Have a box of Fermi (no, not a new cereal) - Page 3

512 "CUDA" cores and less power draw will make a worthwhile purchase for me. I do see a lot of potential from a performance perspective, as the GTX 480 seems to hold up nicely when it comes to minimum frame-rates with some highly demanding games.

Higher quality and quieter vendor-specific cooling, like MSI's SuperPipe line, is also important for me.

So I'm assuming then these cards are of value for Nvidia owners because of the DX11 features then, not necessarily because they blow away the ATI offerings? I read Anandtech's review and I got the impression that the performance in tessellation and min fps is a jump but the power consumption and subsequent heat production mean it's a limited value card? I have an ATI card at the moment but am always willing to go with whatever provides me the bigger bang for the buck. Would it make more sense to A. get another 5770 and cf, B. get a 5850, or C. get a 470? I'm looking at the 300-350 range anyway by the time I'm done upgrading my videocard(s) so I'm open to suggestion.

The big diff between ATI and Nvidia is mostly in multi GPU support. Nvidia has it over ATi at this point in time. I tried to run ATi 5870's Xfire and even on a game like BFBC2 the textures flashes on many maps. That does not happen with Nvidia SLI but then Nvidia is Dx10 not Dx11 as the ATi card. I will get the GTX480 when they come out with the 512, not the 480 as is now. I will go SLI 480's at that point. Also I have a lot of probms with the ATi cards when I tried to use a discrete sound card, even not loading the ATi sound drivers. All IMHO stuff since I am labeled as a Nvida fanboy....

ATi has Eyefinity right now and that is a plus, well until NVidia comes out with their version in next month's driver releases timed with FERMI. ATi needs at least one DP monitor do Eyefinity and supposedly Nvidia will support all DVI but then with Nvidia you will need a SLI setup to get enuf ports to support more then two monitors while ATi can do it with one card. Nvidia's multi monitor support driver is suppose to be usable for older cards like the 275/280/285/295 and most of the the other 2xx cards or even the older 8xxx series but realistically to get enuf frame rates with multi monitor setup even with SLI, the 1st set of cards listed would prob be the min...but hey Nvidia may surprise us...or not.

Yeah I'm getting the hint that cf ATI cards might not bring as much value as I assumed. It really would be no sweat off my back to go with the 470 if it means improved performance, especially because I agree the ATI drivers seem to not be as nice as Nvidia. I will say that I haven't had any real issues with my card on 10.2 other than sometimes not even getting CCC to load. I mainly went with ATI because of their DX11 support but if I'm going to spend 300-350 on either a new ATI or Nvidia card I might just sell my 5770 soon while I can get some decent money for it. It can be frustrating for me because I'm really a newbie when it comes to computer hardware and graphics cards. I mean I'm not stupid but I'm a much more advanced A/V user and it's slow going learning all the ins and outs to the PC hardware game.

I think what I might do to satisfy my curiosity is buy another 5770, try cf out for awhile, and if I'm not impressed either try to get a 5850 on the cheap or look at the 470. The 480 is out of the question with me at the moment. Decisions decisions...

I just ordered a sapphire Vapor-X 5850(same cooling as the toxic) and do some O.C. to maybe faster than a toxic edition and get 10%+ performance than standard 5850http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102886

doesn't the GTX275 use north of 200W? A GTX295 is basically 2 of those. Even if they have to drop the GTX480/470 clocks 10%, I would still prefer the one-card solution. I think it'll have to wait until the next process, but we'll see.

Using SLI ties up 4 slots. It's not really a realistic option for most people.

Hate to say it, but now that the reviews are coming out it appears as though the GTX480 is about the same performance as a 5870 but costs more, runs hotter, and uses significantly more power. The GTX470 gets beat on average by the 5850 and....costs more, runs hotter, and uses significantly more power making it a very tough sale. The performance numbers look a lot worse than I expected.

I currently have a Geforce 275, and I was sort of thinking about upgrading ( I have the itch ). However, I don't see anything that would be a good upgrade. The new nvidea's don't look that great, and I think the new ATI's, I would need to go to a 5870, which are tad overpriced right now in the $400 + range. I could add another 275, but I don't think that would be good either.....Mmmm what to do? I guess I will wait it out until prices drop and the Nvidea cards get flushed out a bit more. Maybe this summer.

I am generally disappointed by the intial fps increases with the FERMI. While it has been suggested that nVidia has had plenty of time to optimze drivers for these new cards, I suspect there is more to see - FERMI is a substantial change in architecture. I think I will likely hold out for one of the pre-overclocked cards EVGA is offering, likely the more expensive Hydrocopper FTW, but if I see some benches I may ssettle for Superclocked...

Of course if the Radeon 5970 drops in price and becomes available anywhere I might just do that...

Yeah, hopefully they can get these things tweaked a little better soon. I was really eyeballing a 470, but not now. The 5870 is looking better and better, especially with the 2GB 5870 on the way....

I'm sticking with my 260 black and living with it for now.......the 5870 seems like a smarter upgrade...almost a 480 :P

Yeah, the 2Gb 5870 looks good, but the price is high pushing $500 right now.

Guys, I'm planning on building a new system, money is a concern. Reading posts and the anandtech review, Fermi seems to be a bit of a let down. If I got it, it would be the 470 for $350 with the hope that future driver optimization will increase performance. Would I be better served by going to a GTS 250 or 260 (currently I'm on an 8800GT 512mb).

The system I would be building would be Win 7, i7 860, 8GB DDR3 RAM. I can save $200 by getting an GTS 250 over the 470, but I'm just wondering if that would be spinning my wheels.

I would look at the ATI 5850, seems like a good one for power / price ratio. I don't think the GTS 250 would be enough of an upgrade from 8800 GT. I have a 8800 GT OC in one of my PC's and it is a pretty good card, especially considering it's age!!!

Me being a Nvidia user for a long time will be skipping the Fermi (for now ????, maybe after newer drivers and rev). Only other series I skipped fom Nvidia was the 5xxx series. I just reinvested in another 5870 (my 4th ) to do xfirex again. Only new game that I tested that still has issues is BFBC2 with some artifacts and occasional texture flashes with Cat 10.3, better then with Cat 10.2. Thats only in XfireX but the game runs fine with one 5870, so def a xfire driver issue. ATi is still behind Nvidia when it comes to driver support for new games and def behind in Multi GPU support.

You are not going to gain much going from the 8800GT to the 250 and 260 for most older DX9 games. The real gain would be going to the 275/285/295 from Nvidia and Dx10 (not many Dx10 games tho). But then if you are dead set on Nvidia then I would rec the 470. At least you will have a DX11 card and will not have to think about upgrading any time soon.

Yeah, spring for either the GTX 470 or the ATI 5850. Both cards are solid upgrades over an 8800GT, and you will be ready for DirectX 11.

As for nVIDIA, I think the now popular "The Way It's Meant to Be Failed" phrase is only fitting for the GTX 480.

I too am a very long time nvidia user and going to skip this first round. I almost pulled the trigger on a 5970 yesterday but since I'm using and evga board, i'd generally like to stay in the nvidia line. I guess we'll have to see. My 2 x 280gtx's are still doing fine but man I love new stuff

Anyone using in their rigs? Thoughts?

Waiting for 512 cores...

If you want thoughts go over to the Anandtech or Hardocp boards. This isn't the place to ask questions about these new cards, unfortunately. Too slow.

I got tired of trying to nab a 480 and settled for a 470. I figure I can SLI another if I am dissatisifed.

Anyways I am not. Crysis gets a solid 30 fps - the min fps is very close to the average fps. I have all the settings at very high with no AA, 1920x1200.

Bioshock 2, Batman Arkham Asylum, Dragon Age, all are very playable at max settings.

Divine Divinity II is a game I just started. It plays at MAX settings, about 45 fps.

I have image settings in nVidia Control Panel, set to let the application decide - or set to quality seems to have the same result. Setting it to performance gets me some better speeds.

Overclocks well with EVGA Precision.

Now the fan...with just the 470 GTX in the machine the temperature (3 ordinary case fans) the temperature never gets to high for the fan on the card to move too fast. When I put my GTS 250 in for PhysX it sat next to the 470 and the heat shot up, the fan kicks up -- and it is loud. The PhySx card had little effect so I have removed it for now.

I figure at $349.99 it was a good choice. It leaves me with the option to SLI, or to upgrade to something bigger down the road. I doubt this card will handle Cysis 2.

I also got 150 to 250 fps (Using FRAPS) playing Stranglehold. I had never seen anything hit that many fps' before. The game is so smooth it's unreal.

I bought a 5850 last week and I can say this card is amazing. I came from using a GTS 250 1gb and what a difference. I love that this card has low power consumption and does not get hot at all. I can now play Crysis Warhead on Enthusiasts (1920 x 1080) at 35FPS (very smooth, no lag at all). It also seems that the colors pop off the screen. I also enjoy that I can run an HDMI cable to my 60" Mitsubishi DLP and it looks fantastic as well. I have not OC'd and don't plan to. I know I can get this card close to 5870 specs with OC (10% - 15%), but it runs just fine as is. I also like playing Torchlight and it looks beautiful as well. I was going to buy the 470 but with the heat, higher costs and the fact that the 5850 (a card that came out 6 months ago) outperforms this card, I decided to go with the 5850, and glad I did. I am very happy

Prob you can since Crysis 2 is built to run on consoles also. I guess it really comes down to how much eye candy there is diff between the consoles and the PC versions. The big question is, will it run Metro 2033 at a hi rez with everything turn on. Now that's a graphics card killer .

Well don't get offended or anything, just saying this board doesn't seem to be as active as those other boards, animosity, well behaved, or not. I'm not saying this isn't a good place to come, I've enjoyed it here since I started coming here regularly. Just saying if someone wants a more timely write up by someone other boards might be a better choice, either technically (anand) or gameplay wise (hardocp). I don't pretend to be nearly as knowledgeable as some here but do appreciate what some of the more regulars here contribute. I have to say though that if this board became more popular it'd inevitably wind up like IGN, Hard, or Anand. It just happens. I'm happy it's not though, it's a nice respite.

No, it won't lol...That game is just nuts as far as being a GPU hog with all the goodies turned on. Fortunately, it looks great at "near-max" settings

Hope you where talking about Metro not Crysis2.

I can almost run Metro at 1920x1200 max'd with xfireX 5870's but def not at 2560x1600. They shld release a bench mark demo/app. that would be the most demanding GPU tester out so far.

Four GTX 480s probably could.

Over 1500 watts of system power draw. Now that is just ridiculous.