480 GTX vs. 580 GTX

[kaydub 3]

There are a number of programs out there. Are you keeping track of your temps under load? On the motherboard and on the videocard? You can generate a lot of heat with the 480. What card do you have?K

[jjjallen 37]

what program do I need to overclock my 480?

This one works well Ron: http://downloads.guru3d.com/Afterburner-2.1.0-Beta-5-download-2604.htmljja

[Scott434 12]

I was impressed with SpiritFlyer's report and impressed with the 580 and once again got caught up in the “new toy” mood. So much so, I fired up newegg and put an EVGA 580SC in my shopping cart when I got distracted by something (can’t remember). No problem I thought, I will come back to it. When I finally returned this morning, NewEgg had updated my cart by removing the 580 because they were out of stock. No problem, it is not like I really needed it, so I did a few flights (PMDG 747, BeaverX etc) and was tweaking my 480 and CPU fan profiles and the 6 different case fans to see if I could improve my Antec 1200 case airflow. Part of my video upgrade was going to be (and likely will be) a move to the Prolimatech SuperMega cooler with a 140mm pwm fan to support a bit more OC. I wanted to get some baseline numbers for temps and fan speeds to compare. Something kept nagging at me. It was the % Utilization of the 480 GPU. Most of the time it was below 50% including in the pmdg747 landing at ksfo. I was now in a subdued mood since the facts were ruining my “can’t wait to get a new toy for Christmas” mood. So a war broke out between the little voices. “You don’t need it”… “I want it though”… “you can’t justify it” … ya but it’s a new toy it will be cool”… “what would a sane person do?... Back and forth it continued…I decided to put the whole topic on hold for a while and try to see what might be coming up if I waited this round out.FSX is stuck in time (“old tech, no path forward, cpu bound” etc). I mean I am very appreciative that we have a FSX (pmdg etc) but it’s tapped out and technologically dead compared to the other applications that can utilize multiple CPUs and GPUs (including things like CUDA etc).I have been frequenting the MS Flight site (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) to see if there was any more info. There is a recent new webisode and a bit of news (Dec 8 I believe, nothing earth shattering like dates or anything). There is a bit of verbiage that hints at utilization of hardware etc. It got me hoping that multiple GPUs and multi CPUs for FS are coming. I kept watching the videos … dreaming.So I made a decision. My next video card will be purchased after I see what the landscape is with MS Flight and it WILL have multiple GPUs. I am targeting Dec 25, 2011!!!. No more “for FSX only” purchases (pmdg exempt of course!!).What are others thinking? PS. Safe happy holidays to everyone.

[jjjallen 37]

I was impressed with SpiritFlyer's report and impressed with the 580 and once again got caught up in the “new toy” mood. So much so, I fired up newegg and put an EVGA 580SC in my shopping cart when I got distracted by something (can’t remember). No problem I thought, I will come back to it. When I finally returned this morning, NewEgg had updated my cart by removing the 580 because they were out of stock. No problem, it is not like I really needed it, so I did a few flights (PMDG 747, BeaverX etc) and was tweaking my 480 and CPU fan profiles and the 6 different case fans to see if I could improve my Antec 1200 case airflow. Part of my video upgrade was going to be (and likely will be) a move to the Prolimatech SuperMega cooler with a 140mm pwm fan to support a bit more OC. I wanted to get some baseline numbers for temps and fan speeds to compare. Something kept nagging at me. It was the % Utilization of the 480 GPU. Most of the time it was below 50% including in the pmdg747 landing at ksfo. I was now in a subdued mood since the facts were ruining my “can’t wait to get a new toy for Christmas” mood. So a war broke out between the little voices. “You don’t need it”… “I want it though”… “you can’t justify it” … ya but it’s a new toy it will be cool”… “what would a sane person do?... Back and forth it continued…I decided to put the whole topic on hold for a while and try to see what might be coming up if I waited this round out.FSX is stuck in time (“old tech, no path forward, cpu bound” etc). I mean I am very appreciative that we have a FSX (pmdg etc) but it’s tapped out and technologically dead compared to the other applications that can utilize multiple CPUs and GPUs (including things like CUDA etc).I have been frequenting the MS Flight site (http://www.microsoft.com/games/flight/) to see if there was any more info. There is a recent new webisode and a bit of news (Dec 8 I believe, nothing earth shattering like dates or anything). There is a bit of verbiage that hints at utilization of hardware etc. It got me hoping that multiple GPUs and multi CPUs for FS are coming. I kept watching the videos … dreaming.So I made a decision. My next video card will be purchased after I see what the landscape is with MS Flight and it WILL have multiple GPUs. I am targeting Dec 25, 2011!!!. No more “for FSX only” purchases (pmdg exempt of course!!).What are others thinking? PS. Safe happy holidays to everyone.

I like your reasoning for staying put with the still great 480. 9and your budget probably likes you for the decision also)As far as Flight I would expect at least 1 year of specing and development as there are many hurdles as we all know. Keep in mind that the existing engine went through many years of development over many iterations. My optimistic guess for release would be next xmas but more like spring or summer of 2012. Flight AKA FSXII.jja

[RobbieHe 0]

Wow - Excellent Job SpiritFlyer! Thanks for taking the time to do all of that work. These sort of treats are rare amd sorely lacking in the FS community.RH

[ppo 67]

Battle of the HeavyweightsSince there is already a considerable body of experience and knowledge base concerning the 480 GTX as it pertains to FSX, it seems to me that it would be worthwhile to attempt to objectively compare it to the new 580 GTX. Even though a wide game based comparison of benchmarks on both cards would be most helpful, what actually happens with these cards when flying in FSX is most important to the flight simulation community.In any such comparison every precaution must be taken to compare apples with apples when possible. So under most circumstances it is important to try and standardize both elements so that the differences will become apparent based solely upon performance capabilities. We want to compare apples for apples. However, It is impossible in this case to conduct a fair appraisal of these two video cards in this manner, because of a number of insurmountable obstacles, as I will try to explain the best way I can.BackgroundThe same Nvidia driver is not available and used for both of these video cards. At the time of this test the 580 GTX uses version 263.09, while the 480 GTX uses 260.99. The effects of the difference could be a double edged sword, cutting either way. The 480 GTX drivers have had time to mature while the 580 GTX has only had the very first one, giving a possible advantage to the more mature 480 GTX. On the other hand, perhaps the new driver is simply an improved version on the former ones, giving the 580 GTX an unfair advantage. This is all unknown, and is a wild card that could trump the hand either way, (or not), with the next mutually shared driver release.Heat and NoiseThe whole subject of the heat caused by the 480 GTX has presented an awkward challenge when trying to establish what should be broadly considered to be a safe and sane overclock to compare to the 580 GTX. The overclocked reference versions of the 480 GTX were limited to only +3.6% on air and only +7% with factory installed water blocks. Even though some of us in the fringe, who had been lucky enough to have particularly good cards went well over these numbers, the vast majority are not willing to do so at the risk of over heating and/or living with all the fan noise.480 GTX Clock Speed?What then are the best clock speeds to do a fair comparison with? One only has to read any number of reviews on the 480 GTX to find that the common 480 GTX has a ceiling close to default because of noise and heat issues. There are always exceptions. My 480 GTX could remain stable in FSX at 800 MHz because of good ventilation, but not many can run at that speed. So what is the best clock speed then to measure the 480 GTX? Which will be the most practical and helpful information to those who may use this data to make a purchase decision?580 GTX Clock Speed?What should the speed the 580 GTX be measured at, the default 772 MHz, or at an overclock? On the surface it should be an easy question to answer, particularly to anyone that does not yet own one of these new cards. It might seem logical that both cards should be measured by the clock speeds they were sold at. However, it is not as simple as that. For most everyone who has actually bought the 580 GTX, that has owned the 480 GTX before it, that perhaps does not seem like a practical approach, at least to me. Why? Because the 580 GTX is perhaps the best overclocker that Nvidia has ever produced to date, whereas the 480 GTX nearly cooks itself at the default 700 MHz. The 580 GTX seems to be able to run much, much faster without getting hot and bothered.580 GTX OverclockabilityAs has been stated by testers and many new owners in various enthusiasts forums, many 580 GTXs will run at levels close to 900 MHz. With voltage tweaks there is often substantially more headroom even than that. I tested my Zotac 580 GTX in FSX at well over 900 MHz for an hour over the PNW at 1.125 volts, without a single artefact, or heat, or excessive fan noise. The temperatures did not exceed 75C and the fan remained at around 65 - 75%, which is barely above my case fans sound levels. So, even though I would not benchmark those speeds for comparison purposes, I have been convinced that the 580 GTX was engineered and designed for these operating zones because of how effortlessly it does so. So, what would be the most meaningful speed to run the 580 GTX at for someone trying to decide whether to buy a 480 GTX at a bargain price, or to pay a premium for a 580 GTX? That is the question I would like to address.Swap Out3 way TestThe answer I came up with is my own, what seems logical and consistent to me after having spent a lot of time with each of these video cards, and experienced what they provide to FSX. Some will disagree I am sure, and I too have waffled back and forth, but here it is. I made a decision I can live with as being the most practical for anyone wanting to use these cards for FSX.The 480 GTX is tested at both default and at 800 MHz while the 580 GTX is only tested at 880 MHz. The 480 GTX is working really hard at 800 Mhz (+14.12% OC) on air, a lot harder than the 580 GTX is when running at 880 MHz (+14% OC). In my opinion there is no reason to test the 580 GTX at default speed because there is absolutely no reason to leave it there. BUT the 480 GTX default vs. 580 GTX overclocked is the most important test results for anyone who wants to know what they can comfortably achieve and enjoy with either video card, because that is the sweet spot for both.Fine Print:However if you do overclock and destroy your computer and/or burn your house down, it is your own responsibility. Even though this information is believed to be true it is not warranted to be so.Specifications and SettingsCPU-Z1CPU-Z2GPU-Z 480 GTX GTXGPU-Z 580 GTXNvidia Inspector 480 GTXNvidia Inspector 580 GTXNvidia Inspector Control Panel Profile SettingsAfterburner Settings 480 GTXAfterburner Settings 580 GTXFSX Settings 1FSX Settings 2FSX Settings 3FSX Settings 4FSX Settings 5The Test BenchConcrete 1480 GTX at 701 MHz 29.3 FPS low, 50.7 FPS Average, 60.4 FPS High480 GTX at 800 MHz 44.9 FPS Low, 54.5 FPS Average, 60.0 FPS High580 GTX at 880 MHz 55.2 FPX Low, 60.1 FPS Average, 60.8 FPS HighTest Results - Concrete 1Concrete 2480 GTX at 701 MHz 42.5 FPS Low, 82.0 FPS Average, 60.4 FPS High480 GTX at 800 MHz 60.1 FPS Low, 92.4 FPS Average, 106 FPS High580 GTX at 880 MHz 64.7 FPS Low, 101.6 FPS Average, 129.5 FPS HighTest Results - Concrete 2Concrete 3480 GTX at 701 MHz 36.7 FPS Low, 70 FPS Average, 87.2 FPS High480 GTX at 800 MHz 58.0 FPS Low, 75.5 FPS Average, 91.2 FPS High580 GTX at 880 MHz 67.3 FPS Low, 86.6 FPS Average, 96.1 FPS HighTest Results - Concrete 3Darrington480 GTX at 701 MHz 36.8 FPS Low, 46.3 FPS Average, 63.2 FPS High480 GTX at 800 MHz 43.0 FPS Low, 52.2 FPS Average, 68.4 FPS High580 GTX at 880 MHz 45.9 FPS Low, 58.3 FPS Average, 71.5 FPS HighTest Results - DarringtonIsrael's Farm480 GTX at 701 Mhz 54.8 FPS Low, 83.4 FPS Average, 97.3 FPS High480 GTX at 800 MHz 70.0 FPS Low, 93.4 FPS Average, 104 FPS High580 GTX at 880 MHz 89.8 FPS Low, 105.6 FPS Average, 112.9 FPS HighTest Results - Israel's FarmAlaska Forest480 GTX at 701 MHz 41.3 FPS Low, 74.6 FPS Average, 119.5 FPS High480 GTX at 800 MHz 57.8 FPS Low, 83.1 FPS Average, 93.7 FPS High580 GTX at 880 MHz 77.1 FPS Low, 92.5 FPS Average, 112.6 FPS HighTest Results - Alaska ForestFSX Comparison Test AveragesSummary of Total Average FPSBrief FSX Test AnalysisBoth the 480 GTX and the 580 GTX are outstanding video cards. The differences in performance more or less follow the known criteria of relative power as determined by common benchmarks. It would seem that with both of these cards, if the CPU and the rest of the computer is providing the opportunity, without bottlenecks, the video cards make their own numbers as advertised, even in FSX The outcome of the tests are remarkably consistent with each other and with the other dozen or so unofficial tests I undertook. The numbers stray very little from the percentages relative to each other. The default clocked 480 GTX has a much lower bottom end than when it is overclocked. The 580 GTX jumps even higher in it's minimums, providing an amazing 67.5% lift at the bottom end where stuttering can happen. The 580 GTX at these settings is just too fast for any of that and is completely stutter free in this computer. It is a nice and gentle smooth experience.There is more FSX testing at the end of this post, adding some other video cards that I have recently owned and tested. Meanwhile let's take a look at some of the factors of why the 580 GTX and the overclocked 480 GTX does so well. Please wade through this as it really explains a lot about these video cards performances.The Heaven Benchmark with the 580 GTX.Unfortunately I sold the 480 GTX before I downloaded this program. According to online bench marks most single overclocked 480 GTXs seem to run in the 43 to 48 FPS range.PassMark November 19, 2010 with 480 GTX at 850 MHzPassMark December 7, 2010 with 580 GTX at 900 MHzThis software tests and stresses a computer completely, evaluating and analysing it's strengths and weaknesses adding to their data base. Hundreds of thousands of computers have been categorized in this way. Please see my notes in the following linked thread and follow the other link to their website to see the latest numbers:Evaluating and Analysing using PassMark SoftwareGo to PassMark Software WebsiteDuring the test the video cards are run and tested to the max. Because this machine provides a non-restrictive platform without bottlenecks the video cards are free to perform much better than those which are limited by other components, especially when highly overclocked. Here are the results of the video card tests:480 GTX at 850 MHz Test November 19, 2010580 GTX at 900 MHz Test December 7, 2010This 480 GTX outperformed the average 480 GTX by 30% for the reasons stated above. The 580 GTX did even better blowing by it's stablemates by well over 40%. Here is a chart of the other video card averages as tested and published by PassMark as of December 7, 2010.PassMark Control Samples Accumulated Comparison DataHere is another way of looking at it275 GTX vs. 470 GTX vs. 480 GTX vs. 580 GTXBack to testing, or I should say, more of a flashback comparison than anything else. This is not really apples for apples, but they are roughly equivalent if the changes are appreciated. 6 months ago I bought my brand new 480 GTX and ran a series of tests to compare it to the 470 GTX and the 275 GTX I had been using up to a month before (when I bought the 470 GTX). Wait a minute, let me back up. In the last two years or so I went from a ATI 3800 to a 8800 GTX to a 9800 GTX to a 275 GTX to a 470 GTX to a 480 GTX to a 580 GTX. Each change was accompanied by all the appropriate CPUs, motherboards, ram, PSUs and so on. When the 480 GTX came out I could not get one right away because they were in short supply, so I bought an EVGA 470 GTX which a month later I traded in with their step-up program for the 480 GTX. That is why I have been able to test all these cards within the past few months.Here is the other, earlier compiled and documented data and screenshots posted in this AVSIM thread:275 GTX vs 470 GTX vs 480 GTXSo indeed, this is not really a direct comparison between video cards only, but more of between systems. The 470 GTX, 480 GTX and 580 GTX are nearly equivalent to each other in most respects with the computer ram, power supply and drives getting better all the time. So in the end it simply gives a real life imperfect look at how much better FSX has been able to work in new computers over the past year. Here is the 580 GTX contribution:Sydney Australia- 580 GTX at 880 MHzSydney Australia (580 GTX)580 GTX at 880 MHz 43.2 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 38.3 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 29.4 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 25.8 FPS AverageMelbourne Australia - 580 GTX at 880 MHz580 GTX at 880 MHz 45.4 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 27.3 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 24.7 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 17.7 FPS AverageJandacot Australia - 580 GTX at 880 MHz580 GTX at 880 MHz 60.0 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 51.9 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 50.7 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 46.3 FPS AverageTamworth Australia - 580 GTX at 880 MHz580 GTX at 880 MHz 56.5 FPS Average480 GTX at 850 MHz 53.9 FPS Average470 GTX at 700 MHz 52.8 FPS Average275 GTX at 721 MHz 39.4 FPS AverageCombined AveragesFindingsThere is enough wiggle room here for anyone to find what they are looking for to justify their decisions or inclinations. If you own a 480 GTX there is every reason for keeping it instead of selling it at a stiff penalty and paying top dollar for a 580 GTX, especially if you overclock the daylights out of it. On the other hand if you can't stand the heat and the noise and you get the occasional stutter, then the 580 GTX is everything you wished the 480 GTX was, and even more.If you do not have a 480 GTX, then upgrading to a 580 GTX is a good thing to do for FSX performance, providing you have a machine that will feed it. The 580 GTX is an amazing card that will blow your socks off without you hearing or feeling it coming. It is nearly impossible to overload or to weigh it down with FSX scenery and detail. I set it at 60 FPS and it seldom if ever drops below 25 even over Seattle! That lifts the whole computer and FSX out of the stutter and shutter ditch. The ladder to the bottom of the FSX FPS common experience has been pulled up an average of 65.7% over the regular 480 GTX. That means if you are pulling 15 with the 480 GTX at 701 MHz over a congested city you can now expect to hold 25 FPS with a 580 GTX. A bottom of 25 FPS becomes almost 42 FPS. This is serious stuff.Check out the difference between the default 480 GTX and the OC 580 GTX at the low end, where it counts the most.ConclusionOf course if you overclock your 480 GTX to 800 MHz, even though most don't for many different reasons, the improvement with the 580 GTX will be less, but still near 15-20%. On the other hand, if you have a water jacket on the 480 GTX, and can get away with really cranking it up some more, you can probably maintain a lot closer to the OC 580 GTX performance levels. However, I can't help to wonder what would happen though if you put a 580 GTX on water instead? Apparently having near 1,000 MHz is not uncommon in such a system. It is still very early days for the 580 GTX so we will see what happens. Even EVGA is getting in on the overclocking act, having a version of the brand new 570 GTX that is clocked even higher than the stock 580 GTX, with the same fan and cooling system! Rumour has it that there is a lot more to come as Nvidia partners play around with these toys with new non-reference designed enhancments. It is very interesting days in the computer hardware business with both the Nvidia's 500 series and the upcoming Sandy Bridge CPU release.I hope this short overview of the 480 GTX and the 580 GTX helps some of you. I don't apologize for being a 580 GTX enthusiast. In my humble opinion if there has ever been a time that a GPU company in this hobby deserves more than a clap and slap on the back, this is it. Nvidia has done something magnificent with the 580 GTX. The great news as far as I am concerned is that when running flat out in a strong computer it is a natural for FSX, just as if it was designed for it. The difference in performance is scaled in FSX just like in other applications. The 580 GTX has more performance than we hoped for in the 480 GTX, without the heat and noise, bringing with it a credible promise of a lot more to come. Thanks for reading.Kind regards,

I have noticed a small error in the graphs and the actual naming. I believe they are not labeled correctly:The first graph labeled Sydney should be Jandacot and Jandacot should be Sydney. At least according to your numbers.Sorry for being picky...However, this is an excellent post which should be very helpful for all of us. Thank youPierre

[SpiritFlyer 987]

I have noticed a small error in the graphs and the actual naming. I believe they are not labeled correctly:The first graph labeled Sydney should be Jandacot and Jandacot should be Sydney. At least according to your numbers.Sorry for being picky...However, this is an excellent post which should be very helpful for all of us. Thank youPierre

You are right Pierre, the data means the same insofar as comparative performance, but Sydney and Jandacot were misnamed for each other in the graph. Good catch!Thanks,Kind regards,

[B748 0]

Thanks Stephen , really nice and useful review ,at the moment in my area I can just choose ZOTAC for 580GTX :Thinking: and EVGA will available in next week. Both are standard version.Could you please advise me about them? Any difference between quality of them?ThanksBob

[Guest 413X3]

I held off on the 480 for many months, suffering with low frames in heavy areas with the gtx285. Now I signed up for an email confirmation of the EVGA 580 superclocked being in stock and bought one last night! I hope it comes this week!

[ppo 67]

I held off on the 480 for many months, suffering with low frames in heavy areas with the gtx285. Now I signed up for an email confirmation of the EVGA 580 superclocked being in stock and bought one last night! I hope it comes this week!

Ordered mine this morning: Zotac 580. It is in stock and used express shipping... It will replace my gtx285. I will be reporting back.Pierre

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Brief Update on the Overclockability of the 580 GTXIn order to dress up my video card I ordered an EVGA backplate and flow-through exhaust designed for their 580 GTX, but which also fits the other GeForce manufacturers reference 580 GTX video cards. Both units fit nicely on my ZOTAC 580 GTX and after a little bit of ZOTAC vs. EVGA badge engineering it was ready for testing.The cool backplate with a little custom lettering!The Flow through exhaust really opens things up.Late last night I loaded FSX into Darrington, my favourite place, with the usual max display settings and began testing with the new pieces, raising the core clock from 900 Mhz to 925 Mhz. After flying for about 5 minutes without much temperature change I raised it to 950 Mhz, then to 975 Mhz for about 10 minutes flying circuits around the town. Finally I stopped and analysed the data and realized that the card was running extremely cool and quiet, even at these higher core, shader and memory clocks.I then raised it to 1000Mhz expecting something bad to happen, but nothing did. I flew touch and gos for just under an hour without any kind of mishap, graphical error, artifact or noise (or smell) coming from anywhere. The 580 GTX was purring like a kitten with temperatures remaining constant in the low 50s C. I opened GPU-Z and Nvidia Inspector and confirmed both the overclock and the temperatures. Here are the idle temperatures, a couple of snipes showing operating loaded GPU temperatures and 3 in-game V screenshots.Idle TempsSnap Shot 1Snapshot 2Screenshot 1Screenshot 2Screenshot 3After I shut down and went to bed I felt lucky to get away with doing that kind of stunting without causing damage. However, this morning I had to make certain of what happened (you know what that is like) so upped the core back to 1,000Mhz and the memory to 4,200 Mhz and loaded into Israel's farm, which is notoriously hard on frames because of the long grass. Instead of flying I spun around and around outside of the plane for a few minutes in full screen at ground level, doing what is the strongest FSX test I know of. The GPU ran at 99% and the fan went to 72% (barely audible above the case fans) but the highest temperature only went to 54 C. Again, not an artefact or stutter, or any kind of drama except perfect performance.Of course I did not stop there. I tried a core clock of 1025 Mhz and memory of 4,250 Mhz and the driver crashed, but then recovered again moments later, but reset the 580 GTX to the default 772 Mhz. I reset it again at 1,000 Mhz and ran at Darrington for a few minutes just to make sure everything was OK - smooth as butter. So I set it back at 900 Mhz where it usually runs FSX, and will stay there, since I now know the boundaries, and will keep back from the fence a bit. Perhaps this is an exceptional 580 GTX because I lucked out with ZOTAC before they began binning for their AMP edition. I don't know, but most likely. Certainly not all 580 GTX cards can overclock like this, but it is known that a whole whack of them do, or something close to it. The backplate and flow-through exhaust made a several degree C difference, but I did not measure how much because I was impatient to install them and get on with it. In any case they are an excellent investment for $30.00 plus shipping (free in the USA) from the EVGA store.Bottom line:The 580 GTX is even better, faster and cooler than I thought it was. I am a very happy camper. Thanks for reading.Kind regards,

[jjjallen 37]

Stephen - I think that all 580's can OC well. Proving that it is a good design. Although I haven't tried to go beyond 1ghz core, my Gigabyte (first GB model out) can easily cruise at 900.Excellent card and thanks for your validation testing.jja

[Guest 413X3]

Can you link me to the backplates and exhaust?

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Can you link me to the backplates and exhaust?

EVGA 580 GTX BACKPLATE AND FREE FLOW EXHAUSTThere you go David.Kind regards,

[SpiritFlyer 987]

Thanks Stephen , really nice and useful review ,at the moment in my area I can just choose ZOTAC for 580GTX :Thinking: and EVGA will available in next week. Both are standard version.Could you please advise me about them? Any difference between quality of them?ThanksBob

In the past 2 years I bought a 8800 GTX, 9800 GTX+, 275 GTX, 470 GTX and a 480 GTX from EVGA. I have not had an ounce of trouble, and all the cards performed above my expectations. I still read the EVGA forums daily as they are the best source of useful information and have complete faith in the company. The reason I have a Zotac is because I could not get an EVGA anywhere so I bought the ZOTAC version instead. This ZOTAC 580 GTX is excellent, but I am uncertain how they handle things if something goes wrong. EVGA has the best service in the business by a long shot. Both EVGA and ZOTAC products are top quality and backed up with a lifetime warranty. Hope this helps.Kind regards,