Nvidia Strikes Back! GTX 580 comming...Next Week?! [56k] UPDATE Now Available!!

It's cool and all, but when it uses more wattage than an entire console, there is something wrong here.

Mr_BillGates

I dont get this, Doesnt the 480 already do everything, and has only been out for a day or 2 ?scottiescott238

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"] So how's the 5870 compared to the 480 again? :PDragonfireXZ95

barely behind, while using less power and alot less heat :P

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

barely behind, while using less power and alot less heat :P

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

barely behind, while using less power and alot less heat :P

blaznwiipspman1

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

ferret-gamer

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

Well I thought it did...but what about mafia 2? I set the physx to medium using my gt 240 and I believe I didn't notice any difference between that and my AMD 4770.

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"]

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

Well I thought it did...but what about mafia 2? I set the physx to medium using my gt 240 and I believe I didn't notice any difference between that and my AMD 4770.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="ferret-gamer"] bc2 doesnt use Physx it uses Havok for it's physics.

karasill

Well I thought it did...but what about mafia 2? I set the physx to medium using my gt 240 and I believe I didn't notice any difference between that and my AMD 4770.

Physx is not needed quad core cpu's are the norm and gpu's handle much more than when physx came out. It was a nice feature when dual core cpu's came out and most games were single threaded. Gpu's now handle physics as well so I don't see the point anymore. Next year 6 core will be the norm and we will have more cpu cycles than games can use and even more gpu power.

[QUOTE="karasill"][QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

Well I thought it did...but what about mafia 2? I set the physx to medium using my gt 240 and I believe I didn't notice any difference between that and my AMD 4770.

pimpog

Physx is not needed quad core cpu's are the norm and gpu's handle much more than when physx came out. It was a nice feature when dual core cpu's came out and most games were single threaded. Gpu's now handle physics as well so I don't see the point anymore. Next year 6 core will be the norm and we will have more cpu cycles than games can use and even more gpu power.

Here to show you video encoding differenced:

The new heaven benchmark results are quite surprising. I tried the benchmark with the exact same settings with my GTX 480, and if i'm not mistaken, i got only a little over 30fps. If your specifications are true, i find it hard to believe, since it looks like a slightly overclocked 480

[QUOTE="pimpog"]

[QUOTE="karasill"] Physx accelerated games do have some nice effects. You're wording of "I believe I didn't notice any difference" makes me laugh... Nice wording ;) Physx is a nice upgrade over standard CPU accelerated physics.. There is a difference, plain an simple... The only problem is not a whole lot of games support it.ferret-gamer

Physx is not needed quad core cpu's are the norm and gpu's handle much more than when physx came out. It was a nice feature when dual core cpu's came out and most games were single threaded. Gpu's now handle physics as well so I don't see the point anymore. Next year 6 core will be the norm and we will have more cpu cycles than games can use and even more gpu power.

Here to show you video encoding differenced:

We are talking about physics here not video encoding they are two diffrent things. Personally I don't want my frame rate to drop to have a couple extra minor effects that don't enhance my gameplay. Plus havok works on all gpu's not just nvidia and it works just as well. Sure you get the game that nvidia gives money to the dev to use physx but the rest use havok. So what is the point for 1 or 2 games a year ??

Okay, i just read up some reviews on the GTX580, and apparently, it is quite powerful. For now, the GTX580 trumps over the HD5970. Nvidia now has a single gpu card which wins over ATI's double gpu card. All Nvidia has to do is develop a card with two GTX580 gpus on it and ATI gets kicked back to stone age until further notice.

The point is that videocards are far better at doing physics based calculations then CPUs. The same kind of math used in video encoding and other vector based maths is used for physics. Something as old as a Geforce 8800 would spank the best CPUs now, even CPUs from the near future.karasill

I got that and agree but physx only works for nvidia and on very few games and most suck. Havok works on all gpus and is on most games so why do I need physx for ?

That is if you really care I will max out the settings on my games but if I can't physics based settings are the 1st settings I will lower. I would rather have walls blow up in 1 thousand chunks than 100 thousnd and have 60fps.

[QUOTE="karasill"]The point is that videocards are far better at doing physics based calculations then CPUs. The same kind of math used in video encoding and other vector based maths is used for physics. Something as old as a Geforce 8800 would spank the best CPUs now, even CPUs from the near future.pimpog

I got that and agree but physx only works for nvidia and on very few games and most suck. Havok works on all gpus and is on most games so why do I need physx for ?

That is if you really care I will max out the settings on my games but if I can't physics based settings are the 1st settings I will lower. I would rather have walls blow up in 1 thousand chunks than 100 thousnd and have 60fps.

[QUOTE="karasill"]The point is that videocards are far better at doing physics based calculations then CPUs. The same kind of math used in video encoding and other vector based maths is used for physics. Something as old as a Geforce 8800 would spank the best CPUs now, even CPUs from the near future.pimpog

I got that and agree but physx only works for nvidia and on very few games and most suck. Havok works on all gpus and is on most games so why do I need physx for ?

That is if you really care I will max out the settings on my games but if I can't physics based settings are the 1st settings I will lower. I would rather have walls blow up in 1 thousand chunks than 100 thousnd and have 60fps.

what the GTX480 should have been.

what the GTX480 should have been.

washd123

what the GTX480 should have been.

washd123

That's not a fair statement. The Fermi architecture is rather new to Nvidia. You can't expect companies to maximize new technologies immediately. That's like expecting launch titles to completely tap out a console's potential.

What's important here is that Nvidia is making good progress, and is actually delivering. Fermi could easily have continued being a 'vaporware' product.

[QUOTE="washd123"]

what the GTX480 should have been.

jhcho2

That's not a fair statement. The Fermi architecture is rather new to Nvidia. You can't expect companies to maximize new technologies immediately. That's like expecting launch titles to completely tap out a console's potential.

What's important here is that Nvidia is making good progress, and is actually delivering. Fermi could easily have continued being a 'vaporware' product.

Okay, i just read up some reviews on the GTX580, and apparently, it is quite powerful. For now, the GTX580 trumps over the HD5970. Nvidia now has a single gpu card which wins over ATI's double gpu card. All Nvidia has to do is develop a card with two GTX580 gpus on it and ATI gets kicked back to stone age until further notice.

jhcho2

Not sure they can make a double gpu card of it since it require so much power...

[QUOTE="jhcho2"]

Okay, i just read up some reviews on the GTX580, and apparently, it is quite powerful. For now, the GTX580 trumps over the HD5970. Nvidia now has a single gpu card which wins over ATI's double gpu card. All Nvidia has to do is develop a card with two GTX580 gpus on it and ATI gets kicked back to stone age until further notice.

aroxx_ab

Not sure they can make a double gpu card of it since it require so much power...

[QUOTE="jhcho2"]

[QUOTE="washd123"]

what the GTX480 should have been.

pimpog

That's not a fair statement. The Fermi architecture is rather new to Nvidia. You can't expect companies to maximize new technologies immediately. That's like expecting launch titles to completely tap out a console's potential.

What's important here is that Nvidia is making good progress, and is actually delivering. Fermi could easily have continued being a 'vaporware' product.

[QUOTE="aroxx_ab"]

[QUOTE="jhcho2"]

Okay, i just read up some reviews on the GTX580, and apparently, it is quite powerful. For now, the GTX580 trumps over the HD5970. Nvidia now has a single gpu card which wins over ATI's double gpu card. All Nvidia has to do is develop a card with two GTX580 gpus on it and ATI gets kicked back to stone age until further notice.

pimpog

Not sure they can make a double gpu card of it since it require so much power...

You can't just based your judgements solely based on 8 games. Certain games favour Nvidia and some favour ATI, depending on their source code. Some games even favour double gpus over single ones. You have to read multiple reviews and benchmarks.

I have a 470 sc I'll just wait for the gtx 6xx.

Just saw the reviews for the gtx 580 and it is still slower than the 5970 and both cost $499. Oh and the amd 6900 is still coming in a couple of weeks. Looking at the benchmarks the 5870 is a little slower or even a little faster in a couple benches vs gtx 480 and only cost $330. Nvidia is getting left behind it seems.

pimpog

The HD5970 and the GTX580 have very similar performance(-10% +10%) but the GTX580 is cheaper, quieter, use less power, has more memory, 3D, physX, and it is a single card (no microstuttering, no scaling issues, etc).

Lets see, the only games that will probably need it is Crysis 2, Metro 2033 maybe even a Total War game. But nevertheless a waste of money. With little games that can fully utilize it, it seems like a money dump.

What games will come out for something like this?? the games will ONLY look better but play the same on lower end csrds.

This is strange... The Canadian price is a few dollars less...8)

Newegg Canada:

ASUS GTX 580 ENGTX580/2DI/1536MD5- $499

Newegg USA:

ASUS GTX 580 ENGTX580/2DI/1536MD5- $569 +10% ($56) off with promo code

Hahahaha wow, my 480 maxes anything and everything I throw at it EASILY. I play Bad Company 2 with 16xAA for example. I cannot possibly imagine more power. :shock:

psn8214

[QUOTE="pimpog"]

Just saw the reviews for the gtx 580 and it is still slower than the 5970 and both cost $499. Oh and the amd 6900 is still coming in a couple of weeks. Looking at the benchmarks the 5870 is a little slower or even a little faster in a couple benches vs gtx 480 and only cost $330. Nvidia is getting left behind it seems.

MK-Professor

The HD5970 and the GTX580 have very similar performance(-10% +10%) but the GTX580 is cheaper, quieter, use less power, has more memory, 3D, physX, and it is a single card (no microstuttering, no scaling issues, etc).

The gtx 580 and the 5970 cost the same on newegg and the 5970 is faster in more games in all the reviews I have seen. However the big problem is 460 in sli and the 6850 in crossfire have the same speed for much less money.

Too expensive for me and i also hate nvidia.Once again i'll go with ati

Too expensive for me and i also hate nvidia.Once again i'll go with ati

Obiwan317

[QUOTE="MK-Professor"]

[QUOTE="pimpog"]

Just saw the reviews for the gtx 580 and it is still slower than the 5970 and both cost $499. Oh and the amd 6900 is still coming in a couple of weeks. Looking at the benchmarks the 5870 is a little slower or even a little faster in a couple benches vs gtx 480 and only cost $330. Nvidia is getting left behind it seems.

pimpog

The HD5970 and the GTX580 have very similar performance(-10% +10%) but the GTX580 is cheaper, quieter, use less power, has more memory, 3D, physX, and it is a single card (no microstuttering, no scaling issues, etc).

The gtx 580 and the 5970 cost the same on newegg and the 5970 is faster in more games in all the reviews I have seen. However the big problem is 460 in sli and the 6850 in crossfire have the same speed for much less money.

But in UK the GTX580 cost £400+ and the HD5970 cost £450+. Also the GTX580 and HD5970 are very similar in performance.

Obviously none of the two cards are worth the money because as you say very well you can buy 2x GTX470 for £165 (2x £330) that are faster than the GTX580 and HD5970.

The 580 is definitely a great card for those that want the complete Fermi experience (meaning the full 512 shader card that was promised before). Here's hoping that the 6970 performs just as good so prices on the 5870 can drop and I can get a second for CrossfireX.

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

barely behind, while using less power and alot less heat :P

blaznwiipspman1

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

[QUOTE="blaznwiipspman1"]

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

SAGE_OF_FIRE

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

[QUOTE="DragonfireXZ95"]

[QUOTE="theuncharted34"]

barely behind, while using less power and alot less heat :P

blaznwiipspman1

Barely?

I got my 480 GTX early, when it was only like 50 bucks more than the 5870. It was worth it. Especially when we take physics into account.

phsyx is nice but over rated. I have a gt 240 and BC2 looks great with the physx effects on but the AMD 4770 phsysics look just as great.

The GTX 580 looks like a bit of a letdown so far. I was really hoping it'd be amazing but I might just get a 69xx instead.

"Luckily" I won't be able to afford a new card till may next year anyway, so the future might bring something nice.

Also can the 580 do MLAA? (probably yes) SAGE_OF_FIRE

Isn't MLAA usually worse than MSAA or SSAA? rpgs_shall_rule

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/1174/1288596806jdszfk1bae94l.png

[QUOTE="rpgs_shall_rule"]Isn't MLAA usually worse than MSAA or SSAA? MK-Professor

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/1174/1288596806jdszfk1bae94l.png

I'd say that puts it somewhere between 2 and 4 as far as picture quality goes.

The GTX 580 looks like a bit of a letdown so far. I was really hoping it'd be amazing but I might just get a 69xx instead.

"Luckily" I won't be able to afford a new card till may next year anyway, so the future might bring something nice.

Filthybastrd

a bit of a let down? its everything the gtx480 should have been

relativaly cool and quiet for high end

fastest DX11 single gpu

[QUOTE="Filthybastrd"]

The GTX 580 looks like a bit of a letdown so far. I was really hoping it'd be amazing but I might just get a 69xx instead.

"Luckily" I won't be able to afford a new card till may next year anyway, so the future might bring something nice.

washd123

a bit of a let down? its everything the gtx480 should have been

relativaly cool and quiet for high end

fastest DX11 single gpu

Yeah I'm really surprised at the performance the GTX 580 is getting with just a few more cores over the GTX 480. Its a good card but I'm fine with the 480 for now. But from what I read the 6970 should end up just as fast and with a similar price.