Rage3D Reviews EVGA's NVIDIA GTS 450 FTW 1GB Video Card

[Lupine]

NVIDIA lifts the NDA curtain from their new GF106 Fermi. Join us as we take a look at EVGA's GTS 450 FTW:

NVIDIA's latest FERMI is the GF106, the basis for the GeForce GTS 450. Positioned as the mainstream gamers upgrade, The GTS 450 laser targets 9600/8800 owners looking for a compelling upgrade option that retains their card's current bells & whistles. Here it is, and bringing the right kind of heat to make gin out some Juniper bushes, too!

EVGA GeForce GTS 450 FTW Review @ Rage3D.com

[Debello]

Not much to see in that review if you read it on a mobile.

[caveman-jim]

Sorry, I haven't learned HTML5 yet to replace the flash.

[aviphysics]

fixed

Originally Posted by Debello

Not much to see in that review if you read it on a iPhone/Pad.

[aviphysics]

I would have like to seen the 768MB GTX 460 in the charts as it is not much more expensive ($170 vs $150). I am a little disappointed the 450 did not have higher gains vs the 250. It looks like there goal was a moderately fast feature rich HTPC card. Unfortunately $130-$150 is a little rich for that market IMO.

[caveman-jim]

I don't have a GTX 460 768, hence it's not in the charts.

[Ristogod]

Maybe if I can allocate the funds down the road, I'll replace the 4350 in my wife's PC with this to allow for much improved folding.

[caveman-jim]

Don't forget that GF108 is still on the way, which might be a good HTPC card and folder, too.

[Crisler]

The only real drawback for the 450 is timing. For the price it is a great card but AMD has already saturated this market pretty heavy. If you where buying a card for $150 or less right now the 450 is a great option and in my opinion a better choice than the 5750 and even the 5770. However this segement of the market already bought up the 5700 series so for nVidia it is too little, too late.

Now we wait and see what AMD will deliver for the shopping season to counter this.

[acroig]

Originally Posted by Crisler

However this segement of the market already bought up the 5700 series so for nVidia it is too little, too late.

nV took way too long to ramp up Farmi. Not a bad product but way behind.

[Lupine]

Originally Posted by Crisler

However this segement of the market already bought up the 5700 series so for nVidia it is too little, too late.

I'd submit that there is a large segment of this market that, not wanting to switch to the red team, has been holding onto their older Nvidia hardware until a new Nvidia solution hits their price/performance equation. So while the GTS 450 may not expand Nvidia's market, it should sell well to existing Nvidia users within the segment, replacing the hardware they've been holding for the past few years.

[Crisler]

Originally Posted by acroig

nV took way too long to ramp up Farmi. Not a bad product but way behind.

You know I am gonna disagree on the way behind part. AMD does not come close to the potential in Tessellation that nVidia delivers and the potential offers from PhysX, Cuda and 3D Vision puts this card ahead of the 5700 series in terms of technology.

The issue here was timing. If this card had released within a month or so of the 5700 series it would have eaten it for lunch. However the dealy of close to a year means the market is just filled right now. The people that where going to buy this price point already have and I said this from the start that nVidia was gonna lose share based on timing alone.

Tha being said I am excited and ascared to see what AMD is doing this next round. Excited because they should push Tessellation up and of course get a performance boost. Scared because there are a lot of rumors floating that they are going to be basically rebranding some cards, if this is true it is most sad.

For right now all we can is wait and see.

Originally Posted by Lupine

I'd submit that there is a large segment of this market that, not wanting to switch to the red team, has been holding onto their older Nvidia hardware until a new Nvidia solution hits their price/performance equation. So while the GTS 450 may not expand Nvidia's market, it should sell well to existing Nvidia users within the segment, replacing the hardware they've been holding for the past few years.

Agreed, nVidia will not be hurt but their chance to gain is severly limited.

[Lupine]

I think "way behind" meant "way behind schedule", not way behind in specs or performance.

[acroig]

Originally Posted by Lupine

I'd submit that there is a large segment of this market that, not wanting to switch to the red team, has been holding onto their older Nvidia hardware until a new Nvidia solution hits their price/performance equation.

Good point.

Originally Posted by Crisler

You know I am gonna disagree on the way behind part. AMD does not come close to the potential in Tessellation that nVidia delivers and the potential offers from PhysX, Cuda and 3D Vision puts this card ahead of the 5700 series in terms of technology.

Also good point but you yourself mentioned timing and I think we're saying the same thing there.

[caveman-jim]

At this price point in Nov '09, the GTS 450 would have cleaned up. Now, the market is mostly people who didn't find the then $150-$200 5700 series compelling enough, and decided to wait it out. Performance wise it splits the difference between the two, and can overclock up to the higher performance level nicely.

It has the same sales problems that the 5700 series has, which is last gen high end in the same price range. If you're upgrading for performance, 260 216's and 4870's are better buy's for your current games. The reason to upgrade here is features, where you get Dx11, OpenGL 4, better CUDA/PhysX. But you still don't get to run with all the eye candy, so you look at power and heat and media functions, too.

It's not bad card, it's just not got a compelling 'wow!' about it, because we've had Dx11 for a while. Lots of partners getting in on the act, with lots of models, means it's going to be very heavily promoted and visible.

[ragejg]

Awesome review, Jim. I'm jealous.

[caveman-jim]

Thanks dude. Where's yours?!?

[ragejg]

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33968454

[@md_Guy]

Another thing I have seen any mention of anywhere is power consumption when using multiple displays, ATI drew quite a bit of flack over it's initial power useage when using multiple displays then around the fermi release there was mention that NV too had power issues.. along the lines of +100W for a second display particularly if using either a different resolution or timing/refresh rate...

[caveman-jim]

I didn't look at that because I didn't think anyone would bother running 2 displays on this level card, for much, and I don't have a second card to test Surround with.

[@md_Guy]

Originally Posted by caveman-jim

I didn't look at that because I didn't think anyone would bother running 2 displays on this level card, for much, and I don't have a second card to test Surround with.

Not so much about gaming, I'm more interested in productivity.. I've been using mult-display for the better part of the decade and could never see going back to one displays.. highly OC'd 5770s are barely enough (2-4xAA, 8-16AF 1080) with eyefinity so I highly doubt 450s are going to be anyone's interest for Surround gaming then again I could be wrong.

[caveman-jim]

OK. I'll keep it in mind for future tests, under productivity.

[noko]

I really don't find the 450 compelling unless it is cheaper. The 5770 is a better performer in games for the most part, can be a great tool using EyeFinity for productive type work. Yes the 450 may have PhyX but what use will it be in games? It just doesn't have the power to effectively use it, same as for 3d Vision, it would be a waste to even think about it. I see 5770's almost the same price point too. It is not a bad card, is competitive to a degree but in this range I still think AMD has Nvidia beat but not by much now.

[nycdarkness]

Drivers alone will make alot of people choose it over a 5770

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by nycdarkness

Drivers alone will make alot of people choose it over a 5770

Yeah, but not really

[ragejg]

Jim, I had an issue with overclocking with GPU PhysX enabled. Without it enabled (on the EVGA card), I was able to hit somewhere around 960/4800 on stock voltage. But with PhysX set to GPU and via testing Fluidmark and 3DMark, I couldn't get anywhere near that.

Could you see if you have a similar experience with that and let me know?

[SIrPauly]

Originally Posted by noko

I really don't find the 450 compelling unless it is cheaper. The 5770 is a better performer in games for the most part, can be a great tool using EyeFinity for productive type work. Yes the 450 may have PhyX but what use will it be in games? It just doesn't have the power to effectively use it, same as for 3d Vision, it would be a waste to even think about it. I see 5770's almost the same price point too. It is not a bad card, is competitive to a degree but in this range I still think AMD has Nvidia beat but not by much now.

Maybe some PhysX titles like Mirrors edge or maybe Batman, Unreal and some older 3d stereo content like Age of Empires, Spore and World of WarCraft; and 3d stereo is more than games, from photos, videos, Internet potential and movies.

I used an 8800 GT in titles and could enjoy Spore, Age of Empires and World of WarCraft -- just to see.

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by ragejg

Jim, I had an issue with overclocking with GPU PhysX enabled. Without it enabled (on the EVGA card), I was able to hit somewhere around 960/4800 on stock voltage. But with PhysX set to GPU and via testing Fluidmark and 3DMark, I couldn't get anywhere near that.

Could you see if you have a similar experience with that and let me know?

I didn't have time to test with non-factory OC in anything other than Furmark, but that sounds odd.

I don't have time right now to retest anything, moving on to the next review and the cards in a box again sorry!

[noko]

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

Maybe some PhysX titles like Mirrors edge or maybe Batman, Unreal and some older 3d stereo content like Age of Empires, Spore and World of WarCraft; and 3d stereo is more than games, from photos, videos, Internet potential and movies.

I used an 8800 GT in titles and could enjoy Spore, Age of Empires and World of WarCraft -- just to see.

So limited 3d Vision usage plus the 3d Vision end would cost $200 for the glasses and an additional $150 for the monitor. Would actually like to see 3d Vision benchmarks if that is continued to be toted as a usable feature. Without accurate tests, including PhysX those features from a buyer point can be very misleading and dissappointing. I've seen Mafia 2 physX tests and it looks like a 460 was the minimum needed card for good quality settings and resolutions. This would be good case scenario for lower resolution testing with PhysX for PhysX games. As it is it maybe a worthless paper only feature.

[SIrPauly]

How do you figure? A potential end-user may have a 120hz monitor based on the many advantages of this type monitor and may desire to use it for Photos, videos, like this:http://www.3dvisionlive.com/content/...owcase3dv.html and movies and limited gaming. Why do you think they are creating 3d laptops for?