WARNING - GTX460 scam! Check your hardware!

Solitaire

Ah, gotta love nVidia. Whenever they're not drowning in their own failsauce they're pulling very nasty bait-and-switch tactics with their silicon :rolleyes:

nVidia have released an unnamed budget GPU nicknamed either "GF105" or "GF104 SE", which is a crippled version of the GF104 found in GTX460s with inferior tolerances and only 288 CUDA cores, as opposed to the GF104's 336 cores. nVidia claims the GPU is designed for OEM cards only, yet the chip is going into real retail GTX460s already on the shelves.

Most of the affected cards sport an "SE" suffix but I strongly recommend that anyone who has purchased a GTX460 recently check GPU-Z or similar to see what's going on inside just to be safe. A real GTX460 will be running at 675/1350/3600MHz (GPU/shader/memory) or higher. The "SE" GPUs run at 648/1296/3400MHz and with fewer cores under the hood run ~18% slower than real GF104-based cards.

Most of the SE cards on the market run on 256bit PCBs, so be particularly suspicious of unusually cheap GTX460 1GB cards and check the model number's specifications carefully. Of course, they could easily turn up on the 192bit PCBs (as 768MB versions) soon enough so if you're in the market for a graphics upgrade be very vigilant this holiday season!

Overheal

Now see, I knew not giving my custom to nvidia would pay off down the road.

Hogzy

Balls. Just bought an MSI Cyclone 460. Paid €175 for it so i would be extremely pi$$ed off if it was a crap unit.
THanks for the heads up Solitaire. Is there any way of checking before i actually use the video card and take it out of its box?

Solitaire

Unless the clock speed is less than 675MHz (which is an automatic admission of guilt as to its Fail!) I sincerely doubt it, unless it has "SE" printed all over it! You need to plug it in and look it up with GPU-z or similar to ascertain what silicon is under the bonnet.

Hogzy

Solitaire wrote: »

Unless the clock speed is less than 675MHz (which is an automatic admission of guilt as to its Fail!) I sincerely doubt it, unless it has "SE" printed all over it! You need to plug it in and look it up with GPU-z or similar to ascertain what silicon is under the bonnet.

I'd say im safe. Its OC'd to 725 and there are fantastic reviews plastered all over the internets so id say its ok.

Solitaire

Yeah it would have to be a mistake at the factory to get one in your card, and AFAIK MSI haven't touched the GF105s with a bargepole; most of the non-OEM cards with GF105s under the bonnet are Palit/Gainward.

lmimmfn

doubt this is an Nvidia scam, it sounds more like a retailer/partner scam as it should be boxed as 460SE as its well known there exists the lesser 460 - http://www.fudzilla.com/graphics/item/20878-zotac-shows-its-own-gtx-460-se

And decent retailers( i.e proving its not just OEM ) are selling it as such, i.e. saying its a 460 SE - http://www.scan.co.uk/products/1gb-palit-gef-gtx-460-se-smart-edition

Although price wise its around the same price/even more expensive than the 768MB one.

But yeah good to post a thread on it to get people to avoid it.

Dublin_Gunner

GTX 460 SlowEdition

Solitaire

^ Heh...

Seriously though, Palit calls theirs the "Smart Edition" while Gainward calls theirs "SE" - which is just as bad as Gainward love to add two-letter codes to all their card names. How the hell could a noob tell between a 768MB "GS" and a 1GB "SE"? 1GB is bigger than 768MB so its gotta be good! :rolleyes::o

Dublin_Gunner

Solitaire wrote: »

^ Heh...

Seriously though, Palit calls theirs the "Smart Edition" while Gainward calls theirs "SE" - which is just as bad as Gainward love to add two-letter codes to all their card names. How the hell could a noob tell between a 768MB "GS" and a 1GB "SE"? 1GB is bigger than 768MB so its gotta be good! :rolleyes::o

I know I made a little joke on the name above, but the reduced shader count on the 460'SE' doesn't really seem to affect it that much. It has a higher ROP count and wider memory bus than the 'full' 768MB version. However, the faster version is obviously the 'full' 1GB version, with 336 CUDA cores, 32 ROPs and 256bit memory interface, versus 288 CUDA cores on the SE, and 192bit memory interface, and 24 ROP's on the 768MB variant.

IMO the 768MB variant is a pointless product. If you want to game at a higher res, you're gonna need the memory and the ROP's of the other two, so the slightly lower CUDA core count of the SE version doesn't really matter all that much, unless you're playing at 12x10 or on a GPU (shader heavy) bound game, as the ROP count with the wider memory bus makes almost as large a difference as the higher shader count.

They should have had the 1GB full version, and the 'SE' or 'GS' version.

Though I'd recommedn the HD6850 ahead of all of them. Priced at ~€150, its the best bang/euro card out there at the moment.

Unregistered.

Would like to see some reviews of this. I'm unsure how the differences would affect the card in non-gaming situations. Lower clocks could pave the way for a passivly cooled card with lower power consumption.

Solitaire

The clocks are only a hair slower, the big differences are the 15% drop in enabled CUDA cores and the drastically lower binning - even with the disabled cores and lower clocks they pull nearly as much power as a fully-fledged GTX460. If you want a >HD4890-grade card with lower power consumption its still HD6850 or bust!

Dublin_Gunner

Unregistered. wrote: »

Would like to see some reviews of this. I'm unsure how the differences would affect the card in non-gaming situations. Lower clocks could pave the way for a passivly cooled card with lower power consumption.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=GTX+460+SE+Review

Tea_Bag

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

IMO the 768MB variant is a pointless product.

thats a little harsh imo.
i have the 768mb version, (unfortunately paid £160 for it only a few months ago, but thats how these things work) and its eaten everything ive thrown at it. looking back, i wish i had bought the 1gb version, only because future proofing means that id easily get another 1gb to SLI down the line, but i havent been disappointed in any game yet. on a very tight budget, which i had, you come away a very happy customer.

if i had bought an SE version though, id be very upset. they arent even priced properly and someone who didnt do much research on the specific SE version before purchase will feel cheated and hard done by. you can also be sure that pc world/maplin/curry's etc will only be carrying the SE version, doubly ripping people off.

im happy with my card (except how prices have plummeted) and really like physx, but my next one will be an ATI card, simply on principle.

Dublin_Gunner

Tea_Bag wrote: »

thats a little harsh imo.
i have the 768mb version, (unfortunately paid £160 for it only a few months ago, but thats how these things work) and its eaten everything ive thrown at it. looking back, i wish i had bought the 1gb version, only because future proofing means that id easily get another 1gb to SLI down the line, but i havent been disappointed in any game yet. on a very tight budget, which i had, you come away a very happy customer.

if i had bought an SE version though, id be very upset. they arent even priced properly and someone who didnt do much research on the specific SE version before purchase will feel cheated and hard done by. you can also be sure that pc world/maplin/curry's etc will only be carrying the SE version, doubly ripping people off.

im happy with my card (except how prices have plummeted) and really like physx, but my next one will be an ATI card, simply on principle.

I didn't say it was useless, I said it was pointless.

Sure, it still performs OK, but in light of the SE 1GB, and the standard 1GB SKU's, I really don't see it being bought by anyone anymore unless the price drops considerably.

768MB is so 2006 lol (G80 style)

Unregistered.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=GTX+460+SE+Review

You're a little late.

Solitaire

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

I didn't say it was useless, I said it was pointless.

Sure, it still performs OK, but in light of the SE 1GB, and the standard 1GB SKU's, I really don't see it being bought by anyone anymore unless the price drops considerably.

768MB is so 2006 lol (G80 style)

Basically, the GF105 is great at rendering, post-processing and AFAIK also tessellation at resolutions greater than Full HD as it retains more ROPs and greater memory bandwidth than a GF104 on a 192bit PCB, but at those resolutions is very weak at texturing and at the same resolution as a GF104 will always fall behind due to the lopping-off of a whole heap of TMUs and shader/CUDA cores.

Now let me ask the question: How many of us want to game with uber image quality and light AA on a cheap-but-decent 22-24" 1080p screen on a budget, and how many of us want to play with low-medium texture quality yet have maxed AA on a single 30" 2560*1600 or three 19" 1440*900 panels having dedicated a similarly puny budget to graphics? I suspect we budget gamers shall lean toward the former, and the GF105's floating on the retail channel shall equally lean toward "bait-and-switch" :rolleyes:

Overheal

I think Tigerdirect was selling them yesterday for $150. But they were clearly marked GTX 460 SEs.

Dublin_Gunner

Solitaire wrote: »

Basically, the GF105 is great at rendering, post-processing and AFAIK also tessellation at resolutions greater than Full HD as it retains more ROPs and greater memory bandwidth than a GF104 on a 192bit PCB, but at those resolutions is very weak at texturing and at the same resolution as a GF104 will always fall behind due to the lopping-off of a whole heap of TMUs and shader/CUDA cores.

Now let me ask the question: How many of us want to game with uber image quality and light AA on a cheap-but-decent 22-24" 1080p screen on a budget, and how many of us want to play with low-medium texture quality yet have maxed AA on a single 30" 2560*1600 or three 19" 1440*900 panels having dedicated a similarly puny budget to graphics? I suspect we budget gamers shall lean toward the former, and the GF105's floating on the retail channel shall equally lean toward "bait-and-switch" :rolleyes:

Well I can tell ya, IMO for the sake of a few €€ (or even the same price), the full gtx460 1GB or HD6850 (even cheaper) and have it all...

Also, all variants are the gf104 - gf105 is a mobile gpu is it not?

Either way, unless you can get a gtx460 1GB (non SE) for less than €140~, the choice has to be the hd6850 in that price range.

Overheal

I would lean toward the 6850 with an existing Crossfire board. The obvious loss however being PhysX, but I won't give my opinion on that.

Dublin_Gunner

Overheal wrote: »

I would lean toward the 6850 with an existing Crossfire board. The obvious loss however being PhysX, but I won't give my opinion on that.

Well it certainly wouldn;t be a game changer for me.

However, if one of the very decent pre OC'd gtx460's were available for around the same price as a HD6850, the decision becomes less clear.

The Gigabyte SOC GTX460 1GB is a cracking card, just about as fast as a 5850 or gtx470 in a lot of games, but a fair chunk cheaper.

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=27537&page=6

Theres a good review of some of the oc'd hd6850's v some of the fastest gtx460's. Not quite that clear, is it?

Solitaire

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Also, all variants are the gf104 - gf105 is a mobile gpu is it not?

Is it? Ah feck, guess we'll have to call it GF104SE.

nVidia still call it GF104, which is instant scam-in-a-can. You don't call two physically different pieces of silicon the exact same production code unless you want to pull a fast one :mad: Even AMD add stuff to existing codes to differentiate cut-down silicon!

Overheal

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Well it certainly wouldn;t be a game changer for me.

However, if one of the very decent pre OC'd gtx460's were available for around the same price as a HD6850, the decision becomes less clear.

The Gigabyte SOC GTX460 1GB is a cracking card, just about as fast as a 5850 or gtx470 in a lot of games, but a fair chunk cheaper.

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=27537&page=6

Theres a good review of some of the oc'd hd6850's v some of the fastest gtx460's. Not quite that clear, is it?

And I reckon you can always swap into a SLI board in the future if you did decide on the GT. You'd probably be itching for a board upgrade in a year or two anyway, depending on it's age: I assume its DDR2 and yestergen's socket?

Dublin_Gunner

Solitaire wrote: »

Is it? Ah feck, guess we'll have to call it GF104SE.

nVidia still call it GF104, which is instant scam-in-a-can. You don't call two physically different pieces of silicon the exact same production code unless you want to pull a fast one :mad: Even AMD add stuff to existing codes to differentiate cut-down silicon!

Well the gf104 and gf104SE are the same silicon - the SE merely has one more SM laser cut than the 460 (6 instead of 7 out of 8 SMs on the full gf104 die, 48sp's & 8 TMU's per SM.)

AFAIK it is actually called the gf104SE. I'd blame the board partners more than NV on this one in fairness - they're the ones marketing a 460SE as a 460. Very subtle difference for those not in the know. (harking back to pre G80 days really)

Overheal wrote: »

And I reckon you can always swap into a SLI board in the future if you did decide on the GT. You'd probably be itching for a board upgrade in a year or two anyway, depending on it's age: I assume its DDR2 and yestergen's socket?

Eh, well it wasn't me looking for the upgrade...(is that my board you're talking about??)

Overheal

Im getting my threads crossed, dont mind me.

Dublin_Gunner

Overheal wrote: »

Im getting my threads crossed, dont mind me.

He he ok!