# ASUS GeForce GTX 470 Fermi



## W1zzard (Apr 16, 2010)

NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 470 was announced a few weeks back - now we got the first production sample of the card from ASUS. Compared to the GTX 480 we saw much more reasonable power consumption numbers as well as fan noise and heat.

*Show full review*


----------



## Yukikaze (Apr 19, 2010)

Excellent review, as always. Thanks ! 

The GTX470 really isn't a bad card it seems.


----------



## Delta6326 (Apr 19, 2010)

not bad in every game i checked it was up to or beat the 5870 at 1920x1200. but im still waiting for both next gen cards, im disappointed in both fields


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 19, 2010)

This is the review I've been waiting for!

Seems the GTX470 sits right between the HD5870 and HD5850 in performance price and of course performance/price.

Just as I have been saying, the GTX470 is the Fermi card that we should all be looking at, because the GTX480 was just pushed to the limits to beat the HD5870.  The GTX470 is far more reasonable.  And I still think driver updates should fix the higher resolution performance.

I still think I'd go with the HD5850 if I was upgrading to this generation though.


----------



## human_error (Apr 19, 2010)

Excellent review as always - good to see the card being price competetive but i wish they could get the heat and noise levels down to make it more comparable with the 5850 and 5870 for heat/power/noise levels.


----------



## angelkiller (Apr 19, 2010)

Yeah this card is much more power efficient and lowers consumption to reasonable levels.

However, I noticed that power doesn't seem to scale linearly. The GTX 480 has 7% more shaders, more ram, and slightly higher clocks, and a lower core voltage, which may equalize the other stuff. But when you look at power consumption, the GTX 480 uses way more than 7% more power. In fact it's not even close to 7%. So clearly, either adding 7% more hardware increases power by more than 7%, or there's another variable here.

Also, how is the power consumption of the OC'ed 470? If it's under the consumption of the GTX 480, than an overclocked GTX 470 would be much more efficient than a GTX 480. (which is what I'm guessing) And if that's true, why did Nvidia release a 480 shader part?


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 19, 2010)

The memory controller likely plays a large part in the heat and power consumption.  As does the different voltage circuits that don't allow voltage control on the GTX470.


----------



## Yukikaze (Apr 19, 2010)

angelkiller said:


> YThe GTX 480 has 7% more shaders, more ram, and slightly higher clocks, and a lower core voltage, which may equalize the other stuff. But when you look at power consumption, the GTX 480 uses way more than 7% more power. In fact it's not even close to 7%. So clearly, either adding 7% more hardware increases power by more than 7%, or there's another variable here.



The GTX480 has 7% more shaders (at 15% higher frequency), 20% more ROPS, 20% wider memory bus and 20% more memory (at 10% higher frequency).

It has more than 7% hardware on the chip/board.


----------



## Sasqui (Apr 19, 2010)

This is why the review front was so quiet after the SLI scaling tests.

After parusing the review, I think the rating was worthy.  This seems to be the card that really shines in the price/perf dept, and VG OC'ing potential.



angelkiller said:


> Also, how is the power consumption of the OC'ed 470? If it's under the consumption of the GTX 480, than an overclocked GTX 470 would be much more efficient than a GTX 480. (which is what I'm guessing) And if that's true, why did Nvidia release a 480 shader part?



Was wondering the same.


----------



## angelkiller (Apr 19, 2010)

newtekie1 said:


> The memory controller likely plays a large part in the heat and power consumption.  As does the different voltage circuits that don't allow voltage control on the GTX470.





Yukikaze said:


> The GTX480 has 7% more shaders (at 15% higher frequency), 20% more ROPS, 20% wider memory bus and 20% more memory (at 10% higher frequency).
> 
> It has more than 7% hardware on the chip/board.


I see.

Either way, I think I bring up a good question. Is an overclocked GTX 470 more power efficient than a GTX 480?


----------



## Altered (Apr 19, 2010)

Nice review Wiz.



newtekie1 said:


> This is the review I've been waiting for!
> 
> Seems the GTX470 sits right between the HD5870 and HD5850 in performance price and of course performance/price.
> 
> ...



I agree looks much more reasonable than the 480 but the 5850 still seems to be the ticket unless you just have to have a Nvidia card.


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 19, 2010)

I think 470 allows voltage tweaking... just read a guru3d review where they used voltage tweaking.


----------



## btarunr (Apr 19, 2010)

Hello, my future DX11 card.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Apr 19, 2010)

dugg


----------



## Fourstaff (Apr 19, 2010)

Hmm, the GTX470 sits directly between the 5870 and 5850, and is priced right in between both. I still think 5850 is a better buy, being almost $100 less than 5870 and almost just as powerful. I would have doubts about 91 degrees being a safe temp all the time, but if W1zzard thinks its allright, then I guess it will be fine for most people not too paranoid about temps.


----------



## HardSide (Apr 19, 2010)

Am I missing something, or there is no temperature comparison? Also you guys review other 470/480 cards from other distributors, like EVGA.


----------



## OneCool (Apr 19, 2010)

I know this is OT a little but does anyone know why nvidia uses such a weird memory amount on their cards?

Good review BTW W1zz 

Not a bad card at all.


----------



## Crazykenny (Apr 19, 2010)

Nvidia... I'm impressed. My first impression of this card is allot better then the one I had about the 480.


----------



## crush3r (Apr 19, 2010)

Nice card, overclocking really opens the throttle!


----------



## cauby (Apr 19, 2010)

oh he didn't use the 10.4 for the ATI cards...i think i'm gonna start a drama!
hehehehehe

nice review w1z!


----------



## DOM (Apr 19, 2010)

cauby said:


> oh he didn't use the 10.4 for the ATI cards...i think i'm gonna start a drama!
> hehehehehe
> 
> nice review w1z!



there Cat 10.4 hotfix not new drviers


----------



## stinzza (Apr 19, 2010)

well its a nice review wizzard  ..but must say that i would take the 5870 over all price/performance..these are norwegian prices=   
          red --sapphire 5870 1gb= 492dollar--       green --asus gtx480= 664dollar
               --sapphire 5850 1gb= 366dollar--                --asus gtx470= 467dollar


----------



## Benetanegia (Apr 19, 2010)

The overclocking of Fermi still amazes me. 26% performance increase from overclock is just amazing.

One question, Wizzard: do you increase the fan speed when OCing or if auto you can clearly tell it runs faster or whatever? I ask it, because according to all the reviews that I have seen, apparently Fermi doesn't consume more nor heat up when you overclock it. Kind of weird, maybe it's way below the perf/watt curve of the architecture?


----------



## erocker (Apr 19, 2010)

GTX 470 Review said:
			
		

> This means that if you are willing to do some manual tweaking and overclocking, you could most probably reach performance levels of the HD 5870 or GTX 480, at a substantially lower price.



A 5850 can do that as well. Perhaps it's a reach hitting 480 levels, but it's still about a hundred bucks cheaper than a 470.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Apr 19, 2010)

interesting the 470 definetly looks more enticing that the 480 at this point. the overclock is impressive and the fact that it matches the 480 when overclocked is even nicer. still curious to see how the fermi revision plays out and if those 32sp's come back on the 485 or whatever they call it.


----------



## Benetanegia (Apr 19, 2010)

erocker said:


> A 5850 can do that as well. Perhaps it's a reach hitting 480 levels, but *it's still about a hundred bucks cheaper than a 470.*



Not even close. $50 is the difference and that's by MSRP. Actual 5850's cost much more than their suggested retail price:

5850: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&Description=hd5850&bop=And&Order=PRICE

The GTX470 has been selling at it's suggested price, although it will probably go up in the future. In any case, right now the average 470 costs $350-360, while the average 5850 costs $310-320.



yogurt_21 said:


> interesting the 470 definetly looks more enticing that the 480 at this point. the overclock is impressive and the fact that it matches the 480 when overclocked is even nicer. still curious to see how the fermi revision plays out and if those 32sp's come back on the 485 or whatever they call it.



Yup it will be interesting to see what happens with newer cards based on the architecture. OCing is amazing and linear with the clock increase. It also scales linearly with the shader count from what I can tell from the results: 25% difference between 470 and 480. That's the exact difference that you get if you artificially calculate 480 results from 470 results. As far as I can tell that never really happened before.


----------



## erocker (Apr 19, 2010)

Benetanegia said:


> Not even close. $50 is the difference and that's by MSRP. Actual 5850's cost much more than their suggested retail price:
> 
> 5850: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&Description=hd5850&bop=And&Order=PRICE
> 
> The GTX470 has been selling at it's suggested price, although it will probably go up in the future. In any case, right now the average 470 costs $350-360, while the average 5850 costs $310-320.



I'm going by the $399 price I see everywhere else for the 470. Either way the 5850 can match it for performance. If you want to argue about price, fine fifty bucks.


----------



## Benetanegia (Apr 19, 2010)

erocker said:


> I'm going by the $399 price I see everywhere else for the 470. Either way the 5850 can match it for performance. If you want to argue about price, fine fifty bucks.



Where? In Spain HD5xxx prices went so high that a GTX470 was cheaper at launch actually. And on Newegg it's not that dramatic, but it happens too, as I demostrated.

And it can be as fast? I don't think so, definately not when overclocked. A 470 OC can match a stock 480, a 5850 can only dream about that feat. You would need a 50% OC or so. FYI that's almost 1100 Mhz


----------



## HalfAHertz (Apr 19, 2010)

Great review and a great product. Nuff said. I just hope retailers don't jack the prices like on the hd5000 cards...


----------



## erocker (Apr 19, 2010)

Benetanegia said:


> And it can be as fast? I don't think so, definately not when overclocked. A 470 OC can match a stock 480, a 5850 can only dream about that feat. You would need a 50% OC or so. FYI that's almost 1100 Mhz



Damn, actually your math makes sense.. Kinda. Looking at the overall performance graph, the 5870 beats the 470. A 5850 is equal to a 5870 with a liitle bit more than equal clocks so.. Well, I just picked up one of those $359 GTX 470's for happy fun times! I really wanted to get a 480 but I would have to quit my job so I can hover over the internet to find one. Even if I'm not happy gaming with it, it's time I get my butt folding again. 


*Uggghhh! Last time I ever use ZipZoomFly, this is the 4th time now they have sold me something stating it's in stock, charged me, then it wasn't in stock. Plus their prices are awful, I had a coupon to basically pay MSRP. Never again... Looks like one is in at Newegg... where I should of bought it to begin with.


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 19, 2010)

erocker said:


> Damn, actually your math makes sense.. Kinda. Looking at the overall performance graph, the 5870 beats the 470. A 5850 is equal to a 5870 with a liitle bit more than equal clocks so.. Well, I just picked up one of those $359 GTX 470's for happy fun times! I really wanted to get a 480 but I would have to quit my job so I can hover over the internet to find one. Even if I'm not happy gaming with it, it's time I get my butt folding again.



folding on a 480?  good god man!  save the penguins ...

Im hoping for an NV refresh here soon... as good as a 470 is, it still eats power _edit: at a surprisingly reasonable rate :| - never mind - fold away!_


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 19, 2010)

OneCool said:


> I know this is OT a little but does anyone know why nvidia uses such a weird memory amount on their cards?



It is because they aren't using the standard 128/256/512 bit memory bus.  The amount of memory must be a multiple of the memory bus.


----------



## Benetanegia (Apr 19, 2010)

phanbuey said:


> folding on a 480?  good god man!  save the penguins ...
> 
> Im hoping for an NV refresh here soon... as good as a 470 is, it still eats power like a monster.



He is talking about folding, a GTX470 will clearly fold better than any other card at that power envelope.

The power consumption is the same as GTX285, 275 or HD4890. Not a monster in my book.


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 19, 2010)

Benetanegia said:


> He is talking about folding, a GTX470 will clearly fold better than any other card at that power envelope.
> 
> The power consumption is the same as GTX285, 275 or HD4890. Not a monster in my book.



Yes you're right!... wow... i had no idea it was that good.  I pretty much assumed it would be a mini 480.  I guess that's what happens .

post edited.


----------



## Benetanegia (Apr 19, 2010)

phanbuey said:


> Yes you're right!... wow... i had no idea it was that good.  I pretty much assumed it would be a mini 480.  I guess that's what happens .
> 
> post edited.



Yeah, it's the natural thing to think anyway and I don't know why there's such a big difference in power consumption tbh. We are talking about 100w... Maybe production cards consume less?


----------



## OnBoard (Apr 19, 2010)

So it's a DX11 GTX 280. Power consumption, clocks and overcloking about identical.

But the real winner will be GTX 460, overclock even more (well it most likely will be clocked higher to begin with) and cost way less. Well in couple months time we'll know if I was right and by then it's either GTX 460 or price dropped 5850 for me 



Benetanegia said:


> I don't know why there's such a big difference in power consumption tbh. We are talking about 100w... Maybe production cards consume less?



Nope, that's what they'll all consume. Compare GTX 280 with GTX 260 and you see the same thing. More memory chips also play into those figures.


----------



## claylomax (Apr 19, 2010)

And it's not a long card at 9'5 inches, it should fit in most cases; I think it must be the most powerful/compact Dx11 card.


----------



## [Ion] (Apr 19, 2010)

I'm actually very impressed with this card, it's not too big (only about 3/4 of an inch longer than my 8800GTS), not unacceptably loud, doesn't draw too much power (~175w is really my limit), it's a bit hot but not unreasonable.  The performance looks quite nice, almost on par with a HD5870 in a lot of games, and the OCing potential is excellent!  I'll still never buy one because my limit for GPUs is always right around $150, but still a very excellent card!
Maybe I'll get a GTS440 or whatever the ~$150 version is called


----------



## Cap'n Killmore (Apr 19, 2010)

nice review as always w1zz.

Do you by any chance have the power consumption with the overclock ?


----------



## kid41212003 (Apr 19, 2010)

claylomax said:


> And it's not a long card at 9'5 inches, it should fit in most cases; I think it must be the most powerful/compact Dx11 card.



Yeah, the 9800GTX is 10.5 inches.

They should have made the card longer, and increase the cooler size.


----------



## bigtye (Apr 19, 2010)

HardSide said:


> Am I missing something, or there is no temperature comparison? Also you guys review other 470/480 cards from other distributors, like EVGA.



yeah mate, Wiz does review cards from lots of other manufacturers. My guess is that when they become available he will do so. If you check other cards like the 5000 series etc Wiz has reviews for various manufacturers.

And no you didn't miss anything with the temp graphs. There is no comparisom between a multitude of cards. You could look up a review of the card you are interested in and manually compare?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/

For the me the temp review bit is more about whether the thermal characteristics of the card are acceptable or not, not a comparisom of more or less acceptable.


Looks like a very good all round card. Thanks Wiz.

Tye


----------



## Sasqui (Apr 20, 2010)

Really surprised to see them in stock at Newegg (as of writing this) at the stated $349.99:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=gtx+470

I truly beleive if the 58xx series hadn't come out, they'd be selling for MUCH more.


----------



## kid41212003 (Apr 20, 2010)

Sasqui said:


> Really surprised to see them in stock at Newegg (as of writing this) at the stated $349.99:
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=gtx+470
> 
> I truly beleive if the 58xx series hadn't come out, they'd be selling for MUCH more.



If you click on them, you will see they are out of stock.


----------



## Sasqui (Apr 20, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> If you click on them, you will see they are out of stock.



Yea, _*now*_, duh!


----------



## RONX GT (Apr 20, 2010)

Yeah finally NV has released a decent graphics card. The cooler looks sweet,same goes for the PCB.The temp is way better then the GTX 480.The price needs to be a little bit reasonable though.GREAT REVIEW WIZZ.......THANKX..


----------



## xtremesv (Apr 20, 2010)

Don't pay attention to my avatar, I'm not a complete AMD fan, I've owned 2 nVidia cards and I've been very pleased with each of them. I was certain about the substitute of my HD4830, however, I wanted to see what nVidia had to offer, maybe I could change my mind. And I must admit that nVidia exceeded my expectations, I was almost convinced that Fermi was going to be at its limit when released but my surprise is that Fermi has a very good OC potential then its architecture is not compromised after all.

GTX470 is an excellent rival to HD5850 and it is perfectly placed in the price/performance battle. I am very disappointed with HD58xx performance in DX11, AMD used that flag to promote their new product line 6 months ago and right now nVidia is claiming it without effort. Moreover, I'm not a partisan of CUDA and PhysX for their closed nature but I admit they make a very good added value.

The time came, I had to make a choice, finally I bought a HD5850, first I didn't want to wait and second I live in a country whose average temperature is about 32C every day of the year, at noon my room is an oven as I don't have an AC. Every review I've seen, the GTX4xx reaches +90C and considering that those reviews were made in very well-conditioned rooms (20-23C) I don't see how I can have a GTX4xx on my system without causing a thermonuclear reaction or buying an AC with a new electricity bill attached to it. I know that eventually, AIBP's will release GTX4xx with better cooling solutions but as I said I don't wanna wait until next GPU gen.


----------



## HammerON (Apr 20, 2010)

Ordered a EVGA GTX 470 from Mwave (Don't really like them, but they had them in stock). The card will be here tomorrow!!!

Thanks for another awesome review


----------



## Parad0x (Apr 20, 2010)

Great review as always W1zz. Is it possible to test the Voltage Tweak feature from ASUS?


----------



## xtremesv (Apr 20, 2010)

cauby said:


> oh he didn't use the 10.4 for the ATI cards...i think i'm gonna start a drama!
> hehehehehe
> 
> nice review w1z!



The same here, what were you thinking!!!!??? why didn't you use Catalyst 12.12!!!???


----------



## xtremesv (Apr 20, 2010)

HammerON said:


> Ordered a EVGA GTX 470 from Mwave (Don't really like them, but they had them in stock). The card will be here tomorrow!!!
> 
> Thanks for another awesome review



Congrats!!! You live in Alaska, you'll enjoy your GTX470, I envy you really


----------



## RONX GT (Apr 20, 2010)

Can it reach 1 GHz? Would like to see the upcoming GTX 460 more energy efficient and reasonably priced to compete against the HD 5850...But for now....


----------



## kid41212003 (Apr 20, 2010)

RONX GT said:


> Can it reach 1 GHz? Would like to see the upcoming GTX 460 more energy efficient and reasonably priced to compete against the HD 5850...But for now....



lol? 1GHz?

40% overclock?


----------



## wahdangun (Apr 20, 2010)

wow, great review wizz, now i will wait for HD 5850 price drop, let's competition begin


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 20, 2010)

added info about voltage increase via smartdoctor to the oc section


----------



## Parad0x (Apr 20, 2010)

Too bad that the max vgpu is 1.087V, same as msi's afterburner. You think this is a software or hardware limitation?


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 20, 2010)

Parad0x said:


> Too bad that the max vgpu is 1.087V, same as msi's afterburner. You think this is a software or hardware limitation?



the voltage regulator doesnt support i2c, only vid input. afterburner and smartdoctor both use nvidia's driver to set the voltage, and 1.087 is the highest the driver allows


----------



## arnoo1 (Apr 20, 2010)

I think it's already time for gtx475 and gtx 485
gtx 275 was way better than gtx 260 more power, less power consumption
the same for gtx 280 vs gtx285
and 250 euro's is a nice price for gtx 470
I will wait 
gtx275 is still fine for me

Edit
great review wizz


----------



## Hayder_Master (Apr 20, 2010)

same shit different name, another over heat card in GTX4xx

thanx w1zzard that was great review as always


----------



## Isty (Apr 21, 2010)

In Sweden the 470 costs as much as the 5870 (3700 swedish crowns, ~515 dollars) so there's no reason to even look at the 470.

For the 480 you will get 5850x2


----------



## Mussels (Apr 22, 2010)

apart from the price, this seems decent.

power consumption is a little high, but its still acceptable for a high performance card


----------



## erixx (May 5, 2010)

Just ordered this one today! Only doubt is if the 'voltage control' by Asus does make any sense?
(Somewhere I read the 'standard' GFX470 does not have any voltage control)


----------



## claylomax (May 6, 2010)

erixx said:


> Just ordered this one today! Only doubt is if the 'voltage control' by Asus does make any sense?
> (Somewhere I read the 'standard' GFX470 does not have any voltage control)



All reference Fermi cards support voltage control. Read the third paragraph. http://www.guru3d.com/article/overclocking-geforce-gtx-470-with-extra-gpu-voltage/


----------



## erixx (May 6, 2010)

Increible! PR-bs caught me! lol. So Asus just offers their own software and maybe (?) better BIOS...
This time I just want the best brand with best options, and not waste my time like with Gigabyte 585OC.


----------



## claylomax (May 6, 2010)

erixx said:


> Increible! PR-bs caught me! lol. So Asus just offers their own software and maybe (?) better BIOS...
> This time I just want the best brand with best options, and not waste my time like with Gigabyte 585OC.



Increible pero cierto.


----------



## erixx (May 6, 2010)

ahhaha!


----------



## erixx (May 14, 2010)

i changed the stock thermal paste for artic cooling #3 and my idle temps are 39-40!!! That's 8 less than the review. (and no I am not running airco


----------



## HardSide (May 14, 2010)

erixx said:


> i changed the stock thermal paste for artic cooling #3 and my idle temps are 39-40!!! That's 8 less than the review. (and no I am not running airco



You using a watercooler? I've seen reviews say its 80-90 idle. Yet you claiming half the temperature.


----------



## newtekie1 (May 14, 2010)

HardSide said:


> You using a watercooler? I've seen reviews say its 80-90 idle. Yet you claiming half the temperature.



I have yet to see a review claim 80-90°C idle, load maybe, but not idle.

And yes, with all the gunk they slather on the card at the factory, simply removing it and putting the TIM on properly, even with generic TIM, can greatly effect temps.


----------



## erixx (May 14, 2010)

lol... If only full load (80ºC) was cooler, otherwise I WILL be running airco soon, for me!!!! 8)

Another interesting fact is that with the Radeon 5850, during Furmark, the temps would climb, climb, climb and reach more than 100 ºC...

Well, with this 470, the temp reaches 88 aprox, and the fan speeds up and the temp stays under 90 forever.... at the price of a jet engine sound....


----------

