‘GeForce GTX 465’ picked apart, tested

You know those early GeForce GTX 460 listings we talked about yesterday? We may now have some specifications for the unannounced Nvidia graphics card. Chinese site eNet claims to have one of the GPUs in its possession, and it’s posted some screenshots of the Nvidia driver control panel that reveal key specs, plus a handful of quick benchmarks.

Saying the product will launch under the GeForce GTX 465 moniker (Nvidia reportedly wants to save the GTX 460 label for a GF104-based offering), eNet shows a photo of the card’s GF100 graphics processor—the same chip that powers GeForce GTX 470 and 480 GPUs. According to the driver control panel screenshots, though, Nvidia has disabled quite a few bits and pieces: there are only 352 stream processors, 1GB of RAM, and a 256-bit memory interface. Clock speeds look to be 607MHz for the GPU, 1,215MHz for the shaders, and an effective 3,206MHz for the GDDR5 memory.

For reference, the GeForce GTX 470 has the same GPU and shader speeds quoted above, but with 448 SPs, 1280MB of RAM, a 320-bit interface, and a 3,348MHz effective memory clock speed.

eNet says its benchmarks show the GTX 465 is slightly quicker than the Radeon HD 5870 in Far Cry 2, "significantly slower" than the Radeon HD 5830 in Crysis Warhead, and in between the Radeon HD 5850 and 5870 in Unigine’s Heaven benchmark. That doesn’t sound like a bad effort if the card ends up launching at around $300 as those European listings suggested, although we’ll still need to get one in our labs for more thorough testing.

In any case, the site claims Nvidia will officially introduce the GeForce GTX 465 on June 2 at the Computex trade show in Taipei, Taiwan. We’ll be on the scene, so we’ll try to bring you the news as it develops. (Thanks to VR-Zone for the link.)

Comments closed
    • Joel H.
    • 13 years ago

    The GTX 480 in SLI is faster than a single 5970 in most everything, but the pricing is lopsided on that particular comparison no matter how you cut it. One GTX 480 is $200 less than a Radeon HD 5970 (and slower), two GTX 480s are faster but significantly more expensive (and louder). Then we’re up to two 5970s, which again, are faster than the pair of 480s–but about $400 more expensive at retail.

    • Farting Bob
    • 13 years ago

    Its probably taken this long because yields are so bad that disabling 30% of the SP’s still means alot of trashed cards. 😛

    • freebird
    • 13 years ago

    Post #14 is correct. The MSRP was $259 at launch for the 5850. I only paid $275 shipped for an XFX 5850 after supplies started getting tight. I waited almost a month for Provantage to ship it, but I still got it for $275 😉

    • aatu
    • 13 years ago

    Maybe nVidia is trying to create an artificial sweet spot for 470 ?

    Because yeah, the usual/real sweet spot certainly isn’t around the 300 mark. And it probably isn’t even held by nVidia.

    PS. I thought my sweet spot last year was Palit GTS250 for 120€ (native VGA and quiet cooler were important factors, although it didn’t turn out to be quiet enough).

    • Meadows
    • 13 years ago

    How would it *not* do that?

    • poulpy
    • 13 years ago

    q[

    • shank15217
    • 13 years ago

    MSRP never went up officially.

    • wira020
    • 13 years ago

    Hopefully, it doesnt inherit its’ brothers thermal…

    • wira020
    • 13 years ago

    I guess they didnt plan to have such yields..

    • lethal
    • 13 years ago

    Far Cry 2 and The Unigine 2.0 benchmarks are the very best scenarios to test Nvidia Hardware. I’m guessing that in the real world, this part will be competitive with a 5830.

    • Forge
    • 13 years ago

    As a 2XL who gets L shirts at every tech show, I’d be more than happy to trade. Heck, I’ll Paypal you S&H+5$ if you’d prefer. Cheap T-shirts are always in demand at my house.

    • CasbahBoy
    • 13 years ago

    My CAN OF WHOOPASS was an eVGA shirt. XXL. I’m an M, unfortunately.

    Edit: I should probably rephrase that to “they didn’t send an M, unfortunately.” 😉

    • willyolio
    • 13 years ago

    the sweet spot in graphics are generally around the $150 mark. that’s the “minimum for decent gameplay” price (5750/5770). diminishing returns generally happen above that mark. 5850/GTX470 are well above that.

    • reactorfuel
    • 13 years ago

    Haha, jeebus, you’re right. $299 was after the MSRP went /[

    • MadManOriginal
    • 13 years ago

    Don’t forgot to include the intangible CAN OF WHOOPASS which NV ships with every card in to a price comparison…talk about a value add!

    • The Dark One
    • 13 years ago

    With the yields they’re supposed to be getting, I’m surprised it’s taken them this long to put out a card with 30% of its SPs disabled.

    • Farting Bob
    • 13 years ago

    Its hard to be price competitive when your chip has 30% more transistors than the 5870 and yields far below what they want. If the yields were higher they could drop the price (but then so could AMD since they seem to have much better success with yields thanks to working more with the process and smaller chip).
    Unless they want to sell their high end chips at significant loss just to gain market share in the very high end, but thats an incredibly risky strategy for a company already behind schedule and without a major cash cow like in previous generations.

    • Mat3
    • 13 years ago

    I find it hard to believe this thing could beat the 5870 at anything.

    • StuG
    • 13 years ago

    This card is going to to fail pretty hard. Its priced all wrong, and aimed all wrong. I think what Nvidia wanted was the following:

    GTX480 -> HD5970
    GTX470 -> HD5870
    GTX460 -> HD5850

    But what it is really like, or is going to be like is the following:

    GTX480SLI -> HD5970
    GTX480 -> HD5870
    GTX470 -> HD5850
    GTX460 -> HD5830

    Their pricing is all wrong because they think they are more competitive than they are. I don’t see how they continue to think that.

    • sweatshopking
    • 13 years ago

    I didnt like the single player too much, but the map editor was and is unrivaled. without a doubt, the game looked good, and damn what a fine ass editor. i would have liked a full SDK, but still the editor is worth the purchase imo. i have lots of friends who dont know dick about editors, who loved bustin out some crazy maps on taht system.

    • shank15217
    • 13 years ago

    Wrong, launch MSRP was $259

    • Hattig
    • 13 years ago

    That’s not how a sweet spot works. The sweet spot is the best performance per dollar (or per Watt, etc, depending on your needs).

    Above the sweet spot, it costs more per extra performance than the extra performance is worth (compared to the sweet spot).

    Below the sweet spot, the performance drops off faster than the price.

    Sadly, in text I cannot draw the graph. So please imagine it!

    • swaaye
    • 13 years ago

    It sure is incredibly important to have that Far Cry 2 crown. And that is sarcasm, btw. That game sucked beyond my wildest dreams. But we have proof that a benchmark utility will keep a shitty game in the limelight for years.

    • armistitiu
    • 13 years ago

    You’re right, but this is NVIDIA we’re talking about. GTX 285 is still pricier than 5850 and the latter offers way more value for it’s money. I still don’t get who buys NVIDIA these days…

    [Stupid me. This was supposed to be a reply for #8]

    • CasbahBoy
    • 13 years ago

    In terms of amount of volume moved, usually the answer is Yes. It is a really fascinating subject, and took me a bit of doing to find the name of the Wikipedia article that covered it: §[<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_pricing<]§

    • [+Duracell-]
    • 13 years ago

    Looking forward to a paper launch on June 2nd…Probably going to get an HD 5850 by then.

    • willyolio
    • 13 years ago

    …which means as performance goes DOWN price should drop even MORE. you’re not supposed to get diminishing returns as performance drops.

    • d0g_p00p
    • 13 years ago

    Is there a big difference between $299 or $300

    • Meadows
    • 13 years ago

    Hah, indeed. The HD 5850 is up to $300 now.

    • douglar
    • 13 years ago

    I wonder how the thermal profile looks compared to the 5830? I also wonder if they found a fix for the large increase in power consumption when using two monitors?

    • reactorfuel
    • 13 years ago

    “Down to?” Launch MSRP was $299. 🙂

    • Fighterpilot
    • 13 years ago

    With those specs it would seem a $250 card?
    HD5850 is already down to around $300 and is likely quite a bit faster.

    • grantmeaname
    • 13 years ago

    that’s how it always works. For every little bit of additional performance beyond the sweet spot, it costs more and more.

    • Game_boy
    • 13 years ago

    So something with 80% of the theoretical performance of a GTX 470 will be priced only $10 lower than an HD 5850? How does that make sense?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This

Share this post with your friends!