Cateva capturi de ecran din Bad Company 2: ATI 5870 se tine aproape de GTX 480 cand plansa nu este foarte incarcata, dar cade in momentul in care plansa este plina de explozii si fum. In ceea ce priveste maxim FPS, GTX 480 este foarte apropiat de ATI insa la minim FPS GTX 480 este mai mult decat dublu in unele cazuri.
 
Aveti aici clip-ul original:
 

 

 

 

 

 

Iata ca a avut loc si lansarea oficiala a mult asteptat-ului GF100 de la nVidia. Modelele de varf GTX 470 si GTX 480 au fost supuse unor teste riguroase de catre toate site-urile mari de profil. Desi benchmark-uri detaliate puteti urmari pe toate aceste site-uri, aici as dori sa sintetizam performanta varfului de gama GTX 480 si sa discutam aspecte legate de pret / consum / temperaturi si justificarea upgrade-ului de la ATI 5870.
 
In jocurile directX [9, 10, 11] GTX 480 are un spor de performanta intre 0 si 50% fata de varful single GPU al ATI/AMD – Radeon HD 5870. Spor de performanta mare se obtine in Unigine 3D, in locurile unde tesselarea este agresiv implementata. Diferenta de performanta fata de ATI este uriasa, peste 100%, insa framerate-ul este neadecvat pentru un joc. In plus, jocuri care sa implementeze tesselation atat de agresiv ca Unigine Heaven nu exista in acest moment. Viitorul va aduce si astfel de jocuri, insa viitorul va aduce si seria 6xxx de la ATI si FERMI 2 de la nVidia. In acest moment noi judecam cele 2 placi din prisma jocurilor existente pe piata.
 
Battlefield Bad Company 2, 1920×1200, HIGH, 4xAA, este jocul in care ATI 5870 sufera drop-uri de performanta si in zona de 23 [posibil issue de driver, se comporta mai prost decat GTX 285]. In acelasi joc, GTX 480 mentine un fps minim de 45, sporul de performanta fiind de 95% in acest caz.
 

 
Situatia se schimba in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, unde GTX 480 nu reuseste decat un 7% spor de performanta.
 

 
In DiRT 2, situatia se mai imbunatateste, GTX 480 devansand ATI 5870 cu 16% in 1920×1200, DX11:
 

 
Crysis Warhed aduce GTX 480 la acelasi nivel cu ATI 5870 la un minim de 22fps. De observat media fps-urilor unde ATI 5870 devanseaza cu 1 frame pe GTX 480:
 

 
In GTA IV GTX 480 isi ia revansa, diferenta fata de ATI 5870 la minim fps fiind de 47% la 1920×1200:
 

 
Mass Effect diferentiaza GTX 480 de ATI 5870 cu numai 4% in 1920×1200:
 

 
Metro 2033, jocul scris special pentru GTX 480, nu dezamageste, dar nici nu exceleaza. GTX 480 are un spor de performanta de 28% fata de ATI 5870 in 1920×1200.
 

 
Diferenta imensa este in DX11 la activarea 4xMSAA, unde 5870 are 2 fps-uri iar GTX 480 are 18 fps-uri. Probabil foloseste o tehnica de antialiasing scrisa cu siguranta in mod voit in bataie de joc pentru placile ATI. Oricum ar fi, jocul nu este jucabil nici cu GTX 480 in 1920×1200, DX11, 4xMSAA.
 

 
Need for Speed: SHIFT. Sporul de performanta pentru GTX 480 este de doar 19% fata de ATI 5870:
 

 
Dupa cum se vede, rezultatele variaza in functie de joc. Un upgrade de la ATI 5870 nu este justificat in acest moment, jocurile unde diferentele de performanta sunt mari [40-50%] sunt putine si acolo 5870 se descurca onorabil iar jocurile pretentioase [Metro 2033, Stalker, Crysis] nu sunt jucabile pe VERY HIGH nici cu aceasta placa.
 
La urma urmei consumatorul decide daca merita sa investeasca 24 de milioane pentru GTX 480, analizand performantele prezentate mai sus. Nu trebuie uitat consumul, caldura degajata si zgomotul. 62 decibeli in full load este putin cam mult:
 

In urma testelor care s-au facut pe noul GTX 480, XBit a publicat o serie de statistici in care se prezenta sumarizat performanta noului varf de gama al nVidia comparativ cu GTX 285, ATI 5870, GTX 295 si ATI 5970. Rezultatele le puteti urmari in pozele de mai jos:
 
GTX 480 vs GTX 285
 

 
GTX 480 vs GTX 295
 

 
GTX 480 vs ATI 5870
 

 
GTX 480 vs ATI 5970
 

Mult asteptatul GTX4xx a fost surprins in cateva poze la CEBIT, intr-unul din sistemele pregatite de nVidia pentru demonstratii. PC-ul rula tech demo-ul Supersonic Sled.  PC Games Hardware [care este de fapt si sursa acestor poze] a reusit sa faca cateva poze a ceea ce se presupune a fi FERMI. Din ce se poate vedea, placa are 2 iesiri DVI si 1 HDMI. Pentru alimentare se folosesc 1 conector cu 6 pini si 1 conector cu 8 pini. Pe stickerul placii se putea observa: GF-100-375-A3. Acest lucru ne spune ca avem de-a face cu editia a 3-a a cipului grafic [respin-ul de silicon no 3].
 
Se mai observa ca nu a fost updatata nici denumirea placii catre 4xx [GF-100-375-A3 inseamna GeForce 100 Model 375 Revizia A3]. Din moment ce avem de a face cu un GTX 375 ne putem astepta ca nu acesta sa fie varful de lance bazat pe FERMI.
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

In timp ce nVidia intampina tot mai multe probleme cu Fermi / GT300, ATI anunta astazi lansarea Radeon HD 5970, prima solutie dual GPU din seria 5000 si in acest moment cea mai puternica placa grafica de pe planeta.
 
ATI Radeon HD 5970 are o putere de calcul de aproximativ 5 TeraFLOPS, full suport in hardware pentru DirectX 11 si este construita pe un proces de fabricatie [litografiere] de 40nm [0.04 microni].
 
Specificatiile ATI Radeon HD 5970 sunt urmatoarele:
4,3 miliarde de tranzistori
2 GB DDR5 la 1 Ghz
725 MHz frecventa GPU
3200 procesoare shader / stream processors
4.64 TFLOPs putere de calcul
160 unitati de texturare
64 unitati ROP 
 
Imaginile si benchmark-urile au fost preluate de pe TECHSPOT, unde de altfel puteti citi un review complet: http://www.techspot.com/review/221-ati-radeon-hd-5970/
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pe langa faptul ca datorita problemelor intampinate in procesul de fabricatie la TSMC s-a amanat lansarea GT300 pentru aprilie-mai 2010,  se pare ca FERMI mai are si alte probleme. VR-Zone a facut o analiza detaliata. Numele de cod al Fermi este GF100, contine 3 miliarde de tranzistori si are o dimensiune de 500 mm^2. In comparatie cu Cypress [ATI 5870], care are nu mai putin de 2.15 miliarde de tranzistori, cip-ul de la nVidia ar parea un monstru. Se pare insa ca specificatiile “on paper” impresionante nu ofera in practica performanta la care ne asteptam.
 
In primul rand, desi performanta unitatii de calcul in dubla precizie este impresionanta, GF100 nu are nici o unitate de calcul in simpla precizie – care are un rol extrem de important in ceea ce priveste performantele in jocuri. Mai mult, cipul se pare ca nu functioneaza la frecventele pe care si le-a propus nVidia, acest lucru fiind alt factor care penalizeaza performanta. Frecventa tinta a fost de 1.5Ghz pentru procesoarele shader iar frecventa reala – calculata in functie de performantele masurate ale placii este prognozata la 1015 – 1230 Mhz.  In momentul in care nVidia are toate aceste probleme cu Fermi, ATI detine coroana celui mai rapid GPU si a umplut planeta de 5870/5850 si versiunile mainstream ale seriei 5000.
 
Intreg articolul de pe VR-Zone il aveti mai jos:
 We all know it is constantly being delayed – but at the end of all those delays, what we were expecting was a stellar product from Nvidia. However, with today’s press release, certain inconvenient details are revealed. Let’s forget about the delays for now, and just consider the product itself.
 
The first Fermi GPU – GF100 – as we know for a while now, is a 3 billion transistor giant, taking a die size of around 500 mm². Compare this with the 2.15 billion transistor, 330 mm² Cypress on the same 40nm TSMC process, and you would be expecting a different class of product. Unfortunately, the details revealed today about cast an uncertain shadow over this basic assumption.
 
The first thing worth noticing is a complete and total absence of Single Precision performance figures or any comparison to direct competition – i.e. ATI’s GPGPUs. It is clear that Fermi’s real performance advantage would be Double Precision performance – had it hit the right clock speeds.
 
However, today’s press release suggests Nvidia have missed target speeds by a lot. To be fair, Tesla products do clock lower, though not by much. In fact, GTX 280 and Tesla C1060 were clocked the same. Even taking a generous increase for Geforce products, things are still uncertain. As a result, DP performance is rated at between 520 GFlops and 630 GFlops. Suddenly, ATI Radeon HD 5870 – which wasn’t even supposed to be a direct competitor – is performing right on par with 544 GFlops against Fermi’s supposed strong point.
 
Consider Single Precision – far more important for gaming graphics, and things turn rather ugly. GF100′s target speeds were reported to be 1.5 GHz for the shaders. Based on the 520 / 630 GFlops figures, the shader clocks can only be estimated at 1015 MHz and 1230 MHz respectively.
 
The SP theoretical performance from 512 CUDA cores? Between 1.05 TFlops and 1.26 TFlops. Even less than 1.05 TFlops, considering the lesser part is likely to have units disabled. Now, no amount of overclock can bridge the enormous gap to the smaller, already available HD 5870, which stands pretty at 2.72 TFlops. Even the mainstream HD 5770 clocks in at 1.36 TFlops! Barring a different clock speed for SP units, or other technology we are unaware of, this is a dismal performance from the Fermi shaders. Sure, Nvidia’s shaders are much more efficient, but this is just too massive a gap to claw back.
 
Then comes the price. A previous-gen C1060 released at $1699, falling to $1199. Compare this with fellow Geforce model, GTX 280, released at $649, falling quick to $500, and finally $300. The price of a next-gen C2070 is a whopping $3999. Nearly double the price as the previous generation C1060. Clearly, these are expensive products to make, so how much can Nvidia sell a Geforce version of Fermi for? Even the cheapest Tesla 20 variant, the C2050 costs $2499, nearly 50% more than the GT200 based C1060 flagship. Can Nvidia sell the $3999 Tesla product at $399 as a Geforce product?
 
So far, we are comparing GF100 to Cypress. Where, in reality, GF100 should be compared to Hemlock. 4.64 TFlops vs. 1.26 TFlops is not much of a comparison at all, however, CF limitations, ATI’s less efficient shaders aside.
 
The other, much less common rumour is the possibility of a dual-GPU Fermi product. Well, considering “Typical” power of Tesla 20 is 190W, this will be highly unlikely, at least for a while. Not to mention, Geforce products might end up clocked higher. A HD 5870s peak TDP is 188W, lower than GF100′s “typical” power! TDP is expected to be 220W, at least, and that is just too hot for a dual GPU product.
 
And we have not factored in the fact that GF100 is nowhere to be seen, and are unlikely to be on shelves in quantity for at least 4-5 months. Any further delays, and we will be looking at new products from AMD.
 
In the end, AMD have a solid product already available that is efficient, economical, scalable. Nvidia have ink on paper – and even that is not looking as promising as we may have hoped for. At this moment, we can only hope for “hidden” or “magical” gaming features which might bring about a revolution in how GPUs work. Short of that, all signs point to Fermi being in real trouble.

Alaturi de DiRT 2, care va sosi pe PC-urile noastre in Decembrie 2009, lista jocurilor care suporata API-ul DirectX 11 se va intregi cu Battlefield: Bad Company 2.
 
AMD just sent over a list of DirectX 11 game titles and when their expected release dates are going to be. It looks like DirectX 11 is finally starting to pick up some speed, which is great news for ATI Radeon HD 5000 video card series owners as you have a card supporting DX11. A new name has appeared on the DX11 game list and that would be Battlefield: Bad Company 2!
 
This is a big title game, so that should help boost sales for AMD. DiRT 2 is coming out on December 1st, so it looks like DirectX 11 is about to get a shot in the arm with these major game titles. NVIDIA’s GT300 ‘Fermi’ graphics solution for DirectX 11 is missing in action and is rumored to not be coming out in volume until April 2010. If that is the case AMD has a six month head start on DX11!
 

 

 

 

Producatorul american EVGA a lansat o noua placa grafica care foloseste chipset-ul Nvidia GeForce GTX275 si nu orice fel de placa, ci una cu doua procesoare, unul dedicat procesarii grafice si al doilea pentru accelerarea in GPU a motorului de fizica nVidia PhysX. Printre aspectele care deosebesc PhysX de alte tehnologii prezente pe piata amintim simularea in timp real a fluidelor, ilustrata si in: acest clip:
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
De asemenea, aceasta placa grafica dispune de suport complet pentru DirectX 10 si tehnologia Nvidia SLI care permite instalarea a pana la 3 procesoare grafice intr-un singur sistem, pentru un spor de performanta considerabil in jocuri.
 
EVGA Geforce GTX 275 CO-OP PhysX utilizeaza o interfata PCI Express 16X si dispune de o memorie totala de 1280MB de tip DDR3. Pe partea de conectica putem enumera un port HDMI (prin adaptor), doua porturi DVI-I si un port VGA (prin adaptor).
 
Sporul de performanta obtinut de aceasta placa grafica raportat la o placa grafica de referinta Nvidia GTX 275 (fara procesor dedicat pentru PhysX) poate fi vizualizat in graficul de mai jos:
 

EVGA Geforce GTX 275 CO-OP PhysX este asteptata in magazine in cursul lunii curente la un pret recomandat de catre producator de 349,99 USD.