The Test

Although NVIDIA is not promoting the card as a competitive gaming card, we’ve gone ahead and run our full benchmark suite. For the sake of comparison with other cards we have run 1680x1050, however the GT 430 isn’t meant for that resolution. For the GT 430 and similar budget cards we have run separate results at 1280x1024 with appropriate quality settings.

For simplicity’s sake we’re only listing the DDR3 versions of the Radeon 5570 and GT 240; there’s really not much to say once we look at performance as even the DDR3 versions paint a clear picture. Conversely we’re using a DDR3 version of the GT 220 as it’s what we had on hand, although today you’re more likely to find the DDR2 version than you are the DDR3 version.

CPU: Intel Core i7-920 @ 3.33GHz
Motherboard: Asus Rampage II Extreme
Chipset Drivers: Intel 9.1.1.1015 (Intel)
Hard Disk: OCZ Summit (120GB)
Memory: Patriot Viper DDR3-1333 3 x 2GB (7-7-7-20)
Video Cards: AMD Radeon HD 5850
AMD Radeon HD 5770
AMD Radeon HD 5750
AMD Radeon HD 5670
AMD Radeon HD 5570 DDR3
AMD Radeon HD 4870 1GB
AMD Radeon HD 4850
AMD Radeon HD 3870
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 768MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450
NVIDIA GeForce GT 240 DDR3
NVIDIA GeForce GT 220 DDR3
Asus ENGT430
Video Drivers: NVIDIA ForceWare 197.13
NVIDIA ForceWare 257.15 Beta
NVIDIA ForceWare 260.62
NVIDIA ForceWare 260.77 Beta
AMD Catalyst 10.3a
AMD Catalyst 10.8b
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
Thoughts & Impressions On 3D TV Crysis: Warhead
Comments Locked

120 Comments

View All Comments

  • esc923 - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    Well you answered which means you do care, which is why I fully agree when you say that you could care less how smart anyone thinks you are.

    I'm not going to bother with reasoning out your obsession with video game FPS as the main 'objective' measure of an HTPC card while dismissing all else, as it's lost on you. Instead, let's try it the man no way instead: your argument is not correct because I say so.
  • manno - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    Don't take this the wrong way, but just because someone responds to a forum post does not mean they care what anybody thinks of them.

    From the article:

    "Whether it’s by NVIDIA’s design or matters out of their hands, GT 430 simply isn’t competitive with AMD’s 5570 and 5670 in gaming performance, with the latter cleaning the GT 430’s clock every single time. NVIDIA isn’t pushing the GT 430 as a gaming performance card so we aren’t going to recommend it as one. If you need budget gaming, then the only choice to make is to go AMD."

    again for all intents and purposes the 430 and the 5570 are the same card. Same performance same price-point one is not superior to the other. Of course the 5670 is better, it's aimed at a different segment. My issue with the article isn't with you it's with "Ryan Smith & Ganesh T S" who draw the wrong conclusion. From the article:

    "We always hate to rely so much on a single benchmark, but at this point HQV 2 provides the best tests we can get our hands on."

    This is wrong to test image quality the best test they could use is a subjective one ie: a double blind test where they play the same clip on the two different platforms to random test subjects. Using AMD's IQ benchmarks to judge any card is inherently biased I don't care what AMD says. Just like using Nvidia's CUDA benchmarks.

    The article's conclusion regarding the 430 vs 5770 is wrong for the time being do a double-blind test and revisit it. Regarding then430 vs 5770 in gaming performance conclusion, well that's just plain wrong.
  • ganeshts - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    I am not sure where you got the idea that HQV is an AMD benchmark.

    HQV is an independent company and has their own video processing chip. They are not related in any way to AMD or nVidia.
  • manno - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    My mistake and thank you for the correction.
  • geok1ng - Tuesday, October 12, 2010 - link

    well manno, that is the trollest behavior i have ever witnessed on the subject of $79 video cards.

    assuming you are NOT a troll, then TomsHardware and HardOCP are also wrong in the comparison with the 5570. Hardly.

    Since AMDs 785G there is no need for a VGA in order to play blurays , except for 2 situations:

    The very few that own a high end sound system ( $1500+) and swear that they can hear the "gap" in quality when going from 7.1 bitstreaming to lossless HD audio. These buyers do NOT pick a $79 VGA, they build a custom PC-based digital audio system to work with theirs bitperfect setup. If you dont know what bitperfect is, then dont bother trolling that the 430 is better than the 5570.

    The not so very few that own a 3D TV: in 3D playback since it is lost half the resolution and/or half the brigthness image quality becomes even more important. After spending 3k+ on the TV i fail to see the reasoning on choosing the 430 over the 450, or the 460, that at least can game.

    I say that HTPCs cards are a thing of the past since the 785G, HD audio is a much hyped and rarely used feature and 3D Bluray is a niche.

    And the fair competitor for the 430 in 3D Bluray comes from the PS3, hence the need to compare this card image quality with the PS3, with camera pictures to silence the trolls.
  • 8steve8 - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    the next htpc king is sandy bridge graphics.

    i mean even westmere is good enough for most.
  • Lolimaster - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    You mean Fusion Llano?

    SB is on par with the low end IGP Fusion Ontario.
  • 8steve8 - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    no i didn't mean llano, but any integrated graphics solution in 2011 will be fine for most people's HTPC needs
  • hmcindie - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    I don't get the point of HQV? PowerDVD and WinDVD do all the processing themselves so the drivers shouldn't have anything to do with it.

    HQV also has a couple of completely ridiculous tests and hasn't been used seriously to gauge image quality in DVD's for a long while now.
  • hmcindie - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link

    And why don't you guys tell what software you were even using? Wtf?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now