ATI's 38xx beat Nvidia in total cost of ownership
I am going to make this short and sweet. The new 38xx series cards have lower power requirements. Therefore at the price point for Crossfire to get the performance everybody is apparently wanting you do NOT have to go out and invest in an additional 750 Watt power supply. We need to look at Total Cost of Ownership before judging because nothing happens in a vacuum. That total cost should include the initial cost of components needed to run the system adequately, and the energy cost. Here is where we find the true value of the cards.
Well, the price difference between a handful of Watts isn't going to be a big factor, at least here in the US...The difference is what, like 40 Watts?
Here in Kentucky, electricity costs about 6 cents per kilowatt hour. That means, you'd be paying an extra .04 Watts *6 cents per hour, or .0024 cents each hour you're paying over what you'd pay for running the other card. You'll never make that up in the effective life of the card.
The power supply expense...well...that part is what truly sucks.
check this, the 3870 beats the 8800gts 640 on bioshock in an interesting way,
i wonder wat causes this kind of performance
Cherry picking - with one exception. The 3870 seems to do better at higher resolutions.
If you average all the differences across all the benchmarks at all resolutions, the year old 8800GTS still wins.
Last, a comparison using the 8800GT would be more useful. It's newer and more competitively priced.
cruiseoveride said:check this, the 3870 beats the 8800gts 640 on bioshock in an interesting way,
i wonder wat causes this kind of performance
Check this, 8800gts beats 3870 on Need for Speed in an interesting way. I wonder what causes this kind of performance?
I don't know. Both numbers represent anomalies. But they are part of the benchmark results, so until we find out what happened, we have to count them.
I didn't have time earlier, but I came back and looked more closely at the numbers. My first impression of the 3870 doing better overall at higher resolutions was wrong.
Quick and dirty chart:
ATI nVidia nv/ati% Avg% nv
FarCry 1024 232 247 +6.5
1280 179 188 +5.0 5.6
1680 132 139 +5.3
FEAR 1024 91 124 +36.3
1280 79 83 +5.1 11.3
1680 67 62 -7.5
COD2 1024 77 89 +15.6
1280 62 78 +25.8 23.0
1680 51 65 +27.5
Quake4 1024 74 80 +8.1
1280 62 71 +14.5 14.8
1680 46 56 +21.7
NfSMW 1024 80 82 +1.0
1280 82 78 +5.1 11.7
1680 62 80 +29.0
BioShk 1024 59 60 +1.7
1280 59 58 -1.0 -8.9
1680 56 44 -27.3
3dMark 1024 10609 10453 -1.5
1208 9789 9088 -7.8 -7.7
1680 9053 7964 -13.7 _____
On the average, the year old GTS is about 16% faster than ATI's latest and greatest. Like I said earlier, I wonder how the 8800GT would have done?
Apologies. The tabs got messed up when I pasted the chart into the tread editor.
I got so wrapped up in the benchmark chart that I lost track of the original topic.hcforde said:I am going to make this short and sweet. The new 38xx series cards have lower power requirements. ... We need to look at Total Cost of Ownership before judging because nothing happens in a vacuum. That total cost should include the initial cost of components needed to run the system adequately, and the energy cost. Here is where we find the true value of the cards.
I think TCO is pretty much a nonissue for a home PC. If you are that concerned about power usage, replacing one incandescent light with a compact flourescent lamp will result in a greater energy saving.
/* begin rant
Use a smaller monitor. Buy a VIA based PC. Your PC will save LOTS of energy. Of course performance will suck walnuts though a drinking straw, but you shouldn't care. Your TCO is low, and you are saving energy. Al Gore will be proud of you.
end rant */
OK. That's out of my system. The whole 3870 TCO issue strikes me as an attempt to find something besides price that the 3870 is better at, since it cannot compete with a year old GTS.
I have both Nvidia and ATI cards JCS, Bought 7800 GT when it was top dog, bought the X1900xtx - still have both. Have a number of Quadro cards for my business.
Just because a number of home owners do not look at it business and industrial users DO look at it. That is where a lot of focus is done in corporate decision with Nvidia and ATI . They have to look at it. They have to look at their own cost also. It all comes into play whether you see it up close and personally or not. It does affect the products that we get.
Thanks, I'll remember that next time I worry about FPS in a game instead of some silly 'cost of ownership'.
I should be running my 486 then still, talk about 'cost of ownership'!
They are not me. Maybe you should post this on some industrial forum, not here. I want FPS like 99% of us, and if I get top dog performance and have to buy a atomic reactor, then so be it.
hcford ATI fanboy tagged!