fair RMA replacement for a GTX 480?

SiD-P · 1 Mar 2011 at 19:39

After reading reviews the 570 is tempting, would also leave me £70 odd in pocket.

Then again a £20-30 inverstment gets me a 580.

been looking around the interweb for an EVGA SuperClocked GTX580, just can't seem to find one.

Insanties_birth · 1 Mar 2011 at 19:42

570 if you need a card now as they're damn good, but if you can hold off a while then the 6990 should give even the gtx 580's a kick up the pants

Cleeecooo · 1 Mar 2011 at 21:48

SiD-P said:
After reading reviews the 570 is tempting, would also leave me £70 odd in pocket.

Then again a £20-30 inverstment gets me a 580.

been looking around the interweb for an EVGA SuperClocked GTX580, just can't seem to find one.

No need for a SC version. Just buy the normal/black ops version.
TBH, normal is fine.

tommybhoy · 2 Mar 2011 at 00:03

Tute said:
I'm not saying the GTX570 wouldn't be a more logical replacement, what i'm saying is that if he was offered a heavily clocked 560 then that would also be fair.

The frame buffer doesn't make any difference, did you bother to even look at any reviews of the card?

Also the core itself is picked for high speeds so you can hardly call it "at it's limits either".

The advantage is a cooler, quieter card as well.

At the end of the day though, he won't get offered something like this so the point is a bit moot.

I did take the time to read reviews, they only managed to oc the card by 44Mhz, as I said the card is reaching it's limits at 1GHz.

Guru3d GTX 560 Ti SOC review

I have had many a discussion about 'frame buffer doesn't make any difference'. It's not all about high resolutions. When you wan't to slap on the IQ then it certainly does make a difference. Hard ocp's one of the few sites that try and find the cards limits, not the games.

HD 6950 1GB Performance Review

You can see the difference in games tested at hardocp's review that more memory is better.

If it doesn't make a difference why do all these cards have the extra vram?
Why does the 580 have 1536MB and the 570 have less at 1280MB? It's not just clock speeds that gets you eye candy.

Tute · 2 Mar 2011 at 00:33

tommybhoy said:
I did take the time to read reviews, they only managed to oc the card by 44Mhz, as I said the card is reaching it's limits at 1GHz.

I would say that's still a reasonable gain, but anyway, the seller doesn't have to guarantee any overclock, do they? They only have to match what the GTX480 does at stock, which a 950+ core'd GTX560 would.

I have had many a discussion about 'frame buffer doesn't make any difference'. It's not all about high resolutions. When you wan't to slap on the IQ then it certainly does make a difference. Hard ocp's one of the few sites that try and find the cards limits, not the games.

HD 6950 1GB Performance Review

You can see the difference in games tested at hardocp's review that more memory is better.

Well no, a faster GPU is better? I mean come on, all three cards quite frankly suck at that resolution - I mean they can barely keep the frames pumping above 30fps. So why would you care about some tiny AA/AF setting that most likely makes no difference to IQ anyway?

If it doesn't make a difference why do all these cards have the extra vram?
Why does the 580 have 1536MB and the 570 have less at 1280MB? It's not just clock speeds that gets you eye candy.

It's there to sell the card to those who still think that frame buffer > all.

REAPERUK · 2 Mar 2011 at 01:54

i would expect a 580 at least even though the 570 is a great card, but the problem is the 570 has less memory, max the AA ect and still the 480 would win, also there is no maxed AA/AF reviews out there

High end cards are there for a reason, so is mid and low end cards.

tommybhoy · 2 Mar 2011 at 02:20

Congrats on the full refund SiD-P by the way. Have you considered X-fire 6950 2Gb>unlocked shaders? Tremendous Bang For Buck!

Tute said:
I would say that's still a reasonable gain, but anyway, the seller doesn't have to guarantee any overclock, do they? They only have to match what the GTX480 does at stock, which a 950+ core'd GTX560 would.

Where is your logic coming from? +44MHZ is showing that the soc 560 IS near it's limits like I said.
The seller can't give you a lesser card than what was originally sold, which a 560 factory oc'd or not is the lesser card of the two.

Who in this forum would go from a 480 to a 560 if you take heat/power/noise issues out of the equation?

Tute said:
Well no, a faster GPU is better? I mean come on, all three cards quite frankly suck at that resolution - I mean they can barely keep the frames pumping above 30fps. So why would you care about some tiny AA/AF setting that most likely makes no difference to IQ anyway?

Have you ever tried gaming on a 50"+ TV? The consoles are crying out for AA/AF.
I never mentioned anything about faster gpu's, you stated that 'the frame buffer doesn't make any difference' and I pointed out that it does:

Average frames for the 3 games are between 28.7>38.2 with the 6950 2Gb.You are saying that's hardly above 30fps? Highly playable in my book.

'We had to run all video cards at 4X AA at 2560x1600 in this game because the two 1GB video cards in this evaluation were completely unplayable at 8X MSAA at this resolution. When we tried to run this game at 8X MSAA on the 1GB Radeon HD 6950 and 1GB GeForce GTX 560 Ti we experience framerates in the 0-3 FPS range, which rendered playing the game impossible. However, the 2GB Radeon HD 6950 was completely playable at 8X MSAA! Its performance did not degrade much at all moving upwards from 4X AA and we’d consider 8X MSAA to be playable on the 2GB Radeon HD 6950. This game proved that memory capacity can go a long way to opening up higher playable settings.'

HD 6950 1GB Performance Review

The 1Gb and 2Gb 6950's both have the same cpu, so obviously the extra vram IS making a difference.

Tute said:
It's there to sell the card to those who still think that frame buffer > all.

Try reading the review

cjkennedy · 2 Mar 2011 at 08:14

hahah i hope this happens to me, would be cool to get a 570, edit refund would be even better seeing as i got my 480 on the day it was released lol

Tute · 2 Mar 2011 at 12:31

tommybhoy said:
Where is your logic coming from? +44MHZ is showing that the soc 560 IS near it's limits like I said.
The seller can't give you a lesser card than what was originally sold, which a 560 factory oc'd or not is the lesser card of the two.

Who in this forum would go from a 480 to a 560 if you take heat/power/noise issues out of the equation?

Here you go:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/gigabyte-gtx-560-ti-soc-review/

Now have a look where the GTX560 is performing - yes that's right, it's performing damn near identical to a GTX480. That makes it a fair swap. I'll give you your overclocking point but at the end of the day, it's not the retailer's problem. They simply have to replace like-for-like at stock, which the SOC would be.

I doubt many on this forum would take the GTX560 as too many care only about e-peen, which the 480 scores more points on than the 560. But that doesn't change my point, does it?

The OP, although he got his refund, would have had a fair deal if he'd have gotten offered a 950+ GTX560. Simple as.

In fact, if anything, the GTX560 is an improvement in the heat and noise stakes.

Have you ever tried gaming on a 50"+ TV? The consoles are crying out for AA/AF.

What relevance does that have? You can't put a GTX480 in a PS3 or 360.

I never mentioned anything about faster gpu's, you stated that 'the frame buffer doesn't make any difference' and I pointed out that it does:

snip

Oh, I get it now.

This has gone well out of context, hasn't it? I assume you've taken my comment of "frame buffer doesn't make any difference" and ran with it much further than the subject of the thread.

I actually thought you had linked to a review of the SOC GTX560 against a 2GB HD6950, but now I see it's just the general HD6950 review. What relevance does this have overall anyway? We were talking about the GTX560 at heavy overclocks against the GTX480 at stock.

I expect now you're going to tell me that my comment read like it was a sweeping statement and that i'm just trying to backtrack or something similar.

At the end of the day, i'm happy to admit that there is a difference at extreme settings between two of the same cards with differing memory buffers, but that it doesn't change your point at all really. All you've done is prove something that was pretty common knowledge from the start.

After all, as I said, those cards are running out of fillrate before they run out of GDDR5.

So where were we? Ah yes, the company would have been well within their rights to offer the OP a 950+ GTX560.

tommybhoy · 2 Mar 2011 at 16:01

Tute said:
Here you go:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/gigabyte-gtx-560-ti-soc-review/

Already read it and pointed you to it in an earlier post.

tommybhoy said:
I did take the time to read reviews, they only managed to oc the card by 44Mhz, as I said the card is reaching it's limits at 1GHz.

Guru3d GTX 560 Ti SOC review

Tute said:
Now have a look where the GTX560 is performing - yes that's right, it's performing damn near identical to a GTX480. That makes it a fair swap. I'll give you your overclocking point but at the end of the day, it's not the retailer's problem. They simply have to replace like-for-like at stock, which the SOC would be.

I doubt many on this forum would take the GTX560 as too many care only about e-peen, which the 480 scores more points on than the 560. But that doesn't change my point, does it?

The OP, although he got his refund, would have had a fair deal if he'd have gotten offered a 950+ GTX560. Simple as.

In fact, if anything, the GTX560 is an improvement in the heat and noise stakes.

What relevance does that have? You can't put a GTX480 in a PS3 or 360.

Oh, I get it now.

This has gone well out of context, hasn't it? I assume you've taken my comment of "frame buffer doesn't make any difference" and ran with it much further than the subject of the thread.

I actually thought you had linked to a review of the SOC GTX560 against a 2GB HD6950, but now I see it's just the general HD6950 review. What relevance does this have overall anyway? We were talking about the GTX560 at heavy overclocks against the GTX480 at stock.

I expect now you're going to tell me that my comment read like it was a sweeping statement and that i'm just trying to backtrack or something similar.

At the end of the day, i'm happy to admit that there is a difference at extreme settings between two of the same cards with differing memory buffers, but that it doesn't change your point at all really. All you've done is prove something that was pretty common knowledge from the start.

After all, as I said, those cards are running out of fillrate before they run out of GDDR5.

So where were we? Ah yes, the company would have been well within their rights to offer the OP a 950+ GTX560.

Tute said:
It's there to sell the card to those who still think that frame buffer > all.

I was showing you an example of why more memory is better than less with the HOCP review as an example between the same cards, nothing to do with the 560 at all. As you say the company have to provide like for like then they can't possibly offer the 560 soc as it's not like for like.
1.5Gb v 1Gb is not like for like.
560 Soc is almost at it's maxed performance out of the box. Currently OC's Asus 480 has 'huge overclock potential' in the description.

If you play at the extreme settings or/and use combinations of PhysX, CUDA, NVIDIA Surround, 3d Vision the 560 is not going to cut it like the 480.

Tute · 2 Mar 2011 at 16:13

tommybhoy said:
Already read it and pointed you to it in an earlier post.

The review clearly shows that the SOC has similar performance to a GTX480. Yet why do you ignore that fact?

I was showing you an example of why more memory is better than less with the HOCP review as an example between the same cards, nothing to do with the 560 at all. As you say the company have to provide like for like then they can't possibly offer the 560 soc as it's not like for like.
1.5Gb v 1Gb is not like for like.

More memory is always better. But it's not as much of a deal as you're making it out to be. As shown, it only comes into it's own when you're dealing with extreme resolutions and tiny settings that makes very little difference to IQ. Would you be happy phoning a retailer and arguing this fact with them? I certainly wouldn't.

560 Soc is almost at it's maxed performance out of the box. Currently OC's Asus 480 has 'huge overclock potential' in the description.

Key word: Potential. As long as that GTX480 works at stock, it doesn't matter. It's not up to the retailer to provide any guarantee of an overclock.

If you play at the extreme settings or/and use combinations of PhysX, CUDA, NVIDIA Surround, 3d Vision the 560 is not going to cut it like the 480.

I would completely disagree - I think that the difference between the two cards i've mentioned would be near enough zero.

tommybhoy · 2 Mar 2011 at 16:47

I am not ignoring that the 560 soc doesn't have similar performance in the reviews. The soc is a smashing card in it's own right.

You would accept the soc as a replacement for the 480 I wouldn't, there is evidence to show there is a benefit from extra ram so I would just point the retailer to it.

You can be happy with your ferrari. I'll stick to my ferrari and I'll get Willy Koenig to tune it for me when I get home.

Tute · 2 Mar 2011 at 17:07

tommybhoy said:
You would accept the soc as a replacement for the 480 I wouldn't, there is evidence to show there is a benefit from extra ram so I would just point the retailer to it.

It's about the thinnest evidence ever, and I don't think the retailer would budge if you started hair-splitting.

You can be happy with your ferrari. I'll stick to my ferrari and I'll get Willy Koenig to tune it for me when I get home.

What a daft analogy.

jakejacob0 · 2 Mar 2011 at 17:09

ask for a 570

Cleeecooo · 2 Mar 2011 at 19:22

jakejacob0 said:
ask for a 570

Why?
If he gets a refund then gets a 570 he makes a profit.
I would still ask for a 580 otherwise accept a refund. Otherwise try asking fir two 470s as they would be trying to clear them out now.

SiD-P · 4 Mar 2011 at 12:53

Got my refund today

I have picked out the following 3 as possible replacements

Gigabyte GTX 580
EVGA GTX 580
Asus GTX 580 DirectCU II

Now I know that the Giga and EVGA cards are probably identical, but could someone comment with regards to reliability & ease of RMA etc.

Also, does the larger cooler on the Asus really make much of a difference with temps?

Van Diemen · 4 Mar 2011 at 17:18

I would get the cheapest out of the 3.

But I have heard that Asus RMA could be nightmare

jigger · 4 Mar 2011 at 17:25

SiD-P said:
Got my refund today

I have picked out the following 3 as possible replacements

Gigabyte GTX 580
EVGA GTX 580
Asus GTX 580 DirectCU II

Now I know that the Giga and EVGA cards are probably identical, but could someone comment with regards to reliability & ease of RMA etc.

Also, does the larger cooler on the Asus really make much of a difference with temps?

Have you thought about a pair of HD6950's ?

bru · 4 Mar 2011 at 17:27

jigger said:
Have you thought about a pair of GTX480's ?

Damm good suggestion there Jigger wish I'd have thought of it myself

jigger · 4 Mar 2011 at 17:32

bru said:
Damm good suggestion there Jigger wish I'd have thought of it myself

Thanks for noticing bru