Wow, ATI has all the bases covered before Nvidia even shows up to the game.
That is pretty amazing to me as well. It would appear that by the time Nvidia gets their first Fermi based card out the door AMD will have their entire line up from entry level to dual GPU monster already on the market and have been available for a while. By the time Fermi starts to have decent availability, who knows, AMD may already have a refreshed and tweaked part.
I guess what is so suprising to me about this is that Nvidia had such a huge lead with the 8800 cards compared to AMD's offereings. Nvidia had enough of a lead that they even pretty much skipped doing much of anything for the 9800 series cards, and still had a huge lead.
Yeah that's what I meant by "this" card - the 5670 is superior to the GT 240. Poor GT 240 had but weeks as the fastest low power card.
Though I still want to see wattage benchmarks on the 550MHz 9800GTs that don't need a power connector. Does their consumption compete with 5670?
Was the GT240 even the 'fastest low power card'? Does anyone have any links that compare the GT240 and 4770? I imagine the 4770 would be a good deal faster, but I don't know how the two would compare in regards to power useage.
*edit -
http://www.techspot.com/review/223-gainward-geforce-gt-240-review/
It looks like the GT240 does ues less power overall when compared to the 4770. According to the above link the GT240 uses about 8% less power at load and 14% less at idle. But, that 8 -14% power savngs gets you a card that is only 72% as fast at 1680 res and 67% as fast at 1920 res, going by those benches... and those numbers are a stock 4770 vs. a factory overclocked GT240. Infact the 4770 looks to give you better average frame rates at 1920 res than the GT240 does at 1680 res, if you go by those bench results. So while you save power overall, you get
much poorer frames per watt with the GT240 compared to the 4770. So I'd hardly call it the 'fastest low power card'.