GTX 470 SLI Performance

Moving on to our sneak peek of our SLI/CF article, we have our look at the performance of the GTX 470 in SLI. We’ll skip the running commentary in this case as in the majority of our charts the GTX 470 SLI is second only to the GTX 480 SLI. We’ll explain why this is once we’ve run through the charts.

MSI N470GTX: Power, Temperature, Noise, & Overclocking GTX 470 SLI Performance, Cont
POST A COMMENT

41 Comments

View All Comments

  • tech6 - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link

    Is it just me getting old or have desktop PC become somewhat boring? There seems to be a lot more sizzle and innovation in mobile, server and even home theater tech. Reply
  • lunarx3dfx - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link

    I have to agree, I really miss the days of Overclocking with dip switches and jumpers, and when a 100 MHz OC actually meant performance you could feel and see. It's not as much fun as it used to be. The mobile market, smartphones especially, has gotten very interesting in recent years especially if you have gotten into homebrew and seeing what these devices are really capable of. Reply
  • araczynski - Saturday, July 31, 2010 - link

    i wouldn't say boring, just that each new iteration of cards is becoming less and less important.

    game developers aren't pushing hardware as hard as fast as the manufacturers would want them to.

    i've had my 4850's in CF since they came out, and i'm still playing everything at 1080p to this day, granted, i don't use AA, but i never have, so don't care.

    dragon age, mass effect 2, star craft 2 all smooth as butter, why am i going to waste time/money with a new video solution?

    this is still on my E8600(?) 3.16Ghz C2D. (win7).

    people are buying too much into the marketing, so cudos to their marketing departments, or which anandtech is one i suppose.
    Reply
  • 7Enigma - Monday, August 2, 2010 - link

    Hmm...have you checked to see if you are CPU limited in games? I have the same CPU and would guess that at 1080p resolution you could very well be CPU limited at stock E8600 speeds. I have the same proc and it is easy as pie to OC to close to 4GHz. I currently run at 3.65GHz at stock voltage and game at 3.85GHz (again stock voltage) with little more tweaking than upping the frequency (9.5X multi, 385MHz bus). And that's just with an OC'd 4870, dual 5850's surely could use the extra cpu power at such a (relatively) low resolution.

    HTH
    Reply
  • quibbs - Monday, August 2, 2010 - link

    In my humble opinion, games drove the PC market into mainstream. It spurred the development of most of the major components. This includes graphics cards. Especially graphic cards. But it seems that game development for the PC, while still major, isn't what it once was. This has to slow down the video card market as the games for PC are less numerous.
    Perhaps a major breakthrough in gaming (3d, holograms,etc) will continue the card wars, but I think it will eventually head in a different direction. A reversal if you will, energy efficient cards in smaller form factor that are very potent at pushing graphics. Think about it, the cards are getting bigger and more power hungry as they grow in capabilities. At some point this will be unsustainable (in many ways).
    Some company will realize that less is more and will produce such a product (when technology permits), and will kick off the new wars.
    Just a thought....
    Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, August 2, 2010 - link

    We're getting more and more powerful hardware, but most games are being developed with consoles in mind, so the benefit of having a vastly more powerful machine is very small.

    I don't feel like I need to upgrade my 4890 and C2D @ 3.4 for gaming, at all. To be honest, my 2900XT didn't really need upgrading, but it ran really hot and started to balls up
    Reply
  • softdrinkviking - Monday, August 2, 2010 - link

    i don't know what a 2900xt is, but i upgraded from a radeon 3870 because i couldn't play butcher bay or a couple of other titles at my screens native 1920x1200. that was without AA or MSAA or any kind of ambient occlusion or anything, it just couldn't hold the framerates at all.
    so i got a 5850, and it's been great for everything under the sun. sometimes i can even max out the AA and stuff and the games play fine. (not in crysis)

    anyway, the current gen of consoles games can usually take advantage of a regular LCDTV's 1080p, so if i can't play a game at that resolution without any extra visual enhancements selected, that sounds like there is room for improvement.

    As for the future of gaming, i personally believe that computers will supplant consoles eventually.
    maybe as soon as 15 years?
    it's just a guess, i can't back it up, but i personally can't see how sony will be able to afford losing so much money on a new generation console.
    if the current generation lasts long enough for sony to take advantage of the, only recently profitable, PS3, then home PCs will have a chance to get much faster and cheaper before a PS4 has time to come to fruition.

    it just seems like the consoles will eventually become financially untennable.
    damn, my dog just died, gotta go.
    Reply
  • afkrotch - Monday, August 2, 2010 - link

    All depends on hardware and games. I have to turn down my game settings on Metro 2033. I use a C2D @ 3.3 ghz and a GTS 250. I get way too much framerate drops at 1920x1200 no AA/AF.

    Granted, I can still play any game out there, so long as I'm willing to lower the quality/resolutions.
    Reply
  • arnavvdesai - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link

    I just wanted to ask if the author or the staff on AT feel that desktop graphics card are a shrinking market? Is the continued investment by ATi and Nvidia into the development of newer cards seem justified? I own a 5870 and barring a technical fault I dont plan to upgrade for another 3 years as I dont see myself upgrading my monitors.
    Is the market slowly but surely reducing or am I just wrong in assuming that? If yes, then where should these companies research into?
    Reply
  • nafhan - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link

    Well, the tech that goes into making a high end card eventually makes it into mobile, low end, integrated, cell phone, and console parts through a combination of cutting down the high end and successive silicon process improvements. So, ATI and Nvidia don't expect to make all their R&D money back from the initial run of high end GPU's. High end GPU's are basically proof of concepts for new technology. They'd certainly like to sell a bunch of them, but mostly they want to make sure the technology works. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now