NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 Slated For June

[btarunr]

Earlier this month, it came to light that NVIDIA is working on its third GeForce 400 series member, the GeForce GTX 460. A new report suggests that this SKU would be timed to be NVIDIA's front-line release for this year's Computex event, held in Taiwan. The SKU is slated for release in the first week of June. The GeForce GTX 460 will be derived from the GF100 GPU, by further cutting down the available streaming multiprocessor (SM) counts, and trimming the memory interface a little. With four SMs disabled (probably an entire graphics processing cluster or GPC), the GTX 460 has 384 CUDA cores, 32 raster operation processors (ROPs), 48 texture memory units (TMUs) with a 256-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, to connect to 1 GB of memory. The rest of its feature-set will be common with the GeForce 400 series. It is expected to compete with ATI Radeon HD 5830, at a similar price-point.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I think this might be more than slightly better than a 5830. I mean a 285 is 23% faster already, this should be just below a 5850.... unless they majorly step down the core speed to something silly like 500 mhz.

 

[naoan]

Any news on GT450 and lower?

 

[cool_recep]

Yeah, what about Power Consumption, Heat and Noise? Performance is not the only criteria for me...

 

[Mussels]

Yeah, what about Power Consumption, Heat and Noise? Performance is not the only criteria for me...

probably the speed of a 5830 at the power/heat of a 5870

 

[HalfAHertz]

Well if GFX performance was linear, then the 460 would be to the 470 as the 470is to the 480...That would mean 6% faster than the 5830 and 5% slower than the 5850

 

[kajson]

Yeah, what about Power Consumption, Heat and Noise? Performance is not the only criteria for me...

It might not be the only criteria for you, but it's the only criteria Nvidia can even imagine to compete in.


So don't expect nvidia to give a lot or any information about such "trivial" matters. Not in press releases anyways.

 

[btarunr]

Any news on GT450 and lower?

http://www.techpowerup.com/?118505

 

[OnBoard]

This card is the reason I sold my GTX 280 a week ago. Will be hard to sell GTX 28x cards when this thing comes out

Hopefully it's good/we get performance figures early. Bad thing is that it would be aimed at 5830, was kinda hoping it would drop 5850 price. Now ATI will just lower 5830 price and people will want that ugly duckling card too.

Availability of these cards might be ok, if there are lots of GTX 480 duds. Anyhow partners will have the boards ready to go, just need the cores.

 

[Hayder_Master]

ok so it will be compete with ATI Radeon HD 5830 in performance but what about price

 

[Benetanegia]

Well if GFX performance was linear, then the 460 would be to the 470 as the 470is to the 480...That would mean 6% faster than the 5830 and 5% slower than the 5850

Fermi does seem to scale linearly at least between 470 and 480, or when you overclock them. TBH that is my concern regarding Fermi derivatives. I mean, in the past a chip that was half another one used to perform better than half that chip. And that's what has usually made mid-range/performance cards so attractive.

 

[ebolamonkey3]

Can't really wait for this. It will be less loud/hot than the 470 and the 480, and still powerful enough for me. And at the very least, this should drop 5000 MSRP by some.

 

[newtekie1]

Yeah, what about Power Consumption, Heat and Noise? Performance is not the only criteria for me...

Considering the GTX470 was a huge step down in Power Consumption, Heat, and Noise from the GTX480, this should be a lot lower still.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Hum..
When it comes out, the GTX460 will compete in price with the HD5850, mark my words.

And even then, all the bullyed-by-nVidia reviewers will compare the GTX460 to the HD5830 even if, by then, they stand at completely different price points.

I saw this happen before, with the GTX275 vs. HD4890.

 

[newtekie1]

Hum..
When it comes out, the GTX460 will compete in price with the HD5850, mark my words.

And even then, all the bullyed-by-nVidia reviewers will compare the GTX460 to the HD5830 even if, by then, they stand at completely different price points.

I saw this happen before, with the GTX275 vs. HD4890.

Really? Because I seem to remember the GTX275 performing about 5-10% better than the HD4890, and only being $20 more($270 vs. $250). And about two weeks after launch both were stabilized at about $250.

And then of course there was the fact that most ATi board partners released cheaper versions that removed features(i.e. Voltage Control) that were in the reference design, and sold those cheaper versions at the $250 price point, actually usually higher because they tacked on a fancy extenstion to the name and did a minor overclock, and then charged even more for the cards that had all the features they were supposed to have.(I paid $260 for my XFX HD4890, and that was the cheapest one with voltage control available at the time).

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Really? Because I seem to remember the GTX275 performing about 5-10% better than the HD4890, and only being $20 more($270 vs. $250). And about two weeks after launch both were stabilized at about $250.

And then of course there was the fact that most ATi board partners released cheaper versions that removed features(i.e. Voltage Control) that were in the reference design, and sold those cheaper versions at the $250 price point, actually usually higher because they tacked on a fancy extenstion to the name and did a minor overclock, and then charged even more for the cards that had all the features they were supposed to have.(I paid $260 for my XFX HD4890, and that was the cheapest one with voltage control available at the time).

Where I live, the HD4890 came out at 200€, whereas no GTX275 could be found for less than 245€.

But that's not the only case.
Just look at the GTS250 launch reviews, where they put the HD4850 512MB against the GTS250 1GB using ridiculous settings for those cards (1920*1200, 4xAA, 16AF), and then the GTS250 512MB came out exactly at the same price as the HD4850 512MB.

And the 9600GT reviews, where they paired it against the HD3850, but when the card came out, it cost as much as a HD3870.

The list goes on and on.

 

[iamverysmart]

I kind of doubt it would compete with the 5830. Doesn't a GTX275 offer similar performance to a 5830 and that only has 240 shaders?

 

[a_ump]

HD 5830 is so sad in performance thou for its price, GTX 460 will without a doubt outperform and beat it in price performance. Hopefully this is what'll finally knock ATi's 5830 price down to 199 or lower, where it rightfully belongs.

I also agree that the GTX 460 will probly compete more along with the HD 5850 than the HD 5830. Nvidia's lower high-end cards is where they'll shine most for now, not it's top performing GPU.

 

[newtekie1]

Where I live, the HD4890 came out at 200€, whereas no GTX275 could be found for less than 245€.

But that's not the only case.
Just look at the GTS250 launch reviews, where they put the HD4850 512MB against the GTS250 1GB using ridiculous settings for those cards (1920*1200, 4xAA, 16AF), and then the GTS250 512MB came out exactly at the same price as the HD4850 512MB.

And the 9600GT reviews, where they paired it against the HD3850, but when the card came out, it cost as much as a HD3870.

The list goes on and on.

Ok, I'll look at those examples:

GTS250 1GB: $150
HD4850 512MB: $140
Price Difference: 7%

The GTS250 was about 5-10% better, depending on the game, regardless of resolution. In fact, according to W1z's review, it was 7% better or more in every resolution except 1280x1024 where it was 6% better.

9600GT 512MB: $200
HD3850 256MB: $170
HD3870 512MB: $210
Price Difference: 17%/-4%

The 9600GT was about 15-20% better than the HD3850, and even better still was about 5% better than the more expensive HD3870. What is even more interesting is, if you fast forward time about a month after the 9600GT's release, you see the 9600GT selling for $170 with the HD3850 and HD3870 still selling at the same $170/$200 price points. If you go even further forward you see the 9600GT going for $140 with the HD3850 going for $140 also and the HD3870 going for $150, though at this point ATi had at least managed to wrangle in their drivers enough to allow the HD3870 to at least match the 9600GT in performance.

Yeah, your examples don't exactly make a good example... Do you have anything better? Perhaps something that is correct would be helpful in backing up your comments.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Ok, I'll look at those examples:

GTS250 1GB: $150
HD4850 512MB: $140
Price Difference: 7%

The GTS250 was about 5-10% better, depending on the game, regardless of resolution. In fact, according to W1z's review, it was 7% better or more in every resolution except 1280x1024 where it was 6% better.

9600GT 512MB: $200
HD3850 256MB: $170
HD3870 512MB: $210
Price Difference: 17%/-4%

The 9600GT was about 15-20% better than the HD3850, and even better still was about 5% better than the more expensive HD3870. What is even more interesting is, if you fast forward time about a month after the 9600GT's release, you see the 9600GT selling for $170 with the HD3850 and HD3870 still selling at the same $170/$200 price points. If you go even further forward you see the 9600GT going for $140 with the HD3850 going for $140 also and the HD3870 going for $150, though at this point ATi had at least managed to wrangle in their drivers enough to allow the HD3870 to at least match the 9600GT in performance.

Yeah, your examples don't exactly make a good example... Do you have anything better? Perhaps something that is correct would be helpful in backing up your comments.

You're looking at MSRP only, which stands for "manufacturer's suggested retail price".
Both the HD4850 and the HD3870 were being sold for far lower than the MSRP when those reviews were made.



As for your trollish last paragraph, I won't bite that, sorry.
I made that mistake on another thread where you mocked my assumptions that AMD 6-core CPUs would support AM2+ boards (with you even claiming how the server CPUs didn't even have a DDR2 controller anymore).
AMD's 6-core server CPUs don't have a DDR3 controller (showing just how much you actually know what you're talking about) and AM2+ support has been confirmed by the motherboard manufacturers themselves.

You were wrong then and you're wrong now. Putting up pretty links to TPU reviews won't make your berserk attempts to mock my posts any better.
So troll away, I'll just ignore you.

 

[cauby]

if the gtx 460 is set to compete with the 5830 in its price point,then it's a dumb competition already.The 5830 should cost U$199,but instead it costs U$240+.I see no value here...

 

[ToTTenTranz]

if the gtx 460 is set to compete with the 5830 in its price point,then it's a dumb competition already.The 5830 should cost U$199,but instead it costs U$240+.I see no value here...

The HD5830 is clearly overpriced, but it is so for a reason.
First, there's really no DX11 competition to it, not in that price range.
Second, it's probably not in AMD's best interest to sell lots of HD5830s. Cypress' yields should be quite good right now so if the HD5830 starts selling too good, they'll have to degrade some of the "good" Cypress chips in order to make more cards.

AMD is probably more interested in selling more HD5850s and HD5870s, which makes them more money from the start.

 

[Fourstaff]

A worthy card to plug the 5770-5850 gap? By the end of this year, 5770 will be relegated to $100 section, and 5850 will still be out of reach of commoners. If Nvidia plays this right, then we have a new winner.

 

[newtekie1]

You're looking at MSRP only, which stands for "manufacturer's suggested retail price".
Both the HD4850 and the HD3870 were being sold for far lower than the MSRP when those reviews were made.

You were wrong then and you're wrong now. Putting up pretty links to TPU reviews won't make your berserk attempts to mock my posts any better.
So troll away, I'll just ignore you.

Actually, ask W1z, the prices he lists in the reviews are not MSRP prices, he takes the prices from newegg. He only uses MSRP when he can't find the product on newegg or google(launch day reviews).

i usually check prices on newegg and google the ones i cant find there. certainly the prices won't be 100% accurate always but its still a good indicator and better than what most other websites offer you.

So now that your "Well those were MSRP prices so they don't count" argument is thrown out the window, what next?

The HD5830 is clearly overpriced, but it is so for a reason.
First, there's really no DX11 competition to it, not in that price range.

You're right, there isn't any real DX11 competition in that price range. However, there is plenty of competition in that performance range. The HD5770 is only about 5% worse than the HD5830, and about $100 cheaper!

Second, it's probably not in AMD's best interest to sell lots of HD5830s. Cypress' yields should be quite good right now so if the HD5830 starts selling too good, they'll have to degrade some of the "good" Cypress chips in order to make more cards.

AMD is probably more interested in selling more HD5850s and HD5870s, which makes them more money from the start.

While that is probably true, the HD5830 sales would likely cut into the HD5850/70 sales if priced lower. But why even releaes the product if that was the case? Why not just leave the HD5770 to defend that performance segment?

 

[Imsochobo]

Ok, I'll look at those examples:

GTS250 1GB: $150
HD4850 512MB: $140
Price Difference: 7%

The GTS250 was about 5-10% better, depending on the game, regardless of resolution. In fact, according to W1z's review, it was 7% better or more in every resolution except 1280x1024 where it was 6% better.

9600GT 512MB: $200
HD3850 256MB: $170
HD3870 512MB: $210
Price Difference: 17%/-4%

The 9600GT was about 15-20% better than the HD3850, and even better still was about 5% better than the more expensive HD3870. What is even more interesting is, if you fast forward time about a month after the 9600GT's release, you see the 9600GT selling for $170 with the HD3850 and HD3870 still selling at the same $170/$200 price points. If you go even further forward you see the 9600GT going for $140 with the HD3850 going for $140 also and the HD3870 going for $150, though at this point ATi had at least managed to wrangle in their drivers enough to allow the HD3870 to at least match the 9600GT in performance.

Yeah, your examples don't exactly make a good example... Do you have anything better? Perhaps something that is correct would be helpful in backing up your comments.

Your from usa.

He CLEARLY marked it in euro.

Meaning, truth, GTX285 retails often for more than 5870.
GTX480 same as 5970
470 almost 5870 price, that it doesnt matter if you go for the 5870, drop a burger and its in your hands.

The problem now is that there havnt been a card in stock in norway yet, as far as i know of, and unconfirmed 1st june.
5870 was to be seen 3 days after the paper launch..
GTS250 costs the same as 4870-4890 (if they still existed.)
5750 is also faster.
http://www.komplett.no/k/ki.aspx?sku=580635 MSI GeForce GTS 250 1GB PhysX CUDA kr 1.145,-

http://www.komplett.no/k/ki.aspx?sku=579852 MSI GeForce GTS 250 512MB PhysX CUDA kr 969,-

http://www.komplett.no/k/ki.aspx?sku=575008 5750 512mb kr 969,-

http://www.komplett.no/k/ki.aspx?sku=502356 MSI Radeon HD 5750 1GB GDDR5 kr 1.145,-


What you pick isnt hard. 5750, DX11, Newer, HDMI audio, Lower temps, more quiet, more oc potential, lower power consumtion, lower price per fps.
Just to prove my point and others, i havnt seen one card except 260 at some times and the 275 compete! and 285 as a good single card if you hate multigpu.

the selection for ati now is twice as good, nvidia loosing interest, and costumers, and vendors, and in europe they do it alot.
Newly dropped by XFX for the fermi, and BFG drops nvidia in europe.+++
All about demand, and performance for the masses, not who can make the best performing single gpu. or the best ones at anything when prices isnt right, I bet they dont even watch over prices in europe.

Ever since the 9 series prices with nvidia have been fucked up.