How long is gtx 480

Today, the Radeon HD and are our basis for comparison. And so Nvidia succeeds its flagship without really upsetting the current hierarchy of performance. The GF GPU is still hot, it still uses a lot of power, but the board that employs it handles both attributes far more gracefully , adding a healthy dollop of performance in the process. Chris Angelini. Topics AMD. See all comments The last bit of the article is the most important I think.

With two companies releasing so close together, it would be in a person's best interest to see what the other is bringing to the table before shelling out such a large chunk of change. If the and have shown one thing.. So, before you start calling a winner here, wait and see. That is my advise. Sound performance but the game here seems to be You can just release a product that competes with the competitors current offerings, you gotta compete with what he releases next Kinda pointless article other then the fact that the offers superb performance but until I see power and noise set in stone I honestly don't care.

A single GPU nearly outperforming a is quite a statement. So it's basically what the should have been. Fair enough, I'll wait for the version of the gf and buy that. The had its flaws, but it still was the fastest single GPU around. We'll see what the 69xx have to offer. If you don't mind holding off a few short weeks, the wait could be worth some savings or potentially more performance for the same dollars depending on what AMD has reserved for us.

For those of you wondering, the Radeon HD turned out to be a bit of a disappointment, falling well short of the GTX and as a result was priced to compete with the GTX , allowing Nvidia to hold the performance crown without dispute for the next few years. It would be interesting to see how those two stack up today, perhaps that's something we can look at in the future.

So, we've established that the GTX was able to save face for Nvidia in and retain the performance crown for a few years before 28nm GPUs arrived in , reigniting the graphics war once more. What we're looking to see now is just how well the tubby mm2 die performs today. There were 3GB variants floating around, but most people picked up the original 1.

Let's check out those results before taking a gander at some actual gameplay. First up we have the Battlefield 1 results using the ultra quality preset, which as it turns out is a bad choice for the GTX and its measly 1. Don't worry though, after we go over all the graphs I'll show some gameplay performance using more agreeable settings. Here we see a reasonable 41fps on average, but again, the GTX is haunted by that limited VRAM buffer as the minimum frame rate drops down to just 23fps.

This meant stuttering was an issue. Dirt 4 was also tested using the medium quality settings and here the experience was quite good with the GTX , certainly playable and for the most part was very smooth at p.

Moving on we have For Honor and here we found a mostly playable experience if that makes sense. At times we dropped down below 30fps and this made gameplay noticeably more choppy than it was on say the RX or HD It's also interesting to note that the GTX absolutely obliterates 's flagship part.

By Steven Walton January 28, Windows 10 vs.