Slashdot Mirror
NVIDIA Ships Decent DX10 Graphics Card For Under $100
MojoKid writes "NVIDIA is launching a new mainstream graphics card today, aimed at consumers in the market for a relatively low-cost upgrade from an integrated graphics solution or older entry-level GPU. The new GeForce GT 240 features a GPU with 96 processor cores, 8 ROP units, and 32 texture filtering units. The GPU is manufactured using a 40nm process, features a GDDR5 memory controller (that's also compatible with GDDR3), and unlike NVIDIA's current high-end GPUs, the GT 240 is DirectX 10.1 compatible. For $100 or less, what's perhaps most interesting is that this graphics card actually puts up respectable frame rates with AA turned on and no external power needed beyond what a standard PCIe slot provides."
How does the GT240 compare to a 9400M?
I prefer the performance graphs/comparisons at Tom's Hardware.
While I understand that there is a psychological influence of the whole "under $100" mark, is it really that much different than the standard price reductions and increasing power of graphics cards over time?
Integrated graphics aren't bad by design, just implementation.
This or better could be integrated, but instead what ends up as integrated graphics is the most bottom barrel POS that is barely capable of displaying a desktop wallpaper.
If they can stick it in a laptop, they can put it on a motherboard.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
If a device can display video at 1080p 24+ frames per second, what's the point of more?
Displaying a video and rendering a 3d scene are two entirely different things. With a video you don't need textures, bump mapping, or dynamic lighting, you just play the frames.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
ATI really doesn't have a card at this price point, which is probably why nVidia came up with this guy, to try to snap up the marketshare on people who have $100 to spend on a video card. Their old product at this price point was discontinued, but the replacement should be out in a couple of months or so.
I read the internet for the articles.
This card is VDPAU Featur Set C. Which is the
Currently, the portions capable of being offloaded by VDPAU onto the GPU are motion compensation (mo comp), inverse discrete cosine transform (iDCT) and VLD (Variable-Length Decoding) for MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 ASP (MPEG-4 Part 2), MPEG-4 AVC (H.264 / DivX 6), VC-1, WMV3/WMV9, Xvid / OpenDivX (DivX 4), and DivX 5 encoded videos.
My CPU never broke 10% with anything from Xvid to 1080p x264.
Now if we could only get the sound working
Last I checked AMD just finally released XvBA with features that VDPAU had last year.
Can you clarify your use of the word almost? I read that chart as 30-60fps depending on resolution.
Are my standards too low?
Nice chip. I'm waiting until you make a 40nm GPU that beats the 9800GT. 40mn is required because heat and noise are crucial to me. All of your fast 2xx series stuff is hot and power hungry, so I haven't moved.
Listen carefully: My magic price point is $200 or less. TPD must be no more than approximately 100W, ah la the 9800GT. I want 1GB (but I'll settle for 768) because 512MB is too small now. I have never cared about SLI and I won't start anytime soon. I *DO* care about heat and noise, so make these damn card builders use good cooling, which I define as "can tolerate less than perfect airflow (because fan filled holes = noise) using 1 large, quiet fan, at FULL load."
Do that and I'll upgrade. Don't and I'll look very hard at Larrabee...
- Loyal NVidia buyer
Some day, ATI will have better drivers than Nvidia, and they'll even be open source. But today, Radeons don't have video acceleration at all, and certainly nothing nearly in the same league as VDPAU.
And video acceleration is the main reason someone would have a 9400M.
You're telling people to upgrade from something that works, to something that doesn't work. The original poster was probably asking if 9400M to GT240 would be an upgrade from something that works, to something that works better.
Anyway, to answer the question: with the GT240, you get MPEG4 acceleration. My dual-core Atom can already play MPEG4 with CPU, but it does sometimes tear, unlike MPEG2, h.264, etc. Doing that with dedicated hardware (which a top-of-the-line most-expensive Radeon that money can buy, is unable to do) would be pretty sweet.
Come on, nVidia... Stop with the re-branding already.
This is just a die-shrunk 9800 GT, which was just a die-shrunk 8800 GT.
Yes, it's a great card for $100. But stop misleading people into thinking it's the same tech as the GTX 260-285.
(They did the same with the "GTS 250", which is just a re-badged 9800 GTX, which was just a re-badged 8800 GTS.)
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com."
The purpose of that site was not known.
I paid 76 dollars for my 9600 GT, fanless, and it' is direct x 10 compatible.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The've been doing it for ages.
A geforce 4 mx was based on the geforce 2 chip set. So it was not only weaker then the other geforce 4 cards, it was also weaker then the previous, third generation. The reason that they keep doing this is quite simple, they sold even if every magazine listed is as a must avoid:
"Despite harsh criticism by gaming enthusiasts, the GeForce4 MX was a market success. Priced about 30% above the GeForce 2 MX, it provided better performance, the ability to play a number of popular games that the GeForce 2 could not run well—above all else—to the average non-specialist it sounded as if it were a "real" GeForce4—i.e., a GeForce4 Ti. Although it was frequently out-performed by the older and more expensive GeForce 3, many buyers were unaware, particularly as Nvidia was quick not to let the GeForce 3 remain on the market. GeForce 4 MX was particularly successful in the PC OEM market, and rapidly replaced the GeForce 2 MX as the best-selling GPU.".
This is one generation old (not two) and more than adequate for the casual gamer. It's also under $100. It's also available in AGP, which is why I own one.
Mal-2
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
There's a silent 5750 coming out next week. Low power, silent, but able to play anything out there.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
This guy doesn't know what he's talking about.
First off, DX 10 and 10.1 have a lot more in common than DX 10.1 and 11, hence the version numbers. DX 10.1 was largely a more strict version of the DX 10 standard, for example requiring 4x FSAA filtering and 32-bit FP rendering. Well all DX 10 hardware supports that anyhow so no big deal. Still there were differences that required new hardware to fully support 10.1.
Now DX 11 has some new stuff and DX 10.1 cards are NOT compatible. Tessellation is one of those and yes earlier ATi cards do have a tessellator, but it's not DX11 compatible. However that's now all that's new. Another big one would be Shader Model 5.0. This adds various features such as double precision support and a new compute shader "basically a way of addressing the shader hardware for GPGPU stuff).
So older cards are NOT DX 11 capable. A notable absence in the ATi 4 series would be double precision support.
I should note that this doesn't mean that they can't use the DX 11 library, it just means they don't support DX 11 features. The break between 9 and 10 (where old hardware couldn't support 10 at all) appears to be the last for awhile. DX 10 hardware can use DX 10.1 and DX 11 APIs, but it doesn't support the new features.
However when someone calls something a "DX 11 card" what they mean is "A card that supports the full DX 11 feature set." Currently the only cards on the market meeting that designation are the ATi 5000 series. The ATi 4000 series are DX 10.1 cards.
For more info on what's new in DX 11 see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee417843(VS.85).aspx#Full that's MS's page on it which will get as highly technical as you'd like.
1.7% yields of Fermi GPUs in first batch.
Wooden screws used in the non-working Fermi prototype card which Nvidia claimed was working.
Q2 2010 release date now for consumer Fermi GPUs instead of the promised Q4 2009 release.
20% clock miss on Fermi architecture.
And now they're releasing re-badged crap yet again.
When will it end?