http://en.expreview.com/2009/10/10/nvidia-geforce-gt240-benchmarks-surface.html
Not bad..but it really depends on the price at which they launch.
Not bad..but it really depends on the price at which they launch.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
40nm GT240 Benched
- Thread starter gurusan
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Problem being the 4850 is stronger in games than vantage, its basically a 9800gt with higher bandwidth and higher clocks + dx10.1. It will be on par in most games, most likely, with a 4770. Unfortunately a 5770/5750 which will most likely end up somewhere between the 4870/4890 but with DX11 and a few fancier features, aswell as being cheaper to produce, is out before the GT240 will make it to market.
ATi's midrange is launching tomorrow and will likely be between 90-130 from 5750 to 5770 with varying memory amounts and overclocks. They'll be dropping GTX260/275/280 prices to compete, which will mean this HAS to sell below them, noticeably. A 260GTX is likely to be beaten by a 5770, or maybe be slightly ahead, with less features, higher power consumption and be a lot bigger, so it will have to be in the £110-125 range to sell.
Its still a higher profit part than the GT200 range, even if it sells a lot cheaper, which is good for Nvidia, but just not sure where they have to price it and if its enough(if it makes it out into the wild, look how long it took the lower end 24/42SP versions to come to market.
Also, why on earth does Nvidia not have codenames that have nothing to do with their marketing names, makes it so hard to discuss.
ATi, Juniper = 5770/5750 out in retail, core and name for the card, easy.
The damn GT240, is built on the GT215 core
The GT260/280 are GT200 cores, theres GT212, 214, this than and the other.
Articles discussing pricing of cores/cards on Nvidia products are a shambles to read right now, though I guess it helps Nvidia with their whole renaming strategy, 98% of people reading what products are new and which are old, have no idea which code is what
ATi's midrange is launching tomorrow and will likely be between 90-130 from 5750 to 5770 with varying memory amounts and overclocks. They'll be dropping GTX260/275/280 prices to compete, which will mean this HAS to sell below them, noticeably. A 260GTX is likely to be beaten by a 5770, or maybe be slightly ahead, with less features, higher power consumption and be a lot bigger, so it will have to be in the £110-125 range to sell.
Its still a higher profit part than the GT200 range, even if it sells a lot cheaper, which is good for Nvidia, but just not sure where they have to price it and if its enough(if it makes it out into the wild, look how long it took the lower end 24/42SP versions to come to market.
Also, why on earth does Nvidia not have codenames that have nothing to do with their marketing names, makes it so hard to discuss.
ATi, Juniper = 5770/5750 out in retail, core and name for the card, easy.
The damn GT240, is built on the GT215 core
The GT260/280 are GT200 cores, theres GT212, 214, this than and the other. Articles discussing pricing of cores/cards on Nvidia products are a shambles to read right now, though I guess it helps Nvidia with their whole renaming strategy, 98% of people reading what products are new and which are old, have no idea which code is what
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The only reason its an improvement is, if a GTS250 was £100, and gave Nvidia only £5 a card, a GT240(built on a GT215 core
), thats half the size, on a smaller process could sell for £90 in retail, but make Nvidia £20 a core in profit.You don't have to beat old cards to have a good product, you just need good pricing and a more profitable core for it to be worthwhile. But as I was getting at, theres not a huge amount of leeway for where the card can be priced at, if it goes tooo low, then those extra profits from cheaper cores goes missing.
5750 is almost certainly going to be faster than a 4850, the GT240 is slower than a 4850....so I can't imagine where it fits in the market really.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Not necessarily, I mean, it almost certainly will be with better drivers, which I think are holding back performance across the range tbh, but its very unlikely to be a 1120sp part like a lot of sites were guessing at. Its likely to be a 800sp part with significantly less bandwidth than a 4870, which may or may not limit how close it can get to a 4870/4890. I think it will be a great card that will excel in the future in DX11 games and will be fantastic value at £120ish, but its highly unlikely to "destroy" the 4850, faster, probably, massively so, not likely.
I actually haven't compared but I'm not quite sure how a 128mbit bus with gddr5 does against a 256mbit bus with gddr3. THe 4770 gave us a clue, and the 5770 should have slightly higher clocks on that memory aswell as more shaders AND higher core clocks. But it will depend exactly how balanced it all is and comes together.
But the same thing works for AMD, if the 5770 matches or beats either the 4850/4870, they can sell it at roughly the same price, but make it for far less, it means they make more money, and their partners all make more money. The difference is AMD isn't making a loss on the 4850/4870 as is, so replacements are just flat out in a better place for more profit. NVidia, are making losses on their equivilent parts at the moment, so replacements really needed to come in at a similar price, which means similar performance, which they've missed quite badly.
I half wonder if the 5770 leaked specs weren't leaked by a certain company, to induce massive dissappointment when it finally launches,
Last edited:
And it's taken them this long to release a low performance DX10.1 card why exactly? We're already on DX11, which is a much more worthwhile spec. I'm sorry but it's pretty hard to have faith in nVidia anymore, particularly when their focus has shifted away from gaming with Tegra and Tesla and the general computing focus of Fermi - combined with the freeze on future Intel chipsets and you have to wonder about the management of the company. They've been far too reliant on renaming chips and have had to resort to massive price cuts just to remain competitive.
I really hope ATI can maximise on this and force nVidia to come up with a competitive gaming card next generation instead of just prannying around. However, I'll only consider nVidia cards when the company stops behaving in an anti-competitive manner, the way they've been buying off developers / publishers and crippling their own cards when used in conjunction with the competition.
I really hope ATI can maximise on this and force nVidia to come up with a competitive gaming card next generation instead of just prannying around. However, I'll only consider nVidia cards when the company stops behaving in an anti-competitive manner, the way they've been buying off developers / publishers and crippling their own cards when used in conjunction with the competition.
The fact that Nvidia seems to be launching an entire lineup of DX10.1 40nm products does not strike me with confidence in terms of when GT300 will be launched...
Still, if this card is priced right, it could be a nice product.
Still, if this card is priced right, it could be a nice product.
Problem is that whenever gt300 is launched, be it November or January, it will be several months before the cut down mid and low range cards comes out hence Nvidia releasing dx10.1 cards in that market for now.
The only reason its an improvement is, if a GTS250 was £100, and gave Nvidia only £5 a card, a GT240(built on a GT215 core
You don't have to beat old cards to have a good product, you just need good pricing and a more profitable core for it to be worthwhile. But as I was getting at, theres not a huge amount of leeway for where the card can be priced at, if it goes tooo low, then those extra profits from cheaper cores goes missing.
makes you realise how big the gpu market actually is when making something like the GTS250 is considered worthwhile by a huge company like nvidia. wonder how many sales they would need to break even on it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2003
- Posts
- 10,913
- Location
- Nottingham
I half wonder if the 5770 leaked specs weren't leaked by a certain company, to induce massive dissappointment when it finally launches,
The specs come from official slides.
I do feel the same but in nvidia defense if they leave it to long intel and ati (it is said that the ati card out in 3rd or 4th quarter of 2010 will have a lot more to do with gpgpu)will get in the act as well and that will make it harder for them.
I just hope games don't suffer to much because they looking in other directions like Tegra and Tesla.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
Nvidia will present a press conference telling us that this is faster than 4x5870 in CrossfireX in Batman
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The specs come from official slides.
Those spec are newly out, but the specs that have been "leaked" and stated for the past month or even two months, have been suggesting it had 1120sp's, which would have obviously given it a pretty decent boost.
Even Anandtech not very long ago at all was talking about it maybe being a 192bit bus, can't remember if they suggested 1120sp's, but that was the general rumours for the past month, hence 800sp's almost feel's like a letdown.
So for 2 months you get people thinking they will get a £130 1120sp, 4890 killer, and then on release they find its the same price(well actually a bit less) but only 800sp's and not even a 4890 beater.
At this point Nvidia will take any lost sales to ATi for whatever reason, hence me wondering if they weren't raising expectations slyly.
Its hard to not blame Nvidia in some way, even though TSMC screwed them big time. Said it before ATi walked head first into TSMC screwing them, without much idea they couldnt' deliver. ATi adjusted and shielded themselves with a differently designed core much less susceptible to massive massive delay from outside sources. The thing is, Nvidia knows what happened, almost 3 years ago to ATi with the 2900xt, but they've continued head first into the same problems that pretty much everyone in the world could have predicted.
As for ATi moving to a more gpgpu nature with the next gen, thats not strictly true, their current core(and last) was more than capable of doing gpgpu type work.
The difference with Nvidia (might be) is that they've seemingly removed a lot of core logic you'd normally put in for graphics acceleration in favour of doing it in software FAR slower, so they can dedicate more die space to raw horse power that can be used effectively in GPGPU.
All AMD are talking about is adding the same level of features, without sacrificing. It supports 98% of what the Fermi will do in terms of GPGPU and programability, and won't be far off in terms of double precision performance. Right now the Fermi is only slated for 700-800gflops of DP power, ATi already have over 500gflops on their current cards, and hasn't come close to being optimised purely for that function, because its all but useless to gaming.