New GPU for 2560x1600 gaming..

[ToMMyGuN]

a single 4870x2 will have trouble at that res and full AA in some games. alot of others it will run full settings fine. BC2 is the new crisys in my book. with 2 of em in CFX and full AA, i get maybe 15-20 fps. not playable

With 2 4870x2's you only get 20 fps in BC2? Wow, I thought that 2 of those cards would do much better than that!

if youre worried about money, im telling you now that 4870x2 is the best choice. it is the cheapest single card that will run 25x16 ok by over $100. as long as you dont need eyefinity or dx11, and your psu is over 500W, you should be fine. you can get one used for under $200. if you do get one though, you need to replace the tim and thermal pads as it will decrease the noise by well over half, and in batman AA it also reduced my gpu temp from 99C max to about 75C max. ill try to get you some framerate results from mine if you want. what do you prefer, as the only way i have right now is tf2 where i have the real-time fps displayed in the corner.

Ekuest, if you could somehow get BC2 fps data that would be much appreciated. The above quote is troubling for your 4870x2 case

 

[ToMMyGuN]

Ok ya'll, I need something to keep me sane whilst waiting for the radeon 6000 series, so check this out:

By my logic here, and single 5850 could do what I described as "handle" BC2 at 2560x1600, but I am leaning more towards a the GTX 460 SLI or the 5870 as of now. Hopefully AMD's release this friday will lower the prices on this chart (making the one above obsolete and useless, kinda like my old 8800gts... lol).

Let me know if there are other cards I can add that you guys would like to see on the chart (note: I like to use the HardOCP review data because it is real world gaming, which is really what matters to me).

 

[cannondale06]

Ok ya'll, I need something to keep me sane whilst waiting for the radeon 6000 series, so check this out:

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p64/Porcupino_photos/GPUComparison19-oct.png

By my logic here, and single 5850 could do what I described as "handle" BC2 at 2560x1600, but I am leaning more towards a the GTX 460 SLI or the 5870 as of now. Hopefully AMD's release this friday will lower the prices on this chart (making the one above obsolete and useless, kinda like my old 8800gts... lol).

Let me know if there are other cards I can add that you guys would like to see on the chart (note: I like to use the HardOCP review data because it is real world gaming, which is really what matters to me).

with your E6600, you will never come close to getting the numbers you see for a game like Bad Company 2.

 

[ToMMyGuN]

with your E6600, you will never come close to getting the numbers you see for a game like Bad Company 2.

I will just have to do something about that, won't I?

 

[audirs]

With 2 4870x2's you only get 20 fps in BC2? Wow, I thought that 2 of those cards would do much better than that!

yea me too, but BC2 is one demanding game. thats 2560x1440 with 8x AA and 16x AF, a little less res then 25x16 and still has trouble. however other games like farcry2 i get over 100fps all the time so i dunno. some games the cards scale 100%, some games, not so much

 

[ToMMyGuN]

Considering the recent price drop on the msi 5850, that sweetens the $/fps value even more:

Single card - @$195, $/fps = 5.27
- @$175 (if msi honors both rebates), $/fps=4.73

Crossfire - @$195x2=$390, $/fps= 6.78
- @$175x2=$350, $/fps= 6.09

Wow, $350 for a 5850 crossfire setup is crazy. I really would love to jump on that... *must wait until 6000 release, must wait...*

I guess the rebate is good until the 31st, so maybe it will go even lower after the 6000 cards are available (fingers crossed)

 

[WorldExclusive]

I had a Dell 30" with 5850CF, 5870, 5970 and GTX 480.

The best performance real world performance came from the GTX 480 OC to 850MHz.
It crushed every game and played Crysis and Metro @ 30fps Maxed consistently.
5850CF and 5970 was sketchy in certain games, low minimum fps compared to the GTX 480. Nvidia having better Tessellation performance helps a lot.

All this dual gpu talk is fud. Until you actually have the hardware you will know what it's capable of.
Also, your system configuration means a lot too. No cheap or budget build parts around expensive video cards.
It takes a complete system to run 2560x1600, every fps is valuable. 5fps makes a big difference, believe it or not.

Single GPUs are now running three displays @ 5760x1200+, why can't the same card run 2560x1600 which has less pixels?
Today's single GPUs are able to run 2560x1600 @ 60fps+ with overclocking, the 8800GTX days are over.

PS
If you're buying this type of hardware and refuse to overclock, you just wasted your time and money. 2560x1600+ is Enthusiast/Extreme PC status.

 

[ToMMyGuN]

I had a Dell 30" with 5850CF, 5870, 5970 and GTX 480...

Thanks for your post! Very valuable insite

 

[martinje]

I got 3 Dell U2311H in portrait surround mode (2 480 in SLI), and so far all the games I have played I been able to max out @ 3240 x 1980 at 4x. Hmm granted I have yet to install Crysis, I have Borderlands, Left 4 Dead 2, Torchlight and Dirt 2.

cant forget Plant vs Zombies too!

 

[LEVESQUE]

Today's single GPUs are able to run 2560x1600 @ 60fps+ with overclocking

That's true, but the problem arise when you want to raise AF and AA. No single GPU on the market right now can do 2560X1600 with 16AF and 8-16AA with the latest DX11 games or other GPU intensive games. Not even a highly OCed GTX 480.

I know some people will say that 2AA or 4AA is enough at that resolution, but it's a matter of taste. Personnally, I prefer playing with a higher AA even at 2560X1600.

 

[Roliath]

I have been gaming with 8800GTS 512MB (G92) @ 25x16 for almost 3 years with no problems. Of course, you need to sometimes lower the res to 19x12, but "no one card can handle 25x16" is just not true.

if you are lowering the res then you are not gaming at 2560x1600 with "no problems".

lol
this!

I have a 30inch dell, and I have 3x Dell 2007FP's in Portrait NV Surround.
My GTX285's are dated, but I have three of them to run these displays (not all at the same time, its either one setup or the other). But yeah you'll definitely need some horsepower behind 2560x1600 especially when you enable AA. I would look at 1gb + cards only.

 

[Omerta]

If you're buying this type of hardware and refuse to overclock, you just wasted your time and money. 2560x1600+ is Enthusiast/Extreme PC status.

I'd disagree with you there =p. Just because you want a 30" monitor, it doesn't mean you need to overclock. Considerable overclocking (in my own experience) generally leads to stability issues in the long run and even things happening in the short run that you just don't notice.

 

[nbuubu]

I'm running my new HP ZR30w at 2560x1600 on a single GTX 285 and I'm definitely feeling the squeeze. Would love to upgrade but I honestly don't know anything that would be a serious jump in quality. Tempted to just wait until the next gen, considering the current one is almost a year old.

Maybe ATI's new high-end in November? Dunno.

I play WoW mostly, which benefits from my OC'd i7 920 and SSD far more than the video card, and doesn't really do SLI well as far as I know, so I default to the most powerful single-card I can buy.

 

[ToMMyGuN]

So, with the release of the 68x0's from amd, has anything changed?

I was thinking about investing in a pair of 6850's and overclocking them to get me near 6870 CF performance, but is that still not going to deliver adequate handling of the newest games?

 

[audirs]

i doubt it, ud have to wait for the performance series to come out. check out the graph that was posted on the first page

a 5970 pulls 44fps with 4x AA. at 8x, id imagine this would be more like 20-25 FPS. im hoping the new AMD high end line can do this res no problem. my 4870x2 cfx setup can basically do the same FPS as a 5970 in BC2 (believe it or not) but thats 2560x1440. i get about 40-50 fps on 4x. and 70-110 on 2x. as stated on the other page, i only get 20-25 on 8x which is not playable.

i am pretty excited though for the new gen of cards coming out. 2560x1600 res is becoming a bit more mainstream in gaming, so hopefully they are focusing in that area now more then the other res. but who knows

 

[ToMMyGuN]

i doubt it, ud have to wait for the performance series to come out. check out the graph that was posted on the first page

Hmm, the graph seems to tell a different tale - If a gtx 460 @stock can get 25.3 fps at 4x AA, I think it is completely safe to assume that 2 gtx 460's @ stock clocks can get that number over 30 (playable).

As the hard review showed, the 6850 ran well with the GTX460, with the 6850 being 12% faster than the GTX460 in BC2 @ 2560x1600 w/ 2xAA.

I am waiting anxiously for hard's crossfire followup on the 6850/70, but things seem to be looking good for 30 inch gamers!

 

[RyanLucier]

I have a gtx 480 and I play starcraft 2, forged alliance / supreme commander, TF2, counter strike source, modern warfare 2, battlefield bc2, borderlands, wow, Need for speed shift, mafia 2, etc. etc. and every one of those games runs like 100fps, almost all with all the trimmings and 4x-8x FSAA... 30" 2560x1600 monitor (2 actually). However there are some that do chug somewhat, like metro 2033... but nothing really is going to run that super smooth.

 

[yang88she]

lol
this!

I have a 30inch dell, and I have 3x Dell 2007FP's in Portrait NV Surround.
My GTX285's are dated, but I have three of them to run these displays (not all at the same time, its either one setup or the other). But yeah you'll definitely need some horsepower behind 2560x1600 especially when you enable AA. I would look at 1gb + cards only.

sounds exactly like what I am running....but I'm waiting on the next gen and I run a 5850 for eyefinity plus a 9500GT on the 3007 for poops n giggles

 

[Godmachine]

I have been gaming with 8800GTS 512MB (G92) @ 25x16 for almost 3 years with no problems. Of course, you need to sometimes lower the res to 19x12, but "no one card can handle 25x16" is just not true.

Too me personally it just seems pointless buying such a big monitor to only run it at a non-native resolution with options turned down in some games to get the acceptable frame rate required.

Go for at least a 480 and if the budget allows it a second one.

 

[audirs]

I have a gtx 480 and I play starcraft 2, forged alliance / supreme commander, TF2, counter strike source, modern warfare 2, battlefield bc2, borderlands, wow, Need for speed shift, mafia 2, etc. etc. and every one of those games runs like 100fps, almost all with all the trimmings and 4x-8x FSAA... 30" 2560x1600 monitor (2 actually). However there are some that do chug somewhat, like metro 2033... but nothing really is going to run that super smooth.

sorry but i find it hard to believe you are getting 100+ fps with a single 480 in BC2, when the graph above shows 40fps on only 4x. i can see it at 2x, but not at 4x or 8x. i havent seen a single GPU on the market that can run BC2 at its full settings and get over 50fps. sli/cfx may tell a different tale, but a single card cannot do that

 

[audirs]

Hmm, the graph seems to tell a different tale - If a gtx 460 @stock can get 25.3 fps at 4x AA, I think it is completely safe to assume that 2 gtx 460's @ stock clocks can get that number over 30 (playable).

As the hard review showed, the 6850 ran well with the GTX460, with the 6850 being 12% faster than the GTX460 in BC2 @ 2560x1600 w/ 2xAA.

I am waiting anxiously for hard's crossfire followup on the 6850/70, but things seem to be looking good for 30 inch gamers!

yea its all relevant to what you consider playable. it also depends on the game. in a first person shooter, anything under 50-60 FPS you will notice lag when you move your mouse around, so playable to me is 50-60+. you could get away playing at 30 fps, but you will see lag for sure.

x2 on the CFX reviews

edit: found some CFX reviews, looks like its pulling 20 fps more then a 5970

looks like they are scaling 100% right now

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/Radeon_HD_6870_CrossFire/4.html
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6850-6870-crossfirex-review/7

 

[ToMMyGuN]

yea its all relevant to what you consider playable. it also depends on the game. in a first person shooter, anything under 50-60 FPS you will notice lag when you move your mouse around, so playable to me is 50-60+. you could get away playing at 30 fps, but you will see lag for sure.

Are you speaking about input lag? Because input lag is tied to your monitor, not your GPU.

I think what you are actually talking about is shuttering from moving your mouse quickly around (the GPU must quickly render the surrounding environment).

The Standard "playable" framerate is 30 fps (at least here at [H] it is (as seen by the red line in all of the video card reviews)). 50-60 is nice, but to me, smooth is smooth, whether its 30 or 300 fps

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the discussion here! I just picked up a GTX480 from someone on this forum

 

[GreenGoose]

The Standard "playable" framerate is 30 fps (at least here at [H] it is (as seen by the red line in all of the video card reviews)). 50-60 is nice, but to me, smooth is smooth, whether its 30 or 300 fps

30 seems a little choppy to me. I'll take 60 please.