NVIDIA's GeForce GT 430: The Next HTPC King?
by Ryan Smith & Ganesh T S on October 11, 2010 9:00 AM ESTBattleForge: DX10
Up next is BattleForge, Electronic Arts’ free to play online RTS. As far as RTSes go this game can be quite demanding, and this is just at DX10. DX11 isn’t even a practical option for value cards like the GT 430.
The GT 430 fares even worse here than it did in Crysis. We had always considered BattleForge to be a shader-constrained game, but at these lower settings there’s a lot of proof that we’re looking at ROPs and/or memory bandwidth, both of which the GT 430 is short on. The Radeon 5670 is approaching double the performance for the same price, a very dire outcome for the GT 430.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
120 Comments
View All Comments
n9ntje - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
Sad to see Nvidia doesn't live up to expectations, while they want us to believe that they have a perfect HTPC card, it isn't.To most people, image quality counts. 3D is still a niche.
IceDread - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
Yeap, it's always best if the competition is even, gives us the best prices.medi01 - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
I am afraid market is too slow to react to nVidia having worse products, AMD has nowhere near market share that it deserves to have.We can't expect one player to dominate all the time. So when the underdog creates superior products, it should benefit from it. But this is not the case in GPU market, unfortunatelly, as nVidia still keeps much bigger market share, than AMD.
dnd728 - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
I've tried quite a few ATI/AMD cards over the years, including the latest 5000 series, and to date not a single one of them worked right, i.e. without keep crashing Windows.It could be one reason.
electroju - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
I agree and I have also used ATI and AMD graphics over the years. AMD graphics writes the worst software or drivers from a reputable company. I go with nVidia because I care for reliability and stability. I do not mind spending money on nVidia graphics because the money goes towards software development. The cost of AMD graphics is too low to provide enough for software development.Zoomer - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
I have personally found nvidia cards to have inferior hardware quality. This was very evident from the time when quality dacs for vga mattered, and nvidia cards absolutely sucked at that. Further suboptimal decisions made their cards meh.Software wise, I thought nvidia's software quality peaked around the time of the detonators.
AmdInside - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
DACs depended on the maker of the card. Quadro NVS cards which were made by NVIDIA were regarding as having excellent 2D image quality over analog display. Sadly a lot of NVIDIA partners used cheap DACs on some of their cards.mentatstrategy - Wednesday, October 13, 2010 - link
Nvidia Fanboi: I have used ati cards and they suck!ATI Fanboi: I have used nvidia cards and they suck!
heflys - Monday, October 11, 2010 - link
Hmmm....Haven't had a problem with ATi/AMD drivers thus far.duploxxx - Friday, October 15, 2010 - link
perhaps you need to read a bit more and see how many 1000's have been recently been affected by this awesome nvidia reliability and stability when they all had to throw away there graphic cards and laptops.