GTX580 reviews thread

[Skurge]

Careful with using Computerbase.de.

They are using Catalyst AI OFF for the 5870. They use Catalyst AI: Standard for all the other RV8x0 though.

That will be a few percent off compared to other reviews.

Additionally they are using the texture detail level for the NVIDIA cards in Quality as opposed to High Quality some other reviewers use.

I'm not sure what AT uses. I guess it might be driver default.

BFG10K did say, you should leave Cat AI on as it also fixes compatibility.

 

[GaiaHunter]

6870 beat 460 in unigine and the 68XX series got better scaling (it was in an article). I will try to find the article and the unigine performance, but if anyone can back me up that would be great.

The 6870 and 6850 CF scaling is really good.

You can have a look at it on the Guru3d GTX580 SLI article. Unfortunately the GTX460 SLI configuration isn't present.

 

[GaiaHunter]

BFG10K did say, you should leave Cat AI on as it also fixes compatibility.

If you look at both the AT and Computerbase.de benchmark of the Dirt2, for example, you will see the GTX580 being around to 50% faster than a 5870.

If you look at the appoppin review at ATB, which uses High Quality for both cards, you will see is only 30% faster at 2560x1600 with 8xAA. At the 1920x1200 on the other hand the GTX580 is 45% faster.

 

[GaiaHunter]

90% right there in that chart for gtx460 with RELEASE DRIVERS.
The 460's scale much better then the gtx470'/480's do.
I would bet the gtx460 scaling with the newest drivers are over 94% by now.
I'm not going through all the searching to prove it. If they had 90% on release day, I'm sure its more by now. That chart I posted was from July 27th.

Guru3d's review has them at 1.8x and 1.9x on July 13.

I'm not sure how much the GTX460 SLI scales now, but it is almost impossible to scale better than the 6870 CF since those keep scaling at over 95% with RELEASE DRIVERS.

But I'm sure with newer drivers releases the 6870 CF will scale over 100%. JK

 

[happy medium]

I'm not sure how much the GTX460 SLI scales now, but it is almost impossible to scale better than the 6870 CF since those keep scaling at over 95% with RELEASE DRIVERS.

But I'm sure with newer drivers releases the 6870 CF will scale over 100%. JK

To be fair lets just call them dam close. agreed? :hmm::biggrin:

 

[ugaboga232]

The one article I saw (or maybe it was a post compilation, now that I think of it I think a forumer here averaged the scaling results) showed an appreciable difference between 4XX scaling and 68XX scaling.

 

[blastingcap]

Thank you Anandtech for asking the question that not many reviewers seemed to care about.

So after all this time, nVidia still hasn't figured out how to add Dolby TrueHD/DTS Master HD bitstream output to their flagship model.

Unfortunately for that, I would have to stick with my 460 a bit longer.

it's a refresh part, so it shares the limitations of gtx480. kepler should address this--and maybe even single-gpu surround. i hope.

 

[ugaboga232]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2114802 thats where I found it. Lol it was lincoln's post.

 

[happy medium]

The one article I saw (or maybe it was a post compilation, now that I think of it I think a forumer here averaged the scaling results) showed an appreciable difference between 4XX scaling and 68XX scaling.

The problem with those results are they are all with release drivers for the gtx460 and it was having some problems if i remember correctly. I think the problems have been resolved.

 

[Obsoleet]

it's a refresh part, so it shares the limitations of gtx480. kepler should address this--and maybe even single-gpu surround. i hope.

Yeah, but why wait for NV to get it's act together? I just don't get how people make excuses for Nvidia all the time (not saying that you are). Just use AMD, they have the best products out, and IMO have since the 4800 series when I dumped Nvidia due to driver issues and no audio over HDMI (at the time). I have all the money I could want, and I wouldn't spend it on a 580, I'd get the 6970 which is a guaranteed ace in the hole.

 

[SolMiester]

Yeah, but why wait for NV to get it's act together? I just don't get how people make excuses for Nvidia all the time (not saying that you are). Just use AMD, they have the best products out, and IMO have since the 4800 series when I dumped Nvidia due to driver issues and no audio over HDMI (at the time). I have all the money I could want, and I wouldn't spend it on a 580, I'd get the 6970 which is a guaranteed ace in the hole.

Epitome of a fanboy post, guarantee a product not even released!.....You do have a point regarding no proper audio over HDMI though....what is the point of the HDMI port if its only good for video?

 

[blastingcap]

Yeah, but why wait for NV to get it's act together? I just don't get how people make excuses for Nvidia all the time (not saying that you are). Just use AMD, they have the best products out, and IMO have since the 4800 series when I dumped Nvidia due to driver issues and no audio over HDMI (at the time). I have all the money I could want, and I wouldn't spend it on a 580, I'd get the 6970 which is a guaranteed ace in the hole.

You can call me whatever you want, seeing as how when I first joined the forums I was accused of being an NV fanboy, then an AMD fanboy, now an NV fanboy again apparently. Whatever, I think I am one of the more impartial and consistent people around here.

I don't think the HDMI thing is a big deal because who actually uses a GTX580 for HTPC usage, anyway? And if it's not going into an HTPC then you have other ways to get that audio.

The bigger issue imho is lack of single-GPU Surround. It was the biggest reason why I switched my order from a GTX460 to a HD6850 after my initial GTX4604-768MB order arrived defective (damaged PCB).

NV's Surround software also sucks compared to AMD's hotkey system where it's easy as pie to switch modes. This is a big deal to me because of all the switching I do:

a) single-monitor centered (side panels disabled)
b) tri-monitor Extended Desktop centered
c) tri-monitor Eyefinity
d) tri-monitor Eyefinity with bezel correction

I understand that there are a few hacks like Zotac's 460 that does triple-monitors up to 1600x1200 but that's just a hack. Hopefully Kepler will ship with full single-GPU Surround support, full HDMI 1.4 support, and Surround software with hotkey profiles.

 

[Zstream]

One thing it does tell,the 6970 will have to be more then 38% faster then a 5870 to match a gtx580 @ 2500x1600. I would guess 40% faster at 1900x1080 since the gtx series doesnt do as well at 2500x1600?

Thanks and good work.

Um, you have the HAWX2 and Uniengine included... Not to be mean but once you remove those two benchmarks, you receive a drastically different number.

 

[SolMiester]

You can call me whatever you want, seeing as how when I first joined the forums I was accused of being an NV fanboy, then an AMD fanboy, now an NV fanboy again apparently. Whatever, I think I am one of the more impartial and consistent people around here.

I don't think the HDMI thing is a big deal because who actually uses a GTX580 for HTPC usage, anyway? And if it's not going into an HTPC then you have other ways to get that audio.

The bigger issue imho is lack of single-GPU Surround. It was the biggest reason why I switched my order from a GTX460 to a HD6850 after my initial GTX4604-768MB order arrived defective (damaged PCB).

NV's Surround software also sucks compared to AMD's hotkey system where it's easy as pie to switch modes. This is a big deal to me because of all the switching I do:

a) single-monitor centered (side panels disabled)
b) tri-monitor Extended Desktop centered
c) tri-monitor Eyefinity
d) tri-monitor Eyefinity with bezel correction

I understand that there are a few hacks like Zotac's 460 that does triple-monitors up to 1600x1200 but that's just a hack. Hopefully Kepler will ship with full single-GPU Surround support, full HDMI 1.4 support, and Surround software with hotkey profiles.

You run Eyefinity with 1 6850?, what sort of FPS do you get? I cant image it would be that great?, what is the resolution of 3 monitors?

 

[carage]

Yeah, but why wait for NV to get it's act together? I just don't get how people make excuses for Nvidia all the time (not saying that you are). Just use AMD, they have the best products out, and IMO have since the 4800 series when I dumped Nvidia due to driver issues and no audio over HDMI (at the time). I have all the money I could want, and I wouldn't spend it on a 580, I'd get the 6970 which is a guaranteed ace in the hole.

Then I heard ATIs don't get along with Onkyo, which I just bought a set...

 

[happy medium]

You can call me whatever you want, seeing as how when I first joined the forums I was accused of being an NV fanboy, then an AMD fanboy, now an NV fanboy again apparently. Whatever, I think I am one of the more impartial and consistent people around here.I don't think the HDMI thing is a big deal because who actually uses a GTX580 for HTPC usage, anyway? And if it's not going into an HTPC then you have other ways to get that audio.

The bigger issue imho is lack of single-GPU Surround. It was the biggest reason why I switched my order from a GTX460 to a HD6850 after my initial GTX4604-768MB order arrived defective (damaged PCB).

NV's Surround software also sucks compared to AMD's hotkey system where it's easy as pie to switch modes. This is a big deal to me because of all the switching I do:

a) single-monitor centered (side panels disabled)
b) tri-monitor Extended Desktop centered
c) tri-monitor Eyefinity
d) tri-monitor Eyefinity with bezel correction

I understand that there are a few hacks like Zotac's 460 that does triple-monitors up to 1600x1200 but that's just a hack. Hopefully Kepler will ship with full single-GPU Surround support, full HDMI 1.4 support, and Surround software with hotkey profiles.

I like your post more everyday. (in red)

I think it sucks they don't have surround avalable for there high end gtx5xx line, thats where it would count. Lower end gpu's like the gtx 470/460 are not really cut out to do a 3 monitor setup at ultra high resolutions at a decent fps. Except mabe older games that are not so graphicly intensive.

 

[happy medium]

Um, you have the HAWX2 and Uniengine included... Not to be mean but once you remove those two benchmarks, you receive a drastically different number.

yea no need for future games and direct x 11 tessalation benches. NOT!
I disagree.

 

[blastingcap]

You run Eyefinity with 1 6850?, what sort of FPS do you get? I cant image it would be that great?, what is the resolution of 3 monitors?

I did a lot of homework last year on this and found out that in most games, triple monitor doesn't slow down linearly with pixels. What ends up happening in Eyefinity is that I get usually ~45% of the fps that I'd get on one monitor. So if I would have gotten 100 fps at 1680x1050, then at the same settings, I'd expect ~45fps at 5040x1050. (You can see this non-linearity to a lesser extent in reviews where going from 16x10 to 25x16. The fps doesn't scale down linearly with the number of pixels.)

After running the numbers, I figured that my 5850 couldn't easily handle 5760x1200, and my desk would have a hard time fitting 3 x 24" anyway. So I wound up with 3 x 22" monitors for a total unbezelcorrected resolution of 5040x1050.

5140x1050 (bezel corrected), I get ~60-70fps on average in Left 4 Dead 2 and TF2 (highest detail settings, HDR on, etc., plus 4x MSAA) at stock clocks. If I overclock, I can drive up the fps by quite a bit. I haven't tried Eyefinity as much on stuff like Bioshock or Fallout 3, etc. but assuming triple the pixels halves my framerate, I'd still get very good fps in those games.

Best part about Eyefinity is that it is usable outside of games, too, unlike 3D. Useful to multitask and stuff. In fact, I'm watching TV on my third monitor as I type this.

 

[apoppin]

Um, you have the HAWX2 and Uniengine included... Not to be mean but once you remove those two benchmarks, you receive a drastically different number.

What is wrong with using H.A.W.X. 2 as a benchmark? i used the benchmark built into the full retail game.

Are we to start picking and choosing what benchmarks we don't want to see?
:\

 

[Zstream]

yea no need for future games and direct x 11 tessalation benches. NOT!
I disagree.

Lol, ok. Whatever floats your boat mate. I don't care if you disagree or not, the fact of the matter is that these two benchmarks are specifically targeted at Nvidia tessellation performance. You can't use those benchmarks and come to the conclusion that you did. That is a poor thought process.

What I am trying to say is that it does not need to be 40% faster. It needs to be around 30% faster, which is in a range of possibility. Sorry, I tend to look at my microscope with no shade of color.

 

[Zstream]

What is wrong with using H.A.W.X. 2 as a benchmark? i used the benchmark built into the full retail game.

Are we to start picking and choosing what benchmarks we don't want to see?
:\

That's not what I was trying to get at so stop it right now.

 

[blastingcap]

I like your post more everyday. (in red)

I think it sucks they don't have surround avalable for there high end gtx5xx line, thats where it would count. Lower end gpu's like the gtx 470/460 are not really cut out to do a 3 monitor setup at ultra high resolutions at a decent fps. Except mabe older games that are not so graphicly intensive.

Eh, you only like me when I agree with you and hate my guts when I don't.

I hate multi-GPU so I am hoping that Kepler solves the single-GPU Surround problem. I've read that it's a hardware issue--you can't just write software for it and make the problem go away. Kepler probably started getting designed before Eyefinity going public, so unless NV was already going to include it, they probably started designing Kepler with only 2 monitors in mind. I'm not sure if it was possible to add Surround support to the GPU in the middle of the design process. If it wasn't possible, then Kepler will not have single-GPU Surround, which sucks. But I guarantee you that even if Kepler won't have it, Maxwell will.

For games that are so graphically intense that I can't play on 3 monitors, the solution is simple: I play on the center monitor.

Of course the ideal solution is to have 3 x 24" or 30" so on lighter games you can game at mega-resolution, and even on heavier games (of which there aren't THAT many, thanks to consolification of PC gaming) you have 19x12 or 25x16 resolution.

 

[AdamK47]

 

[Daedalus685]

I was probably alone.. but I really liked the exposed metal of the 480.. I'm sad to see it go.

 

[blastingcap]

My, what a large e-thing you have! :biggrin: :thumbsup: