I think your math is correct. And to add to it, in DiRT 2, the ATI cards are really underperforming compared to my own tests...
Also, it's quite baffling how the GTX 275 is sometimes as fast as the GTX 465.
Who on earth buys a card at this price point and doesn't expect to use AA and AF in spadefuls? Particularly so since most of those framerates are relatively playable I haven't turned AF off in years and don't intend to start now
On the very limited information we have (big factors being power and noise, they don't sound too complimentary on the latter, however it is a prerelease model), I don't think it is unreasonable to say that it's pretty uninspiring value compared to the 5850, (and probably the 5830, and even more probably the 5770, if you judge value as a cost/fps).
For comparison's sake a simple comparison of average fps at your chosen comparison resolution of Full HD gives you the following breakdown:
Cost
Cheapest newegg 5850s are $289, MRSP on the GTX 465 is $279, so it is 1% cheaper on a theoretical pricing comparison (since you can't actually buy one yet I don't think?)
Gaming
Crysis Warhead: 22% slower
RE5: 40% slower
ME2: 2% faster
Dirt2: 13% faster
Battleforge: 9% slower
Average: 11.2% slower
Assuming my maths is right (never taken as given!), you have to squint pretty hard to suggest it's anything like a sensible deal unless you particularly and specifically play Dirt2, especially if that picture holds accross a broader selection of games when we get full reviews (it might not, but it might).
Hopefully retail pricing will be lower
Man, thank god I skipped this whole generation.
i would say the opposite, it's baffling how the 465 is as slow as the 275 in some cases. considering they are of different architecture, have different SP count, and all other specs in favor of the 465.Also, it's quite baffling how the GTX 275 is sometimes as fast as the GTX 465.
What resolution do you play at? Since when has 1080p been considered low resolution?
Since 1080p monitors have been under $150. Even low end PCs come with 1080p monitors, and people hook their PCs up to 1080 TVs (which have been cheap for years).
Multi-monitor or 30" is now the enthusiast. Anything lower than 1080p is "extreme budget."
That's the problem with current mainstream video solutions. They're still designed based on the assumption that entry level and mainstream gamers are going to run at 1280x1024. Which hasn't been a mainstream video resolution since at least 2007.
At 2560x1600, i see the GTX 275 beating this a whole bunch of times.
WTF...
Just because it is mainstream doesnt mean it is low resolution.
And the 465 isnt an enthusiast card anyways.
Fermi...HTPC??!!
*head explodes* (much like people's HTPCs would explode with Fermi in it)
Since 1080p monitors have been under $150. Even low end PCs come with 1080p monitors, and people hook their PCs up to 1080 TVs (which have been cheap for years).
Multi-monitor or 30" is now the enthusiast. Anything lower than 1080p is "extreme budget."
That's the problem with current mainstream video solutions. They're still designed based on the assumption that entry level and mainstream gamers are going to run at 1280x1024. Which hasn't been a mainstream video resolution since at least 2007.
Yep, I keep thinking this myself. (High resolution is so cheap now)
If power consumption is really low (5770 levels), this might be a decent niche solution of HTPC enthusiasts, although extremely overpriced. Anyway, I seriously doubt it is, which means the card is wholly unimpressive. Evidently NVIDIA did not learn from the 5830 slip up (which is finally starting to sell below $200, so good luck competing with that).
So when does this card become worth buying ?
ATI Catalyst:
Catalyst A.I.: Standard
..
AAMode: Quality
Nvidia GeForce:
Texture filtering – Quality: High quality
Texture filtering – Trilinear optimization: Off
Texture filtering – Anisotropic sample optimization: Off
Antialiasing - Gamma correction: On
Antialiasing - Transparency: Multisampling
I think at 279 is might be pushing it. But if the other rumor of it being 249 is correct I think that is a pretty decent buy. It will be 50-60 less than the 5850 and offer comparable performance at 1080p and below.
my x6 rig in sig is a htpc so is the i5
x6 on 120 inch projo
i5 on a 58 panny
For your information ansiotropic / trilinear filtering optimization are completely seperate options and are not enabled with Catalyst AI.Not such a fair test, it seems:
Catalyst AI will apply some kind of aniso/trilinear optimization with the 'standard' setting, so why is it disabled on the nVidia card? And it seems the AA settings are also heavier on the nVidia side.
Frankly, I don't get why anyone would ever want to turn aniso/trilinear optimization off in the first place. There's quite a bit of bandwidth to be gained there, with virtually no visual impact at all.
For your information ansiotropic / trilinear filtering optimization are completely seperate options and are not enabled with Catalyst AI.
Catalyst A.I: Catalyst A.I. allows users to determine the level of 'optimizations' the drivers enable in graphics applications. These optimizations are graphics 'short cuts' which the Catalyst A.I. calculates to attempt to improve the performance of 3D games without any noticeable reduction in image quality. In the past there has been a great deal of controversy about 'hidden optimizations', where both Nvidia and ATI were accused of cutting corners, reducing image quality in subtle ways by reducing image precision for example, simply to get higher scores in synthetic benchmarks like 3DMark. In response to this, both ATI and Nvidia have made the process transparent to a great extent. You can select whether you want to enable or disable Catalyst A.I. for a further potential performance boost in return for possibly a slight reduction in image quality in some cases. If Catalyst AI is enabled, you can also choose the aggressiveness of such optimizations, either Standard or Advanced on the slider. The Advanced setting ensures maximum performance, and usually results in no problems or any noticeable image quality reduction. If on the other hand you want to always ensure the highest possible image quality at all costs, disable Catalyst A.I. (tick the 'Disable Catalyst A.I.' box). I recommend leaving Catalyst A.I enabled unless you experience problems. ATI have made it clear that many application-specific optimizations for recent games such as Oblivion are dependent on Catalyst AI being enabled.
No they're not:
http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7626
As you can see, image quality is affected by enabling Catalyst AI. This can only occur when filtering and/or shader 'optimizations' (read: cheats) are applied.
I can't see... so either I'm lucky or unlucky...