Attack of the Fermi desktops: More gaming PC builders announce systems with new Nvidia graphics cards

Attack of the Fermi desktops: More gaming PC builders announce systems with new Nvidia graphics cards

Summary: Seemingly minutes after I posted about CyberPower announcing gaming computers with the brand-new Nvidia GeForce GTX 470 and GTX 480 DirectX 11 cards—part of the so-called Fermi platform—a slew of other system builders announced their own Fermi desktops. Though these are pretty much existing lines that just have the new cards as upgrade options, in sum they represent a range of prices.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Hardware, Security
17

Seemingly minutes after I posted about CyberPower announcing gaming computers with the brand-new Nvidia GeForce GTX 470 and GTX 480 DirectX 11 cards—part of the so-called Fermi platform—a slew of other system builders announced their own Fermi desktops. Though these are pretty much existing lines that just have the new cards as upgrade options, in sum they represent a range of prices. Of course, that range starts at about $2,000 and can quickly escalate from there.

At that "low" end, you can get a Falcon Northwest Talon with a GTX 470 for as little as $1,851.77, a Maingear Shift with a GTX 470 for $2,099 or a Velocity Micro Edge Z55 with a GTX 470 for $2,114. You can tack on another couple hundred dollars to move up to the GTX 480. With deeper pockets comes the opportunity to added two or even three of the new boards in an SLI configuration. You can still stay under $3,000 with a Shift with two GTX 470s ($2,519) or a Falcon NW Mach V with a pair of GTX 470s ($2,900.71).

But what fun is just a dual-SLI setup? If price is no option, you can get three Fermi cards and choose the latest top-end processor, the six-core Intel Core i7-980X Extreme Edition, at the same time. For $5,864 Origin PC will overclock the i7-980X to 4.4GHz and liquid-cool a trio of GTX 480Xs.

One notable omission from the Fermi list is Alienware, though you know it's just a matter of time before that gaming PC leader will make its own announcement.

Topics: Hardware, Security

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

17 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Unknown performance

    While the new cards should be good, I don't think
    I would spend that much money until I see some
    perfmance numbers.
    tommcd64
    • They are out, but

      the main uses seem to be as space heaters and noise makers; that is hot and loud. :-)

      They are on average a tad faster than ATI/AMDs top single GPU card, but generally not recommended as a great buy.
      Economister
      • Agreed. AMD = better value, by far

        I'd rather take an AMD 890GX platform with a Radeon 5970, knowing that I can drop another 5970 in there to kill everything with an NVIDIA label for a while, and still be able to upgrade to a Phenom II X6 for a [b]reasonable[/b] amount of money, unlike with Intel.

        AMD has better value, and a better platform. Intel is just all over the place, and they lack a good platform with decent graphics.

        Hell, how does Intel compete in the $100 quad-core market like AMD does with the Athlon II X4???

        Likewise, where are the Intel business platforms with sub-$100 CPU's that support hardware virtualization technology? I'll tell you: [b]they don't exist![/b] (I hate that Microsoft went back on Virtual PC and took out the hardware VT requirement because Intel wouldn't change - they should've stuck to their guns on that one, forcing Intel to be more competitive with AMD, but it was in Microsoft's own best interest to increase sales of Windows 7 on Intel's lackluster hardware)
        Joe_Raby
        • Reminds me of the ...

          ready for Vista or whatever-it-was-called debacle. :-)

          Edit: That was MS trying to please Intel also.
          Economister
          • You mean "Vista Ready PC"

            Ya that took a lot of flak. For some systems, it worked. For the el cheapo Acer, Gateway, etc. systems, it was a flop. There are customers that will buy all kinds of cheap crap, and want a Mustang's performance for the price of a Pinto.

            Microsoft made it clear to OEM's how to market it, but OEM's didn't listen. They told them to get pre-certification for Vista-ready computers that would meet the premium requirements (WHQL for Home Premium) so that those systems would carry a premium certification logo before launch.

            Instead, you've got Acer that wants to sell $399 PC's with crap all through them (underpowered hardware, bogged down by tons of preinstalled crapware) and they want to market them with the latest-and-greatest OS, because it looks like a value-add on paper, even though the systems aren't really all that "capable". It was OEM's that were pushing Microsoft to offer lower-end versions of Windows or else not be able to sell their latest software. For any software developer not to be able to sell their latest wares, that spells death.

            The problem with "Vista Ready PC" was with the fact that Intel wanted support for GMA 900 (915 chipset) graphics included in Vista because the GMA 950, at the time, was considered Intel's "premium" integrated graphics option.

            Please keep reading after you stop laughing....

            Intel wouldn't budge, and they were still shipping mass quantities of 915 chipset systems at the time that Microsoft wanted to ship their OS (which was already delayed). So what was Microsoft going to do? Delay it even more? No, instead they decided to include a simple driver for the GMA 900 (it's essentially the same as the Standard VGA driver that ships with Vista, but identifies the hardware by name) and built a version of Vista with only basic graphics support for those low-end PC's (as well as other, older PC's with other low-end video). And we know what became of that: Vista Home Basic.

            In any case, I don't think Microsoft could've won. Their choices were:
            a) Not ship a GMA 900 driver and lose OEM sales of Vista with new low-end PC's
            b) Delay Vista even longer until all integrated graphics had DX9 capabilities
            c) Ship a Standard VGA driver with support for GMA 900 without the extra graphics effects

            FYI: The same problems arose around the low memory requirements, but that was more of an OEM issue, and there are too many OEM's to point the finger, compared to Intel over chipsets.

            Also FYI: Most of Microsoft's sales come from OEM's, and it's a necessary sin to listen to them. Those same OEM's persuaded Microsoft to carry Windows XP for Vista-Unready netbooks. I like how Microsoft dubs them "ultra low-cost PC's", because that's just a softer way of saying "underpowered PC's".
            Joe_Raby
          • Thx (nt)

            nt
            Economister
        • Of course AMD's better.. By far..

          Tho I'm not too upset with Microsoft pulling the hardware VT requirement. My main box here running Windows 7 Pro would have needed a complete gutting and rebuild. The chip/mobo in the system is socket 939 - meaning NO CPUs with hardware virtualization. Now I can take advantage of playing around with XP Mode without having to buy a new box.

          For the record - XP Mode on this system (AMD Athlon 64 3400+ with 1 GB RAM) - runs pretty darn well considering it's a 4 yr old system.

          Granted XP Mode is slow to boot - but then again, XP on this system was fairly slow to boot as well. Then again, I'm not using it for anything specific - everything I've got pretty much just works out of the box with Windows 7. Just to find settings when someone calls me for support.
          Wolfie2K3
          • Recommendations

            Upgrading your RAM will help. Ok, granted XP Mode now works on Windows 7 without VT, you still need 1GB of RAM [b]minimum[/b] for Windows 7 itself (for 32-bit - 64-bit minimum is 2GB), plus another 1GB of RAM for XP Mode (512MB for the OS, plus some overhead for Virtual PC) for it to run well, especially with the integration features.

            Aside from the USB support, I wonder how much different, performance-wise, Windows Virtual PC is from the older Virtual PC 2007 with all the patches on the same hardware....

            FYI: I had a Sony VAIO P (Atom Z520 1.33GHz, 2GB RAM), and as soon as the VT support was added by Sony into the BIOS, I tried Virtual PC (the new one) and it was just too horrible to describe.
            Joe_Raby
  • RE: Attack of the Fermi desktops: More gaming PC builders announce systems with new Nvidia graphics cards

    "More gaming PC builders announce systems with new Nvidia
    graphics cards"

    LOL - we're an organized group now?
    CobraA1
  • What about individual cards?

    "At that 'low' end, you can get . . ."

    . . . you can probably upgrade an existing system. It's
    not unusual for gamers to upgrade existing systems or
    build systems from scratch. You pay a lot more to slap a
    brand name onto a machine.

    I'd like to to know if individual cards are for sale yet,
    and at what price.
    CobraA1
    • Prices, yes, but cards, no

      http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=gtx+480
      Joe_Raby
      • Don't forget the 470 series..

        They're going for around $349...
        Wolfie2K3
        • I didn't forget

          At that price though, I'd probably want to spend the extra $50-70 for a Radeon HD 5870 instead.
          Joe_Raby
  • RE: Attack of the Fermi desktops: More gaming PC builders announce systems with new Nvidia graphics cards

    evidently. since we are, put us, Psychsoftpc (www.psychsoftpc.com), on the band wagon
    psoft@...
  • Im running dual 8800GTX in Sli mode

    I'm running dual 8800GTX in Sli mode. Playing battlefield bad company 2, every setting maxed,including antialising 16xQ csaa,Anisotrophic 16x,1400x900 and having outstanding performance. I will wait until the prices come way down and they actually make some games that i like that i can use the boards with.

    See a reviews and some vids and its truly outstanding what they can do with them boards,but i can wait for the price to come down--ALOT lol
    Stan57
  • Tired of nVidia junk technology

    nVidia will never again reside in any of my machines.
    Narg
  • RE: Attack of the Fermi desktops: More gaming PC builders announce systems with new Nvidia graphics cards

    I don't know that I would trust Alienware after Dell bought them out. Certainly wouldn't use them as a standard for comparison. As a previous poster said most hard core gamers build or upgrade their own system instead of paying for a brand name. I certainly don't want to pay for the ability to call India for support.
    Greenman76