4870 1GB vs GTX260-216 game off

Nenu

Nenu

[H]ardened
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
20,315
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=645
This is a recent review of NVidia and AMDs more affordable performance cards with 180.46 and 8.10 drivers, Vista 64 + games:
Call of Duty: World at War
Dead Space
Fallout 3
Far Cry 2
Left 4 Dead

Wow, Nvidia take it strongly with the recent driver.
Have any 4870 owners noticed a jump in performance over 8.10 with the 8.12 driver?
 
Great post. I'm getting one of these cards for xmas. Being [H], I wonder what the results are when both cards are overclocked. Does the gap lessen for ATI or does the gap grow wider for nVidia?
 
You really can't go wrong with either card now. I mean you can pretty much get either card now for $200 and at that price point us consumers can only be happy about it :) I went with the Ati card this time around just to try something different after using Nvidia for the last couple of years. And its been great for me...
 
Funny how they use the latest beta drivers for the nvidia cards but for ati they use old drivers :rolleyes:
 
I would like either one of these cards myself, but at over $350 converted from the GB pound I'll hang on a bit. Probably get the 4870 a bit cheaper to be fair, but still not coming down all that much.
 
LOL...8.10 driver? how funny that is when nVidia is using the latest one ....

as we can tell this benchmark is pretty much worthless to see......
 
shansoft said:
LOL...8.10 driver? how funny that is when nVidia is using the latest one ....

as we can tell this benchmark is pretty much worthless to see......
Click to expand...

The link in post #2 compares recent drivers.
 
Well, depending on the site you look at it would appear that the gtx 260-216 is >= 4870 1 gb both at stock clocks, and latest drivers, if only by an insignificant margin. Now, depending on your budget if you wanted what I would consider the best bang for the buck in the $200-$300 US realm i would have to mention the 4850x2, as from 99.999% of sites i have viewed it would appear that the 2gb version with the 8.12 drivers outperforms the gtx 280 in pretty much every benchmark. You can find the 4850x2 on newegg right now for $309.00 with a rebate of $20.00 = $289.00 US, FYI rebate ends the 31st.
But back to the issue at hand if it came down to my choice, i would pick the gtx 260-216 over the 4870, simply because cosmetic reasons as the cards are neck in neck performance wise.
 
Nenu said:
The link in post #2 compares recent drivers.
Click to expand...

just by looking at L4D benchmark..

I can close my windows..

entirely "BULLCRAP"

130fps on average? even with no Mercy its impossible LOL.....
 
GTX 260 216 is a better value imo, as most recent benchmarks show it winning in a majority of titles, better compatibility usually, and it of course can out overclock the Radeons, and really stretch its legs beyond the factory default speeds.
 
A lot of these sites show the uselessness of their benchmarks by still going with 4aa when a lot of the games are in the 80s and 100s. There really isnt any reason why a lot of those benchmarks shouldnt have 8aa on.
 
Perhaps because 8xAA doesn't give TWIMTBP picture? The techgage review seems pretty biast compared to all the other reviews about the 8.12 drivers. I see no reason not to run L4D with 4xAA instead of 8xAA on all the cards.

l4d1920.gif

followup_17.png
 
try to go into the game and record the fps yourself...


130fps avg as they shows are ENTIRELY IMPOSSIBLE.....

the actual value should be around 90-100...... where is that 30fps boost from?

just by looking at that graph, the entire review is either made up or not even actually testing correctly.....
 
Just go back and look at our latest Gameplay Evals on new games, we've been including 1GB 4870 and 216 Core GTX 260 for a while now, and we always use the latest drivers.
 
It's good times for the consumer. You can put on your favorite team colours and get good performance regardless of who you go with :D
 
Sorry to keep coming back to the 4850x2 but if your looking for best bang for your buck, $289 US on newegg x 2 cards = crossfire 4850x2's for $576!!!
 
With the Newegg promotion of $50 CB, would you guys jump on this deal evga GTX260 for $217.00? I'm considering replacing my 8800GTS - 640MB, it should be considerable upgrade, right?

I just need to hear the devil whisper into my ear and say "go for it".

edit: 15% cash back, estimated saving of $37.20.
 
BugginOuT said:
With the Newegg promotion of $50 CB, would you guys jump on this deal evga GTX260 for $217.00? I'm considering replacing my 8800GTS - 640MB, it should be considerable upgrade, right?

I just need to hear the devil whisper into my ear and say "go for it".

edit: 15% cash back, estimated saving of $18
Click to expand...

Sure, go for it. ;) I upgraded from an 8800 GTX to a factory OC'd GTX 260 (192) and it was a noticeable improvement at 1680x1050).

As for the GTX 260 (216) vs. the HD 4870 1GB, I bet you could replace an owner of either one's card with the other and they wouldn't notice the difference right off. They're both excellent.
 
They both perform within a few frames of each other , No one will noticed the difference. Just get whats cheaper or whatever has what you need.
 
Hi all:

I'm the one who wrote the Techgage article, and I'd just like to respond to a few comments here.

shansoft said:
130fps on average? even with no Mercy its impossible LOL.....
Click to expand...

130FPS is not impossible at 1680x1050, as the chart shows. In addition to the information shown on the graph itself, we also include direct screenshots from each game used to show exactly how it was configured (the L4D screenshots show Vsync enabled though, when it was actually disabled in order to achieve high FPS), and I can assure you, our results as as accurate as possible. Like [H], we don't utilize timedemos, and we re-run each setting/game multiple times in order to achieve accurate results.

The exact run goes as follows:

Benchmarking begins in the last safe house for that mission, and Fraps' FPS recording is started right before the door is opened. I proceed up the stairs and through the doors, hop on the trash can that's lying on its side and shoot the zombies up and down the hall. I then proceed to run down the hall, stopping at each doorway to take care of zombies that might be in each room.

At the end of the hallway is the metal grate which must be shot out, and after taking care of zombies, I make my way up the ladder to the roof and run to the top-left corner, then look down at the helipad. That's when I stop Fraps recording.

If you don't trust my results, apply the same settings and follow my general instructions there. Each run varied between ~1 - 3 FPS, so I wouldn't expect anyone's results to stray far.

Tamlin_WSGF said:
The techgage review seems pretty biast compared to all the other reviews about the 8.12 drivers.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. We should have used 8xAA, and to be honest, I'm unsure why the thought didn't cross my mind. To call us biased is truly ridiculous, however, especially due to a chosen setting in one game. We put a ton of effort into both our testing process and methodology, and we aren't just going to blow that by being biased. Besides, I'm not sure how we can be biased when we concluded that both cards are essentially equal...

That aside, thanks to anyone who commented on the article, and we'll be sure to better choose our anti-aliasing settings for our future GPU content.
 
You can't go wrong with either card but you have to look at it this way.

The 4870 was originally intended to beat the 260 which it did, then months later nVidia brought the 216 version out. So your comparing a card that was already beaten once, but had to be redone to take victory again.

So I doubt AMD will come out with a 4870 rehash and might just skip to the next gen for battles between the performance cards. But we could always see a bump in something from ATi.

I still prefer ATi due to their monthly driver releases as opposed to nVidia's weekly unknown stability/iq/performance/lack of WHQL drivers. I got tired of checking Guru3D forums to see if the driver I'm downloading is good.
 
I love the Techgage review, especially this part:
In an attempt to offer "real-world" results, we do not utilize timedemos in our graphic card reviews, with the exception of Futuremark's automated 3DMark Vantage. Each game in our test suite is benchmarked manually, with the minimum and average frames-per-second (FPS) captured with the help of FRAPS 2.9.6.

To deliver the best overall results, each title we use is exhaustively explored in order to find the best possible level in terms of intensiveness and replayability. Once a level is chosen, we play through repeatedly to find the best possible route and then in our official benchmarking, we stick to that route as close as possible. Since we are not robots and the game can throw in minor twists with each run, no run can be identical to the pixel.
Click to expand...

As a "never heard before" site, they managed to do a "real world" benchmark with so many cards and games when [H] couldn't even do it themselves :p :
Mark_Warner said:
Good point. It would have been nice to be able to put the 4850x2 in, but these gameplay evaluations are always limited on time, so even if I had had a 4850x2, there is no guarantee that I would have had the time to fit it in. Every card we put in adds a fairly significant amount of time to the process.

It would also be nice if we had more choices from NVIDIA. But I'm really not sure how soon that is likely to change.
Click to expand...

Actually I doubt that Techgage really do the benchmarks :eek:
 
all the GTX260 -216's are $300 plus.... where are people seeing them for $200 ? i see the old GTX260 for around $200... but not the 216 version...
 
On Newegg? The cheapest Core 216s are around $250, then there's MS Live cashback and today only (!) 15% cashback through Paypal.
 
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10959&Itemid=1

"These cards will be sneaked to market in the next two weeks but we are not sure how would you be able to tell if you got the 55nm card, without taking the cooler off and inspecting the card."

Will it be the same thing as it was with intel processors before? That you just had to have luck to get a processor revision G0 instead of B0?
If that will be the case with 65 nm - 55 nm i could buy a 65 nm GTX 260 right now. Instead of buying a GTX 260 in january and still probably get a 65 nm version..
 
alg7_munif said:
As a "never heard before" site, they managed to do a "real world" benchmark with so many cards and games when [H] couldn't even do it themselves :p :

Actually I doubt that Techgage really do the benchmarks :eek:
Click to expand...

To tackle the first part, we've been around since March 2005 and have published 704 articles to date. Now you've heard of us :)

I'm not quite sure what you mean by the rest of that line though, but if you mean that we haven't tested with cards other than what was mentioned in the article, it's because that was a one-off piece of content. We cover many more models throughout our regular GPU content.

As for us not actually conducting the benchmarking, I can assure you that we do. I'm also confident that we put a lot more effort into that than the typical tech site. Benchmarking a typical GPU (as in, not a fresh launch) takes about eight hours, and as a result of the many GPUs we've looked at in the past, I've played through some levels hundreds of times, and I've gained enough headaches to make me never forget them.

You pulled a quote from our testing methodology page, so I assume you were there. You might have noticed that we expose a lot more about our testing procedures than most others, and it's for a reason. We want our readers to know exactly how we do things... and have nothing to hide. It's that simple. I'm not sure how that can be interpreted as us not really doing the benchmarks, but whatever I guess.
 
Love EVGA. Gave me a Core 216 mislabeled as a Core 192, which is what I initially ordered. So I payed $204 for a core 216:D
 
alg7_munif said:
I love the Techgage review, especially this part:


As a "never heard before" site, they managed to do a "real world" benchmark with so many cards and games when [H] couldn't even do it themselves :p :


Actually I doubt that Techgage really do the benchmarks :eek:
Click to expand...

Techgage is like Crysis, "The way it's meant to be played...errrr.....reviewed." :D Good graph which basically covers the order of performance:

4870x2 > GTX280 > 48701GB > GTX260 Core 216

fallout3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top