Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
MajorMajorMajor said:
I mean, even if this is the real deal, it looks like it’s taking the *edited* out of FPS games in general which means it would be awesome to play.
The witty comments, then variety of guns, the range of environments show and driving a *edited*ING monster truck. What more could you want (besides tits, explosions, and more tits)?
even more tits?
In response to:
MasterP said:
I noticed no one posted anything about the GTX 480.
Nobody posted anything because it is neither an impressive card nor is it legendary failure. Its rather uninteresting TBH, which is not usually a good sign for a flagship card.
MasterP said:
Go look at the Anandtech individual game comparisons. They’re sad, and far from “10-15%”.
And if the throw down is games it can play that the 5870 can’t, my 3 yeard old 8800GTX could play almost every single game on the same resolution with tolerable framerates as both cards.
To answer your question, no I’m not disappointed. I was expecting it to perform equal to or less than the 5870 and cost $700. You were too. Why you’re so bent out of shape about it being a little bit faster for a little bit more money is puzzling. Maybe if Nvidia had the alternate cashflow of a CPU market and could bank on money from dozens of lawsuits against Intel in every major court on the planet they’d have released a card that was this much faster and then sold it below production cost, like ATI does.
according to anandtech, at 1920×1200, the gtx 480 is:
12.5% faster in crysis warhead
27.9% faster in battleforge
32.3% faster in HAWX (though both were over 100 fps already)
6.8% SLOWER in Left 4 Dead (though bother were over 100 fps already)
26.1% SLOWER in Battlefield Bad Company 2
11.4% faster in stalker
22.9% faster in Dirt 2
5.9% faster in Mass Effect 2
3.8% faster in Wolfenstein
which means ON AVERAGE its 9.3% faster. But for that 9.3% it costs you an extra 100 watts power consumption under load. I mean hell the gtx 470 which is SLOWER than the 5870 still uses an extra 30W.
Yes I am happy it came in under $500 (though I will wait until they are actually available to see if that is still the case) but come on they had plenty of time they should have had something better than this. I mean the price/performance wouldnt bother me if the thing was at least on par with AMD as far as heat and power efficiency go.
MasterP said:
25% more? Have you even looked at how much the 5870s from real manufacturers cost? It’s $50 more, $75 at most, which is 11-17%, for 15-30% greater performance. Even at your lowball estimate of 10-15% higher performance it’s comparably priced.
Oh and there are games the 5970 and SLI/CF configs of the 480/5870 can’t get 60fps on. So yeah, when it comes to the newer games that 15-30% makes a difference. Especially if you’re buying with more than 1 year of intended usage.
Also worth noting, the big gain for the GTX 480 was in the minimum FPS for all the tests, which at times was twice that of the 5870.
the 5870 1gb cards run $400-425. Your geforce cards arent even shipping, when they do ship the prices will be $500-550+.
Please tell me what game the gtx 480 can play that the radeon 5870 can’t.
also as to my “lowball estimate”, here are some quotes:
Techspot review said:
On average when Nvidia’s new flagship managed to outperform the Radeon HD 5870 it was around 16% faster
anandtech review said:
The GTX 480 is between 10 and 15% faster than the Radeon 5870 depending on the resolution,
hothardware review said:
Generally speaking, versus the single-GPU powered Radeon HD 5870, the GeForce GTX 480 is on average roughly 5% – 10% faster, give or take a few percentage points depending on the test
I mean seriously you aren’t disappointed by these new cards? After a 6 month wait I expected more than something that was slightly faster and way too hot. This is akin to intel releasing a 5ghz p4 instead of the core2 series.
MasterP said:
Of course, I forgot. Outperforming the competition by a sizable margin means you fail, especially when you’re in the same price range as that under-performing competitor card.
Btw, the FTC is suing Intel over their decision to lock Nvidia out of the chipset market.
so charging 25% more for 10-15% performance is a good return on investment? Also please tell me what game(s) the radeon 5870 can’t play maxed out at 1920×1200. I mean it doesnt do you any good getting 10% better performance if you are talking about 100 vs 110 fps.
Actually the gtx 470 is a better deal as its priced perfect considering its performance, though its not as power-efficient as the radeon offerings.
MasterP said:
I noticed no one posted anything about the GTX 480. It’s 15-30% faster than the 5870 in most games and isn’t outrageously priced.
It is however insanely hot, with load temperatures of 98C.
I do believe I called this card. 100%. Nickname can vouch.
being 6 months late and they only get 15%? and the card is still $500? and consumes that much power and that much heat?
sounds like more of a fail than a win to me.
yeah if you can get in during a model change you can always get awesome deals on the old models. that’s what my dad did with the 40″ sony he bought. Granted its only a 60hz model but unless you are looking at the 60vs120vs240 side by side, in 99% of situations you wont notice the difference
the brackets this year busted unbelievably bad.
The #1 seed everybody thought SHOULDNT be a 1 seed is the only one still left :/
you know i thought those baby pictures might be misinterpreted but meh.
Also I like how NONE of the #1 seeds made the final 4 in the NIT. So much for the argument that Illinois, VT, and Mississippi State should be in the big dance…
