New GTX260 vs 4870 1GB

[sourthings]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: sourthings

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: sourthings

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: sourthings
This is the same fanboy who will try to tell you ATI has not retaken the single card performance card crown and nvidia still has it in the 280. Another review from the same sight show the 4870X2 is faster than not just a single GTX 280, but two GTX280s in SLI.

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15293/11

Yes that's right, the $500 X2 is faster than two GTX 280s coming in at $900. Now watch the fanboy explain how this is just not so. But still insist the 260 'is far and away better than a 4870 1GB'

yes, sure it is

Nothing you linked to says anything of the sort

X2 is still $550 although it has recently been on sale and my GTX280 was $380, over 5 weeks ago

i don't have to be a fanboy of anything but truth to correct your misrepresentations [also]

it *appears* that the 4870/1GB is pretty damn equal to the new GT260
- fanboys will spin individual benches to make one look better than another

and GRID is *one* game where a GTX280 is no slouch either ..

Fixed my link to start at the benchmarks, rather than the conclusions

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15293/5

exactly what i mean about fans of either manufacturer *spinning* a single bench

what they said:

Well, this is a great game, but it's pretty much CPU limited with its quality settings maxed out along with 16X aniso and 4X AA. At 2560x1600, the multi-GPU configs do separate a little bit, and the 4870 X2 comes out ahead of three GTX 260s in SLI, let alone two.

so now we have a 2% difference - well within margin of error

That is one comment tied to the COD4 benches, if you look through all the benches you'll see the X2 is faster than GTX 280 SLI and TRI-SLI as well in all the other games at all the resolutions. The one exception is Crysis. Although that review was done when Crysis wasn't scaling well on the X2. But I'll still bet the gt200s are faster for Crysis in SLI, other than that the X2 is faster than 2 280s across the board.

Pretty impressive for $400 less.

Hold on

Why am *i* supposed to look to support YOUR premise

what you posted supports the opposite conclusion - twice!!

i don't see my x2 as faster than 280GTX SLi ... "in all the other games at all the resolutions"

I wasn't asking you to. Saying I countered my conclusion twice is a little silly, for posting a link to the conclusion before the benchmarks, and then in your opinion them saying cpu limitations were affecting one benchmark, that still showed the 4870x2 faster than 280 sli ?

I don't need you to support my conclusion, you pointed something out, I stated that in that review the 4870X2 is faster than GTX280 sli in every benchmark except Crysis. You can find a lot of reviews that will show you the same.

If you don't see your X2 as faster than 280 SLI, I suggest you buy another 280 and you'll see for yourself, without someone having to hold your hand through it.

 

[apoppin]

lets see the benches to support your view then; using the latest drivers

it wasn't 'my opinion' - each time i quoted from your own source to blow your argument away

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: apoppin
lets see the benches to support your view then; using the latest drivers

10/10/08

http://images.hardwarecanucks....ames/CWH/GPUCharts.jpg

Edit: The graph doesn't have GTX280 SLI, but shows a marginal lead over a single 280. I do think 80-90% of the time, GTX280 SLI would be faster than a single hd4870X2.

 

[sourthings]

Originally posted by: apoppin
lets see the benches to support your view then; using the latest drivers

it wasn't 'my opinion' - each time i quoted from your own source to blow your argument away

? I'm not even going to pursue this. I linked you to a review from the same site quoted in this thread showing 4870x2 to outperform gtx280 sli in every benchmark they performed apart from Crysis.

You take this too seriously, you blew away my arguments because I didn't link directly to the benchmarks, but to the conclusion ? Which I then rectified, and you think them stating that there were cpu limitations in one bench blew away my statement again, when the obvious conclusion would be it would limit either video card configuration, without bothering to carry on and look at all the benches ? Why the need to be so confrontational and ignore what was offered for you to look at, especially if it's so imporant to you to 'blow arguments away'.

You can find other benchmarks that show the same from other sites. In near every case 4870X2 is faster than gtx280 sli. If you believe it or not is not my concern. It's like saying you don't believe in the sun because someone won't drag you outside and point your face at it.

 

[Tamale]

hasn't anyone read the last page where Damage repeatedly considers the cards practically even?

Despite the fact that these are tremendously complex chips with hundreds of millions of transistors, AMD and Nvidia have achieved a remarkable amount of parity in their GPUs. In terms of image quality, overall features, performance, and even price, the Radeon HD 4870 1GB and the GeForce GTX 260 "Reloaded" are practically interchangeable. That fact represents something of a comeback for Nvidia, since the older GTX 260 cost more than the 4870 and didn't perform quite as well.

One thing I do know is that, whichever one you prefer, both of these cards are wicked fast for 300 bucks. In fact, you probably don't need either one of them unless you plan on using it with a nice, big monitor with a resolution of at least 1920x1080 or 1920x1200. Heck, even then, you can get by very well in almost all of today's games with something like a $170 Radeon HD 4850. What you get when you step up to one of these $300 cards is substantially more GPU power, memory bandwidth, and longevity potential. That may not always be apparent, but it may sometimes be painfully so. Only in a couple of cases?Warhead at 1920x1200 and GRID at 2560x1600?did we see the 4870 1GB's extra memory make a difference versus the 4870 512MB. But the difference in GRID was night and day. Personally, given the choice, I'd pony up the extra cash for the 1GB card, just for the peace of mind. But I'm probably crazy for saying so.

It's crazy how heated things get when you finally see two cards perform very similarly.

It's obvious to me (and I would think most people here) you should just go with the best card that suits your habits.. if you don't mind overclocking a card yourself, then it's not as important to get a nicely factory-overclocked card like the zotac. a lot of people don't mess with things that void warranties, and understandably so with programs like eVGA's...

look, this argument is ridiculous, and calling the tech report a biased site is laughable. Damage tested two similarly-priced cards he had available to him without doing any warranty-voiding procedures and they came out pretty much even throughout the gamut of tests. end of story!

 

[MrK6]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: MrK6
I said the review was, not the site; reading comprehension is a good skill to possess.

You do realise that Scott Wasson pretty much writes all the GPU related articles? So according to you, the entire GPU section of the techreport is biased and full of lazy reviews.. since its done by the same idiot reviewer who supposedly cant hold a candle to the fundamentals of economics?!

I think you should read the review more thoroughly than making bold childish statements about the review and the reviewer. Hes a lot more credible than you are.

And you also fail at classical arguments as well, and should probably let this drop since you clearly cannot comprehend English. When did I say that all of the techreport reviews were lacking? Where? Oh, I didn't? So you're just making things up? Fantastic. It's too bad your ego is hurt because I don't approve of the work this reviewer presented, don't go cry about it or anything... oh wait...

Originally posted by: WreckageYour post is "biased and lazy" as you clearly did not even take the time to read the article you are bashing. :roll:

They dedicated a whole paragraph to the clock speed of the GTX they tested....

The handsomely stickered card you see above is the GeForce GTX 260 AMP²! Edition from Zotac. (I would like to thank Zotac for making me type AMP²!, since I could use the exercise.) Not only does it have an additional TPC, but its clock speeds are quite a bit higher than early GTX 260s. The AMP²! has a 649MHz GPU core, 1404MHz shaders, and 896MB of GDDR3 memory at 1053MHz, up from 576/1242/999MHz on the first wave of GTX 260 cards. Those clock speeds are also, I should note, higher than the stock clocks for the GeForce GTX 280, which are 602/1296/1107MHz.

Plus they go on to talk about other cards (EVGA) and their clock speeds.

I swear this has to be the worst case of fanboy whining over an article, ever.

Because I question the validity of an article that shows the new GTX 260 in a good light, I'm now a fanboy? What kind of idiot are you? Also, is a symptom of fanboyism going blind? The fact that he labels the cards clocks is a start. The fact that he doesn't accentuate this fact is the problem. One can't present graphs and charts for a means of comparison when it isn't a level playing field. The GTX 260 216 used in the review is one of the most highly overclocked samples available (576 vs. 649? That's ~12.7% increase in core speed), and anyone that buys any one of the many reference-based products on the market will be sorely disappointed. It's misrepresentation at the best, and doesn't complement a professional presentation. I don't know if it was the designer's fault, the author's fault, the editor's fault, or some other party, but it is not a well-designed review, plain and simple. Now if you want to take every chance you get to bolster NVIDIA in your opinion due to some infatuation, hey, whatever does it for you. Don't try to pass it off as a universal truth. As dug already said, the fact that nVidia's own representation on the forum wants nothing to do with you is evidence enough to me.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: sourthings

Originally posted by: apoppin
lets see the benches to support your view then; using the latest drivers

it wasn't 'my opinion' - each time i quoted from your own source to blow your argument away

? I'm not even going to pursue this. I linked you to a review from the same site quoted in this thread showing 4870x2 to outperform gtx280 sli in every benchmark they performed apart from Crysis.

You take this too seriously, you blew away my arguments because I didn't link directly to the benchmarks, but to the conclusion ? Which I then rectified, and you think them stating that there were cpu limitations in one bench blew away my statement again, when the obvious conclusion would be it would limit either video card configuration, without bothering to carry on and look at all the benches ? Why the need to be so confrontational and ignore what was offered for you to look at, especially if it's so imporant to you to 'blow arguments away'.

You can find other benchmarks that show the same from other sites. In near every case 4870X2 is faster than gtx280 sli. If you believe it or not is not my concern. It's like saying you don't believe in the sun because someone won't drag you outside and point your face at it.

I thought this whole thing was silly, so I went and looked at the numbers... I'm suprised to see how well the the 4870x2 does compared to the GTX260/280 in SLI configs.

In CoD4 the 4870x2 and SLI 2xGTX260/280 are all limited by the CPU or something else, except at 2560 res. There the 4870x2 is faster then 3xGTX260 or 2xGTX280, but within ~1FPS, so that'd be margin of error I'd think, right?

In HL2 the 4870x2 is faster then SLI 2xGTX260/280 at all resolutions except 2560. At that res the 4870 is faster then the GTX260 SLI, but slower then the GTX280 SLI.

In Enemy Wars Quake Territory the 4870x2 is faster at all resolutions (then any card) at 1980 res or below. At 2560 the SLI 2x GTX260/280 is faster by a decent amount.

In Crysis the SLI GTX260/280 are faster then the 4870x2.

In Assasains Creed the 4870x2 is faster then the GTX260/280 in 2x or even 3x SLI.

In Race Driver GRID, again the 4870x2 is faster then the GTX260/280 in 2x or even 3x SLI.

So what are we fighting about again? I don't think you can beat the 4870x2 for ~$550.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

So what are we fighting about again? I don't think you can beat the 4870x2 for ~$550.

except for the bestbuy visiontek 4870x2 for $412 + shipping, or the Ebay 30% cashback netting you any brand of X2 for ~$380

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: jaredpace

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

So what are we fighting about again? I don't think you can beat the 4870x2 for ~$550.

except for the bestbuy visiontek 4870x2 for $412 + shipping, or the Ebay 30% cashback netting you any brand of X2 for ~$380

Isn't that the same price as a GTX280 when it's on sale? Hawt.

 

[exar333]

One topic no one has brought up is that there are a lot more CF motherboards floating around. I always wanted to SLI my 8800GTS, but I detest the crap that Nvidia calls their motherboards these days.

I would pick the 1GB 4870 over the GTX260 (or GTX280) for this reason. Get one now, and maybe grab another. If you still have the same CF-enabled, great!!, otherwise it is likely your new board will also.

Just my $0.02.

Edit: SP

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

Originally posted by: sourthings

Originally posted by: apoppin
lets see the benches to support your view then; using the latest drivers

it wasn't 'my opinion' - each time i quoted from your own source to blow your argument away

? I'm not even going to pursue this. I linked you to a review from the same site quoted in this thread showing 4870x2 to outperform gtx280 sli in every benchmark they performed apart from Crysis.

You take this too seriously, you blew away my arguments because I didn't link directly to the benchmarks, but to the conclusion ? Which I then rectified, and you think them stating that there were cpu limitations in one bench blew away my statement again, when the obvious conclusion would be it would limit either video card configuration, without bothering to carry on and look at all the benches ? Why the need to be so confrontational and ignore what was offered for you to look at, especially if it's so imporant to you to 'blow arguments away'.

You can find other benchmarks that show the same from other sites. In near every case 4870X2 is faster than gtx280 sli. If you believe it or not is not my concern. It's like saying you don't believe in the sun because someone won't drag you outside and point your face at it.

I thought this whole thing was silly, so I went and looked at the numbers... I'm suprised to see how well the the 4870x2 does compared to the GTX260/280 in SLI configs.

In CoD4 the 4870x2 and SLI 2xGTX260/280 are all limited by the CPU or something else, except at 2560 res. There the 4870x2 is faster then 3xGTX260 or 2xGTX280, but within ~1FPS, so that'd be margin of error I'd think, right?

In HL2 the 4870x2 is faster then SLI 2xGTX260/280 at all resolutions except 2560. At that res the 4870 is faster then the GTX260 SLI, but slower then the GTX280 SLI.

In Enemy Wars Quake Territory the 4870x2 is faster at all resolutions (then any card) at 1980 res or below. At 2560 the SLI 2x GTX260/280 is faster by a decent amount.

In Crysis the SLI GTX260/280 are faster then the 4870x2.

In Assasains Creed the 4870x2 is faster then the GTX260/280 in 2x or even 3x SLI.

In Race Driver GRID, again the 4870x2 is faster then the GTX260/280 in 2x or even 3x SLI.

So what are we fighting about again? I don't think you can beat the 4870x2 for ~$550.

as i said to sourthings, feel free to cherry pick all you want .. your blanket statement is false

i purchased a 4870x2 for a reason .. to have the fastest single slot Video card and to experiment with CF x3
- *obviously* i thought it is a great value and i paid $469 for it

but to say the X2 is faster across the board than 280 SLi and insist it a fact is a Spinner at his worst; someone who refuses to provide any real examples - except CoD4 which was blown apart by the reviewer. Also the conclusion of that same review said nothing to support your view. i expect a bit more.

 

[bryanW1995]

ok ok apoppin...it's obvious that you want to trade your 1gb 4870 for an nvidia card temporarily...I don't have a 260, however, um, er, how about I send you my 9600 gso for your 1gb 4870?

 

[ViRGE]

Cooler heads will prevail, or my prevailing action will be to put heads in coolers(i.e. I start vacationing people). It's your choice.

-ViRGE

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
ok ok apoppin...it's obvious that you want to trade your 1gb 4870 for an nvidia card temporarily...I don't have a 260, however, um, er, how about I send you my 9600 gso for your 1gb 4870?

no .. i have two Nvidia cards .. 280GTX and 8800GTX

this thread is about the New GTX260 vs 4870 1GB .. since i have a 4870/1GB already coming to replace my 512MB version in CF-X3, i was *specifically* asking if someone with a new GT260 might want to trade for a 4870/1GB for a few days
- there appears to be a little controversy about the benchmarks .. and this is one sure way to settle it without stress or further flaming; it takes me about 3 days to run through a full benchmark suite and i already have a HD set up for my 280/8800.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I thought this whole thing was silly, so I went and looked at the numbers... I'm suprised to see how well the the 4870x2 does compared to the GTX260/280 in SLI configs.

In CoD4 the 4870x2 and SLI 2xGTX260/280 are all limited by the CPU or something else, except at 2560 res. There the 4870x2 is faster then 3xGTX260 or 2xGTX280, but within ~1FPS, so that'd be margin of error I'd think, right?

In HL2 the 4870x2 is faster then SLI 2xGTX260/280 at all resolutions except 2560. At that res the 4870 is faster then the GTX260 SLI, but slower then the GTX280 SLI.

In Enemy Wars Quake Territory the 4870x2 is faster at all resolutions (then any card) at 1980 res or below. At 2560 the SLI 2x GTX260/280 is faster by a decent amount.

In Crysis the SLI GTX260/280 are faster then the 4870x2.

In Assasains Creed the 4870x2 is faster then the GTX260/280 in 2x or even 3x SLI.

In Race Driver GRID, again the 4870x2 is faster then the GTX260/280 in 2x or even 3x SLI.

So what are we fighting about again? I don't think you can beat the 4870x2 for ~$550.

Which sites were you looking at?

 

[Ackmed]

Funny how slanted this topic is. Overclocked, versus not overclocked. Some things/people never change.

On topic, the cards are so close in speed, both are good choices. Sadly, I wont be in the market for several more months, maybe something even better out by then.

 

[ginfest]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Funny how slanted this topic is. Overclocked, versus not overclocked. Some things/people never change.

On topic, the cards are so close in speed, both are good choices. Sadly, I wont be in the market for several more months, maybe something even better out by then.

Pot, meet kettle

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Funny how slanted this topic is. Overclocked, versus not overclocked. Some things/people never change.

On topic, the cards are so close in speed, both are good choices. Sadly, I wont be in the market for several more months, maybe something even better out by then.

Part of the deal with OCd vs not is many NVIDIA OEMs offer factory overclocked cards, and very few ATi OEMs do.

Whatever the reason is, this has always been the way of it.

As you note, outside of the vendor specific features, you probably wouldn't notice the difference between these cards.

 

[apoppin]

i would have to agree .. for such different design and manufacturing philosophies, the 1GB 4870 and the new GT260 appear to be "twins" in performance

.. not so strangely, for since launch, Nvidia and AMD have been positioning each card against each other .. imo, the new GT260 has got dangerously close in performance to the GTX280 and AMD upped the VRAM to make 4870 suitable for 19x12.

Choice is always good. i simply chose AMD when Nvidia's Tesla launch prices were sky high. If i were picking now, who knows? SLI's 280s? Maybe
- i am very happy with both my x2 and GTX280. i did not like my 4870 for 19x12 and it simply won't do for X3 CF.

The true fans of each manufacturers will try to spin that one is "superior" to another. In very specific instances, one card outperforms the other - but not so much the other card is a dog; not in any game i found, so far
- and people who want PhysX/CUDA will choose Nvidia; DX10.1 for AMD

Pick one .. it is not life changing unless it was meant to be so
:Q

 

[MegaWorks]

I don?t understand this? How long have we been in these forums, many years right! And yet we still manage to act like little kids fighting over a candy bar. It?s silly to think that AMD/ATI or nVidia produce bad cards these days. I mean they?re so equal that you don?t know what to buy anymore. Yes yes I?ve been guilty myself, I was an ATI fanboy and Rollo was one of the reasons why I stop buying nVidia base on principle lol! But I don?t care about that anymore, people change you know. Now that we know ?nRollo? and keysplayr2003 are focus group members it doesn?t matter and it won?t affect my opinion.

I think CUDA is fantastic and it made me buy four 9800GT installed in one machine for folding@home. For gaming I have two 4850 in CrossFire, and the reason is better driver support but I guess we can argue that topic. So thank you nVidia and AMD for delivering great products, I?m a happy costumer. :thumbsup: :beer:

Sorry ViRGE for going off topic.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: apoppin
- and people who want PhysX/CUDA will choose Nvidia; DX10.1 for AMD

Physx, DX10.1... bah. nV-- give me a shorter card that competes with the 4870 and I will consider it. As of right now, I'm stuck with choosing the 4870 because I really don't feel like buying a new case or modding this one. Not that a 4870 is something bad to be "stuck" with... now if I could just find the money to get one...

 

[Zebo]

These cards are not equal why you guys keep saying that? Sure in majority of games they are equals +-5% and very playable - but in two games that I know of -Devil may Cry and Grid - one card is playable (more than 30FPS) at max settings the other is not.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...i-radeon-hd-4870-1gb/9
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3415&p=7

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Zebo
These cards are not equal why you guys keep saying that? Sure in majority of games they are equals +-5% and very playable - but in two games that I know of -Devil may Cry and Grid - one card is playable (more than 30FPS) at max settings the other is not.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...i-radeon-hd-4870-1gb/9
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3415&p=7

You are just cherry picking benches at ultra high detail/resolutions 99% of us do not use.

do you DMC play at 25x16 with 8xMSAA?
:roll:

Now Grid is Quite Playable - according to your standards - on GTX280 at 25x16 on Ultra with 4xAA
- even 33fps on a 260

and do we see the minimum FPS on either of these tests?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Zebo
These cards are not equal why you guys keep saying that? Sure in majority of games they are equals +-5% and very playable - but in two games that I know of -Devil may Cry and Grid - one card is playable (more than 30FPS) at max settings the other is not.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...i-radeon-hd-4870-1gb/9
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3415&p=7

You are just cherry picking benches at ultra high detail/resolutions 99% of us do not use.

do you DMC play at 25x16 with 8xMSAA?
:roll:

Now Grid is Quite Playable - according to your standards - on GTX280 at 25x16 on Ultra with 4xAA
- even 33fps on a 260

and do we see the minimum FPS on either of these tests?

I'm not Cherry picking I am going to multiple review sites who test more than 5 games to get a more complete picture of these cards abilities.

Speaking of abilities - it's immaterial what I play at - both cards would satisfy for now - however if a card can't perform with certain games and high res now, how will it's ability be crippled with future games using similar coding or engines which will then effect everyone who ones that card?