• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

nvidia or ATI?

Well what will you be using the card for? Assuming gaming, what resolution will you be running it at and are there any particular features you're looking for? Also, knowing your budget would be good.
 
well my friend told me a 5870 would be good for a 22 inch monitor and its just for world of warcraft. but my other friend told me that a gtx 480 would be good... then again he is hardcore about computers.
I have 180$ and i saw one on hardforum but i can't message that guy until i have 50 posts. :(
 
I think just by reading [H]'s reviews of both cards you can choose for yourself between performance, heat and power consumption. Either card should be great for WoW.
 
If all you are doing is playing WoW on a single 1080p (1920x1080) or less monitor a gtx 460 768MB would be all you would need. We got one for my brother for $110 at Microcenter last week. He can play pretty much anything we have thrown at it maxed out (aside from Metro 2033). Look for deals on the hard deals subforum. No one brand is better than the other, even though most people will bash whatever they don't own and praise what they do to feel more secure in their purchase.

I would probably steer you away from the 480 at this point in time, now that the 570 is out. With that said, you probably don't need a high end GPU to play WoW -- buy mid level and pocket the change.
 
Last edited:
see thats what i thought but people kept telling me ati was better. so go with nvidia then? or do more research. i'm confused lol.
 
oOUdieOo said:
see thats what i thought but people kept telling me ati was better. so go with nvidia then? or do more research. i'm confused lol.
Click to expand...

Do more research to understand how the cards stack up at the resolution you are playing at, then buy whatever you can find cheapest to give you the performance you want. :cool:

I personally use a 5870 in my machine, but I run 3 monitors off of one card.

edit: Didn't notice you have a 5770 -- is that not working up to snuff for you? I would consider a move to a 460 from a 5770 a sidegrade.
 
Last edited:
It would cost 3 monitors (displayport capable, or add 1 adapter), and a card to push them. Ballpark $800.
On the nvidia side it would cost 3 monitors and two cards to push them (have to run SLI).


Your 5770 should really be fine for playing WoW on your existing monitor...
 
If you want:

a card to last max of 2.5-3 years before you upgrade
PhysX
CUDA support for certain programs
Decent 3D support
The most performance available, irrespective of cost
go nvidia.

If you want:
a card to last at least as long as the rest of the PC
A multi-display setup
A power efficient card that runs quiet and cool
Good value performance that does most of the work for half the price
go AMD.

For me, on balance it's AMD. More reliable, better value cards that use a sensible amount of power and don't melt the rest of your system are my sort of thing.
Enormous amounts of power, heat and noise to squeeze the last few frames per second out of a game and cause the card to only last a few years isn't worth it for me for the very limited appeal of 3D and PhysX, and that's why I don't personally buy nvidias.

Neither of the 5870 or the 480 are an appropriate choice currently though. The 5870 has been replaced by the 6950, and has a higher-performing counterpart the 6970. Meanwhile the 480 has been replaced by the 570, and the higher-performing counterpart the 580.
 
see what worries me the most is the heat from nvidia. people always talk about how hot they get... it scares me. but i do want something that will last.
 
Geforces typically run hotter than Radeons. Not by much any more as of the GTX500 series, but it was certainly true of the GTX400s [another reason not to buy them].
Radeons will typically top out at about 80-85C, the new geforces at around 85C. The old geforces ran at 95C. Past experience with several generations of geforces has taught me that any geforce that runs over 75C on a regular basis will start failing after about 2 years. My X1900XT and my pair of 4870X2s have all run at 90C+ on a daily basis due to their running environments for well over 2 years, and have no issues to report whatsoever. The same extends to all the other radeons in between them, and after them. Disregarding any potential issues at the outset [which you could have from any manufacturer] Radeons simply last longer, and that's a big issue for a fair few people.
 
With all of AMD's current driver issues, I simply cannot recommend their cards to anyone.

For lack of any better alternative, Nvidia.
 
Welcome to my easy three-step alternative!
Step 1. Uninstall Catalyst 10.12
Step 2. Reboot
Step 3. Install Catalyst 10.10e

It's not hard.
 
Been using ATi since the original Radeon days....never had a thought of using Nvidia...not going to upgrade PC any time soon... Drivers have been good since the 9500Pro days dispite what people may think...
 
A lot of it's down to multi-GPU setups. AMD have had a fair few problems with crossfire over the years [there have been plenty with SLI too] but they're too quick to tar all radeons with the same brush. I have had next to no driver issues with any of the single GPU Radeons I've owned (Rage Pro/9200/X800/X1600/X1900/HD3870/HD4830/HD4870 512).
 
oOUdieOo said:
see thats what i thought but people kept telling me ati was better. so go with nvidia then? or do more research. i'm confused lol.
Click to expand...

If you are going to get an ATi, then get one with a damn good warranty, like XFX and the double lifetime deal, always been burned by ATi's reliability in the past, to the point where I went back to nVidia after a 7 year break, at this point I'm quite happy with that decision.
 
As I posted in the other thread, were you using reference cards? Non-reference cards are definitely to be avoided.
 
A 5870? that's not very wise. It's outdated. overpriced, and inefficient. I assume you mean a 6870.
 
I just switched to Nvidia after using ATI cards for six years. And I highly regret it. I'll probably go back to ATI after I return my GTX 460.
 
samuelmorris said:
Welcome to my easy three-step alternative!
Step 1. Uninstall Catalyst 10.12
Step 2. Reboot
Step 3. Install Catalyst 10.10e

It's not hard.
Click to expand...
10.10e is slightly less broken than 10.12, but still broken.

ATi's drivers for the 5800, 6800, and 6900 series of cards have never been 100% functional (I should know, I've had an HD 5850 since launch). There's no sign that they plan on fixing them any time soon, either.

With all the issues PowerPlay currently has (which is what controlls clockspeed scaling on ATi cards), I've had to give up and lock my card in full 3D clocks at all times to avoid issues with DXVA accelerated video (drivers underclock the card incorrectly), game detection (drivers fail to detect a game and don't clock up the card), and monitor flickering (drivers change memory clock or set it too low).
 
oOUdieOo said:
whats the difference? isn't 5870 better than the 6870?
Click to expand...
The 5870 is about 7% to 8% faster depending on resolution, but given the price difference it's probably not worth it. 5850's have been down to $180 or lower recently, and you've got other good performers down there (460 and 6850) with good overclockability, it just doesn't justify the cost for the 5870, especially now that the 6950 is at $299 with the unlockable bios to 6970.

Unless you can find a good sale then it's not worth buying at regular price.

edit;
$239.99 MSRP on the 6870, plus 8% performance = $259. Anything more than that and you're losing value, anything less than that and you're gaining value.
 
My friend uses two 6850s with 10.10e and has almost no issues whatsoever. Just because you have problems doesn't mean everyone has probems. Using a Geforce in tandem with a Radeon for PhysX is bound to cause issues as well.

as for the 5870 vs 6870, UtopiA covered that perfectly, no more to add.
 
samuelmorris said:
My friend uses two 6850s with 10.10e and has almost no issues whatsoever.
Click to expand...
"almost no issues" still means he's having issues.

PowerPlay is broken on every card from the HD5830 and up. Go ahead, start a DXVA accelerated video and watch your video card's GPU clock drop to 400MHz, and its RAM clock drop to 900MHz. It won't go up to 3D clocks as long as that video is open (even if it's paused). This is particularly problematic for web video, which also uses hardware acceleration by default. Just leaving a web browser open in the background with a video paused in it would keep your card stuck in 2D clocks (obviously very bad for performance).

That drop in memory clockspeed will also cause any secondary monitors you have attached to your video card to jitter as the RAM stabilizes at the new clockspeed. You'll see a jitter again when you close the video and the RAM clock goes back up to its normal 2D value.

samuelmorris said:
Just because you have problems doesn't mean everyone has probems. Using a Geforce in tandem with a Radeon for PhysX is bound to cause issues as well.
Click to expand...
Wrong. There's no way around it, it's a problem inherent to the drivers and everyone with these ATi cards suffers from it weather they realize what's happening to them or not.

ATi and Nvidia drivers DO NOT CONFLICT on Windows 7, the driver model assures this. You can mix and match video cards to your heart's content without a problem. Case in point, absolutely nothing changes if I remove my Nvidia card and install only ATi's drivers.
 
Last edited:
Depends on what you want to spend. For 1920x, I like the GTX 460 1Gb with a decent cooler. For example; the Asus DirectCU, MSI Hawk, and MSI Cyclone. Those cards are very good @ 850 on the core and many of them do even better with voltage increases.

The MSI GTX 470 with the twin frozr cooler could likely do a decent OC and wouldn't get crazy hot.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127513&cm_re=gtx_470-_-14-127-513-_-Product

They're 290usd with rebate. That card @ 730-800 on the core would do very well. Techpowerup! reviewed a 465 version of that card and it didn't go above 66C @ 760 on the core.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_465_Twin_Frozr_II/32.html

If you want a faster card that costs more, there's always the GTX 570.
 
UtopiA said:
What's wrong with PowerPlay?
Click to expand...
I thought I made that fairly clear...

When ATi first released the HD5800 series of cards, they scaled core and memory clockspeed up and down depending upon workload using clockspeed values defined in the video card's BIOS. It was discovered shortly thereafter that changing the memory clockspeed caused the image on secondary monitors to jitter while the clockspeed changed (and in some cases, this even lead to instability and gray screens of death).

To sort out this issue, ATi tweaked the driver to keep the memory clockspeed at a fixed value (1000 MHz for the HD 5830 and HD 5850, 1200 MHz for the HD 5870, etc). As long as the clockspeed never changes, flickering and instability are avoided.

The problem is that they forgot to cover the PowerPlay state associated with DXVA2 hardware accelerated video decoding. It reverts to the old values defined in the video BIOS for hardware accelerated video, which are 400MHz core and 900MHz RAM. An additional side-effect of this bug is that the 3D applications (which should be able to request full 3D clocks) are IGNORED while a video is open and the drivers are in this glitched state.

End result? Opening a video leads to flickering secondary monitors, possible gray screen of death, and very poor performance in games since you're stuck slightly below 2D clockspeeds. If you close the video, everything returns to normal.

This issue has remained unresolved since launch-day, which can only mean one of a few things; AMD doesn't care enough to fix the issue, AMD can't fix the issue with a driver and needs to release a fixed BIOS, or AMD can't fix the issue in the driver and needs to recall the cards to replace them with new (fixed) revisions.
 
alrite i ended up just building a computer that was 12k that came with 4 gtx 580's i should be fine for a while.
 
UtopiA said:
Oh good, this doesn't concern me.
For a second there I thought I was going to have to spend 5 minutes in Radeon Bios Editor. You had me worried. :)
Click to expand...
Actually, it does. Read the rest of the post, the issue effects single-monitor users as well... you'll still be stuck in 2D mode even if you open a 3D application if you open a video, and you may suffer a Gray Screen of Death (GSOD) if you open a video.

When you edit the video BIOS on your HD 5870, you'll want to change the PowerPlay state for hardware accelerated video to 850 MHz core, 1200 MHz RAM.

Edit: If you could post your BIOS once you've modified, that would be great. I can add it to the AMD Driver Bug Thread as part of the work-around solution for PowerPlay. Saves everyone from editing their BIOS by hand (for the HD5870, at least).
 
Last edited:
Unknown-One said:
I thought I made that fairly clear...

When ATi first released the HD5800 series of cards, they scaled core and memory clockspeed up and down depending upon workload using clockspeed values defined in the video card's BIOS. It was discovered shortly thereafter that changing the memory clockspeed caused the image on secondary monitors to jitter while the clockspeed changed (and in some cases, this even lead to instability and gray screens of death).

To sort out this issue, ATi tweaked the driver to keep the memory clockspeed at a fixed value (1000 MHz for the HD 5830 and HD 5850, 1200 MHz for the HD 5870, etc). As long as the clockspeed never changes, flickering and instability are avoided.

The problem is that they forgot to cover the PowerPlay state associated with DXVA2 hardware accelerated video decoding. It reverts to the old values defined in the video BIOS for hardware accelerated video, which are 400MHz core and 900MHz RAM. An additional side-effect of this bug is that the 3D applications (which should be able to request full 3D clocks) are IGNORED while a video is open and the drivers are in this glitched state.

End result? Opening a video leads to flickering secondary monitors, possible gray screen of death, and very poor performance in games since you're stuck slightly below 2D clockspeeds. If you close the video, everything returns to normal.

This issue has remained unresolved since launch-day, which can only mean one of a few things; AMD doesn't care enough to fix the issue, AMD can't fix the issue with a driver and needs to release a fixed BIOS, or AMD can't fix the issue in the driver and needs to recall the cards to replace them with new (fixed) revisions.
Click to expand...

Ergo, close the video and everything will be normal.:D
 
Unknown-One said:
Edit: If you could post your BIOS once you've modified, that would be great.
Click to expand...
I'm using a non-reference card with different clock values than the normal design.
TPU has an archive of bioses, you could download any reference bios from there and change the one Clock setting from 400/900 to 850/1200 (and match the vcore) and it would work just as well. ;)

Here's the first one I clicked:
http://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/74046/Asus.HD5870.1024.090914.html
The date indicates it is reference, and you can see the value which needs to be changed.

I'm using ATT with 3D app profiles so any kind of hardware acceleration @ desktop (2D) has no effect on my settings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top