GTX460 "review"

[BFG10K]

So, you reckon it does more work or less work?

I honestly cannot say. It would depend on how the extra workload required to generate angle invariance compares to the lesser workload from underfiltering.

 

[BFG10K]

The argument for Core i7 over C2D isn't in the framerates but in how smooth the gameplay is on a quad core compared to a dual. Same argument could be made for a Q9550 over a C2D. My Core i7 is silky smooth even though it runs most games at a similar framerate that my old E8400 @3.6Ghz did.

Without objective evidence to back this up (e.g. frame plots over a reasonable duration) this is likely nothing more than a placebo effect. I went from an E6850 to an i5 750 and I never experienced anything like that during gaming, and multiple benchmarks back my observations.

And I also saw improvements in Crysis when overclocking from stock on the E8400. Just saying...

I never saw any of that either. In fact, I underclocked my E6850 (stock 3 GHz) down to 2 GHz and both Crysis games showed little to no difference. Then I underclocked my GPU by 33% and both games saw a linear performance drop.

But anyway, all this talk of cores and CPUs has prompted me to start working on another article. I already have the results of 21 games running on four vs two cores on my i5 750 + GTX470, and I’m considering doing single core too. Not because people use single-core these days, but because it might be interesting to see just how far this GPU bottlenecking goes.

 

[NoSoup4You]

The most obvious improvement when overclocking my cpu came from the multiplayer level "Battleground" in Crysis Wars. My old s939 X2 struggled to run that level at 20 fps regardless of how low I dropped the shader settings. The C2D at stock jumped that up into the high 40's, and OC'ing to 3.6Ghz got me into the low 50's. This was back in January 2009 so I don't recall exactly what graphics settings I was using, but back then I used to force DX9 in Vista and then edit the configs to get the best "DX10 effects" like sunrays, POM...etc.

I don't really have anything to add regarding quad's providing smoother gameplay at the same fps as a dual except that we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[bryanW1995]

if you really want to disagree with bfg, then instead of saying "let's agree to disagree" why don't you instead actually go get some frame plots of those games with 4 vs 2 cores?

bfg, I look forward to your article.

 

[mav451]

You guys aren't arguing the same thing. BFG uses an example where a GPU-limited game shows no gains/losses if you adjust the CPU overclock. Just think about how hilarious that statement is for a second - we _already_ know this.

 

[BFG10K]

My old s939 X2 struggled to run that level at 20 fps regardless of how low I dropped the shader settings.

I have no trouble believing that, because that’s a very poor CPU. Yeah, if someone has something like that, they definitely need to upgrade, no question about it.

 

[BFG10K]

BFG uses an example where a GPU-limited game shows no gains/losses if you adjust the CPU overclock. Just think about how hilarious that statement is for a second - we _already_ know this.

Yes, we might already know this, but it’s not obvious that it also applies to the vast majority of cases out there. In fact, I’ve seen cases where people had something like an E8600 + GTX260 and were being told to upgrade to an i7 to get better Crysis performance. LOL.

As it stands now, we have people with decent dual-core setups absolutely terrified of upgrading to a decent graphics card because they’re told they’ll be “CPU limited”, and are instead directed to CPU/platform upgrades, as if these will somehow remove their overwhelming GPU bottleneck.

Likewise, we have links to doomsday style graphs demonstrating games being seemingly unplayable unless you have an i7 overclocked to 4 GHz.

Actual gaming is practically never like that, yet we have the fringe cases being portrayed as the norm, and the importance of the CPU being constantly overstated.

I’d rather have an E6850 @ stock + GTX480 than an i7 @ 4 GHz + GTX260 any day. The former will game far better overall than the latter.

 

[happy medium]

A little better review site. Tomshardware.

http://www.tomshw.it/cont/articolo/...e-tutti-aspettavano-dirt-2-dx11/26197/13.html

The early benchmarks seem true.

 

[Lkr721993]

A little better review site. Tomshardware.

http://www.tomshw.it/cont/articolo/...e-tutti-aspettavano-dirt-2-dx11/26197/13.html

The early benchmarks seem true.

So its a better buy than a 5850?

 

[RussianSensation]

So its a better buy than a 5850?

Both are awesome cards. If you are not going to be overclocking, 5850 is going to be a lot faster, especially at higher resolutions with AA.

If you don't mind overclocking, for $230 you can get a card that at 850 mhz will equal the performance of the 5850, while being the quietest videocard of this generation. If you can find a 5850 for $260, then it's also an awesome deal as it can be overclocked to 5870 speeds (of course at $260 I'd pick the 5850). However, most 5850s are now hovering around $290-$300. In that case, I'd rather take the GTX460 and pocket $70 towards a next generation $200 gem (and you know you will want a new videocard in 12-15 months from now!), while enjoying a very quiet videocard at load.

 

[Keysplayr]

Not bad. Not bad at all.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Not bad. Not bad at all.

Yea, very nice cards for the money. Fermi had been mostly a disappointment, in my opinion, so far. These new GTX460 cards really are attractive, however. The 1GB version is close enough to the 5850's performance, while being a decent deal cheaper, that some people will choose it over the 5850. The 5830 has to drop in price now. And maybe even the 5850 will drop. Much better, more well rounded cards from Nvidia this time around.

 

[Shilohen]

Good part: We might get a price war now that we have nice competition
Bad part: Competition means alternatives, implying choice, meaning I no longer know if I should go SLI GTX460, XFire 5850 (for much more $) or single 5870 and XFire later if needed...

All in all, I'm very pleased with the reviews and hope to see a fully enabled GF104 chip soon to pressure the 5850 and 5870 even more.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

So its a better buy than a 5850?

Absolutely. Not even a question at this point.

 

[Shilohen]

Absolutely. Not even a question at this point.

The 1GB version is, but it won't be much available yet. When it is, if AMD does not reduce the MSRP on the 5850, then I agree with you. The answer is not as clear if they do, however.

 

[Maximilian]

Absolutely. Not even a question at this point.

Yup, until they drop the price of the 5850 the 460 seems like a much better buy, dunno about the US but here in the UK the 5850 can be £100 more expensive in some cases, its crazy. I wouldve jumped on the 460 had it been around 7 months ago but whatever, im still happy with my 5850

 

[Russwinters]

Yeah, basically the GF104 is what should have been the launch chip. I'm pretty sure the original fermi boards where just thrown out because thats all they had working, and couldn't wait any longer. Basically beta product.

Bad play on nvidia there, now they have to work double to redeem themselves; this is a good first step.

 

[bryanW1995]

Good part: We might get a price war now that we have nice competition
Bad part: Competition means alternatives, implying choice, meaning I no longer know if I should go SLI GTX460, XFire 5850 (for much more $) or single 5870 and XFire later if needed...

All in all, I'm very pleased with the reviews and hope to see a fully enabled GF104 chip soon to pressure the 5850 and 5870 even more.

sli generally scales better than xfire, and from looking at the reviews it appears that gtx 460 is no exception. I would definitely go with the gtx 460 1gb sli if you can wait a few weeks for them to show up.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Yeah, basically the GF104 is what should have been the launch chip. I'm pretty sure the original fermi boards where just thrown out because thats all they had working, and couldn't wait any longer. Basically beta product.

Bad play on nvidia there, now they have to work double to redeem themselves; this is a good first step.

It would have been a trade off.

They wouldn't have the fastest single GPU with a GF104.

 

[Shilohen]

sli generally scales better than xfire, and from looking at the reviews it appears that gtx 460 is no exception. I would definitely go with the gtx 460 1gb sli if you can wait a few weeks for them to show up.

Yep, or for AMD prices to adjust themselves. I'm buying only at the end of August, so channels should be filled and prices stabilized.

 

[bryanW1995]

the problem with buying in august is that southern islands info is going to start appearing soon now that nvidia finally has a good fermi card out. In fact, if amd was smart they might try to throw out some fud like "but, but, we have eyefinity!!" before just reflexively dropping their prices. hopefully they aren't smart.

 

[tincart]

Eagerly awaiting the Southern Islands press-bomb. nVidia certainly has released a couple of great GPU's.

 

[Shilohen]

I know, I hoped to buy 58xx right after SI release and hopefully after Intel SSD refresh but, alas, SquareEnix decided to release their game earlier than I expected. I'm of the ever wait for the nifty thing coming up soon type, so I need to choose a milestone to trigger my computer upgrades. In this case, it's a full build as I gave my old one to my parents, and my trigger was FF XIV. SE delayed the PS3 version too, so I've no way out of it . This is why the single 5870 and XFire later is still an option too, I expect 5870 prices to go down when SI gets released.

 

[konakona]

Both are awesome cards. If you are not going to be overclocking, 5850 is going to be a lot faster, especially at higher resolutions with AA.

If you don't mind overclocking, for $230 you can get a card that at 850 mhz will equal the performance of the 5850, while being the quietest videocard of this generation. If you can find a 5850 for $260, then it's also an awesome deal as it can be overclocked to 5870 speeds (of course at $260 I'd pick the 5850). However, most 5850s are now hovering around $290-$300. In that case, I'd rather take the GTX460 and pocket $70 towards a next generation $200 gem (and you know you will want a new videocard in 12-15 months from now!), while enjoying a very quiet videocard at load.

yes, some of us do care about noise levels. It's great that you can have a quiet nv card now. Aside from that, I think it means more than just being competitive to 5850 price/performance wise. Before GTX460 came along, we simply didn't have any choice between 5850 and 5770 due to 5830 suckage. Now we actually have something compelling at the $200 mark so we wouldn't have to pay $300 even if you could get by with something slightly slower.

 

[Russwinters]

It would have been a trade off.

They wouldn't have the fastest single GPU with a GF104.

Judging by the architecture changes I would say whatever GTX485 etc they make out of the GF104 would beast the 5870, and 480 while remaining much much cooler and consuming a nice amount less power the the 480.

The problem is that the 485 or whatever it will be, will now be going against SI, which will beat it out I imagine.