Need a new graphics: Which is better?

[Deleted]

Hey guys, my graphics card (8800 GTX) died on me. I've found two new ones, but I can't decide which is better - my dad says the gainward one is better, but someone else said the 470.

I can't get the gainward 470, etc..So it has to be zotac. Which would you guys say is the better card?

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...14&subcat=1810

or

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=GX-136-GW

Thanks in advance!

[Fuzzykins]

The 460 is < the 470 in terms of performance. (The 470 is better.)

[nwo]

GTX 470 is a lot faster, but it also uses up a lot more power and runs extremely hot.

[Fuzzykins]

GTX 470 is a lot faster, but it also uses up a lot more power and runs extremely hot.

I was going to elaborate, but I figured it'd turn him off of the 470. If you have any moderately vented Case, aren't overclocking your CPU that high, and have an 80+ PSU, heat isn't an issue.

[RaZz0r]

http://www.hwcompare.com/9005/geforc...force-gtx-570/ the 570 is better then the 560 tho its a real power hog

[Deleted]

Numbering is fairly obvious in the case of NVIDIA.

ABB

A = Generation notation (Higher is later)
BB = Model notation (Higher is better performing)

The 470 is a last generation upper card. The 460 is a last generation midrange card.

AMD/ATI is similar:

ABBB
A = Generation
BBB = 'Range' and Model indicator

Just like with NVIDIA, the higher B is - the better the card. A identifies the generation. Note that for both cards just because its a newer generation does not mean its better if the model number is lower.

Note that both brands occasionally changes their generation formating (as you can probably tell from NVIDIA going from a 4 digit to 3 digit arrangement), but this is whats currently in effect.

[Deleted]

Did you guys look at the specs etc though. This is gainward 460? Not your standard 460

- Core Clock: 800Mhz
- Memory: 1024MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 4000MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 256-Bit
- Processing Cores: 336

Compared to the Zotac 470:

- Core Clock: 607MHz
- Memory: 1280MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 3348MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 320-Bit
- Processing Cores: 448


So is the 470 really better than the Gainward 460?

[Ignorance]

470 is a better card.

You may not see a difference between the 460 and 470 depending on the rest of your system. For example, I went from 2x 9600's in SLI to a GTX 465 -- I did not see any performance increase because the rest of my system was out of date to keep up with the card.

I saw a great graphical performance increase when I build my new computer and added the GTX 465 into it, though.

[Deleted]

Did you guys look at the specs etc though. This is gainward 460? Not your standard 460

- Core Clock: 800Mhz
- Memory: 1024MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 4000MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 256-Bit
- Processing Cores: 336

Compared to the Zotac 470:

- Core Clock: 607MHz
- Memory: 1280MB GDDR5
- Memory Clock: 3348MHz (Effective)
- Memory Interface: 320-Bit
- Processing Cores: 448


So is the 470 really better than the Gainward 460?

The Gainward is merely an overclocked card, you could achieve the same clocks with the Zotac 470. However, the Zotac has a 320-Bit interface compared to a 256-Bit interface, and it has 448 Processing Cores compared to 336 on the Gainward, which makes all the difference in terms of performance.

[nwo]

http://www.hwcompare.com/9005/geforc...force-gtx-570/ the 570 is better then the 560 tho its a real power hog

Did you read the OP? -No
Did you read what you link/post? -No

Anyways, when comparing graphics cards, you can't just look at the specs such as clock speeds, amount of RAM, etc. You pretty much have to refer to actual gaming benchmarks. The only time you can look at the specs is when you are comparing two identical model number cards, such as GTX 580s, you have some with more RAM, some that come factory overclocked, etc. In that case, it makes a very small difference.

However, in this case, you are comparing a GTX 460 to a GTX 470, which are two different models:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/311?vs=313

[Perkyspy]

Id personaly just get the GTX 480 from OCuK

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showpr...odid=GX-079-GI

£227 this week until the 13th, ordering one myself tomorow, and the SOC edition doesnt preform that under par to the GTX 580

[Deafyx]

Just be warned, the 470 runs hot

Not to scare you or anything, just saying have good airflow through your case. 470>460 though.

If you really wanted best bang for buck, save up a bit more, and grab the 560TI

[nwo]

If you really wanted best bang for buck, save up a bit more, and grab the 560TI

How would a 560Ti be a better bang for the buck if it costs more? It performs roughly the same as a GTX 470. It just runs a lot cooler.

[Perkyspy]

your saying the 560ti is best bang for buck? okay lets work that out..

so just for test purposes the FPS on Crysis at 1920x1200 4xAA Enthusiast Shaders Gamer Qaulity..

so there GTX 480 gets 50.7 FPS GTX 560ti gets 43.6 so do a few simple calculations

GTX 480, 227 divided by 50.7 = 4.47 so your paying £4.47p per frame
GTX 560ti 200 divided by 43.6 = 4.58 So your paying 11p more per frame..

so hence GTX 480 best bang for buck imo

[Fuger]

Get a GTX 560 it is the new 8800Gt. It also overclocks like a monster and if you SLI a pair they are around a good a a 590

---------- Post added 2011-04-06 at 10:47 PM ----------

your saying the 560ti is best bang for buck? okay lets work that out..

so just for test purposes the FPS on Crysis at 1920x1200 4xAA Enthusiast Shaders Gamer Qaulity..

so there GTX 480 gets 50.7 FPS GTX 560ti gets 43.6 so do a few simple calculations

GTX 480, 227 divided by 50.7 = 4.47 so your paying £4.47p per frame
GTX 560ti 200 divided by 43.6 = 4.58 So your paying 11p more per frame..

so hence GTX 480 best bang for buck imo

The 560 gets better FPS when clocked to 1ghz. So you 7 fps is irelevant. Also, i bet your 8800 died to heat. The 480 is one of the loudest, hottest, hungry cards on the market. It will also consume more power meaning over time the 560 will be cheaper.

[Biggiej]

I would look into getting one of the 500 series cards if you can, the run a lot cooler, use much less power. it may cost a little extra, but I think it would be safe to say its worth it .

[Uncle Julian]

I'm personally running two evga 460 GTX SSC (factory over-clocked models, 850 MHz, which I bumped up to 900 MHz) in SLI mode, and I love it to death...the card's take 50w less and run a good 12 degrees celcius cooler than my old 260 gtx (stock). I'm purchasing the evga 560 ssc (also factory overclocked) for a friend though. If you had to choose one or the other in a non-SLI config, an extra $30-$40 for the 560 is worth it in my opinion. The extra cuda cores are pretty important I believe.

If you take a look at the "Fastest graphics card in the world" (used by nVidia about their new 590 GTX), you'll see that it only has 612 MHz clock speed, which is slower than my 460. The difference here though is it has 3gb memory, 768-bit, and 1024 cuda cores. Hope that helps some