-
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.
*Official OMG I RMA'd my 460 Thread*
- Thread starter Overslop
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 482
Wait a minute... Did they send out review cards with a better cooling solution? Was just looking at a review of this card and the cooling looked awesome! :O
Are they that disgusting? And I was just thinking they looked like an awesome brand...
Another way of looking at it:
GTX 460 (potential to clock to 900+ on the core) @ £187 vs GTX 470 @ £235 + louder, hotter, uses more power, makes the 460 a no-brainer to someone like me who doesn't want the not inconsiderable hassle and expense of water cooling.
GTX 275s clock really well too so that's a moot point. Water cooling isn't necessary for the heat, it's just for people like me who want their PCs to be close to silent.
Where did you get the £235 from though, that's a fiver too much.
So say it's £43 more then for considerably more power, much longer warranty and better resale value.
I stick by my comment that the GTX 460 is a stupid choice at the current prices.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-032-ZT&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1810
Where did you get £230 from!?
That's just the thing though, it isn't. You've read the reviews, you don't need me to post the results of games testing where the OC'd Palit is within a second or two of the 470.
The point you're making is that the GTX 460 can be overclocked to GTX 470 levels. This is true.
The point I'm making is that the GTX 470 can also be heavily overclocked. And thus the performance difference is restored.
So the fact remains that even after overclocking, the GTX 470 is noticably more powerful.
The point I'm making is that the GTX 470 can also be heavily overclocked. And thus the performance difference is restored.
So the fact remains that even after overclocking, the GTX 470 is noticably more powerful.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
fwiw i had my zotac GTX 470 @ 775 core and managed 17,359 3dmark vantage GPU score.
GPU test 1: 52fps
GPU test 2: 49fps
GPU test 1: 52fps
GPU test 2: 49fps
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 978
- Location
- Scotland
What ATI card does the gtx 470 compare to? Would it be between the 5850 and the 5870?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
yes
How come you gave up on it?
And did it get noiser after the OC, ie. in having to ramp the fan up?
Would have thought a clocked 470 would have scored more than 17k+ in vantage, 5870 @ 1000 core hits 21270 GPU score.
Jane Nash
67.18 FPS
New Calico
57.26 FPS
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=2168514
Jane Nash
67.18 FPS
New Calico
57.26 FPS
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=2168514
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
So are a lot of 460gtx's coming with different cooling to that shown in the reviews?
I'm not surprised, the 5850 is only making a very small amount of profit, cores are very expensive on a crappy process. The 460gtx is trying to sell for up to £40 cheaper, but its really only a 5-10% smaller core and knowing Nvidia/AMD I'd expect AMD's design is still better tweaked for the process so I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia's yields are no better, or even a very small amount worse(smaller cores naturally have higher yields than bigger cores, normally). Which means a 460gtx 768mb is probably being made at little to no profit and a very slim margin on a 1GB version, putting on more expensive cooling in review models and then putting crappy loud cheap cooling on shipping models, well, you're talking about a $5 difference in cooling could be the difference between breaking even and making a tiny profit.
I'd also be very careful about temps and having constantly changing high/low temps, the word is that they've gone back to the broken bump material because the "fixed" one couldn't cope with the new cards, and the old bump material eventually broke as heat constantly went up and down.
I still can't see how the 5850 isn't the better buy at £10-20 more than the 1GB version(if you shop around or hope retailers stop screwing us), its noticably faster in many situations and overclocks like a beast if you get the right ones. Incredibly easy to cool silently, frankly stock + heavy overclock it gets hot but still quiet, with 3rd party cooling you can have max voltage, 1Ghz + clocks and have it quite literally silent.
I'm not surprised, the 5850 is only making a very small amount of profit, cores are very expensive on a crappy process. The 460gtx is trying to sell for up to £40 cheaper, but its really only a 5-10% smaller core and knowing Nvidia/AMD I'd expect AMD's design is still better tweaked for the process so I wouldn't be surprised if Nvidia's yields are no better, or even a very small amount worse(smaller cores naturally have higher yields than bigger cores, normally). Which means a 460gtx 768mb is probably being made at little to no profit and a very slim margin on a 1GB version, putting on more expensive cooling in review models and then putting crappy loud cheap cooling on shipping models, well, you're talking about a $5 difference in cooling could be the difference between breaking even and making a tiny profit.
I'd also be very careful about temps and having constantly changing high/low temps, the word is that they've gone back to the broken bump material because the "fixed" one couldn't cope with the new cards, and the old bump material eventually broke as heat constantly went up and down.
I still can't see how the 5850 isn't the better buy at £10-20 more than the 1GB version(if you shop around or hope retailers stop screwing us), its noticably faster in many situations and overclocks like a beast if you get the right ones. Incredibly easy to cool silently, frankly stock + heavy overclock it gets hot but still quiet, with 3rd party cooling you can have max voltage, 1Ghz + clocks and have it quite literally silent.
Last edited:
What do you mean by broken bump material? is this related to pcb/soldering, fractures that can occur over time because of temperature changes, is what you're talking about related to this, when cards go faulty?
Just to be clear about the bump material, Charlie is talking about GF100 not GF104. There isn't any indication of mass GF100 failures, its just a 'what if' article at this stage. The characteristics of GF100 and G86 are quite different, so it's way too early to call any potential problem yet there, and nobody knows what materials are used on GF104.
I agree that a 5850 at +£20 GTX460 price is a decent buy, but i think getting the right ones is the problem at the moment. I've seen them for £200 (~£25 over GTX460) but they don't list the brand, so i think to make sure you're getting a good quality make the price difference is still quite a lot (more like ~£50). There should be some decent 3rd party coolers for the 460's soon enough (especially when those guys read all the complaints about Palit/Gainward!) so really either card with a custom cooler is a good option.
Basically i think if your budget is £175-200 the GTX460 is the card to get, if your budget is £220-250 then the 5850 is the card you want. I think they both sit nicely in price relative to the other, but i really hope we get some price cuts on anyway.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Yup, the difference is the "old" bump material was proven to be the reason behind many many failing chips in the last few gens of Nvidia parts, they put in a quick fix, which seemed to work for those parts. The reason it doesn't work this time around is the characteristics of the GF100, and the fixed bump material was breaking cores itself so on GF100 they went back to the old one. Its fairly simple though, the old one failed time and time again due to it not being suitable for a constantly changing core temp, the bigger the thermal cycling, the quicker the problem showed. The GF100 is far worse in terms of temps than the older cores, and frankly the GF104, is still a lot more power hungry and hot running than the last gen.
I'd be very surprised if Nvidia used the "newer" bump material on GF104, it uses less power, but is a much smaller chip, its power/mm^2 isn't very different from GF100, its power efficiency, temp generation are very very similar to the GF100. IF they've had time to find a newer material and use that on GF104 is something we don't know, but if the one they used as a fix last year doesn't work on GF100, it won't work on GF104.
The way the old bump filling failed, was over time, things started dying a 1-2 years after being used, not a couple weeks. So the question is will the bump material start failing, especially on GF100's where cooling isn't great and temp changes from idle to 90C+ at load, start failing in a 12-18 months time. To be honest, its a big problem, that Nvidia's paid in the region of half a billion in well, damages would be the right term, but random payoff's for various made up reasons would be their definition, to several of the biggest pre built computer/laptop makers in the world to "cover" the issue.
For the end user, you get a replacement, meh, not too big a deal.
With your long distance selling regs, technically you are only supposed to 'test' the product in the same way that you could in a store.
So not putting inside your machine, only taking it out of the box to look at.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
noise. it would get up to 93 degrees under 3dmark vantage when clcoked and slight over volt. and then the fan would upset me. and it didnt play company of heroes flawlessly in all ultra at 1080p.. so i thought, well i might as well get a 460 gtx then?!
and that didnt turn out great noise wise either.