Is this worth it?

J

JakeMFBacon

New Member
they have the gtx 465 SC at frys for 265 -55 instant savings and 35 rebate = 180 . Is it worth it or is the 460 for 220 still better?
 
Look at some benchmarks. the 460 is usualy equal to/beats the 465 by a small margin. Uses less power, makes less heat.
 
JakeMFBacon said:
they have the gtx 465 SC at frys for 265 -55 instant savings and 35 rebate = 180 . Is it worth it or is the 460 for 220 still better?
Click to expand...

I agreee with Linkin, the 460 is the better card. I would personally pay the extra $40 for the 460 over a 465. That is assuming it is a 1GiB 460, not 768MB
 
dont get things mixed up now,there are two gtx460's one with 192bit/768mb and one with 256bit/1GB both have the same stream processors at 336. the gtx465 is the same as a gtx460 with 256bit/1GB, just lower clocks and comes with 16 more Stream Processors at 352. I would get the gtx465 for two reason's, it's cheaper and it has more stream processors, everything else is the same except for the clock speeds which you can OC to match the gtx460.Than it would be better/faster at a lower cost
 
Last edited:
tech savvy said:
dont get things mixed up now,there are two gtx460's one with 192bit/768mb and one with 256bit/1GB both have the same stream processors at 336. the gtx465 is the same as a gtx460 with 256bit/1GB, just lower clocks and comes with 16 more Stream Processors at 352. I would get the gtx465 for two reason's, it's cheaper and it has more stream processors, everything else is the same except for the clock speeds which you can OC to match the gtx460.Than it would be better/faster at a lower cost
Click to expand...

and would be producing more heat and using more power...

The 460 is a revised version of the 465, in so much as it is designed to have near the same performance, yet be more efficient, which it does both of

JakeMFBacon said:
Well I was comparing the 1gb 460 to the 1gb 465
Click to expand...

1GiB 460 would be my choice, hands down for performance, price, power usage, everything
 
16 more stream processors is not even close to making it worth the negatives on the gtx465.
The GF104 chipset is a more efficient design than the GF100. So OK you can overclock the 465 to match the 460 clocks, but what about overclocking the 460???
 
Lol, the 465 is only going to use a few more watts, like 10 or less and produce maybe 5-10 degree's higher in temps.ya'll putting it like it's outrageously more hotter/more watts but it's not.i can see if it was 20-30 degrees hotter and uses 20-30 more watts.
 
tech savvy said:
Lol, the 465 is only going to use a few more watts, like 10 or less and produce maybe 5-10 degree's higher in temps.ya'll putting it like it's outrageously more hotter/more watts but it's not.i can see if it was 20-30 degrees hotter and uses 20-30 more watts.
Click to expand...

lower temps initially = more room for overclocks.

I assume you are on about everything at stock on both cards. If you OC the 465 to 460 specs, the heat production will be much higher again, lowering the performance gain you will be able to get out of the card because you will hit the temperature head sooner. That and the whole point of a gaming system, which must be fairly high performance, is to get the best out of it to make your games look as good as they can with what you have. To do that you want everything being on its limits, and if your video card is putting out more heat than another almost exactly the same card, you are going to be raiseing internal temps, not just affecting how far your video card can go, but how far your CPU and memory can go, and potentially the life/stability if you aren't monitoring temps properly and things are getting too hot.

You can't disagree with facts and figures from both cards, and nvidia themselves who designed the 460 to be a better card than the 465
 
tech savvy said:
Lol, the 465 is only going to use a few more watts, like 10 or less and produce maybe 5-10 degree's higher in temps.ya'll putting it like it's outrageously more hotter/more watts but it's not.i can see if it was 20-30 degrees hotter and uses 20-30 more watts.
Click to expand...


The joke is on you. How about 60-80 watts more and 20c hotter?

237401.png


237371.png


237361.png


The 1gb 460 beats the 465 is EVERY single benchmark-

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/nvidias-geforce-gtx-460-the-200-king/6

465's also don't overclock very well. My 460 does 850 core clock on stock volts, 900 with the max capped voltage which is only .07 volts more than stock. All 460's can get to 800 easily, and at that clock it will chew up and spit out a an overclocked 465 even if it makes it to 750 whcih I doubt I hear most have trouble getting past 700.
 
Last edited:
Aastii said:
lower temps initially = more room for overclocks.

I assume you are on about everything at stock on both cards. If you OC the 465 to 460 specs, the heat production will be much higher again, lowering the performance gain you will be able to get out of the card because you will hit the temperature head sooner. That and the whole point of a gaming system, which must be fairly high performance, is to get the best out of it to make your games look as good as they can with what you have. To do that you want everything being on its limits, and if your video card is putting out more heat than another almost exactly the same card, you are going to be raiseing internal temps, not just affecting how far your video card can go, but how far your CPU and memory can go, and potentially the life/stability if you aren't monitoring temps properly and things are getting too hot.

You can't disagree with facts and figures from both cards, and nvidia themselves who designed the 460 to be a better card than the 465
Click to expand...

+1

465 is just a hugely cut-down GTX480, GTX460 is all new, GF104 core, less heat, less power consumption and better overclocker. nVidia made yet another naming blunder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top