I would tend to agree though its not an across the board victory. A GTX 280 at below 1920x1200 is a waste IMHO. That's not what its for.
I plan to pick up a 4870X2 when it comes out for 1680x1050... Just think of the AA, also the future proofing.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would tend to agree though its not an across the board victory. A GTX 280 at below 1920x1200 is a waste IMHO. That's not what its for.
I plan to pick up a 4870X2 when it comes out for 1680x1050... Just think of the AA, also the future proofing.
I plan to pick up a 4870X2 when it comes out for 1680x1050... Just think of the AA, also the future proofing.
I would tend to agree though its not an across the board victory. A GTX 280 at below 1920x1200 is a waste IMHO. That's not what its for.
Run hot by design to keep the noise down or produce more heat?Card runs very very hot with out modifications to drivers or cooling.
ordered my 4870 this afternoon, hope i get it soon
I'll probably get the 4870. Sure the 260 GTX has more VRAM and a higher memory bus, but most benchmarks I've seen a 4870 beats a 260 GTX. Thats where the beauty of GDDR5 and higher memory clocks come in.
Call of Duty is a far cry from Crysis. Pardon the pun.
The memory has nothng to do with it. In the cases where the 4870 is faster, it's the 800 SPs and higher Gflops that are the difference.
The gtx 260 has more SP's than the 4870. The 260 has 192 SP's while the 4870 only has "800 SP's". You have to realize that with ATI SP's that you divide 800 by 5 (5 ATI SP'are the the equivalent of 1 Nvidia SP), therefore the 4870 really only has 160 SP's.
I have read about the 5:1 on so many sites and reviews I really doubt that everybody is wrong. Plus, look at the benchmarks. Games that are shader intensive the 4870 starts to show it's weakness which is also why the GT200's perform better in these games.
Think about it logically. ATI's 800 SP's can't really be 800. If that was the case shouldn't it perform a lot better than the GT200 cards? When in fact in shader intensive games the GT200 cards perform better.
That's why, overall in WiC and Crysis, the 4870 (with it's hypothetical 160SP's) performs better than the 9800gtx with 128SP's but not as well as the GTX 260 with 192SP's.
The only other minor factors were that I wouldn't have to go through driver hell trying to switch over and that Nvidia vendor warranty support is better than ATI vendors with the exception of Visiontek (which is the only ATI card I would even consider buying).
.
I didn't add any fan fix on my 4870, and it stays at 71 C under load. It sounds like a high number to me, but I can't feel any heat at all, only cool air out of my antec 900.
I know it's a little off-topic but how much better are these cards compared to the 8800GTS (G92)?
My card doesnt top out past 65C and i have a GTX 260. Thats not even running it at 100% fan. These cards dont necessarily run as hot as many people would like to think. Id say 260 for the price it is now...
Huh, where did you get that idea from
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/07/11/summer-2008-graphics-performance-roundup/1
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...eon-hd4870-512mb-graphics-card-review-14.html
For the hardwarecanucks review they tested the gtx280 and 4870, not the gtx260. However, if you have seen enough benchmarks you know that an overclocked gtx260 benches pretty much the same as a gtx280 (when the gpu core clock is above 670 on the gtx 260). If you look at these benchmarks in these two reviews, generally the higher the resolution and AA the better the GT200's outperform the 4870. Keep in mind the minimum frame rates as they are obviously the most important number when benchmarking.
Huh, where did you get that idea from
The vast majority of reviews have shown the HD 4870 surpassing the GTX 260 in Crysis at virtually every single resolution/settings:
Crysis benchmarks/performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=13
HD 4870 > GTX 260 across the board
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/14990/12
HD 4870 > GTX 260 across the board
http://en.expreview.com/2008/06/24/first-review-hd-4870-and-hd-4850/16/
HD 4870 > GTX 260 across the board
http://hothardware.com/Articles/ATI_Radeon_HD_4850_and_4870_RV770_Has_Arrived/?page=10
HD 4870 > GTX 260 (albeit only one res/setting tested here; 1920x1200 High
Granted, there are a few reviews out there which show them performing virtually neck and neck, and even a couple Ive come across where the GTX 260 managed to pull ahead in certain situations by a couple of frames per second, but that withstanding, it's very misleading of you to claim that the GTX 260 is categorically > than the HD 4870 in Crysis as you have, when it's clearly not the case in most scenarios.
Yup, and the 4870 basically out performs the gtx260 once you start turning the resolution up and using AA / AF.
Big surprise there, this guy is a mod on a evga forum, of course his card doesn't overheat . You work for evga, so you probably get the cherry picked gtx260 I'm sure
Im guessing both the 4870 and the gtx 260 are 2x faster then the 8800gts, Im just guessing though.
The 8800GTS 512MB? The 4870 is more like 30% faster than it.
Actually from what I've seen in benchmarks, the higher the resolution the closer the GTX260 gets to the 4870, and high resolutions are pretty much the only time the GTX260 ever gets infront.
Can't comment on AA, haven't checked out any benchies that directly compare the GTX260 and 4870 with increasing levels of AA.
Big surprise there, this guy is a mod on a evga forum, of course his card doesn't overheat . You work for evga, so you probably get the cherry picked gtx260 I'm sure
in all fairness not all the cards have that issue, Makes me wonder if they should not be looking at the last stages of the manufacturing process. I am wondering if the heat sink being seated properly. and of course you can't redo it without voiding the warranty