270 or less Video Card buy..

MaximLuva

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
121

Mr. K6

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,077
I was in the exact same seat a couple weeks ago, almost the same exact choice - GTX260 for $235 or the 4870 for $240. I read a ton of reviews and threads on both cards. In the end, I went for the 4870 because it seemed to pull ahead of the GTX260 at resolutions of 1680x1050 and higher (I play at 1680x1050) and it's AA performance was awesome. At 1280x1024, it's a different story as it seems NVIDIA cards put out higher frames at lower resolutions. I don't think you can go wrong with either card, but if you do intend to go to a higher resolution, I'd recommend grabbing that VisionTek 4870 :).
 

MaximLuva

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
121
Thanks for some insight. It is really a tough decision... :) on one hand I love nvidia cards for their reliability (in my history with them) and their drivers, however ATI does make a great case here and I've loved their stuff too, I've had a few of their cards in the past....

Looks like I'll be checking this thread out, as well as doing more reading :)
 

_Sin_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
1,653
wait for a deal

your card is no slouch

look on the [H]ot deals section, a bunch of people got a gtx 260 for 169, while it's no longer available, it certainly proves the prices are going nowhere but down.
 

Sabrewulf165

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 23, 2004
Messages
2,972
I'd go with the GTX 260 personally. I'm not sure where K6 is getting that the 4870 has an advantage at higher resolutions. From what I've seen, they trade blows depending on the game in question, and as the GTX 260 has lower power consumption and nearly double the framebuffer for the same price, it seems like a no-brainer to me, especially with great options like eVGA on the nvidia side.

On the other hand, if you're only playing at 12x10, why not just go with a 4850 for $150? Or even just stick with what you've got for a while?
 

xp3nd4bl3

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2004
Messages
2,259
If your current card is pulling its weight then keep it! I have done way too many upgrades for no reason. If you decide you need one of those new cards my vote is for the 4870.
 

BravO)))

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
6,450
It all depends. If you have a 4870 now, you can buy any 4800 series card an crossfire it as regards to your upgrade ability. A lot of people don't realize that crossfire scales way better than sli... It's like this, if you bought a gtx 260 and decided it was not enough, you would probably get another and sli it when you should have went with the 4870 and bought another one down the road. People might hate me for this.
2 x 4870's perform way better than 2 x gtx 260's and sometimes 2 x gtx 280's.
Ati's new motive recently has been about upgrade ability, that is why you can now have a 4870x2 crossfired with a 4850. You can't have a gtx 280 sli'd with the gtx 260.
 

Falling Anvil

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
1,570
Looks like EVGA clearing it's stock still. ;)

I'm tempted to try again after that ED fiasco, but maybe you can try and then get back to us on this?
 

geok1ng

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
2,130
Using a 19" monitor there is simply no reason to upgrade video cards first instead of going for 16x10 or 19x12 resolutions.

which option will give more improvement on the computer usage and gaming imersion:
1440x900 with16xAA with a 4870?
1920x1200 with 0xAA with a 320MB 8800GTS? bluray movies on the PC!!!

You can find a Soyo 24" for less than $300,S-MVA panel, 6ms response time, NO input lag- check the tread here!

And later (no later than black friday, rest assured) you will get a cheaper or faster VGA. I believe that by the time the NVIDIA die schrink-200b- arrives the 1GB 4870 version will cost less than $300, the 260-4870 less than $200, the 4850 less than $150:D
 

gar818

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
1,336

No, more like experience. I used ATI recently and had nothing but driver issues, they dont know how to make good drivers, they SUCK!! this is my opinion, here is the deal with ATI, if they fix something, something else breaks with there drivers, they are slow at releasing drivers as well, nvidia updates betas almost weekly to fix any issues with newly released games. Also a GTX 260 is cheaper and faster when overclocked.
 

unleashed

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
323
No, more like experience. I used ATI recently and had nothing but driver issues, they dont know how to make good drivers, they SUCK!! .
Really?
Care to elaborate?
What drivers did you use, in what hardware configuration?
btw, you definately sound like a fanboy hence my questions.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2005
Messages
2,629
The fact is, YOU CANNOT GO WRONG with either choice, both are great cards.

It all depends. If you have a 4870 now, you can buy any 4800 series card an crossfire it as regards to your upgrade ability. A lot of people don't realize that crossfire scales way better than sli... It's like this, if you bought a gtx 260 and decided it was not enough, you would probably get another and sli it when you should have went with the 4870 and bought another one down the road. People might hate me for this.
2 x 4870's perform way better than 2 x gtx 260's and sometimes 2 x gtx 280's.
Ati's new motive recently has been about upgrade ability, that is why you can now have a 4870x2 crossfired with a 4850. You can't have a gtx 280 sli'd with the gtx 260.

No it doesn't, where the hell do people see all this fud
 

BravO)))

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
6,450
How about the 4870 x2 preview from [H]. Is that enough fudz for ya.
 

Valset

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
6,533
it is kind of a toss up between a GTX260 and a 4870. I am an AMD fanboy but I just bought a GTX280 for a number of reason (getting it for under 350 was one) but this is assuming that your getting a new monitor. at your current there is no reason to upgrade. If you want to go to 2.3mp then the GTX260 or the 4870 would be good choices. if you want the extra power then the GTX280 is nice. the 4870X2 just cost too much right now unless your gaming on a 30" monitor.

I don't recognize your motherboard but if it can crossfire then go with the 4870. If not then see what you can get the better deal for.
 

PRIME1

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 4, 2004
Messages
3,942
Get a GTX260 because it's a little cheaper. Spend the extra dough on hookers and blow.
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,908
No, more like experience. I used ATI recently and had nothing but driver issues, they dont know how to make good drivers, they SUCK!! this is my opinion, here is the deal with ATI, if they fix something, something else breaks with there drivers, they are slow at releasing drivers as well, nvidia updates betas almost weekly to fix any issues with newly released games. Also a GTX 260 is cheaper and faster when overclocked.

Sounds exactly like my experiences with Nv cards once upon a time with their BETA parade. Fix one game and break another. But I digress.

Currently, and for the last few years Ati and Nv have been more or less on par when it came to drivers for Windows. Your experience is not the norm. Your unqualified "ATI drivers SUCK" does make you seem a fanboy or an angsty youngster. Ati's Windows drivers are just fine for most people, configs, and games, just like Nv's are.

OP either card is a damn good choice. But if your monitor is only capable of 1280x1024 your not gonna see that much of a benefit coming from a 8800gts. At that res the cards will be cpu bottlenecked in many titles even with 3ghz quadcore. You should be able to ramp up AA to max levels in most games at that res, but that is about it for benefits compared to your current card.
 

Bdbtoys

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
250
I would take a 260/280 over the 4870 because of the PhysX support. I'm positive ATI will be getting the support, but Nvidia has it now.
 

Valset

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
6,533
I would take a 260/280 over the 4870 because of the PhysX support. I'm positive ATI will be getting the support, but Nvidia has it now.

PhysX is not really an issue. It may be in the future but right now it is not a real consideration. Intel and AMD have havok, and Nvidia has PhysZ and no games right now. still an interesting tech though
 

MaximLuva

Weaksauce
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
121
I found a card for 229.00 on Newegg....

Still gunna wait till next week to see if prices drop a little more...

Thanks for all the replies, anymore opinions on the cards are more than welcome!
 

bangmal

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
275
I would take a 260/280 over the 4870 because of the PhysX support. I'm positive ATI will be getting the support, but Nvidia has it now.

physX means nothing beside adding 20000 points to your 3dmark vantage cpu score
 

bangmal

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
275
Sounds exactly like my experiences with Nv cards once upon a time with their BETA parade. Fix one game and break another. But I digress.

Currently, and for the last few years Ati and Nv have been more or less on par when it came to drivers for Windows. Your experience is not the norm. Your unqualified "ATI drivers SUCK" does make you seem a fanboy or an angsty youngster. Ati's Windows drivers are just fine for most people, configs, and games, just like Nv's are.

OP either card is a damn good choice. But if your monitor is only capable of 1280x1024 your not gonna see that much of a benefit coming from a 8800gts. At that res the cards will be cpu bottlenecked in many titles even with 3ghz quadcore. You should be able to ramp up AA to max levels in most games at that res, but that is about it for benefits compared to your current card.

thats so right, after FIVE nvidia beta crap, the card still cant downclock properly. I am starting to believe nvidia deliberately does this, because the infeior quality of card can not sustain the fluctuation of the rise and down of the clock?
 

Bdbtoys

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
250
PhysX is not really an issue. It may be in the future but right now it is not a real consideration. Intel and AMD have havok, and Nvidia has PhysZ and no games right now. still an interesting tech though

physX means nothing beside adding 20000 points to your 3dmark vantage cpu score

By your remarks I take it you both havn't played anything that took advantage of it yet... I have and it works well.

I didn't want to get into a PhysX dispute per-se... but instead wanted to point out one difference between the 2 cards that could matter to the OP.
 

Valset

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
6,533
By your remarks I take it you both havn't played anything that took advantage of it yet... I have and it works well.

I didn't want to get into a PhysX dispute per-se... but instead wanted to point out one difference between the 2 cards that could matter to the OP.

I have, but I am not talking about how it works rather the adoption rate and time line. while the first is arguable the latter two really aren't. there is no sense in consideration of a feature on a video card that is that far out. there are only a hand full of games that are going to be able to use it. It will be upgrade time by the time it is a real consideration.
 
Top