just another evidence of their bad management :shadedshu ...


----------



## Tatty_One (Nov 3, 2010)

motasim said:


> ... using your same reasoning; if nVidia did their job on Fermi properly in the first place, and weren't in rush to send their product to the market regardless of its clear issues, "*there wouldn't have been so many complaints about the GTX480 and it's power consumption*" ... nVidia should have waited a bit further and issued the proper GTX 480 (i.e. GTX 580), but this is just another evidence of their bad management :shadedshu ...



Or good management if in fact it will now, some months on be the right product that actually manages to compete with AMD's "new" high end offering, may well have actually served a very strategic purpose.


----------



## Benetanegia (Nov 3, 2010)

It's all part of the same management mistake with the fabric thing, one mistake lead to another mistake, but most of them imposible to avoid back then.

They should have revised the fabric thing when they received A1 and go directly to B1 revision instead of doing metal respins that didn't really fix anything or very little? That would have made them be 4 months late or so instead of 6 months and have a much better product. But it is very easy to judge that right now that we know where the error was made. At the time all they knew was that the fabric which is in fact nothing but a metal layer didn't work, so a metal respin was what made most sense: 2 months late and hopes of fixing it. A metal respin takes less than 2 months so it just made sense to try to fix the management mistake in a metal respin. The error was deeper than they thought and the rest is history left for prosperity. Should they have went to B1 after A2 didn't fix anything, being 8 months late but with a card that could potentially destroy Cypress like the alleged GF110 is apparently going to? Again, maybe they should have, but that was probably too much pressure for partners and it's again a decision that is too easy to make now that we have all the responses...

EDIT: tbh if GF110 turns out to be just GF100 made right, and it seems most likely to, I'm going to be dissapointed, regardless of how it does in comparison to Cayman. Because even though I think it's going to be very competitive against Cayman, I'm 99% sure they could have made a much better card if they had used the 48SP SMs instead of the 32 in GF100. In fact, IMO if they wanted to release another 512 SP chip, they could have taken GF104 and add another 16 SP. The architecture must be able to handle it, because in GF104 2 dispatchers are working with 3 SIMDs with no performance penalty at all, so every dispatcher can surely dispatch to 2 SIMDs, so 2x2=4= 64 SP. And since GF104 has 2x the TMU/SFU/load/store of CF100 per SM, they would end up with a card with almost same specs as GF100 but with a sub 400mm^2 area (instead of the rumored 460-480 mm^2 of GF110). The only drawback would be tesselation, because with half the clusters it would have half the tesselation capabilities. Still considering that even the GTX460 (or GTS450 if you stretch it) annihilates Cypress and Barts when it comes to tesselation it would be a good compromise.


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 3, 2010)

*NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 priced at US$599, to be available November 9th?*

Supposed GTX 580 price($599) and availibilty info coming from VRzone..



			
				VRzone said:
			
		

> However, in an unexpected twist, we stumbled upon an online posting made no more than just a few hours ago, which suggests the GeForce GTX 580 is expected to cost US$599, and will be available on November 9th. These GeForce GTX 580 cards will come from a number of NVIDIA's partners, but all are reference boards.



http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-...-599-to-be-available-november-9th-/10222.html

That price is actually a big far out of reach for me unfortunately(especially for a single GPU card).


----------



## erocker (Nov 3, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> Supposed GTX 580 pice($599) and availibilty info coming from VRzone..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I hope that isn't true.


----------



## wolf (Nov 3, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> Supposed GTX 580 pice($599) and availibilty info coming from VRzone..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



especially with no job yet  but still $599 seems steep given what you can get a GTX480 for, and it's only rumored to be ~20% faster.


----------



## dir_d (Nov 3, 2010)

That cant be true...Nvidia would be shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 3, 2010)

wolf said:


> especially with no job yet  but still $599 seems steep given what you can get a GTX480 for, and it's only rumored to be ~20% faster.



Exactly, i have no job right now and at that price it just pushes me away even more. Even if i had the money i still wouldn't drop that much for a single GPU card unless it's giving me ungodly performance.

I hope it's not that much and if so, i hope the 6900's are cheaper.


----------



## wolf (Nov 3, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> Exactly, i have no job right now and at that price it just pushes me away even more. Even if i had the money i still wouldn't drop that much for a single GPU card unless it's giving me ungodly performance.
> 
> I hope it's not that much and if so, i hope the 6900's are cheaper.



If Nvidia just waited till the 6900's were out, they could judge performance of the 580 vs the 6970 and price accordingly.

hec if AMD does what they did with the 5870 and go for roughly a ~$399 price point Nv may have screwed themselves, if they wait they will know what they can price them at to sell as many as possible.


----------



## N3M3515 (Nov 3, 2010)

Well that's not to far from reality GTX 480 is at 489 USD on average, so 20% more is 586 USD.

HD5870 is at 360 USD, speculated 40% increase of HD6970 will take it to 504 USD BUT, that won't be the case because people will prefer to buy 2x HD6870 for 480 USD and 20% more performance.
Then i guess it will be at 450USD.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 4, 2010)

dir_d said:


> That cant be true...Nvidia would be shooting themselves in the foot.



remember what half the nvidia fanboys on the forum repeat over and over:

'i dont care about price, power, heat or noise so long as its the fastest!'


nvidia knows that their fanboys (not their regular users) only care because they have the FASTEST, not about any other category.


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 4, 2010)

Mussels said:


> remember what half the nvidia fanboys on the forum repeat over and over:
> 
> 'i dont care about price, power, heat or noise so long as its the fastest!'
> 
> ...



Everybody knows those two or three Nvidia fanboys on the forums are wrong in some of those aspects.(considering this is an AMD heavy forum)

You have to remember, if you're buying a top end card, heat, power and noise don't matter to a lot of people, if you're paying top tier price you should know and have the precautions set up so that you can deal with those. In the end it's quite literally about performance actually, if this card is a monster, you bet your ass people/enthusiasts with the cash will be buying it no matter the heat, power, noise etc. and i honestly don't see a problem with that.


----------



## N3M3515 (Nov 4, 2010)

The only thing i care about is bang for buck, i don't buy x card that performs 10% than a y card for 50% the price (for example), i don't care if its the FASTEST(10% pathetic)

EDIT: oh ! my card runs 5 frames faster than yours........omfg.....


----------



## Wile E (Nov 4, 2010)

Mussels said:


> remember what half the nvidia fanboys on the forum repeat over and over:
> 
> 'i dont care about price, power, heat or noise so long as its the fastest!'
> 
> ...



I sure as hell wouldn't buy it for that price. I'm dying to ditch ATI, but not for that much money.


----------



## erocker (Nov 4, 2010)

Found these:


----------



## Kantastic (Nov 4, 2010)

Not very often we see an IHS on a GPU... wonder how hot those things are?


----------



## erocker (Nov 4, 2010)

Kantastic said:


> Not very often we see an IHS on a GPU... wonder how hot those things are?



G80, G92, G200, 470's, 480's all have IHS's.


----------



## Wile E (Nov 4, 2010)

My G92's (8800GT) didn't have spreaders on them.


----------



## HammerON (Nov 4, 2010)

Kantastic said:


> Not very often we see an IHS on a GPU... wonder how hot those things are?



This is why water cooling was created

No more issues...


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 4, 2010)

I hope its like 400 bucks. Thats fair for a top tier GPU. To bad the GPU market isn't like the NFL and use price caps


----------



## N3M3515 (Nov 4, 2010)

it's funny how each generation the radeons get better relative to the geforces, look:

3850870<8800gts<8800gtx    <performance leader: 8800gtx> nvidia
4850<gtx260=4870<gtx 280      <performance leader: gtx 295>  nvidia  
5850<gtx470<5870<gtx480       <performance leader: hd5970>  amd
6950=gtx570<6970=gtx580 ??   <performance leader: hd6990>  amd


----------



## bear jesus (Nov 4, 2010)

N3M3515 said:


> it's funny how each generation the radeons get better relative to the geforces, look:
> 
> 3850870<8800gts<8800gtx    <performance leader: 8800gtx> nvidia
> 4850<gtx260=4870<gtx 280      <performance leader: gtx 295>  nvidia
> ...



Hmmm interesting point, if you are right with the 5xx and 69xx cards it kind of makes me wonder if this was ATI/AMD's plan all along, just take a few steps closer each generation until they are back on top in all price points again.


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 6, 2010)




----------



## wolf (Nov 9, 2010)

google and you shall find, GTX580 gets a thumbs up from me


----------



## CDdude55 (Nov 9, 2010)




----------

