Thursday, October 28th 2010
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Reference Design Graphics Card Pictured
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.
Source:
PCinLife
213 Comments on NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Reference Design Graphics Card Pictured
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
I agree the heat issues are really a non issue imho.
The 5 series still only lags a bit behind.
from your specs and name, you may seem to lack any recent ATI hardware to backup that claim....
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.
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.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.
www.tcmagazine.com/tcm/news/hardware/31375/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-cooler-seen-detail
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. 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.
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.
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"
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.
+1