4850 vs 9800GTX+

[error8]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6
Really, an overclocked HD4850 >> an overclocked 9800GTX+.

Would you care to explain this? If both cards are equal and you start overclocking both, how will the 4850 become faster?

The HD4850 has much more overclocking headroom than a 9800GTX+ and it's easier to take it much further. It's not even close if you really overclock the hell out of each card.

Since you're not going to do anything about it here it is:

http://www.rbmods.com/Articles/Asus/4850_top/4.php

4850 overclocked to 780/1140 ( core/memory). It is a very nice overclock indeed, but it might be lower on OPs card, these numbers are not granted, they just give us an idea about what to expect, since any other overclock informations about this card are lacking.

Now for 9800GTX+ here is this thread:

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=519786

It's an old thread, maybe just as old as OPs card, so this gives a good idea about the whole ocing stuff. You can find other threads about GTX+, that have the same numbers. Here is what a person got with his GTX+:

Core 860 mhz
Shader 1998 (unlinked) mhz
memory 1300 mhz.

Now, of course that 9800GTX+ is some 100mhz slower at stock then 4850, since at 738 mhz is as fast as the ATi card at 625 mhz. But the point is that the proportions are being kept, for the most part, when overclocking, so that just doesn't put 4850 in advantage here.

Originally posted by: MrK6
You can't compare two completely different video card architectures clock for clock - that's not how it works.

I didn't. I said this:"Now, of course that 9800GTX+ is some 100mhz slower at stock then 4850, since at 738 mhz is as fast as the ATi card at 625 mhz. But the point is that the proportions are being kept, for the most part, when overclocking, so that just doesn't put 4850 in advantage here."

It's the same as saying "you can't compare them clock for clock"

Originally posted by: MrK6
While the 9800GTX+ clocks well, it doesn't clock as well as the HD4850. For example, if you look at percentages, your average HD 4850 can do ~760MHz (20%), 850MHz+(35%) with voltage while your average 9800GTX+ can do ~850MHz (15%). Also note that the differences become even more apparent at higher resolutions and higher image quality settings, where the HD 4850 excels.

Saying that the "average" 4850 overclocks 5% faster then 9800gtx+ is not an advantage. 5% is nothing.
And we are not speaking about volt modding here. Most people have no idea what volt modding is and don't want to try it. The average Joe might overclock, but it will not volt mod his card. And there is no higher image quality on the 4850 side. It might handle higher resolutions better and feel the AA penalty better, but the image quality is the same.

Originally posted by: MrK6
The HD 4850 is just a phenomenal bang-for-your-buck package, especially for the enthusiast looking to squeeze every last drop of performance out of it.

I totally agree with you on this. But this thread is not about what I choose between 4850 and 9800GTX+. Is about the extra hassle that changing one card with another equal card, means and if it pays off.

 

[Jack Flash]

New card is on the way! Guy was nice enough to mail his first so i wouldn't be without an operable computer. UPS shipping is going to cost $10.25 which seems a fair cost for the benefits this card will provide.

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6
Really, an overclocked HD4850 >> an overclocked 9800GTX+.

Would you care to explain this? If both cards are equal and you start overclocking both, how will the 4850 become faster?

The HD4850 has much more overclocking headroom than a 9800GTX+ and it's easier to take it much further. It's not even close if you really overclock the hell out of each card.

Since you're not going to do anything about it here it is:

http://www.rbmods.com/Articles/Asus/4850_top/4.php

4850 overclocked to 780/1140 ( core/memory). It is a very nice overclock indeed, but it might be lower on OPs card, these numbers are not granted, they just give us an idea about what to expect, since any other overclock informations about this card are lacking.

Now for 9800GTX+ here is this thread:

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=519786

It's an old thread, maybe just as old as OPs card, so this gives a good idea about the whole ocing stuff. You can find other threads about GTX+, that have the same numbers. Here is what a person got with his GTX+:

Core 860 mhz
Shader 1998 (unlinked) mhz
memory 1300 mhz.

Now, of course that 9800GTX+ is some 100mhz slower at stock then 4850, since at 738 mhz is as fast as the ATi card at 625 mhz. But the point is that the proportions are being kept, for the most part, when overclocking, so that just doesn't put 4850 in advantage here.

Originally posted by: MrK6
You can't compare two completely different video card architectures clock for clock - that's not how it works.

I didn't. I said this:"Now, of course that 9800GTX+ is some 100mhz slower at stock then 4850, since at 738 mhz is as fast as the ATi card at 625 mhz. But the point is that the proportions are being kept, for the most part, when overclocking, so that just doesn't put 4850 in advantage here."

It's the same as saying "you can't compare them clock for clock"

Originally posted by: MrK6
While the 9800GTX+ clocks well, it doesn't clock as well as the HD4850. For example, if you look at percentages, your average HD 4850 can do ~760MHz (20%), 850MHz+(35%) with voltage while your average 9800GTX+ can do ~850MHz (15%). Also note that the differences become even more apparent at higher resolutions and higher image quality settings, where the HD 4850 excels.

Saying that the "average" 4850 overclocks 5% faster then 9800gtx+ is not an advantage. 5% is nothing.
And we are not speaking about volt modding here. Most people have no idea what volt modding is and don't want to try it. The average Joe might overclock, but it will not volt mod his card. And there is no higher image quality on the 4850 side. It might handle higher resolutions better and feel the AA penalty better, but the image quality is the same.

Originally posted by: MrK6
The HD 4850 is just a phenomenal bang-for-your-buck package, especially for the enthusiast looking to squeeze every last drop of performance out of it.

I totally agree with you on this. But this thread is not about what I choose between 4850 and 9800GTX+. Is about the extra hassle that changing one card with another equal card, means and if it pays off.

Not to add too much to this reply but you say 5% is nothing when the percentages between the two post of yours are within 2-3%. Posting two links to two seperate sites does not gain forumbane points.

Both cards are good, I still would prefer an accelero 2 and a 4850.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: Zstream


Not to add too much to this reply but you say 5% is nothing when the percentages between the two post of yours are within 2-3%. Posting two links to two seperate sites does not gain forumbane points.

Both cards are good, I still would prefer an accelero 2 and a 4850.

I don't really understand what you mean.

 

[MrK6]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6
Really, an overclocked HD4850 >> an overclocked 9800GTX+.

Would you care to explain this? If both cards are equal and you start overclocking both, how will the 4850 become faster?

The HD4850 has much more overclocking headroom than a 9800GTX+ and it's easier to take it much further. It's not even close if you really overclock the hell out of each card.

Since you're not going to do anything about it here it is:

http://www.rbmods.com/Articles/Asus/4850_top/4.php

4850 overclocked to 780/1140 ( core/memory). It is a very nice overclock indeed, but it might be lower on OPs card, these numbers are not granted, they just give us an idea about what to expect, since any other overclock informations about this card are lacking.

Now for 9800GTX+ here is this thread:

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=519786

It's an old thread, maybe just as old as OPs card, so this gives a good idea about the whole ocing stuff. You can find other threads about GTX+, that have the same numbers. Here is what a person got with his GTX+:

Core 860 mhz
Shader 1998 (unlinked) mhz
memory 1300 mhz.

Now, of course that 9800GTX+ is some 100mhz slower at stock then 4850, since at 738 mhz is as fast as the ATi card at 625 mhz. But the point is that the proportions are being kept, for the most part, when overclocking, so that just doesn't put 4850 in advantage here.

Originally posted by: MrK6
You can't compare two completely different video card architectures clock for clock - that's not how it works.

I didn't. I said this:"Now, of course that 9800GTX+ is some 100mhz slower at stock then 4850, since at 738 mhz is as fast as the ATi card at 625 mhz. But the point is that the proportions are being kept, for the most part, when overclocking, so that just doesn't put 4850 in advantage here."

It's the same as saying "you can't compare them clock for clock"

Originally posted by: MrK6
While the 9800GTX+ clocks well, it doesn't clock as well as the HD4850. For example, if you look at percentages, your average HD 4850 can do ~760MHz (20%), 850MHz+(35%) with voltage while your average 9800GTX+ can do ~850MHz (15%). Also note that the differences become even more apparent at higher resolutions and higher image quality settings, where the HD 4850 excels.

Saying that the "average" 4850 overclocks 5% faster then 9800gtx+ is not an advantage. 5% is nothing.
And we are not speaking about volt modding here. Most people have no idea what volt modding is and don't want to try it. The average Joe might overclock, but it will not volt mod his card. And there is no higher image quality on the 4850 side. It might handle higher resolutions better and feel the AA penalty better, but the image quality is the same.

Originally posted by: MrK6
The HD 4850 is just a phenomenal bang-for-your-buck package, especially for the enthusiast looking to squeeze every last drop of performance out of it.

I totally agree with you on this. But this thread is not about what I choose between 4850 and 9800GTX+. Is about the extra hassle that changing one card with another equal card, means and if it pays off.

You need to read what I write and not what you're thinking. Even comparing these cards percentagewise doesn't accurately depict their differences, and negating any differences by some arbitrary threshold to prove your point is a poor argument. And we are speaking of voltmodding because every user is different. Some have a tiny bit of enthusiast in them and the pencil volt mod takes ~5 minutes to do to net some more MHz.

Also last time I checked, the options to run higher resolutions and AA yielded better image quality.

This thread is about options available with each card. My comment stated that an overclocked 4850 was much faster than an overclocked 9800GTX+, I think I proved my point.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Its true that an HD4850 sometimes performs near GTX260 levels (especially with high levels of AA) where as the GTS250/9800GTX+ will never reach those kind of performance numbers even when OCed.

 

[dug777]

I can't speak for all 4850s, but would suggest my freaky little sample that comfortably tops the 4870 core (currently 775/1063) on stock voltage eats any 9800GTX+ for breakfast

Add lashings of AA and the GTX260 runs scared in many circumstances, even at the weak-as stock clocks of 625/993:

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=1261&page=5

 

[Cookie Monster]

Yea, this kind of thing happens when you stick with a 3 year old ROP design.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: MrK6

My comment stated that an overclocked 4850 was much faster than an overclocked 9800GTX+, I think I proved my point.

Where the hell did you proved anything?
At least I gave you arguments, poor or not, you've just thrown some words and nothing more. You do know that when you want to prove something you have to back it up with facts, links, otherwise it could be just words in the wind. "Last time I checked" and "i know that" doesn't mean nothing, if you can't prove it. And it looks like you can't.

The problem is that you don't get the thread's main idea. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT CARD SHOULD I BUY BETWEEN 4850 and 9800GTX+. OP hasn's said anything about volt modding so, having 5% more oc room is not an argument to switch the cards and 8X AA on 4850 is not playable most of the time, because the frame buffer is insufficient, if, this is what you were referring at on the image quality situation, because I really don't know, since you're just saying stuff from what you remember.

Here is an old review with these cards side by side at 1920X1200:
http://xtreview.com/addcomment...00GTX+-vs-HD-4850.html

They are equal, even though 9800GTX+ is a bit in front. Drivers have improved on both sides, so even if this review was made today, I think we had the same picture.

The fight we're having is useless anyway, since OP already made up his mind.

 

[MrK6]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: MrK6

My comment stated that an overclocked 4850 was much faster than an overclocked 9800GTX+, I think I proved my point.

Where the hell did you proved anything?
At least I gave you arguments, poor or not, you've just thrown some words and nothing more. You do know that when you want to prove something you have to back it up with facts, links, otherwise it could be just words in the wind. "Last time I checked" and "i know that" doesn't mean nothing, if you can't prove it. And it looks like you can't.

The problem is that you don't get the thread's main idea. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT CARD SHOULD I BUY BETWEEN 4850 and 9800GTX+. OP hasn's said anything about volt modding so, having 5% more oc room is not an argument to switch the cards and 8X AA on 4850 is not playable most of the time, because the frame buffer is insufficient, if, this is what you were referring at on the image quality situation, because I really don't know, since you're just saying stuff from what you remember.

Here is an old review with these cards side by side at 1920X1200:
http://xtreview.com/addcomment...00GTX+-vs-HD-4850.html

They are equal, even though 9800GTX+ is a bit in front. Drivers have improved on both sides, so even if this review was made today, I think we had the same picture.

The fight we're having is useless anyway, since OP already made up his mind.

There's no "fight" here. We're discussing video cards, not your mother. Go outside, take a deep breath, come back in, and try to have a conversation.

Originally posted by: ZstreamPosting two links to two seperate sites does not gain forumbane points.

Well said.

I think the problem here results from your lack of understanding of the fundamental differences between the ATI HD 4800 series and NVIDIA 9800 series architectures. Using the examples you linked to, the HD4850 overclocked 25% while the 9800GTX+ only overclocked 16.5%; however, there's more. When the HD 4850 was overclocked, ALL of its core components were overclocked (as I've said before). This isn't the case with the 9800GTX+, where, for example, its shaders were only overclocked 9%. This is simple math here, I really don't understand where there's a problem. Not only does the HD 4850 overclock better than the 980)GTX+, clock-for-clock, the HD 4850 also gains more performance.

Also, when I consider the "overclockability" of a video card, I consider it in all aspects, including voltmodding. Just because you or some other average Joe user throws it out because you don't want to dabble in it doesn't mean its not an option for the OP or any other user. Not only does the HD 4850 respond well to voltage, overvolting the card is very easy to do as their are multiple path ways to do it and some of them are very simple.

Originally posted by: dug777
I can't speak for all 4850s, but would suggest my freaky little sample that comfortably tops the 4870 core (currently 775/1063) on stock voltage eats any 9800GTX+ for breakfast

Add lashings of AA and the GTX260 runs scared in many circumstances, even at the weak-as stock clocks of 625/993:

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=1261&page=5

Thanks, another one of my points. Honestly, I thought this stuff was common knowledge by now (almost 9 months after release), but I guess not. The HD 48xx series has extreme balls when you crank the image quality (AA, resolution, etc.). And nice overclock :thumbsup:.

Originally posted by: error8
The problem is that you don't get the thread's main idea. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT CARD SHOULD I BUY BETWEEN 4850 and 9800GTX+. OP hasn's said anything about volt modding so, having 5% more oc room is not an argument to switch the cards and 8X AA on 4850 is not playable most of the time, because the frame buffer is insufficient, if, this is what you were referring at on the image quality situation, because I really don't know, since you're just saying stuff from what you remember.

Evidently you lost scope as well, or either that you can't form and state a conclusive argument.

OP:

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
I have an eVGA 9800GTX+ which I can trade for a ASUS 4850 TOP. Only cost to me would be the price of shipping.

If I had a shorter card I would be able to use all 6 HDD slots my case has available. Right now two are blocked by the 9800GTX+

Also, the 4850 requires only one 6 pin connector wheras my 9800GTX+ requires 2.

I replied:

Originally posted by: MrK6
Really, an overclocked HD4850 >> an overclocked 9800GTX+. Add in the fact that it'll better fit your case, you really can't lose considering you're only paying shipping.

Stating A) If he's overclocking he's going to get a card that's a good deal faster. B) It'll fit in his case better so he can use all 6 HDDs. And C) It's so cheap, go for it!

You didn't even offer advice to the OP, but rather came in to the thread questioning my post. Who lost sight again?

If you still can't figure it out, go google for awhile and do some research or you can continue ignoring any decent argument or logical progression - either way the OP made the right choice and my work here is done.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: MrK6
There's no "fight" here. We're discussing video cards, not your mother. Go outside, take a deep breath, come back in, and try to have a conversation.

Again, you didn't understood the meaning of the word "fight", in this context, but that doesn't surprises me at all. You had to write it down here and explain it, so you can understand it, is it?

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: ZstreamPosting two links to two seperate sites does not gain forumbane points.

Well said.

Thank God there are others that can speak for yourself, since you are not able to?

Originally posted by: MrK6

I think the problem here results from your lack of understanding of the fundamental differences between the ATI HD 4800 series and NVIDIA 9800 series architectures. Using the examples you linked to, the HD4850 overclocked 25% while the 9800GTX+ only overclocked 16.5%; however, there's more. When the HD 4850 was overclocked, ALL of its core components were overclocked (as I've said before). This isn't the case with the 9800GTX+, where, for example, its shaders were only overclocked 9%. This is simple math here, I really don't understand where there's a problem.

True. For me 25-16.5=5. I have my guilt here. So it's more like 8.5% difference in favor of the 4850. Astonishing

Originally posted by: MrK6

Not only does the HD 4850 overclock better than the 980)GTX+, clock-for-clock, the HD 4850 also gains more performance.

This phrase has no sense. Read it again. Clock for clock it doesn't matter, since we're taking in consideration only the percentage of the overclock.

Originally posted by: MrK6
Also, when I consider the "overclockability" of a video card, I consider it in all aspects, including voltmodding. Just because you or some other average Joe user throws it out because you don't want to dabble in it doesn't mean its not an option for the OP or any other user. Not only does the HD 4850 respond well to voltage, overvolting the card is very easy to do as their are multiple path ways to do it and some of them are very simple.

I believe that 9800GTX+ also has its own volt mods. But I have to agree, 4850, once it is volt modded, comes close or maybe over 4870 in some cases, where bandwidth limitation isn't important. But again, OP didn't took volt modding or overclocking into consideration when he thought about making this exchange and so, there is no point in putting this as a plus for the 4850. It's like taking CUDA or PhysX into consideration.

This is what he said:
"If I had a shorter card I would be able to use all 6 HDD slots my case has available. Right now two are blocked by the 9800GTX+

Also, the 4850 requires only one 6 pin connector wheras my 9800GTX+ requires 2."
Do you see volt modding and overclocking here????

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: dug777
I can't speak for all 4850s, but would suggest my freaky little sample that comfortably tops the 4870 core (currently 775/1063) on stock voltage eats any 9800GTX+ for breakfast

Add lashings of AA and the GTX260 runs scared in many circumstances, even at the weak-as stock clocks of 625/993:

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=1261&page=5

Thanks, another one of my points. Honestly, I thought this stuff was common knowledge by now (almost 9 months after release), but I guess not. The HD 48xx series has extreme balls when you crank the image quality (AA, resolution, etc.). And nice overclock :thumbsup:.

Thank god doug777 posted a link for you, since it's clear that you aren't able to sustain your own ideas.

Originally posted by: MrK6

Originally posted by: error8
The problem is that you don't get the thread's main idea. WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT WHAT CARD SHOULD I BUY BETWEEN 4850 and 9800GTX+. OP hasn's said anything about volt modding so, having 5% more oc room is not an argument to switch the cards and 8X AA on 4850 is not playable most of the time, because the frame buffer is insufficient, if, this is what you were referring at on the image quality situation, because I really don't know, since you're just saying stuff from what you remember.

Evidently you lost scope as well, or either that you can't form and state a conclusive argument.

OP:

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
I have an eVGA 9800GTX+ which I can trade for a ASUS 4850 TOP. Only cost to me would be the price of shipping.

If I had a shorter card I would be able to use all 6 HDD slots my case has available. Right now two are blocked by the 9800GTX+

Also, the 4850 requires only one 6 pin connector wheras my 9800GTX+ requires 2.

I replied:

Originally posted by: MrK6
Really, an overclocked HD4850 >> an overclocked 9800GTX+. Add in the fact that it'll better fit your case, you really can't lose considering you're only paying shipping.

Stating A) If he's overclocking he's going to get a card that's a good deal faster. B) It'll fit in his case better so he can use all 6 HDDs. And C) It's so cheap, go for it!

You didn't even offer advice to the OP, but rather came in to the thread questioning my post. Who lost sight again?

I offered advice to the OP on the PM as he requested it from me. This is why I never said anything on his thread, until I bumped into your "HD4850 >> an overclocked 9800GTX+", when the major difference was of only 8.5%, for the 4850.
And, nobody is granting you 760mhz overclock on the TOP 4850. It might be 690mhz or it might not overclock at all. Same is for the 9800GTX+. Overclocking might be totally different of what you find on the net, so judging two cards after their overclocking abilities is not smart at all. Yet, you've based your whole advice on this argument, that in the end, might mean nothing.

Originally posted by: MrK6
either way the OP made the right choice and my work here is done.

[/quote]

Amazing work you've done here. Great. For your own consideration, OP already was going to change the card, but he started this thread just to be sure.
Even if there was only one person that would tell him that this trade it worth being done, out of 20 that would think otherwise, he would listen for that one, since he only needed a small push, to do it

The bottom line is that if the extra hard drives satas available with the 4850 and the availability of the extra 6 pin cable, are important for him, then this trade was good. But the overclockability doesn't fit in, as an argument, for this exchange.

 

[AmberClad]

Flamebaiting and off-topic comments removed.

AmberClad
Video Moderator

 

[MrK6]

So be it, I won't continue further.

 

[Jack Flash]

Didn't mean to start WW3 but such is life.

I'm thankful for all of the responses and ultimately am pleased with the decision I came to.

My 4850 will arrive tomorrow and I will let everyone know how it goes.

 

[soccerballtux]

Only reason I wouldn't would be if you play Unreal Tournament 3 extensively-- 4850 struggles at this game, likely drive related; not sure why it's not been fixed yet.

 

[Sylvanas]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Only reason I wouldn't would be if you play Unreal Tournament 3 extensively-- 4850 struggles at this game, likely drive related; not sure why it's not been fixed yet.

Not at all- have a look at the many reviews its fine. If you have had this problem it is probably an issue on your side not that of the card/driver.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Only reason I wouldn't would be if you play Unreal Tournament 3 extensively-- 4850 struggles at this game, likely drive related; not sure why it's not been fixed yet.

That's odd, Unreal 3 was extremely playable with my puny HIS ICEQ3 HD 3850 512MB AGP with everything on max at 1280x1024 with 4x FSAA.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: evolucion8

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Only reason I wouldn't would be if you play Unreal Tournament 3 extensively-- 4850 struggles at this game, likely drive related; not sure why it's not been fixed yet.

That's odd, Unreal 3 was extremely playable with my puny HIS ICEQ3 HD 3850 512MB AGP with everything on max at 1280x1024 with 4x FSAA.

2nd.

I had no problems playing it when I initially installed it (and indeed, couldn't get the fps to drop below the cap).

Assume I was playing 1600x1200 8XAA/16xAF but couldn't say for sure because the demo has stopped working (some 'modified executable' issue, which persists when I reinstall it).

 

[Jack Flash]

Card arrived and works well. Performance is definitely better, but the fan is more annoying sounding. Shipping the 9800GTX+ cost $11.18.

Looks like if I reverse the HDDs all 6 will be able to fit inside the case. Card seems to droop somewhat at the end. Warped?

 

[funboy6942]

DITCH THAT POS COOLER!!!

I got, had, that one on my card and took this one from my X1900GT and stuck it on my GD4850 and it dropped my temps by near 20c, and is quiet.
Linkage

Its kinda on the high side, but I been using it now on over 3 generation of cards, so its made up for its cost and then some so far, and is soooooooo much better then that pos stock one they stuck on there.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Jack Flash
Card arrived and works well. Performance is definitely better, but the fan is more annoying sounding. Shipping the 9800GTX+ cost $11.18.

Looks like if I reverse the HDDs all 6 will be able to fit inside the case. Card seems to droop somewhat at the end. Warped?

Go into ATI CCC and change the fan speed. This should result in a higher temp but much quieter noise level coming from the card.

edit - If your going to get a 3rd party cooler, make sure the VRM section of the HD4850 is cooled properly. Ive done this using some cheapo ramsinks.

 

[Jack Flash]

This card is giving me a lot of 'whine' doing things like resizing windows. It's not the fan. Is this par for 4850's or should I be questioning the health of the card?