| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Video Card Performance |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Video Cards | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Written by Olin Coles | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tuesday, 09 November 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Page 6 of 21
DX10: 3DMark Vantage3DMark Vantage is a PC benchmark suite designed to test the DirectX10 graphics card performance. FutureMark 3DMark Vantage is the latest addition the 3DMark benchmark series built by FutureMark corporation. Although 3DMark Vantage requires NVIDIA PhysX to be installed for program operation, only the CPU/Physics test relies on this technology. 3DMark Vantage offers benchmark tests focusing on GPU, CPU, and Physics performance. Benchmark Reviews uses the two GPU-specific tests for grading video card performance: Jane Nash and New Calico. These tests isolate graphical performance, and remove processor dependence from the benchmark results.
3DMark Vantage GPU Test: Jane NashOf the two GPU tests 3DMark Vantage offers, the Jane Nash performance benchmark is slightly less demanding. In a short video scene the special agent escapes a secret lair by water, nearly losing her shirt in the process. Benchmark Reviews tests this DirectX-10 scene at 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 resolutions, and uses Extreme quality settings with 8x anti-aliasing and 16x anisotropic filtering. The 1:2 scale is utilized, and is the highest this test allows. By maximizing the processing levels of this test, the scene creates the highest level of graphical demand possible and sorts the strong from the weak.
Jane Nash Extreme Quality SettingsCost Analysis: Jane Nash (1920x1200)
3DMark Vantage GPU Test: New CalicoNew Calico is the second GPU test in the 3DMark Vantage test suite. Of the two GPU tests, New Calico is the most demanding. In a short video scene featuring a galactic battleground, there is a massive display of busy objects across the screen. Benchmark Reviews tests this DirectX-10 scene at 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 resolutions, and uses Extreme quality settings with 8x anti-aliasing and 16x anisotropic filtering. The 1:2 scale is utilized, and is the highest this test allows. Using the highest graphics processing level available allows our test products to separate themselves and stand out (if possible).
New Calico Extreme Quality SettingsCost Analysis: New Calico (1920x1200)
Test Summary: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 competes on two levels: price point and GPU segment. At the $500 price point, it competes directly against ATI's dual-GPU Radeon HD 5970 and a pair of AMD Radeon HD 6870 video cards combined into CrossFireX. In regard to single-GPU competition, the closest video cards would be ATI's Radeon HD 5870 or NVIDIA's own GeForce GTX 480. 3dMark Vantage usually sets the pace for coming events, and through the analysis of these two tests spread over two different resolutions we gain a clear insight into who ranks where. In the Jane Nash tests, the dual-GPU Radeon HD 5970 and CrossFireX Radeon HD 6870's outscore the GeForce GTX 580, but then in the New Calico tests the GTX 580 comes back to outperform or match these same video cards. Comparing the GeForce GTX 580 to the older GTX 480 creates a tremendous performance margin of 31/34%, even more so with the GTX 580 and ATI Radeon HD 5870 (+32/55%). Our cost analysis indicates a trend among the premium top-end graphics products: better frame rate, and less value.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
I'm asking you, the empowered visitor, since you obviouly know the 'right' way to do this after telling me that our way was wrong.
If anything, at most a GTX490...
Quote:
##anandtech.com/show/4008/nvidias-geforce-gtx-580/17
Anand's numbers also seem to be more in line with other reviews I've looked at. So unfortunately it looks like you need to retest power consumption with another program, why not ask Anand what program they used?
Otherwise, from what I read, good review. Not planning on upgrading so I didn't read the whole article unfortunately. Been a reader for some time now, first comment so thanks for the great articles so far. BTW I have a suggestion/request for the graphics card articles: Add minimum frame rate numbers to the tests, as these are as important as average frame rates, if not more so.
Cheers
##techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_580/3.html
##techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_580/3.html
For the sake of performance, it is obvious that a single 470 wouldn t do it. It would have been tem time more interesting to know how would perform a SLI with more popular 460 gtx 1g HAWK or FTW or even a 470 SLI since you put a 6870 Crossfire on the stake, and that such are in pair with the mentioned cards.
That would be relevant to know how this newby 580 perform agaisnt his own kind.
I'm also sorry that all of the work I put into this article didn't provide enough information for you to develop a decent idea of where this card fits.
Ususally those review are to make an opinion of what to buy according to what you use, and guide the pretenders to an upgrade.
Well it doesn t take rocket science to guess the 580 is to topple ATI best dog, this is the obvious part, everybody will do it.
But what of the average joe ? Since GTX 460 is the average card on the market and not the 470, what should he do, acquire a 580, or double his 460 ? That s the second more important question on the market, now.
If i take that the 6870 is equal to a hawk and less than a FTW,according to your own reviews, average joe could guess that 2 of those would let the 580 on the floor panting as did the double 6870.
But as other factors kick average joe can t be sure then the revue fails him, and the average joe drive the market bulk, and want the not so obvious answers.
If the review is to give an "en passant" review of the 580 its excellent, but its too obvious, everysingle review will do it.
I hope you ll have 2 NVIDIA card when your start reviewing the non vanilla 580. I can assure you its all that matters for much people.
You solved the ATI side and its great for them but we Nvidia side are left hanging.
Are they really going to have to start their next gen chip in the 600's?
Hey Olin, GREAT article BTW!
Same reason they slap 2011 on car models .... it works to sell things.
So here you go, both on and off topic. Nice review, thanks for all your efforts.
With the preponderance of video hardware turning to 3D enabled products I'd like to know how I can un-chart the costs of 3D enabling via hardware if that's possible (I have no depth perception, just ask the US Navy). So I get no bang for the buck with this evolution that others are likely fascinated by. Any general rule of thumb that you may have already gotten your mind around?
Thanks again.
You are comparing TWO 6870s to ONE gtx 580 and btw the 580 is a SINGLE gpu card while one 6970 is a DUAL gpu card!!
Ofcourse it'll always outperform a 580 but i bet if you guys at benchmarkreviews added another 580 in SLI you'd get very different results.
what a load of crap
A pair of these in SLI would be $400 - $430, and would perform better than the EVGA cards.
##newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127534&cm_re=gtx_460_1gb-_-14-127-534-_-Product
The Hawk & the Cyclone overclock very well, especially the Hawk as it can easily reach and exceed 900 MHZ. But yeah, the EVGA has pretty good clocks as well as it comes nicely overclocked.
IMO the Hawk is the better value card for a GTX 460 right now @ $215.
Excellent job on the review!
Question - Can you confirm if NVIDIA did in fact get rid of most of their Hyper Compute Performance on the 580?
"The temperatures discussed below are absolute maximum values..."
But they are NOT absolute maximum values, nor is the power consumption. You state that loaded system power with the 580 is 191W and 315W with the 480. But you also say that you tested temperatures and power consumption with Furmark, which throttles the card, this can be checked if you run the benchmark test where you will get a LOT lower performance compared to the 480 for example. ALL other reviews out there state the 580 gets you 15-25% better performance than the 480 for the same or SLIGHTLY less power.
But not 124 watts less. And the difference isn't just down to a lower VID like ivor said. Test again with another program, Vantage, Crysis or, like Nordichardware did, try with Kombustor and using the "Post-FX" setting.
Please update the article as soon as possible as it is hugely misleading right now.
thanx for the great articles
Will you comment on the noise level? This seems to be a greater concern to me more and more as I seek to spend more time and money seeking out quieter components. The only reason I didn't purchase a GTX480 was due to the noise, so I have been having to do with a GTX460. The majority of reviews point out that the GTX580 is much quieter which seems to be a positive move on nVidia's part.
A 580 = a package ( it is a stable solution for every game there is )
sli/crossfire/cf = raw power + cheaper but a more unstable way of dealing with older games even new top titles like aliens of predator.
While videocard do the same, the different versions of it are ment for different people.
Even if the gtx580 cost more and doesn't provide on every little aspect on the best way, the card = still a far better choise for most people
then any sli/crossfire/cf unstable solution.
The 580 = a perfect naming for this product. its 20-25% faster / lesser usage of watt / lesser heat / lesser noise.
2x 460's or 2x other budget cards or x2 solutions are great if the card actually produces 200% faster speeds then the 1 cored version. Which it clearly isn't doing. Its even below the 580 or with a minor fps above it. ( on only "newer games")
This game of sinking prices just ahead of launch is getting old, and it ruins my cost analysis every time. So visitors, keep this in mind when you read these reviews, and understand how prices change on a daily (and sometimes hourly) basis.
in that can buy two of them for the price of one GTX480 or GTX580 and have more performance
other wise I have become disgruntled with the swift obsolesce of today's technology