GeForce GTX 400 Series Performance Expectations Hit the Web

[Imsochobo]

I think fermi will earn its place in history alongside FX 5800 Ultra and R600 (2900xt) as a hot, power hungry and pricy (price/performance wise) card... I could even mention Voodoo5 6000 but it was never released officially.
Also all the cards mentioned above were released after delays... except Voodoo ofcourse

2900 XT was something, FX series so wasnt.

But your mostly right, 2900 series was nothing for the average performance oriented consumer, but it did beat EVERYthing when watercooled!
The clocks it achieved was so staggering talking by experience, sole reason why i bought it.

anyhow, this card might end up like the X1800/1900 series, except being hot aswell, ati had expensive parts, but faster.

Nvidia enjoyed those times, but this time it might be the other way around, i so not doubt that fermi will be fast.
but they aint gonna blow ati away with the fermi, far from, may just stay in the game, and maybe prove themself next time.

 

[Wile E]

Yes it does. I remember reading about it. Something about diminishing returns and high power draw required to keep it fed.

Thats why after the R600 debacle(with 512bit bus) ATI moved back to 256bit bus with 3870/4870 and now the very powerful 5870 still has a 256bit memory bus.

If it were that easy or worthwhile ATI would have made the 4870 or the upgraded 4890 with a wider memory bus. They already tried it and it wasnt worth it. Nvidia has been using GDDR3 which benefits from a wider memory bus. On GDDR 5 theres already plenty of bandwidth on a 256 bit bus.

As an analogy its like having 4 X 5970's in a computer. After 2 of them theres not much performance increase if any. So you have a hot and power hungry setup that is inefficient. Just like RV600 was.

I'm not surprised the power draw is as high as they say.

No, ATI moved back to 256 because 512 was too pricey to build.

And test have shown that current 58xx cards benefit from more memory bandwidth when OCing, suggesting that the 256bit bus is indeed a bottleneck. That can be achieved either thru higher memory clocks, or a wider bus if they wanted to stamp out a new core. Both add heat and power, so the point is moot.

And btw, the 2900 outperformed the 3870 when OCing, and part of that reason was the wider bus. That's why all of the top ATI scores were still done with 2900 at that time, and not the 3870.

2900 was power inefficient mostly because of the package size, and it's high current leakage, not because of bus width.

 

[shevanel]

what is a good test to know if you actually NEED to overclock memory in real world gaming use?

 

[Wile E]

what is a good test to know if you actually NEED to overclock memory in real world gaming use?

If overclocking memory gives a performance boost.

 

[shevanel]

so anything that can be given a performance boost means it was a bottleneck?

 

[Wile E]

so anything that can be given a performance boost means it was a bottleneck?

Technically speaking? Yes. If it isn't a bottleneck, ocing doesn't help, especially when talking about video card memory.

 

[shevanel]

I see. Good point.

my cpu is my bottleneck imo... i miss the i7 920 @ 4ghz

 

[Imsochobo]

I see. Good point.

my cpu is my bottleneck imo... i miss the i7 920 @ 4ghz

for high fps, yes.
For over 50 fps, nada...

I feel no lagg or stuff like that with a PH II 940 @ stock hoho...

 

[TAViX]

And test have shown that current 58xx cards benefit from more memory bandwidth when OCing, suggesting that the 256bit bus is indeed a bottleneck. That can be achieved either through higher memory clocks, or a wider bus if they wanted to stamp out a new core. Both add heat and power, so the point is moot.

And btw, the 2900 outperformed the 3870 when OCing, and part of that reason was the wider bus. That's why all of the top ATI scores were still done with 2900 at that time, and not the 3870.

Do you have any proof of what you've wrote there??

All the o.c. forums are saying that o.c. the RAM of current 57xx and 58xx is useless, since it provides very little performance gain, even when using liquid cooling or sub-zero custom H2/ He/N2/etc cooling. The main performer is only the GPU, so where did you got your informations, mind if I ask??:shadedshu

 

[shevanel]

i guess you havent seen the vantage thread with all the 5850 oc's and scores? unless vanatage is misleading and is not reflective towards real-world gaming?

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

there goes the news thread

in anycase, waiting is always the hardest part

 

[$ReaPeR$]

i totaly agree on the waiting part,i would very much like to see the performance of this gpu, debating on speculations is a bit pointless imo , funny, but pointless.

 

[HalfAHertz]

Nvidia are arrogant, not stupid - they will not release a 300W single gpu card, you can quote me on that! I call this article total bs, I don't even know why it deserves to be in the news section...

 

[X-TeNDeR]

Very interesting.. ofcourse this can be a ploy by NVIDIA to dazzle us untill the real deal is here, shocking the gaming community (as AMD did with the "400 shaders" HD4xxx)

If this info is true - they should Ship these cards with Doom 5

 

[GSquadron]

I dont really think the new fermi will end up with such low performance. They must be better, cuz the chip is even bigger than the previous and it is supposed to be less bigger cuz it is 40 nm. They will use in GTX400 series the GDDR5 version and i hope that this will help a bit nvidia. But if they want to price it that high, i say to nvidia: Go home you little boy, your mummy is waiting for you

 

[Wshlist]

No graphics card draws 300Watt for itself, and it can't be they 'advise a 300W PSU' either since that is too low for a system this day an age, so in short I think it's all nonsense.

 

[ucanmandaa]

yeah i was talking about stock cards... watercooling + overclocking and modding were not included

 

[kaneda]

The one thing, in my opinion which is keeping nVidia afloat in the eyes of enthusiasts (besides fanboyism) is CUDA. ATi stream is far from a rival. AMD/ATi need to sort that out before it takes the last of what nVidia has to offer. in pure gaming price/performance they're dominating, its just in GPGPU they're flopping, and not in a good way. What use is power if there's no way of accessing it?

From a 3d modellers perspective, i want some nice open ATi powered renderer , make use of that raw power.

Though, im still stuck, due to monetary reasons, on my old X1950Pro.

 

[GSquadron]

Is your X1950 pro better than my 7600GS?

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

yes it is

 

[Frick]

Is your X1950 pro better than my 7600GS?

x1950 pro is on par with 7900gs and 7900gto.

 

[kaneda]

I love how my gpu got to be the topic of conversation not the point I made XD.

the card I have isn't horrid, can still play quite a few games relatively well, older games obviously but still.

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

Is your X1950 pro better than my 7600GS?

x1950 pro is on par with 7900gs and 7900gto.

you didnt get the meaning he is trying to say

 

[TheLaughingMan]

No graphics card draws 300Watt for itself, and it can't be they 'advise a 300W PSU' either since that is too low for a system this day an age, so in short I think it's all nonsense.

Yes, yes they do, at peek power usage. That is not even close to unrealistic. Granted it will most likely never reach that high, but it is capable of it is the point.

 

[eidairaman1]

The one thing, in my opinion which is keeping nVidia afloat in the eyes of enthusiasts (besides fanboyism) is CUDA. ATi stream is far from a rival. AMD/ATi need to sort that out before it takes the last of what nVidia has to offer. in pure gaming price/performance they're dominating, its just in GPGPU they're flopping, and not in a good way. What use is power if there's no way of accessing it?

From a 3d modellers perspective, i want some nice open ATi powered renderer , make use of that raw power.

Though, im still stuck, due to monetary reasons, on my old X1950Pro.

at least you are feeding that card properly. Id have to upgrade to do that.