Nvidia demos 'fastest DX11 GPU', touts near-silent operation

By on November 8, 2010, 7:00 AM
Yesterday at the PDXLAN 16.5 gaming event in Portland Nvidia gave attendees a first-hand glimpse at their next generation graphics card -- which is widely expected to bear the GTX 580 moniker. Although the company’s Director of Technical Marketing for the GeForce line, Tom Petersen, was careful not to give out any specific details or show the product itself, he did share some interesting tidbits and tech demos that got the crowd cheering up in excitement.

Besides promising the ‘fastest DirectX 11 GPU on the planet’ will be out very soon, Petersen said the unreleased card boasts a new vapor cooling system, offering dramatically quieter and cooler operating conditions over their previous flagship, the GTX 480, as well as the GTX 285. The card is said to be nearly silent during gaming. With Fermi receiving quite a bit of flak for exactly these reasons it’s interesting to see Nvidia hyping the technology, although AMD/ATI doesn’t seem too impressed by it as they’ve been using something similar since the ATI Radeon HD 2900 series.

Nevertheless if Nvidia really manages to deliver the fastest single-GPU card while significantly decreasing temperatures and noise levels then AMD might still have something to be worried about. After talking the card’s new cooling capabilities, Petersen topped off the presentation with a couple of tessellation-focused demos of Aliens vs. Triangles and Endless City, followed a brief segment demonstration of Call of Duty: Black Ops gameplay on PC.

Although the card in question hasn’t been officially revealed yet, it is expected to feature 512 CUDA Cores, a GPU clock of 772 MHz, a shader frequency of 1544 MHz, 1536MB of GDDR5 memory running at 4408 MHz, and dual-DVI, HDMI outputs. The GeForce GTX 580 is expected to be priced around the $500-$550 mark.





User Comments: 54

Got something to say? Post a comment
Cryptopsy said:

Nvidia ftw!, Best GPU in my opinion

bioflex said:

seriously, nvidia really shows promise but since i am kind of an amd fan i would wait and see what they have to got offer.......i just hope amd has something much spectacular than this up their sleeves. any way, good job nvidia.

Kibaruk Kibaruk, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Either AMD or Nvidia, it makes competition so in the end only we (customers) win from price/performance wars and new technology.

I'm still an AMD fanboy and will keep buying them no matter what =)

kaosss said:

looks promising

DSparil said:

Oh yes. The endless war between AMD (they got ATI) and Nvdia commences for the pockets of the consumers.

What they should do is decrease the power consumptions of the flagship cards. The 480 is just way too brutal, and when paired off with the i7... Let's just say that the power company is your best friend.

Ahmed90 Ahmed90 said:

to be honest noise and heat or what ever all that is not big issue if the card cost much $$$$

Fragrant Coit Fragrant Coit said:

I play mostly FPS games, and have been wanting to upgrade for a while. A lot of AMD offerings look attractive, but I'm slightly concerned about loosing PhsX.

In some games the ragdoll etc really adds to the satisfaction of a Headshot or what have you.

Can someone here with a modern AMD (preferably something Mid Range) tell me how it fares on say, LFD2? It's all well and good seeing Demos and screenshots but thats generally far removed from the end experience.

This upgrade will have to be like the last..... Tell the Mrs the card has failed !!!! LOL

edison5do said:

I hope they bring something espectacular so AMD would do something similar but with butget price..!!! I love this kig of technology/price/performace wars, we always win!

kevin1212 said:

$500! This card had better impress. I would put my money on AMD for victory here though, i suspect this card will still be very power hungry, odds are AMD will once again deliver better efficiency. The "i told ya so" will come after the review.

ET3D, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I'll be waiting to read the reviews, as well as the reviews of the Radeon 6970. I think it's nice that NVIDIA is taking noise into account as an important features. Regardless, I'm satisfied with the Radeon 5850 I won here and won't buy any of these new cards. (But hey, I won't mind winning them.

taea00 said:

I'm always jazzed when AMD or NVidia step up the competition, because like Kibaruk said we the customers are the ones that win. I've gone with AMD cards the last few times, but that's because at the time when I built my computer they had the slight edge. This liquid cooling system sounds awesome though and I hope they push each other to develop new techniques like this. AMD's cards definitely run hotter so they need to look into this cooling system.

Puiu Puiu said:

I'm not really impressed by what they showed in this demo. Better cooling and better tessellation, but nothing else. We'll just have to see how it will fare against the 6970. Hopefully both of these cards will manage to drive the prices down on older or cheaper versions.

Staff
Jesse Jesse said:

Ahmed90 said:

to be honest noise and heat or what ever all that is not big issue if the card cost much $$$$

I disagree. I would have bought a GTX 480 if it wasn't so hot and loud. I went with two 460's instead.

Kibaruk said:

Either AMD or Nvidia, it makes competition so in the end only we (customers) win from price/performance wars and new technology.

Lol, I'm pretty sure both AMD and Nvidia are making boatloads of money. I wouldn't say we are the only ones.

Ahmed90 Ahmed90 said:

prismatics said:

Ahmed90 said:

to be honest noise and heat or what ever all that is not big issue if the card cost much $$$$

I disagree. I would have bought a GTX 480 if it wasn't so hot and loud. I went with two 460's instead.

yes you may do that some people may do it but most people wont especially those with limited cash

bugejakurt said:

NVidia turned silent this past year in my opinion and AMD seized this opportunity without hesitation. It seems now NVidia is back to the market with even more promising GPUs.

Se7enVII said:

Saw this. Out of my price range for sure. I wonder how the 6970 will perform against it. Will probably be picking up a 6870 myself though and crossfire down the road.

jgvmx said:

As with AMD's 6800 cards its nice to see Nvidia trying to make more power and thermal efficient products, hopefully making them less expensive to produce. Not everything is about brute force, as the 480 showed.

Cueto_99 said:

I bet nvidia spent all this time working on a cooling solution rather than on the gpu, since all they did was enabling some Cuda cores and upping the MHz... But anyways it's good to know they are at least trying to catch up...

AbsolutGaloot said:

so, it's a really big heatpipe. I'm not sure how this is supposed to be impressive, heatpipe cooling has been around for quite a while. Granted, not for stock cooling, but I'm going to wager that this card will reflect this in the price.

Demons said:

Hopefully this will drive the mid-range cards down even further. I would love to get a second 460 GTX for by box. Nvidia is really going to give AMD a run for their money this round!

compu4 said:

If they could also reduce the card's power consumption and price, I would be quite happy.

limpangel limpangel said:

fastest DirectX 11 GPU on the planet

I think I'll wait for third-party benchmarks before believing that. This is not the first time Nvidia promised, but did not deliver. Or it delivered but with drawbacks on other fronts like heat and power consumption.

I don't say ATI is perfect, but in the last year or so they have been doing the innovating while Nvidia just kept getting lazier.

Wagan8r Wagan8r said:

That would be a nice card to have. Unfortunately, I don't have that kind of cash to spend on a GPU. Gotta buy too many appliances!

Guest said:

Looking at this bunch of nerds in the audience, thinking of braindead zombies...

Razerblade said:

ATI seem to be ahead of the game normally, I think Nvidia lost a lot when ATI bought out their 5 series and Nvidia didn't provide an answer till a few months ago. I think both cards are generally equal but maybe Nvidia are starting to get ahead again. Only time will tell what ATI bring out!

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

Dsparil said:

Oh yes. The endless war between AMD (they got ATI) and Nvdia commences for the pockets of the consumers.

What they should do is decrease the power consumptions of the flagship cards. The 480 is just way too brutal, and when paired off with the i7... Let's just say that the power company is your best friend.

a 480 and i7 pulls about 450 watts during game play. Its not that serious. Its the noise on stock coolers that can bother someone.

peterbezemer said:

First see the real deal, then judge :-)

---agissi--- ---agissi---, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Didnt look that revolutionary to me.. just more of the same. I know there were some improvements but its not like its groundbreaking.

bam13 said:

looks nice...this whole ati vs. nvidia thing is quite interesting though, IÂ'm pretty curious who will finally win this race

hassaan said:

Hmm..sounds like another power hungry, super hot, large graphics card from Nvidia. Featuring 'amazing' theoretical features that will probably never make it to video games for the next 5 or 10 years if at all. I'm leaning strongly toward ATI cards. Less power, lower temps but still great performance.

ChrisG683 said:

But can it play Crysis?

sMILEY4ever said:

Kibaruk said:

Either AMD or Nvidia, it makes competition so in the end only we (customers) win from price/performance wars and new technology.

I'm still an AMD fanboy and will keep buying them no matter what =)

I agree with what u said but my choice is only based on gaming performance/$.

hassaan said:

What about multiple displays? I really need Nvidia to come out with triple monitor support on one card and allow SLI while sporting those 3 monitors. AMD did it, I don't understand why Nvidia can't?

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

I think I'll wait for third-party benchmarks before believing that.

The GTX 480 is presently the "fastest DX11 GPU"...and the GTX 580 is supposed to offer more performance in gaming in general, and tessellation (not the only DX11 feature) in particular.

So you seem to believe that this replacement "GPU" which has a higher shader count ( 512 to 480), faster core and shader frequency, and faster video memory is still going to end up somehow slower than the GTX 480. Belief like that takes a kind of very special enthusiast*....unless of course you somehow see Cayman XT both launching before the GTX 580 and having more performance.

Personally I'd see both the GTX 580 and HD 6970 offering very similar levels of performance and launch within the same timeframe. The difference here is that the GTX 580 has been demonstrated publicly, while the 6970 has not, thereby making nvidia's talking head statement demonstrably true.

( * very special enthusiast = fanboy)

What about multiple displays? I really need Nvidia to come out with triple monitor support on one card and allow SLI while sporting those 3 monitors. AMD did it, I don't understand why Nvidia can't?

Maybe because nvidia are playing catchup with this technology...much the same as AMD are with 3-D gaming.

And if you think AMD has a finished Eyefinity product, then think again. From the release notes of Catalyst 10.10:

[link]

[link]

[link]

[link]

And a biggie....which has supposedly been resolved -only to be relisted as a known issue for the next Catalyst release...

-Mouse cursor may intermittently be corrupt/missing in one of the displays under Eyefinity configuration while playing games/samples (same release notes)

And to top it all off....artifacting and screen corruption issues for numerous users when using DP in connection with DVI (signalling issues).

Word of advice hassaan- If you're going to pull some random feature from your fave's supposed repertoire it might be apropos to know something about it's implementation. Having set up a couple of Eyefinity (that's AMD's three or monitor single display) set up's I can assure you that it's not entirely ready for primetime.

Johny47 said:

limpangel said:

fastest DirectX 11 GPU on the planet

I think I'll wait for third-party benchmarks before believing that. This is not the first time Nvidia promised, but did not deliver. Or it delivered but with drawbacks on other fronts like heat and power consumption.

I don't say ATI is perfect, but in the last year or so they have been doing the innovating while Nvidia just kept getting lazier.

Nvidia's getting lazier you said? I'm not in on that 'fanboy' rubbish but Nvidia have been pushing hard with this Tesselation etc and I think that's nice but it's just a shame not many games are using it to the fullest like the Heaven Benchmark, that looks incredible and I hope that's the future of games(on PC anyways =/).

9Nails, TechSpot Paladin, said:

ChrisG683 said:

But can it play Crysis?

I wish this were something that I could laugh at. But seriously! Like Chris eludes to, I also look for a worst case scenario and then a graphics card that can best that situation.

With GPU technology has the wall been hit?

Its been 3 years since Crysis came out and its still hard (impossible) to find a single GPU that can play this game at 1920 x 1080, high quality details, at 60 frames per second. With the old days of iD and Quake, each new generation of graphics card seemed to double the frames per second of the old cards at the same resolution. (Example: [link] ) Maybe we had brighter ideas back then? But now it seems like we're fighting to get 20% improvement in frame rates through hardware upgrades.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

well we all know its not going to be considerably faster than AMD's offering who cares that they just know decided to care about noise and how cool there products are.

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

well we all know its not going to be considerably faster than AMD's offering who cares that they just know decided to care about noise and how cool there products are.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

I wish this were something that I could laugh at. But seriously! Like Chris eludes to, I also look for a worst case scenario and then a graphics card that can best that situation.With GPU technology has the wall been hit? Its been 3 years since Crysis came out...

Probably the worst coded game in existance. Nvidia and AMD are somehow at fault or dragging their heels because one (of sometimes two*) poorly coded game in three years brought GPU's to their knees? The fact that you can count the number of games using CryEngine 2 on the fingers of a Mickey Mouse hand- and have fingers to spare for future releases should tell you how unoptomised the games default settings are. And if that doesn't then maybe [link] should be somewhat apparent

Following your example, Intel and AMD are also stagnating with CPU vectorization because of GTA IV's voracious appetite for core speed and memory bandwidth?

(* The other game being Metro 2033 when checking the tacked-on DX11 IQ settings)

well we all know its not going to be considerably faster than AMD's offering who cares that they just know decided to care about noise and how cool there products are.

True. It's not like AMD have been using energy efficiency and it's attendant lower heat output as a marketing point for the last year or so.......oh.

BTW: Repeating your posting might inflate your post count, but it doesn't add a whole lot to the debate.

KG363 KG363 said:

I really want to see this cooler

Jetatt23 said:

I'm not real concerned with heat and noise. I can hardly even hear my ATI HD4890 running at full blast, and I don't tend to overclock so heat has never been a problem with me. I care more about performance. It's one thing to claim to be the fastest, but will it hold up to review when it comes out?

Relic Relic, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

That demo was pretty awesome especially the dynamic tessellation, definitely can't wait to see benchmarks for the GTX 580. I'm also happy to see improved cooling, as hot hardware is a bit of a pet peeve. With that said though I doubt I'll be purchasing one anytime soon as it's simply not a good buy for me and I'm sure many others. I'm more interested in what the refreshes of the 470/460 have to offer down the road especially with AMD bringing a good value with the 6850/6870 & possibly 6950.

vangrat said:

Well, the Demo was very nice. But I still reserve judgement for the final hardware comparison. That, or whether NVIDIA will have their card out first. If NVIDIA get their card out this year, before Christmas. Then they will have my vote.

spyx said:

this is awesome but quite expensive but as someone who will buy black ops i think i might consider this....

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

this is awesome but quite expensive but as someone who will buy black ops i think i might consider this....

Somehow I don't think you would need the processing power of a GTX 580 to max out the settings on a Call of Duty game.

The only reason the card and the game are linked is because nvidia chose to unveil the card at an event is aimed at gaming/LAN. Black Ops just happens to be the flavour of the day (release wise).

For non-fanboys and the vaguely interested, TPU has their preliminary GTX 580 review up >>here<< , also a preliminary SLI review

JMMD JMMD, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Looks pretty sweet, just need to see some benchmarks to know how awesome it really is. way out of my price-range but progress is good.

dividebyzero dividebyzero, trainee n00b, said:

It seems the TPU site is down.

Here's an alternate quick review (Googlish) with some added links

Seems to outperform the GTX 480 by 15-20% for the most part. 70°C max temp under Furmark is a big improvement. Fairly close to the HD 5970 in overall performance- individual game variance is quite high due to the buggy nature of the HD 5970's crossfire profiles

LinkedKube LinkedKube, TechSpot Project Baby, said:

Probably the worst coded game in existance. Nvidia and AMD are somehow at fault or dragging their heels because one (of sometimes two*) poorly coded game in three years brought GPU's to their knees? The fact that you can count the number of games using CryEngine 2 on the fingers of a Mickey Mouse hand- and have fingers to spare for future releases should tell you how unoptomised the games default settings are. And if that doesn't then maybe [link] should be somewhat apparent

Following your example, Intel and AMD are also stagnating with CPU vectorization because of GTA IV's voracious appetite for core speed and memory bandwidth?

(* The other game being Metro 2033 when checking the tacked-on DX11 IQ settings)

True. It's not like AMD have been using energy efficiency and it's attendant lower heat output as a marketing point for the last year or so.......oh.

BTW: Repeating your posting might inflate your post count, but it doesn't add a whole lot to the debate.

Crysis was a game of stature, not user performance. Many people here know I've always kept up to date with hardware and even back then it was disappointing as it still is now. 480 sli on my monitor in the living room 1080p 45fps max with high settings. We still hold Crysis to this potential but we dont take into account it was kind of abandoned as software all together. Crysis should have been the next pcmark vantage but it was handled incorrectly.

Recipe7 Recipe7 said:

This here article does not speak of a card that will cost 500 USD... more like 600-700 especially with this new 'silent' technology they are boasting. Get your wallets ready.

jonelsorel said:

Sorry, I haven't been keeping track lately; is the 580 what the 480 was supposed to be 6 months ago?

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.