Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

More...
Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

More...
Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

More...
Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 10 August 2010 13:29

Nvidia GTX 480 512SP tested

Written by Slobodan Simic
nvidia

Five percent faster and 204W hungrier

The guys from Expreview.com somehow managed to get their hands on Nvidia's GF100 with all 512 stream processors, or as Nvidia calls them today, CUDA cores. Back when it was announced, the GF100 appeared on the GTX 480 card, but only slightly crippled, with 480 SPs, and it looks like that Expreview.com scored the reason why Nvidia never announced the full 512SP card and probably never will.

Although the numbers seems a bit odd considering that the 512SP card is about five percent faster in average and at the same time has a power consumption of over 200W more under load when compared to the GTX 480. We have no reason not to take those numbers seriously. We are sure that even the guys from Expreview rechecked those scores, but it looks like that the fully enabled GF100 just doesn't make sense.

Despite the large triple-fan cooler running at 92 percent, the card managed to hit 94 degrees Celsius, which is practically insane considering the sheer size of the cooler.

It is still unclear if such a card will ever be available and if Nvidia will ever stand behind such a card, but one thing is clear, it just doesn't make sense. (And it could very easily fall under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. sub.ed.)

You can find the review here.

Last modified on Tuesday, 10 August 2010 14:13
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
0 #1 MrScary 2010-08-10 16:51
Despite the large triple-fan cooler running at 92 percent, the card managed to hit 94 degrees Celsius, which is practically insane... Thanks to nvidiots fry pan company haha GJ.
...but it looks like that the fully enabled GF100 just doesn't make sense.
I second that, nvidia is for losers
 
 
+11 #2 kartikkg 2010-08-10 16:56
yes under current "technological" resources ,its not possible to create a very strong processor without releasing that much heat, its one of the physical limitations of the semi conductor materials , More the number of transistors more power consumpton more heat ,its a very simple equation
 
 
+20 #3 johndgr 2010-08-10 17:09
204 extra watts? This is something that i can not believe. And it is not April the 1st to have an easy explanation about that numbers. Something is wrong with the card they are testing, or with the equipment they are using. Or maybe it is a stupid excuse for NVidia never to produce a 512sp card.
 
 
-12 #4 MrScary 2010-08-10 17:19
Quoting kartikkg:
yes under current "technological" resources ,its not possible to create a very strong processor without releasing that much heat, its one of the physical limitations of the semi conductor materials , More the number of transistors more power consumpton more heat ,its a very simple equation

I have never had a VGA that reach 94ºC, must be a whole new experience, ha.
 
 
+19 #5 yourma2000 2010-08-10 17:45
204w more? o_0 are you sure you didn't accidentally hit the 4 at the end? if not then this is a complete [censored] up from Nvidia and should instantly ditch the attempt for 512SP. AFAIK this chip must have the worst performance for watt ratio in microchip history :-x
 
 
+45 #6 Marburg_U 2010-08-10 18:09
"The way it melts to be played."
 
 
+3 #7 turingpest 2010-08-10 18:56
seems that the card they've got their hands on (and how?) is unfit to be released. 204w more is practically impossible with out increasing the voltage to the point where the chip'll be on the verge of frying. somethings wrong here. either the voltage that they measured is incorrect, or the power consumption they measured is incorrect.
 
 
+6 #8 blandead 2010-08-10 19:19
@turingpest
"somethings wrong here. either the voltage that they measured is incorrect, or the power consumption they measured is incorrect"

"We have no reason not to take those numbers seriously. We are sure that even the guys from Expreview rechecked those scores, but it looks like that the fully enabled GF100 just doesn't make sense."

I don't think its the measurements, but more so there is something wrong with the card when all shaders are enabled. Some engineering flaw no doubt, which is why there will never be a fully enabled GF100 at 45nm
 
 
+2 #9 thaad 2010-08-10 19:38
Nvidia cannot compete ATI if just keep tune with fermi. ATI still hold the thing such HD5890!!!.... & HD6000 series soon.

ATI a few step ahead now!
 
 
-43 #10 SiliconDoc 2010-08-10 20:34
Who needs the 480 full to blow away everything ATI ? NO ONE. As ati fanboy Kyle recently discovered, to his dismay.

" GeForce GTX 460 1GB SLI vs. Radeon HD 5870 CFX

In light of the GeForce GTX 460 1GB SLI providing superior gaming performance compared to Radeon HD 5850 CFX, we wanted to game the 460 SLI against AMD's Radeon HD 5870 CFX and check out performance. The results are surprising as we match up this $460 SLI setup against the $780 CFX configuration."

ROFLMAO - 460 WINS! BEATS EVEN 5870CF! BWAHAHAHAH

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/08/09/geforce_gtx_460_1gb_sli_vs_radeon_hd_5870_cfx

Now you can lay down and whimper before lying again atitoys.
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments