ASUS GeForce GTX-465 Video Card E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Video Cards
Written by Olin Coles   
Tuesday, 22 June 2010
Table of Contents: Page Index
ASUS GeForce GTX-465 Video Card
Features and Specifications
NVIDIA GF100 GPU Fermi Architecture
Closer Look: ASUS GeForce GTX-465
Video Card Testing Methodology
DX10: 3DMark Vantage
DX10: Crysis Warhead
DX10: Far Cry 2
DX10: Resident Evil 5
DX11: Aliens vs Predator
DX11: Battlefield Bad Company 2
DX11: BattleForge
DX11: Metro 2033
DX11: Unigine Heaven 2.1
NVIDIA APEX PhysX Enhancements
NVIDIA 3D-Vision Effects
GeForce GTX465 Temperatures
VGA Power Consumption
ASUS SmartDoctor and GamerOSD
Editors Opinion: Fermi GF100
ASUS ENGTX465 Conclusion

NVIDIA Fermi Features

In today's complex graphics, tessellation offers the means to store massive amounts of coarse geometry, with expand-on-demand functionality. In the NVIDIA GF100 GPU, tessellation also enables more complex animations. In terms of model scalability, dynamic Level of Detail (LOD) allows for quality and performance trade-offs whenever it can deliver better picture quality over performance without penalty. Comprised of three layers (original geometry, tessellation geometry, and displacement map), the final product is far more detailed in shade and data-expansion than if it were constructed with bump-map technology. In plain terms, tessellation gives the peaks and valleys with shadow detail in-between, while previous-generation technology (bump-mapping) would give the illusion of detail.


Stages of Tessellation with NVIDIA Fermi Graphics

Using GPU-based tessellation, a game developer can send a compact geometric representation of an object or character and the tessellation unit can produce the correct geometric complexity for the specific scene. Consider the "Imp" character illustrated above. On the far left we see the initial quad mesh used to model the general outline of the figure; this representation is quite compact even when compared to typical game assets. The two middle images of the character are created by finely tessellating the description at the left. The result is a very smooth appearance, free of any of the faceting that resulted from limited geometry. Unfortunately this character, while smooth, is no more detailed than the coarse mesh. The final image on the right was created by applying a displacement map to the smoothly tessellated third character to the left.

Tessellation in DirectX-11

Control hull shaders run DX11 pre-expansion routines, and operates explicitly in parallel across all points. Domain shaders run post-expansion operations on maps (u/v or x/y/z/w) and is also implicitly parallel. Fixed function tessellation is configured by Level of Detail (LOD) based on output from the control hull shader, and can also produce triangles and lines if requested. Tessellation is something that is new to NVIDIA GPUs, and was not part of GT200 because of geometry bandwidth bottlenecks from sequential rendering/execution semantics.

In regard to the GF100 graphics processor, NVIDIA has added a new PolyMorph and Raster engines to handle world-space processing (PolyMorph) and screen-space processing (Raster). There are sixteen PolyMorph engines and four Raster engines on the GF100, which depend on an improved L2 cache to keep buffered geometric data produced by the pipeline on-die.

Four-Offset Gather4

The texture unit on previous processor architectures operated at the core clock of the GPU. On GF100, the texture units run at a higher clock, leading to improved texturing performance for the same number of units. GF100's texture units now add support for DirectX-11's BC6H and BC7 texture compression formats, reducing the memory footprint of HDR textures and render targets.

The texture units also support jittered sampling through DirectX-11's four-offset Gather4 feature, allowing four texels to be fetched from a 128×128 pixel grid with a single texture instruction. NVIDIA's GF100 implements DirectX-11 four-offset Gather4 in hardware, greatly accelerating shadow mapping, ambient occlusion, and post processing algorithms. With jittered sampling, games can implement smoother soft shadows or custom texture filters efficiently. The previous GT200 GPU did not offer coverage samples, while the GF100 can deliver 32x CSAA.

GF100 Compute for Gaming

As developers continue to search for novel ways to improve their graphics engines, the GPU will need to excel at a diverse and growing set of graphics algorithms. Since these algorithms are executed via general compute APIs, a robust compute architecture is fundamental to a GPU's graphical capabilities. In essence, one can think of compute as the new programmable shader. GF100's compute architecture is designed to address a wider range of algorithms and to facilitate more pervasive use of the GPU for solving parallel problems. Many algorithms, such as ray tracing, physics, and AI, cannot exploit shared memory-program memory locality is only revealed at runtime. GF100's cache architecture was designed with these problems in mind. With up to 48 KB of L1 cache per Streaming Multiprocessor (SM) and a global L2 cache, threads that access the same memory locations at runtime automatically run faster, irrespective of the choice of algorithm.

NVIDIA Codename NEXUS brings CPU and GPU code development together in Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 for a shared process timeline. NEXUS also introduces the first hardware-based shader debugger. NVIDIA's GF100 is the first GPU to ever offer full C++ support, the programming language of choice among game developers. To ease the transition to GPU programming, NVIDIA developed Nexus, a Microsoft Visual Studio programming environment for the GPU. Together with new hardware features that provide better debugging support, developers will be able enjoy CPU-class application development on the GPU. The end results is C++ and Visual Studio integration that brings HPC users into the same platform of development. NVIDIA offers several paths to deliver compute functionality on the GF100 GPU, such as CUDA C++ for video games.

Image processing, simulation, and hybrid rendering are three primary functions of GPU compute for gaming. Using NVIDIA's GF100 GPU, interactive ray tracing becomes possible for the first time on a standard PC. Ray tracing performance on the NVIDIA GF100 is roughly 4x faster than it was on the GT200 GPU, according to NVIDIA tests. AI/path finding is a compute intensive process well suited for GPUs. The NVIDIA GF100 can handle AI obstacles approximately 3x better than on the GT200. Benefits from this improvement are faster collision avoidance and shortest path searches for higher-performance path finding.

GF100 Specifications

  • Up to 512 CUDA Cores
  • 16 Geometry Units
  • 4 Raster Units
  • 64 Texture Units
  • 48 ROP Units
  • 384-bit GDDR5
  • DirectX-11 API Support

GeForce Specifications

Graphics Card

GeForce GTX 285

GeForce GTX 465

GeForce GTX 470

GeForce GTX 480

GPU Transistors 1.4 Billion 3.2 Billion 3.2 Billion 3.2 Billion

Graphics Processing Clusters





Streaming Multiprocessors





CUDA Cores





Texture Units





ROP Units





Graphics Clock
(Fixed Function Units)

648 MHz

607 MHz

607 MHz

700 MHz

Processor Clock
(CUDA Cores)

1476 MHz

1215 MHz

1215 MHz

1401 MHz

Memory Clock
(Clock Rate/Data Rate)

1242/2484 MHz

837/3348 MHz

837/3348 MHz

924/3696 MHz

Total Video Memory

1024 MB

1024 MB

1280 MB

1536 MB

Memory Interface





Total Memory Bandwidth

159.0 GB/s

102.6 GB/s

133.9 GB/s

177.4 GB/s

Texture Filtering Rate

51.8 GigaTexels/s

26.7 GigaTexels/s

34.0 GigaTexels/s

42.0 GigaTexels/s

GPU Fabrication Process

55 nm

40 nm

40 nm

40 nm

Output Connections

2x Dual-Link DVI-I
1x S-Video

2x Dual-Link DVI-I
1x Mini HDMI

2x Dual-Link DVI-I
1x Mini HDMI

2x Dual-Link DVI-I
1x Mini HDMI

Form Factor





Power Input

2x 6-Pin

2x 6-Pin

2x 6-Pin

6-Pin + 8-Pin

Max Board Power (TDP)

204 Watts

200 Watts

215 Watts

250 Watts

Recommended PSU

550 Watts

550 Watts

550 Watts

600 Watts

GPU Thermal Threshold





Chart Courtesy of Benchmark Reviews



# Little mistake...BETA911 2010-06-21 23:33
At Battleforge, how can a none DX11 card (9800GTX+) be in the charts when DX11 is tested? Same with the HD490.
Then, the HD5770 is not 256-bit but 128-bit!
Report Comment
# RE: Little mistake...Olin Coles 2010-06-22 06:07
Thanks for finding that typo - it's been fixed. I'll update the chart, too, since those products shouldn't be included. Even though the game allows them to benchmark with the same settings, they're not compliant and likely ignore the DX11 extensions.
Report Comment
# A Strange review pt1The Crouch 2010-06-22 11:50
I'm really sorry, but this review does not make much sense to me. Not compared to other reviews mind you, but in itself!

I count 5 clear wins for the 5850, 3 for the 465 and one wash (Resident evil 5). From the 465's point of view, thats a staggering 67% more wins for the 5850!!
Report Comment
# A Strange review pt2The Crouch 2010-06-22 11:52
When it comes to the value numbers you provide I count 5 wins for the 5850 and 4 for the 465 (RE5 is clearly a 465 win).

And by the way, I don't count the two parts of 3D vantage as separate tests.

So not only is the 5850 the faster card with over half the tests won, more importantly, it also offers the most bang for your buck! All according to your own figures!

At least to me, this would count as a clear win for the 5850, but that is hardly what I see in the summary.

Also worth mentioning i think: Having been on Newegg on a few occasions, $305 seemed a bit steep for a 5850, and for aspiring customers for a graphics card, I can tell a 5850 can be found for $285. Only $5 more expensive than the price for the 465 you are quoting, and with that small difference I think the value numbers throughout the test would look a bit different.
Report Comment
# RE: A Strange review pt2Olin Coles 2010-06-22 16:03
Based on NewEgg prices today, nearly every single Radeon HD 5850 is priced above $305 with an average price of $325 (I did the math). Conversely, several models of the GTX-465 sells for as little as $250, with an average price of $260. That makes the Radeon HD 5850 22~25% more expensive... but does it perform 22~25% better? No, it doesn't. It doesn't even perform better than the GTX-465 all of the time; only 'some' of the time... slightly more than half (as you point out). So should a card that costs $55-75 more than GTX-465 be considered the best value when it doesn't even offer a relative boost to performance? I don't think so.
You should also check your math on the cost per FPS, because the GTX-465 beats the Radeon 5850 in nearly all of them.
Report Comment
# Thank you !SiliconDoc 2010-06-27 17:10
I came here to see just how much red raging rooster ATI bias was here on the gtx465.
I thank you and congratulate you for your response to the commenter.
I sit here absolutely STUNNED. I can't believe that somebody didn't just "take it" and nearly agree with the ati fan fraud.
My faith in humanity has been renewed.
Believe me, I really, really appreciate it.
Sincerely sick of the rampant red bias,
Report Comment
# Is a 1~2 FPS lead really a win?Olin Coles 2010-06-22 17:54
Is a 1~2 FPS lead really a win? You might see it that way, but I don't. Especially when the Radeon HD 5850 costs $55 more.
Report Comment
# RE: ASUS GeForce GTX-465 Video CardStephen E 2010-06-22 16:48
About the VGA Power Comparison that you did, can you provide a sample calculation on how you came up with your data?

Did you just report the AC Power differnence between no graphic card in the system and with the Graphics card installed? Did you try to take into account the PSU efficiency?
Report Comment
# RE: RE: ASUS GeForce GTX-465 Video CardOlin Coles 2010-06-22 16:53
From the power consumption section: "A baseline test is taken without a video card installed inside our test computer system, which is allowed to boot into Windows-7 and rest idle at the login screen before power consumption is recorded. Once the baseline reading has been taken, the graphics card is installed and the system is again booted into Windows and left idle at the login screen. Our final loaded power consumption reading is taken with the video card running a stress test using FurMark. Below is a chart with the isolated video card power consumption (not system total) displayed in Watts for each specified test product."

Power supply efficiency is not taken into consideration for any of our reported results. Only the motherboard, processor, memory, SSD, and video card are drawing power. The math is simply idle/load result minus baseline.
Report Comment
# Weird...xtremesv 2010-06-22 18:04
Why do reviewers still benchmark FarCry 2? Is it a requirement recommended (imposed) by Nvidia?

And I don't get your pricing figures. I found a 5850 for $285 and another for $305 in Newegg... the ones you mention beyond $325 include special cooling designs.
Report Comment
# nooneoverclockyourkeyboard 2012-02-11 03:10
hey do you know that i got my zotac gtx 465 at just 7250 which is $147.17(converted to USD) and the 5850 costs 14950 which is $303.48.At this price i can sli a gtx 465 and when you sli a gtx 465 against a 5850 clearly 465's the winner.I dunno why the prices aren't coming down for the 5850.
Report Comment

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews

Like Benchmark Reviews on FacebookFollow Benchmark Reviews on Twitter