Nvidia Fermi GF100 review
Holds a small performance edge over ATI's latest, but Fermi's real strengths may be wasted on gamers
Review Date: 26 Mar 2010
Reviewed By: David Bayon
Price when reviewed:
Nvidia's Fermi graphics cards were officially unveiled in September 2009, but in truth we've been waiting a good deal longer than that. It's the manufacturer's first major architecture since the GT200 back in 2008, and a series of delays has seen ATI enjoy an unchallenged run at gamers' wallets.
We'd heard hints of just how advanced the new GF100 architecture would be, with up to 512 stream processors, a 40nm fabrication process and 3.2 billion transistors. Now it's finally here, we can start to figure out for ourselves just how powerful - and, as we'll see, power hungry - Fermi is.
First things first: that target of 512 stream processors hasn't been hit in either of the first two releases. The GeForce GTX 480 has 480 of them, along with a 700MHz core clock and 1.5GB of GDDR5 memory with a 384-bit memory interface. The lesser GTX 470 has 448 stream processors, a 607MHz clock and 1.25GB of memory with a 320-bit memory interface. Nvidia is keen to stress the headroom available within the architecture, so it's likely we'll see that higher model at some point.
If you're looking for Core i7 levels of instant domination, you're in the wrong place - Fermi may be a new architecture but it isn't going to flip the graphics card market on its head overnight. In fact, the first two cards are very close in both physical size and gaming performance to ATI's Radeon HD 5870 and 5850.
We ran benchmarks in a variety of current titles and, on the whole, the Fermi cards narrowly outperformed their ATI equivalents. In Crysis at 1,920 x 1,200 and Very High settings, the GTX 480 averaged 40fps to the HD 5870's 38fps; the GTX 470 scored 33fps to the HD 5850's 32fps. Higher settings saw similar margins. World in Conflict had the two Nvidia cards consistently ahead by just under 20%, and in Stalker: Call of Pripyat that margin was around 5%. Other games had ATI's cards ahead by a whisker, and if we average all the results, Nvidia's edge looks to be between 5% and 10%.
But the most interesting of all Fermi's specifications is its power consumption: Nvidia puts the GTX 470 at 215W and the GTX 480 at a massive 250W. With each card successively installed, our test rig idled at 131W and 204W respectively; when stress-tested with FurMark those figures shot up to 380W and 406W. Compare that to a peak of just 267W with ATI's fastest single-GPU card installed, and you'll get an idea of just how hungry Fermi is. The GTX 480's core also reached a scorching 98°C, and during games you'll have to put up with a noise like a CD drive permanently whirring into action.
Stream Processor Count
Pure speculation, but it looks like they have a process yield issue. 480 is 32 short of 512 and 448 is 32 less again. Is it that they are building chips with 512 stream processors and disabling blocks of 32 during test to get working parts?
By milliganp on 29 Mar 2010
They're unverified rumours for now, but we've heard similar talk from various sources. I guess we'll find out when they go on sale next week - don't be surprised if the GTX 480 is in short supply.
By DavidBayon on 29 Mar 2010
I was thinking exactly the same and AnandTech seems to confirm it:
"...GF100 is a 512 SP/core part organized in a 4x16x32 fashion, but these first parts will not have all of GF100’s functional units activated. Instead we’ll be getting a 480 core part for the GTX 480, and a 448 core part for the GTX 470. Ultimately we will not be seeing the full power of GF100 right away..."
for more info see here:
By stasi47 on 29 Mar 2010
ITLeader says the following:
"...one full SM is disabled. It’s uncertain whether this is because of yield problems. Even using a 40nm process, the GTX 480 chip is massive. Alternatively, Nvidia may have disabled an SM because of power issues ..."
By stasi47 on 29 Mar 2010
- EE confirms 4G network outage
- EU promises single telecoms market by 2015
- Samsung courts Android developers with $800,000 contest
- iOS 7: release date, features and more
- Yahoo promises not to "screw up" Tumblr
- Nook ebook readers to get browser and email access
- Google "cheated" UK taxpayers, says former exec
- Music and lights could trigger malware
- Apple vs Samsung battle moves to suppliers
- Outgoing Intel CEO: we could have powered the iPhone
- Hands on with the new Google Maps
- Nokia Lumia 925 review: first look
- Why I won't subscribe to Creative Cloud
- GoPro camera strapped to a remote-control helicopter: the ultimate boy's toy
- Acer Iconia A1 review: first look
- Acer Aspire P3 review: first look
- Acer Aspire R7 review: first look
- How we produce the PC Pro podcast
- Google Now draining iPhone battery
- The government website that doesn't work with IE, Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Macs or smartphones
- Best smartphones for 2013
- The best broadband speed tests
- iPhone apps for business travel
- How to get a job as a mobile games developer
- 25 best Windows 8 apps
- Introducing Arduino - a simple Raspberry Pi alternative
- The tweeting spaceman
- Samsung Galaxy S4 vs HTC One
- 30 best web apps
- Getting started with HTML5
- How to boost your mobile reception
- How to fix Facebook: Social Fixer
- Taking the stress out of WordPress updates
- Where to download free web fonts
- Turn your tablet into a Sky+ remote control
- How to measure the success of a new IT system
- Three years on: the state of the tablet market
- Windows 8: what works and what doesn't
- Yes, I write down my passwords
- How to make money from apps
There are dozens of exciting prizes up for grabs on PC Pro Competitions. All our competitions are free to enter. Try your luck.ENTER NOW