Hardware Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 768MB and 1GB Graphics Card Review

I did read the analysis and my point is still valid.

While the GF104 isn't just a GF100 with even more cores fused off, but a GF100 derivative, many (most?) of the accomplishments of GF104 are simply due to it being a cut-down version of the original GF100.

In any case, "revamping" the GF100 is pretty much a no-go. There's too much time and work involved to pull this off; time and work better spent on doing the actual follow-up to the GF100.

I'd say nVidia's best bet for a high-end high-performing card right now would be to do a "GTX460X2", or "460GX2" if you will.

 

5850

@ 199

http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials...R5+PCI-Express+Graphics+Card+?productId=40733

 

Now it gets interesting...

 

Oh great another crappy nvidia toas.... Wait what, this ones good?? Sorry got so used to nvidia bashing my mouth well fingers ran away with themselves. Now what do we do for kicks?

 

It only gets interesting if a "proper" 5850 hits £200 and not a Tesco Value one.

 

It's a generic HD5850 and as such it seems good value considering the "usual" asking price. Can't get a HD5850 at anywhere near these prices around here. Hopefully the GTX460 will do something about that, although I'm actually a bit tempted to get a GTX460 instead of a HD5850. Have been waiting for what seems like ages to get a new graphics card.

 

LooooooooooooooOOOOOOooooooooooL tesco value one. Its from a reputable brand but it will have an Aria warranty, i.e. probably crap

 

I don't know who supplies the "Arianet" cards but it looks like a plain reference model to me. They offer a 2 year warranty on this card.

The "interesting" bit is the fact this supplier is dropping the price of the 5850 already.

As posted earlier, the same e-tailer has an XFX 5850 for £223 as a "Super Special". That a good enough brand for you?

I know it is early but is it still too early to hope for further 5850 price reductions?

 

After having read the BT review several times and looked over tons of numbers here and elsewhere, I'm actually starting to think that a 460 will be better value. A 5850 at £225 is better than it was, but it's still a lot of money. £190 is a big difference to me and it seems you get similar performance in a lot of situations.

If a Vapor-X 5850 comes to £225, then I'd be more interested. Have a ton of other build considerations atm, but I'm literally watching this by the hour.

 

I think everyone is watching it by the hour and it is only 38 hours after the 460 launch...

 

Well look, it depends on what settings are chosen for comparison. Take crysis results and the 4890 vs. gtx 275 article here on bit-tech.

The high settings test puts the 275 way ahead of the 4890 at 1900x1200 without AA: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/04/03/radeon-hd-4890-vs-geforce-gtx-275/6

The very high settings test brings the two closer together at 1900x1200 without AA: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/04/03/radeon-hd-4890-vs-geforce-gtx-275/6

Changing the game settings to very high makes the gap between the 2 appear signifigantly smaller, and the gap between the 4890 and gtx 285 smaller still.

But very high isnt playable at 1900x1200! ....well that doesnt matter if you maintain that common settings are the best method of comparison, no card with more than 512mb vram is running out of framebuffer at these settings, the test completes and valid results are produced.

So high settings leave spare power to increase the detail settings a bit and very high settings is a bit too much and needs chopping down a touch. What happens when you tweak for playability? and how does the relative performance picture appear then? In Crysis: Warhead the highest playble settings of the 4890 and the gtx 275 are the same, but now the 4890 is a touch faster, and whats more the gtx 285 doesn't seem all that far ahead: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article/2009/04/01/asus_eah4890_video_card_evaluation/3

You could take this as the vagaries of benching Crysis, and how using TIMEDEMOS #cough cough# or veeeeeeeeery short playthroughs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vvQZlbEPAk skews the picture a great deal, or you could say that fixed settings across cards MAY lead, across A NUMBER of games to unrepresentative results. Then there are games that defy benching in a timely fashion, such as say ARMA 2. I believe its very hard to fault highest playable settings, and if anything gives more informative and just plain more interesting results than fixed settings benchmarking.

That said I trawl through many sites for graphics reviews, like anandtech, hardocp, guru3d, techreport, hardwarecanucks, hardwareheaven, techpowerup, pcper and of course dear old bit-tech.

 

I found this review a little odd to be honest, it showed the different cards and their clocks but didn't include them in the review results?

 

I'm stuck with my 4850 at the moment, id like a DX11 card so I'm currently looking to upgrade and this card does look like the ticket. just gonna hang on for a while see what / if ATI do with the 5830/5850 prices first.

Well done Nvidia though for getting back in the game.

 

I await the GTX461 or the GTX475, basically the card that has the full 384 SPs.

 

Then you're richer than me. Congrats!

 

No I only wait for it so everything else will be cheaper. XD

 

Why did they release GTX 465 again?

 

A weak attempt to try to stop the already weak HD5830.

This revision is looking good, they just might re-release a GTX465 as the full 384SP GTX460 if we're lucky.

 

Like i said I've seen one for £207, and aria now have one for £199.
Also theres a VTX stock one for £199 at overlock.co.uk.

So that aint £50.

 

r

the hipoz you are right.