1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Graphics GTX580 arrived this morning.....first impressions

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by dead beat, 4 Jan 2011.

  1. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    I'm thoroughly happy with it too.

    I don't do any folding, so that's not a concern for me. I hear the scaling on the 500 series cards is supposed to be a big improvement. Since my AMD platform doesn't seem to be holding me back like I thought it would, I might stick another 580 in there next month and see what happens and leave Sandybridge for later in the year.

    I guess it all depends how demanding games get this year.
     
  2. Pete J

    Pete J Employed scum

    Joined:
    28 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    7,226
    Likes Received:
    1,784
    Welcome to the 580 club! Have rep!

    Try running Dead Space! I saw 700FPS+ with my old 480s :jawdrop: .
    I'd probably get a Sandybridge CPU first - with any luck you can pick up another 580 in two months time with a price drop. However, from your rig pics, it looks as though you have a 30" monitor. In which case, I reckon your CPU isn't holding you as far back as you think it is.
     
  3. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    Cheers



    This is what I'm thinking too. IMO I think I'd see more benefit on a 30" monitor from a pair of 580's than I would from a single 580 coupled with Sandybridge (as appealling as Sanybridge might be).

    I know the 955 isn't the best CPU by any stretch, but at 3.9 Ghz, It can't be that slow, surely? And I think for gaming it's far less important than if I was doing other more CPU intesive tasks. Though I am aware that some games rely quite heavily on the CPU.
     
  4. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
    mate got mine on bfbc2 running 16 x af and 16 aa with no probs
     
  5. JaredC01

    JaredC01 Hardware Nut

    Joined:
    24 Nov 2002
    Posts:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    62
    Are you on a 30" monitor with 2560 x 1600 resolution though?
     
  6. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
  7. JaredC01

    JaredC01 Hardware Nut

    Joined:
    24 Nov 2002
    Posts:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    62
    53 FPS average isn't what i consider ideal... Unless I'm running above 60FPS, I'm not happy. There's little hiccups that will drop average to less than playable. If you start off with 'barely' playable, then the hiccups become bad enough to get you killed.

    Besides, there's not a huge difference past 4xAA, as I posted in his other thread.
     
  8. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
    Agreed, but the drivers from the posted link the are dated, as a said i'm getting above what they post as average (well above) and if the op is running 4x he shouldn't have any issues with the GPU being able to handle the game

    Also the given frame rates are given with a i7 940 cpu
     
  9. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    I can't notice any difference in picture quality above 4xAA on my monitor during gameplay. I think AA is more important on lower resolutions such as yours. All it does is eat into my framerates.
     
    JaredC01 likes this.
  10. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
    http://www.geforce.com/#/Optimize/Guides/AA-AF-guide

    If anything if makes a greater difference at high resolutions, such as yours as you can see a much greater amount of detail on the screen (also the reason you only truly benefit from HD on tv's over 50" (again also open to debate))

    A thread covering the differences
    http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=79858

    And there is a good bit on wikipedia covering it.
     
  11. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    Well all I can say is that it makes no visual difference as far as I can see. And the performance sacrifices far outweigh the visual benefits.
     
  12. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
    Fair enough, just earlier you were talking about SLI, if your not to worried about visual benefits just turn all the bells and whistles off and you'll have no need.

    Me i love all the extras thats why i upgraded :thumb:
     
  13. DIZZY DAZZLER 2010

    DIZZY DAZZLER 2010 Tech nut!

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2010
    Posts:
    252
    Likes Received:
    5
    I dont understand how HD can look better on TV's above 50" ?? Reason being compared to a 32" at 1080p the 50" should look worse due to the pixels being the size of house bricks adding further jagged edges into the picture!

    I agree that there is very little visual difference adding more than 4xAA at resolutions above 1920x1080.
     
  14. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    Well no doubt if i do run SLI then I will turn the less necessary features up. But with a single 580 on a 30" monitor the results in demanding games are not desirable. It is also a form of future proofing, as I believe the games that are to be released over the next year or so will be significantly more graphically intense.

    If I was running the same res as you then I would have the AA at max settings.
     
  15. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
    No mate you don't benefit from it unless the tv is over 50", ie the lower the size the better the picture(unless you have a **** picture to start with.....)

    BFBC 2 isn't demanding just been checking the frame rates and am getting 100 ish fps at 16 and 16q. And until consoles get a refresh i don't think the PC is gona have much issues except for bad coding and even worse ports.

    All my responses were to your first post

    My CPU barely touches 30% in the CPU monitor and i'm not sure if its even using all the cores.

    but if your making the move how you do it doesn't matter.
     
    Last edited: 5 Jan 2011
  16. wyx087

    wyx087 Homeworld 3 is happening!!

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    11,987
    Likes Received:
    706
    the TV size thing is relative to viewing distance, you cannot say a certain size as if you sit at 2 feet from the 30inch TV, you'll want monitor kind of resolution.

    this is why 2560x1600 30inch monitors vs 46inch 720p TV's. you can even get away with 480p 50 inch if you are very far away from the TV.
     
  17. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,961
    Likes Received:
    561
    only 10% more than the 295? I was hoping for more tbh. Not sure It's worth upgrading for that.
     
  18. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    10%?

    Where did you get that figure from? This 580 is sh*tting all over my 295.
     
  19. brave758

    brave758 Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    29
    Totally agree
     
  20. dead beat

    dead beat Rippin six 4 life

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    1,543
    Likes Received:
    48
    +1
     

Share This Page