🚀 go-pugleaf

Tanzen <waldby...@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the entrails of
the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>On 7/1/2013 8:05 AM, Xocyll wrote:
>> Tanzen <waldby...@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the entrails of
>> the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:
>>
>>> Whoever said that is extremely prone to exaggeration.
>>
>> I said it, quoting hardware reviews I read online.
>>
>> It's 2.5 months away from being 3 years old (introduced Sept 13, 2010)
>> and it was aimed at the midrange market.
>>
>> See for instance
>> http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/NVIDIA_GTS_450/
>>
>> You don't get high performance cards for less than $200, that's the
>> midrange/budget area.  High end is going to run probably $400 and up
>> (can get a GTX 670 locally around $400 up to the GTX Titan at $1079.)
>>
>> You can get a lot of performance out of a modern midrange card, but
>> you'll never be able to max out all the graphic settings in a new game
>> (unless that game has graphics that aren't modern.)
>>
>> My current card is a generation newer than yours (GTX 550 Ti,)
>> outperforms your card in every way, and was a midrange card when I
>> bought it a couple years back.   It was designed as a midrange card,
>> just as yours was.
>>
>> Mine is still enough for me in most games simply because I don't use
>> FSAA and AF and if need be I can turn down/off shadows and not really
>> miss them, and I don't need more than 30FPS ever, giving me enough
>> performance for my needs.  In games that let you do it, reducing
>> particle count for physics stuff can also give a relatively huge
>> performance boost without changing the visuals much.)
>>
>> You might find this chart handy for comparisons when your shopping for
>> your next card.   (Not a substitute for reading reviews about the
>> specific card(s) you're considering, but will give you a broad overview
>> of relative power.)
>>
>> Xocyll
>>
>
>I wouldn't be so quick to think you know what my card does.  

I can google, I know EXACTLY what your card can do.

>I've seen 
>pictures of the 450 on nVidia and they show a fairly usual looking card 
>with a fan.  Mine is a European model, and most of the card consists of 
>heat sinks.  There is no fan.  It's a GTS 450 Zone Edition Silent 
>Passive video card. Maybe the specs are similar to the one with a fan, 
>but I doubt they are identical.

Your card is made by Zotac and they manufacture in China and ship
worldwide not just to Europe.

In fact it looks like your Zotac GTS 450 is actually weaker than a
standard chipset GTS 450.  The spec calls for DDR5 Vram, but Zotac uses
DDR3 on the Zone Edition and the core clock is MUCH lower (they actually
follow spec on the active cooled version.)

From
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Zotac-s-Passively-Cooled-GTS-450-Zone-Edition-Makes-Appearance-236042.shtml
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In order to achieve this feat, Zotac had to lower the operating
frequencies of the GTS 450 Zone Edition as the GPU is now clocked at
600MHz, while the 1GB of DDR3 memory works at 667MHz (1334MHz data
rate).

In comparison, the standard version of the GTS 450 comes with a 783MHz
core clock and with 1GB of GDDR5 memory that is running at 902MHz
(3.608GHz data rate)."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

You use less power and make less noise at a CONSIDERABLE loss in
performance. 
(Oh and GTS 450s come with up to 920Mhz core clocks retail - EVGA active
cooled.  That's a full 50% faster than your card with faster Vram too.)

Your card was not only midrange, it was on the low end of midrange when
it was new, because it's "silent".



The link I put in the last post accidentally got snipped out when I
edited, here it is.

Video Card Hierarchy chart.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

Xocyll