AMD Makes Fun of Nvidia Fermi's Hotness

LOL Love this.

But what happened to Toms..----We used to get at least one new article a day.....3 and 4 a ways back.Now it;s become regular to have nothing for 2 or 3 days.Did somebody quit?

Love it, but can't but wonder if AMD should've used the money elsewhere. The 460 1GB is one hell of a card at a fine price and partly makes up for the mess that is the 480.

They should at least put the ad on as many sites as possible; far too niche for TV ads.

The video is great but they should of got this before the 460, that was hell of an improvement.

It was, but only in relative terms. While its official competition is the 5830, a price drop on the 5850 would completely negate any advantage it has. ATI must be reluctant to do this however because it knows the 5850 can be overclocked to achieve performance that is on par with the 5870.

It will be interesting to see ATI's next move. I'm betting they're going to sit pretty (and so will the prices) until the 6000 series is released later this year.

Hilarious ad, especially the part they find the 'heat source'. Most innovative ad I've seen in ages but acting & script could have been a bit better. And the gamers were a bit too stereotypical. Honestly, most of us aren't scruffy-looking teenies in hoods anymore.

And it's interesting to see so many companies now directly attacking their competitors' products.

*looks at gtx480 widget after playing a game, 45 degrees C ...Oh, so hot

Plus getting hot is what happens when your equipment actually does it's job properly (you know like antialiasing and basic things, without frame drops, doh!).

What a load of nonsense ^^

Allthough the video is of course, quite funny

I should point out that nVidia fans were laughing at 4800 series owners for having hot chips, but forgot that they were small and used less power. Fermi uses lots of power for a big chip AND produces lots of heat, hence why the 460 was a necessary step - to redesign the chip so it's still powerful yet more frugal, and it worked.

nVidia's only really small chips are the low end 40nm 2xx series - they seem to have an obsession with bigger = better.

How is it a load of nonsense when it's a proven fact that pre-460 Fermi's power draw and heat output was through the roof? Everybody knows it and it's been a source of humour and anti-Nvidia statements since day 1.

If you care about your power consumption and heat output then AMD are pointing their finger saying "you don't want a Fermi then".

maybe it's because of the Holidays.

I've said this before, but I'm going to say it again - people (especially ATI fans, apparently) quickly forget their history. The HD 3870 hit 92C at full load, just like the GTX 480, but folks weren't flaming it like mad and creating this level of hype over it. It's all relative. Because ATI managed to do a stellar job on power draw and heat with their 5000 series, everyone starts thinking that the numbers Fermi is putting out are somehow shocking, ridiculous and unprecedented. Sorry, but that's just not the case. Sure, Fermi is hotter and hungrier than the competition. So what? It's not hot enough or hungry enough to actually cause any problems in the REAL WORLD, and it outperforms it's opponent. Take your pick - ATI or Nvidia - either way you're getting a great GPU and there's no need for all the spam.

And an unnecessary lecture isn't spam? Making veiled accusations of fanboiism isn't spam?

I'm not a fanboi by any stretch of the imagination and always get the best card for my cash when it's time to purchase a new one, and the "best" card isn't always the one that produces the biggest numbers.

I've not forgotten about ATI's past products because I avoided the ones that overheated or drew too much power. In the same way I'm avoiding top-end Fermi cards for exactly the same reasons - I have no inclination to spend a lot of extra money on a beefier power supply, more fans and bigger cases for the marginal performance boost over the top-end Radeons 5800s.

I will enjoy poking fun at Nvidia until top-end Fermi is fixed, not because I've conveniently forgotten ATI's history, but because Fermi was, to many enthusiasts, a joke. The GTX 460 has changed that, and I greatly look forward to seeing 6870 vs GTX 485 (or whatever the top-end card based on the improved architecture will be called).

So yeah, there's no need for all the spam.

Take it easy, dude. My reference to spam was a general statement on what I consider to be an unrealistic and unreasonable flood of Fermi-hate. As to the necessity of my "lecture" - of course my post wasn't necessary. No comments on the articles here are necessary. However, if you can feel free to poke fun at Nvidia, I can certainly feel free to point out what I consider to be a flaw in your point of view. It's unfortunate that you took it so personally (and I can certainly understand why you did, considering the fact that I quoted you to make my point), but that's often the way it works here, and as long as people refrain from cussing each other out and calling each other names (and no, I don't believe that "ATI fan" is an inflammatory designation), I consider it to be a fair means of expressing an opinion. Lastly, I feel I should point out that the top-end Fermi doesn't need to be fixed - nothing's broken.

It's certainly going to be interesting to see ATI's next move. They've got room to maneuver in terms of die size and power consumption, but they have to tread carefully. If the 6870 is twice as fast as the 5870, they'll be onto a winner.

Let's look at it this way - Fermi is not only hotter than the 58XX series, but uses much more power. That's the bit people are forgetting. ATi may have released hot chips before, but they've not had a really power hungry offering for quite some time now. The 48XX series introduced a much smaller chip than we expected; the company changed its philosophy on designing GPUs whereas nVidia kept on going with bigger and hungrier - that's why the 48XX series ran pretty warm.

Fermi requires more energy per transistor and there's no getting away from it, even with the 460, but there are obvious advantages to having CUDA, PhysX etc. so it's up to you what you want to buy. The 460 isn't hot - that's why people call it Fermi done "right", but the 465 etc. are far too inefficient, and I can see why AMD poked fun at them for it. A bit misdirected, really, but like I said, it applies to all of the Fermi family bar one GPU.

@LePhuronn:

Yes i agree, it is a little hotter and way more power consuption, i did not dispute that one bit, but the point is i can play on them cards with 32x AA and not have unplayable framerates ..the reason for the heat and powerdraw is because the card can work ...properly with all the features at a decent rate ... try turning a high AA rate on one of the ATI's and see if you can play at a decent rate? then you will see my point.

As far as heat and power are concerend yes ATI is lower in both, but this comes at a cost so do not kid yourself too much. it is purely a case of preference, and i want something that works for what i do.

the heat stories are an improvment, the not so insulted 8800GT (2 of i just swapped for a gtx480) run far hotter (40 degrees c hotter!!) and drew more power, whilst also being far slower ... now how you call that a failure is purely beyond sane comprehension ... so it is a funny video, but based on bad knowledge and not real life experience, i have a gtx480 and it is fine and improved ... i also have a 5870 and it is far slower and is crippled when features are turned up ... usless to me!.

Now you can keep your preference and state false things about the fermi failing, but it in truth is far improved from the old nvidias and is a power hungry beast of a card ... whats the problem with that?

The 480 is a faster card, yes, but some of it is game dependant - without AA, the 5870 is faster at AvP and only a little slower at Crysis. Far Cry 2 is seemingly very well optimised for GeForce cards and a great game for them. DiRT 2 is a very slight win for the 480. World in Conflict shows better average rates for the 480 but the minimum frame rate is below that of the 5870. The game you're playing can mean a lot, even if the 480 is more powerful. As for using AA, from the benchmarks I've seen it's not a big difference, and one that narrows as your use higher resolutions.

What isn't in doubt is that the 480 uses a shedload more power than the 5870. Just check the latest review - is it worth an extra 20-25% power, a bit of temperature and some noise for a few frames per second? Please let us know - what games or applications are you using it on? Fermi has obvious strengths in GPGPU computing as well as a few TWIMTBP titles.

The 480 is extremely powerful, but it comes at a price. ATi's new cards aren't too far off - we get a refined architecture soon that may make amends for some of Evergreen's deficiencies; GF104 is a rethink of Fermi, and a serious step in the right direction, so naturally we're interested in a 512-core version of the GF104 for a true indicator of Fermi performance, so don't let it be said that we're all Fermi haters, just disappointed that it wasn't better.

You miss my point on the AA ...for example:

my 5870 i play Battlefield BC2 ...get about 40 fps (45 max) with no AA

i turn AA up to 16x and get about 15 fps (not playable)

my gtx480 i play Battlefield BC2 ..get about 65 fps (max 72) with no AA

i turn up AA to 32x and get about 55 fps.

the drop is far less dramatic on a card that uses it's power ...i have played with both in many games and all the benchmarks keep the AA figues low (4x or lower) cause the ATI completely fails when you turn the features up ... i would rather use more watts than have a card that fails doing what i want. that is all.

I understand it's a preference and we have a right to our own opinions, but that power is put to use to put it simply .. owning both i can see how the benchmarks are fiddled.

Interesting... Anandtech have the 5870 ahead of the 480 in BC2 for average framerates. For minimum framerates, the 480 wins. HardwareCanucks have the 480 only slightly ahead up to 4xAA for each resolution, though I admit they don't go higher than that. Also, none of these reviews deal with 8xAA or higher - the memory bus on that 480 must be very helpful in keeping framerates up, though unless you've got a large monitor, anything over 8xAA is overkill, at least in my humble opinion. It's all moot anyway, I can't afford either of these.

Someone else had a bit more luck:
http://www.overclock.net/ati/68246 [...] 0-a-2.html

Maybe your system hates ATi? I will definitely agree that once the 480 is used properly, it really stretches its legs, but it's application-specific.

Yeah probably right, i have an old q6600 based on a dell XPS ...so maybe there are some limitations in bios or hardware that affect the performance,

It is allways strange to see that the benchmarks differ dramtically from my real life experience with either of the cards, it just raises alarm bells to me.

either way it is nice to see some competition as it will result in better and cheaper cards for us all in the end eh

I still don't get why my stock Zotac 480 completely outclasses the benchmarks and reviews in heat and performance though ... that said in Dirt2 on my machine i get lower FPS than the benchmarks so i guess the reference platform makes alot of a difference, still a shame to see such scare stories when my experience is far better than the stated heat knightmares hehe.

Overclock!

Fiddled in favour of Nvidia perhaps, rarely in favour of ATI, if ever. Your BC2 benchmarks are interesting because I get 40fps at 1920x1200 with 2xMSAA with my 5870 when it's running at 2D clocks for flash. When I switch that off and it goes back up to stock 3D clocks then performance is around to 60-80 fps mark, even hitting 100 at times.

Sometimes things just don't work - for example when I had 2 8800GT(s) in SLI Crysis performance was worse than it was with one card, despite every other game running far better with SLI on.

By the way, 32x AA? Placebo. Anything above 8x is not perceivable, this has been proven years ago. Great to see the marketing working its magic.

How many times, Toms?

If you can't be bothered, either employ someone to moderate the comments for you or just disable comment posting. End of.

I'm thinking about buying a frankenstein PC, that is, the mobo here, the card there, the cpu and power from some other name, and so on. In the end, one stormy night, in the lab tower of my castle, stitch it all together and, as electricity flows, cry:"It's alive! It's alive!"

Excuse me, I was getting off topic. How about GTX 470? is it getting THAT hot? My point is I still doubt between radeonous HD6870 and 'nvidious GTX470. Not on the results specifically (I can read roundups, thank you). It's about these funny problems after making one of them my piece of toast. Excuse me, I'm spanish and I don't know if I phrased that well enough. Just trying to relieve pressure in the clash of good vs. evil that shows up when GPU's universes collide .

Thanks in advance for your help.