-
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.
So ladies and gents, was fermi a fail after all?
- Thread starter deusexlumina
- Start date
It depends what brand of graphics card he currently has.
Only for the blind and the ones who are stuck in there ways, 400 refresh 500 series is only a taste for what is coming.
still waiting for a 5000 refresh myself as the 6000 is a binned 5000 and a massive fail i.e taking the smeg out of the consumer.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2006
- Posts
- 1,922
- Location
- UK
The launch failed, that is all.
I trust that Kepler on the other hand, will be big.
I trust that Kepler on the other hand, will be big.
I'm not sure how anyone can say Fermi is a fail? Sure it was a lot later than AMDs 58** series, but at least when it was released it gave better perfomance.
I bought my GTX 480 nearly a year ago now and it's still perfoming brilliantly.
The fact that AMDs current top end card the 6970 is only on a par with the year old 480 make it all the more impressive.
If Fermis a fail then I'll take big fat fails all day long and twice on a Sunday.
If anythings a fail it's AMDs latest 69** series offerings, which tbh fell well short of what was expected from them.
I bought my GTX 480 nearly a year ago now and it's still perfoming brilliantly.
The fact that AMDs current top end card the 6970 is only on a par with the year old 480 make it all the more impressive.
If Fermis a fail then I'll take big fat fails all day long and twice on a Sunday.
If anythings a fail it's AMDs latest 69** series offerings, which tbh fell well short of what was expected from them.
If you read the thread its very clear why the architecture is a failure.
Late.
Hot.
Power hungry.
Produced at a loss.
Loud.
Nvidia said Fermi was future on Nvidia GPU's before they went into production and then dropped the architecture as it become clear it was a complete failure in every aspect.
Late.
Hot.
Power hungry.
Produced at a loss.
Loud.
Nvidia said Fermi was future on Nvidia GPU's before they went into production and then dropped the architecture as it become clear it was a complete failure in every aspect.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2011
- Posts
- 1,142
- Location
- London
I am confused as to why people say the 480 is hot and loud.
Mine runs at maximum 72 degrees C while playing GTA IV or Farcry 2 on MAX settings. Also getting 60+ FPS obviously. The fan doesn't run over 44 which is basically as loud as my HS fan
Mine runs at maximum 72 degrees C while playing GTA IV or Farcry 2 on MAX settings. Also getting 60+ FPS obviously. The fan doesn't run over 44 which is basically as loud as my HS fan
LOL, I mentioned it was late.
As for being hot, who cares? I certainly don't, it's not like someones going to buy a £450 video card and put it in a small form factor case?
Power hungry, yes it is, but again you don't buy a £450 video card and expect it to be eco friendly.
Produced at a loss, why should I care about that
Loud, it's only loud if you have insufficient airflow in your case, and again you don't buy a £450 video card and put it in a 15 quid case.
Like I said give me fails all day long if Fermis considered a failure
All I'm interested in is frames per second, and fortunately my GTX 480 has provided me with plenty of them for nearly a year.
Someone has got to be paying you to make posts like this... no one can be this angry at a faceless corporation.
This is a bit like calling a Darts player a failure for reaching an intended score instead of hitting all bullseyes. I do not know where people get the idea AMD are intent on getting performance crown when they say they are after the value crown.
What ?
LOL, I mentioned it was late.
As for being hot, who cares? I certainly don't, it's not like someones going to buy a £450 video card and put it in a small form factor case?
Power hungry, yes it is, but again you don't buy a £450 video card and expect it to be eco friendly.
Produced at a loss, why should I care about that
Loud, it's only loud if you have insufficient airflow in your case, and again you don't buy a £450 video card and put it in a 15 quid case.
Like I said give me fails all day long if Fermis considered a failure
All I'm interested in is frames per second, and fortunately my GTX 480 has provided me with plenty of them for nearly a year.
Well if you can't accept some of the reasons thats fine.
Nvidia have had to sell Fermi for £200 to make sales that says it all.
The thing is Jigger I care most about performance, not about how much Nvidia is making a loss, how much heat a card chucks out or even how much it's going to cost me in electric to run!
Surely performance is the be all and end all? I don't think I've inadvertantly got lost on the interwebz, but we are posting in the Overclockers forums right?
a forum that positively encourages people to get the most performance possible out of their computer hardware by turning voltages up, therefore causing more heat and using more electric in the process.
Perhaps you should try a search for underclockers if you're really that interested in the eco side of computing?
Also have a look at http://www.anger-management.com as you seem to have quite a bit of pent up aggresion that needs addressing
Well then you don't care if the card is a success or failure, and your argument is kind of irrelevant.
Also have a look at http://www.anger-management.com as you seem to have quite a bit of pent up aggresion that needs addressing
That, coming from you is absolutely ridiculous. *points and laughs*
Well it seems it used to be a fail, now prices are down to £200 on the GTX480 it is better than 6970 at £260 ish, I will be buying a GPU soon and with a budget of £200 it looks like GTX480 wins hands down for me, I want the best performance for price which at this moment in time seems that crown goes to GTX480
You know why it was a fail? Because it was significantly more expensive, hotter and had a huge power draw compared to the 5870, for at best 10% more performance. This is the main reason why anyone called it a fail. As most people said, it was a good card in its own regards, and that's it.
Well of course it would. Its performance is hardly going to drop is it?
Why are you so blind to the things that nVidia do? AMD's and nVidia's latest range of cards are both fails when it comes to performance. The GTX580 the same performance increase over the 480, as the 6970 does over the 5870. If you think AMD's a fail, then you must think nVidia is too.
If Fermi's a fail then I'll take big fat fails all day long and twice on a Sunday.
Take note of this, the 6900s were massively hyped up, people like you often say they fell short, but I bet you think the 580 is some sort of miracle card right? I cringe at all the reviews that go on about the "substantial" 10% performance improvement that the 580 brought over the 480, it's pathetic. Now where nVidia fail that much more is their price point, because it's still very high, where as AMD brought a very small performance increase over the 5000 series, but at least they dropped the price quite a bit, so now you can get more than 5870 performance for less than £200 (6950 flashed to 6970).
Also, you need to stop getting upset that people are suggesting your graphics card is a fail, when you clearly love your GTX480 so much, does it really matter what anyone else says about it? No one is saying its performance is rubbish.
In reality though, I'm not expecting you to respond in a calm, collected and reasonable manner because of how I, and others are used to you responding, if you decide to be mature and reasonable, then it's all good, but it's up to you.
Last edited:
Realistically, that's the 6950. There's no reason to get a 6970 when the 6950 runs at the same performance levels, so based on that the 6950 is currently the better value card, especially so as it's got 2GB of ram over 1.5GB.