Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

3870 with new drivers > 8800 GT?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 13, 2008 2:26:21 PM

After research on the net, I'm convinced nVidia's 8800GT has better performance than ATI's 3870.

But.... I've read that the 3870 will gain performance once the new drivers for it will be released. So does anyone know whether these have been released yet and if it gained enough performance to beat the 8800GT?

More about : 3870 drivers 8800

January 13, 2008 2:53:05 PM

It's all hot air my friend. Unless those be "magical" drivers.. The only hope for ATI will not be new drivers for the two single gpu DX 10.1 cards, but the new x2 gpu cards.. They're looking spicy! Further benchies should be out soonish. (Welcome to the Forum)
Ryan
January 13, 2008 3:02:54 PM

Well it might all be hot air, but I'd like to see prove of that (after all, who tells me you're not just an nVidia fanboy who's trying to discredit ATI with me? :)  )

So...are those drivers out yet? If yes, can anyone point me to benchmarks with them? If not, when will they be out?
Related resources
January 13, 2008 3:22:01 PM

I'm actually a "fanny" man. There's enough hot air around here without fanning further it thanks! But get real, my tungston testicled friend, are you realy expecting a 30-40 % jump from a new driver ?? wtf, get a sense of direction..?? maybe 5-10% at most - but that still doesn't catch the cat. Trust me - wait for the x2.. Then buy 2 of them and do this:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/593/1/

My argument is simple - the single gpu aint ever gonna catch a gt's perf', but in CF they historically scale better than the sli. Come again?


Ryan.
a b U Graphics card
January 13, 2008 3:29:21 PM

while its possible that new drivers could improve the performance of the 38xx cards, i wouldn't hold my breath. people have been saying "wait for the new drivers" sense the 2900 launch, and they haven't really materialized. Drivers can improve performance, but usually not by a lot, and they don't work miracles. For the price, the 3800 cards are great. If you need more performance, nvidia is the way to go, but most don't and there is where ATI is competitive. This may end up being the future of ATI as well. competitive on the price/performance ratio, but not the most powerful, which is fine by me, I wont pay more than $200 for a video card anyway. I'm not a "fanboy" either, having just replaced my 8600gt with a 3850.
January 13, 2008 3:38:38 PM

How come you swapped cards nvalhalla?? Personally I'm holding on a little longer for a nice new wolfie, water cool it to maybe 5ghz (they do reckon they do 4 ghz on air!) and then see what grafix cards best at that time (hopefully the 3870x2 will prove to be as good as it looks - if that's the case AND the price isn't tooo OTT, that'll be my GPU (or rather GPUs!!) Really couldnt care less if its nvid or ati - I'll take price/perf winner.
Be safe
Ryan
January 13, 2008 3:39:05 PM

Hmmm... And what do you guys think of the statements saying the 3850 is better for watching movies than the 8800GT?
January 13, 2008 3:39:32 PM

Forget that first question (I had understood u swapped 8800 gt for a 3850..) I didn't see the "6"..
January 13, 2008 3:39:50 PM

Ah yes, the infamous HD2900/3800 magical driver theory. Just keep waiting, I swear it will happen some day... :ange: 
January 13, 2008 3:40:43 PM

Loads of users/reviewers state that video play back (including colour quality) is better on the ati cards (as it was with the 1900 lot
January 13, 2008 3:40:44 PM

I meant 3870, not 3850
January 13, 2008 3:42:45 PM

for video playback - I can't see it making much difference.. Hey, why not get a lower model dx 10 ati/nvid card if you just want vid playback? Or are you a GAY MER?
January 13, 2008 3:43:59 PM

Ugh... So choosing between 3870 or 8800gt basically means I have to choose between better gaming-performance or better video playback-performance?
January 13, 2008 3:45:15 PM

Lol, you're quite full of yourself, aren't ya? :) 

I'm gamer as well as movie-watcher...
a b U Graphics card
January 13, 2008 4:02:48 PM

No, it means choosing between higher performance and lower price. I get very close to the 8800gt with my overclocked 3850 (800/1100) and it only cost me $144 + tax from BB. Sure it wont do as well on higher resolutions, but I only have a 19" CRT, so I don't really care about 2560x1600....
January 13, 2008 4:20:07 PM

I don't think the 3870 will really every "beat" the 8800GT, but I think you could get a 3870 for less money update the drivers and OC it to at least match a stock clocked updated 8800GT. A driver update alone probably won't ever do it for a 3870 though.
January 13, 2008 4:47:19 PM

Another really nice thing about the 3870 series is the native HDMI and ATI cards usually interface a lot better with HDTVs, than Nvidia cards. The stock cooler on the HD 3870 is a hell of a lot better too. A lot of people say that ATI has better picture quality than Nvidia, but I can't confirm that, since I don't own an ATI card yet.

You will definitely get better performance from the 8800GT, but if you want to do any overclocking, you are going to have to buy a aftermarket cooler, since they run pretty hot. Also, they don't scale as well as the 3870 in dual GPU configurations, but that's a moot point if you don't have a motherboard that supports one or the other.

From THG's review, the 8800GT is only 7% lower performance than the 8800GTX on stock. Where as the HD 3870 is pretty much equal to the 2900XT in graphical performance at stock.
January 13, 2008 4:57:34 PM

IndigoMoss said:
You will definitely get better performance from the 8800GT, but if you want to do any overclocking, you are going to have to buy a aftermarket cooler, since they run pretty hot..


Makes sense.. It may be worth while you considering Thermal right's 03 GT, if this is the route you choose:

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQyMywx...

Be safe

Ryan
a b U Graphics card
January 13, 2008 5:33:49 PM

$50 for an aftermarket cooler is ridiculous. Might as well put that money into a GTS 512, which has a better stock cooler anyway.
January 13, 2008 6:17:50 PM

soterius said:
After research on the net, I'm convinced nVidia's 8800GT has better performance than ATI's 3870.

But.... I've read that the 3870 will gain performance once the new drivers for it will be released. So does anyone know whether these have been released yet and if it gained enough performance to beat the 8800GT?


New Drivers are not likely to effect the card significantly for games that it already scores well.
If there are some games that it performs far less than should be expected, there is a good chance drivers should correct that.

However, anything more than minor changes for "normal" performance should not be expected.
January 13, 2008 6:19:18 PM

you have a point. I just have a thing about fancy coolers (guess I'm a bit wierd). Whenever I pass a computer bits shop I'm always ogling at them..
Ryan
January 13, 2008 6:53:44 PM

so what if u max clock the 3870 and the 8800gt whats the performance difference then? im thinking the 3870 can be overclocked more because of gddr4 or am i wrong?
January 13, 2008 7:08:43 PM

wrong - the ram speed has little impact on oc results. Both OCed - the GT is still the clear winner in most tests. where as the ati x2 vs the 9800 x2 (or whatever it'll be called) will be a different story.
January 13, 2008 7:09:01 PM

thepinkpanther said:

---------------
why have sex when u can play computer games?!?
?


Most folks play computer games when it's not an option.
January 13, 2008 7:58:25 PM

I thought the 2900 cards improved a lot after launch with driver updates??

Anyway, ideally if I was looking right now I'd wait for the 3870x2, then buy another in a year or two and Crossfire them. Otherwise, I'd get one of the current 3870 and crossfire it with another at some point. Or, Crossfire with a 3870x2 down the road actually as long as they can prove the 3870x2 will play nice and not dumb itself down with a single GPU 3870 :) 
January 13, 2008 8:09:46 PM

Hold your crossfiring horses!

CF 3870x2 nope
CF 3870 ok
CF 3870 + 3870x2 nope
January 13, 2008 9:09:08 PM

Ironnads said:
Hold your crossfiring horses!

CF 3870x2 nope
CF 3870 ok
CF 3870 + 3870x2 nope

Are you sure?
January 13, 2008 9:41:00 PM

Except we've already seen shots of the 3870x2 in Crossfire :) 

What we don't know just yet is if when Crossfiring with a single 3870, will the 3870x2 scale itself down in memory/GPU speed to match the single 3870, or if it'll show up essentially 3 cards in crossfire.

Part of this confusing comes from lots of rumours and no official answers about CrossfireX and how each card in crossfire no longer scales itself down to the 'slower' card. Unfortunately nobody has tested this and ATi isn't answering questions on their forums or via email from what I've heard. Would be nice to know either way though!
January 14, 2008 6:47:16 AM

I figured that there was no cf connector on th x2 card.
Ryan
January 14, 2008 9:17:03 AM

Maybe the new ATI drivers can bring some improvements to the card but not in terms of performance over the 8800GT. Maybe in some games but not overall in general.
January 14, 2008 12:20:16 PM

homerdog said:
Ah yes, the infamous HD2900/3800 magical driver theory. Just keep waiting, I swear it will happen some day... :ange: 


It kind of happened and kind of didnt. Compare 2900xt benchmarks using 7.11/7.12 with launch benchmarks. Its not an easy task as many sites have changed the games they test with and sometimes the cpu aswell, but to say the 2900 gained about 30% all round since launch is not an understatement. In that respect it happened. I have a 2900pro btw so yes I have trawled the benchmarks lol. Its still a shade slower than the 640mb gts with AA & AF on, instead of way way behind with the launch drivers, but never grew to beat the g80 gts all round, which i had expected it to eventually do, so in that respect it didnt happen. I would say there isnt much more to come from the 2900, 3870 & 3850 overall in dx9, but judging by what i have seen soo far, dx10 performance will edge forward for some time to come. Plus since ati is not on the case as far as getting game developers on board goes, as nvidia is, the radeons benefit a fair bit from driver revisions as they get to grips with newer titles. (I mean, in not soo many words, performance tends to grow in games a month or two after games have come out as drivers are tweaked for them, since they dont have access to the majority of titles during development as nvidia seem to do)

The crysis patch analysis on techspot:

http://www.techspot.com/article/83-crysis-patch-perform...

...shows that probably chopping shadows, effects and particles to medium would make high quality in dx9 and dx10 playabale at 1400x900. I have crysis too btw and this is what i game at, but my pro only copes with this at its stock speeds at 1152x864, although at 35-40fps pre patch with cat 7.12 (i cant check the patch as im away from home for at least another 4 weeks).
January 14, 2008 1:19:26 PM

The 2900 has seen marked increases with driver updates since its release. It was a gradual process though, with each new driver bringing a little bit more. I'm all for driver improvements, but I also like to see a card perform like it's supposed to out of the gate. In that respect Nvidia is a little better. Not great mind you, but better.

Oh and thanks for the link. I see that DX10 remains noticeably slower than DX9. Maybe the up and coming 170 Forceware drivers will fix this.
January 14, 2008 4:40:04 PM

Just hope ATI can deliver a driver that can fully utilize and use the HD3850 and HD3870's potential. But at $240, the HD3870 is a great value and delivers good performance on todays games. I have played Crysis using the HD3870 on Med-High settings (1280x1024) and I got a smooth performance through out the game. I couldn't ask for more, it's a money well spent.
January 14, 2008 5:06:27 PM

I think the 3870 is good value, and with crysis you just got to know how to play with the settings, if you can manage 1152x864 with all on medium and physics and shader on high, that looks like 80% as good as all high (dx9 high) and alot of modern cards can handle that.
January 14, 2008 5:11:29 PM

Ironnads said:
My argument is simple - the single gpu aint ever gonna catch a gt's perf', but in CF they historically scale better than the sli. Come again?


Thats what she said.
January 14, 2008 5:11:38 PM

nvalhalla said:
If you need more performance, nvidia is the way to go, but most don't and there is where ATI is competitive. This may end up being the future of ATI as well. competitive on the price/performance ratio, but not the most powerful, which is fine by me, I wont pay more than $200 for a video card anyway. I'm not a "fanboy" either, having just replaced my 8600gt with a 3850.


My wife swears by ATI image quality over Nvidia, but since she's the artist and modder in the family, I trust her judgment. I never noticed much visual difference between her old X1650 Pro and my the 7600GS.

I was going to get a 512 meg 3850 for $199, but I saw a 3870 for $229 at Newegg. The problem is, it has DDR3 (same as the 3850), instead of the DD4 of the $249 version. Maybe I should just spring for the faster RAM? I know I won't get the 256 meg version, 512 seems to be necessary for high textures these days.

I only went up to $250 for a card once before, when I got an AIW Radeon 9800 Pro. Before and since, I've spent between $100 and $150. Now, it's time to spend a bit more. The way AMD is nowadays, R700 probably won't arrive until May 2009.

soterius said:
Hmmm... And what do you guys think of the statements saying the 3850 is better for watching movies than the 8800GT?


I agree with that mainly because of AVIVO. It comes with ATI cards, whereas you have to pay something like $50 for Pure Cinema. At any rate, when we watch movies on the X1650 Pro system and not the one with a 7600GS.

We really need new video cards...

zenmaster said:
Most folks play computer games when it's not an option.


Anyone remember the classic ad in PC Gamer for Battlecruiser 3000? A buggy game, but eventually patched and available for free via the developer. Well, the ad showed a cute girl in a nightie trying to get her husband or boyfriend to stop gaming and come to bed. He was rattling off a litany of ship to ship combat troubles. The ad was a keeper, and I think I have the issue in a box somewhere.

April 20, 2008 4:41:05 PM

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

check this out....

3870 is very close to 8800GT.. and in most of the test.. nvdia uses 169 or 163 driver... which has a bug... the bug favors nvdia cards... coz the bug is it produces dead cell.. so it reduces the texture load by 13%... and gets more FPS... hmm... i want some 3870 user to check crysis at ultra hi 16qX @1440x900... and tell me what FPS they get..
Pls check that on a vista x64 with 4GB DDR2 and a phenom 9500 if psbl... lol

Coz my friend get only --- FPS AVG and on a PCI-e 2 slot he ges --- or ---.. so.. if some one can say what they get.. i can decide which one to buy

the -- will be filled later geting the result from a 3870 user... [;)]

Coz me no fanboy... just want a good card for a good price.. and i also need DX10.1.. coz i work for microsoft and i know what it dose... so i dont need anyone tellin me about DX10.1... k dx10.1 is super and i will give a simple info for guys who want to know about it...

DX10.1 is not made for Graphics improvement .. G imp was additional.. the DX10.1 is designed for a different purpose... that y we need a different mechanism to make it work...

For example..

IF a game is designed in DX10 and if it is giving (75FPS on 8800GT & 65FPS on 3870)

The same game if it is designed in DX10.1.. it will give 73FPS on 8800GT and will give 85FPS on 3870...

Reason is... DX10.1 will use streaming processors..

it u r able to understand this.. fine...

If u don't.. just forget it... k

April 20, 2008 5:57:24 PM

Y U talk so funny?
a c 272 U Graphics card
a b \ Driver
April 20, 2008 6:11:15 PM

saikamaldoss said:
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...

check this out....

3870 is very close to 8800GT.. and in most of the test.. nvdia uses 169 or 163 driver... which has a bug... the bug favors nvdia cards... coz the bug is it produces dead cell.. so it reduces the texture load by 13%... and gets more FPS... hmm... i want some 3870 user to check crysis at ultra hi 16qX @1440x900... and tell me what FPS they get..
Pls check that on a vista x64 with 4GB DDR2 and a phenom 9500 if psbl... lol

Coz my friend get only --- FPS AVG and on a PCI-e 2 slot he ges --- or ---.. so.. if some one can say what they get.. i can decide which one to buy

the -- will be filled later geting the result from a 3870 user... [;)]

Coz me no fanboy... just want a good card for a good price.. and i also need DX10.1.. coz i work for microsoft and i know what it dose... so i dont need anyone tellin me about DX10.1... k dx10.1 is super and i will give a simple info for guys who want to know about it...

DX10.1 is not made for Graphics improvement .. G imp was additional.. the DX10.1 is designed for a different purpose... that y we need a different mechanism to make it work...

For example..

IF a game is designed in DX10 and if it is giving (75FPS on 8800GT & 65FPS on 3870)

The same game if it is designed in DX10.1.. it will give 73FPS on 8800GT and will give 85FPS on 3870...

Reason is... DX10.1 will use streaming processors..

it u r able to understand this.. fine...

If u don't.. just forget it... k

Well that goes some way to explaining why Fista is a dog egg. :lol: 
April 20, 2008 7:34:33 PM

Fista may be aa dog but vista is good right... lol

M8... vista is good for users who have 4GB of ram and... for guys who have 2 or 3 gb... xp is better with the /3GB switch... lol

y do u say.. vista not good... coz u get low FPS... but did ever check what the ram usage is... ha...

Check and then tell me... play crysis on a XP x64 with 4 gb and try the same on vista 64...

system should have 4GB DDR2 800Mhz Ram and should have x2 or x4 processor...

then tell me which is better... [:) ]

Do u know how many hours we spend doing reserch... ha...

Any way...

Understand this.. xp has limit.. vista dont...

K... try this and tell me.... ok ;) 

Till then byee...
April 20, 2008 7:36:20 PM

hardware requirement is more... thats all

vista will not use ur graphics card... it even cuts aero off when u play game... its always the processor and ram that lets down vista....

try it if u don't believe me...k

April 21, 2008 4:01:25 AM

All I have to say about the 3870> 8800 GT....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAHAH

What is more likely is 8800 GT>3870>9600 GT

Thats pretty much what it is now (With AA off, the 3870 Drops with it on)

I don't see any new drivers helping it much, it has been out for a while now. I'm more interested in the 3870 X2 performance increase and or Quad.

Also the 9800 GX2's Quad SLI performance Increase.

As for the 3870, its still a budget card that doesn't come close to match the 8800 GT.


April 21, 2008 4:32:03 AM




@ saikamaldoss: Whachu talkin bout Willis? Cut the shenanigans and show some results if you want to make factual claims. BTW, what is it exactly that you are claiming? 4GB of RAM has Vista surpassing XP in FPS or that Vista just uses more RAM?
April 21, 2008 8:23:47 AM

wait till 30th of this month... i will get my 3870x2 and then i will show u some proof..k

or if u have X64 xp and x64vista with x4 processor and 4GB ram...
i dont have to prove.... u urself can see it... just try installing Vista x64... m8.....

I don't ****...
if i say something... its out of my research....
April 21, 2008 10:30:04 AM

saikamaldoss said:
Fista may be aa dog but vista is good right... lol

M8... vista is good for users who have 4GB of ram and... for guys who have 2 or 3 gb... xp is better with the /3GB switch... lol

y do u say.. vista not good... coz u get low FPS... but did ever check what the ram usage is... ha...

Check and then tell me... play crysis on a XP x64 with 4 gb and try the same on vista 64...

system should have 4GB DDR2 800Mhz Ram and should have x2 or x4 processor...

then tell me which is better... [:) ]

Do u know how many hours we spend doing reserch... ha...

Any way...

Understand this.. xp has limit.. vista dont...

K... try this and tell me.... ok ;) 

Till then byee...

Can you type out a message properly please?
I can't read your responses with all the "...... lol ..... lol" in it.
The 3Gb switch in XP is a waste of time, it only allows programs to allocate more RAM, but no current game is going to sap more than 2.5Gb of RAM anyway (which is I believe how much any one program can have without the 3Gb switch).
Oh and where exactly do you work in MS?
April 21, 2008 12:54:55 PM

saikamaldoss said:
wait till 30th of this month... i will get my 3870x2 and then i will show u some proof..k

or if u have X64 xp and x64vista with x4 processor and 4GB ram...
i dont have to prove.... u urself can see it... just try installing Vista x64... m8.....

I don't ****...
if i say something... its out of my research....



Well with all due respect, when someone says that research supports something they need to provide data to prove it. I will be watching for your posts on the 30th then. ;)  I don't have an 64-bit OS yet, soon I will, but I can't test it out. I plan to get both XP and Vista just to experiment though when I get my new system running ( with 4 GB of RAM ).

@Lukebird: If his native language isn't English then he probably learned most of it from the internet...hence the strange 1337 .
April 21, 2008 1:26:04 PM

SpinachEater said:
@Lukebird: If his native language isn't English then he probably learned most of it from the internet...hence the strange 1337 .

Indeed, I feel quite foolish for making such a comment before asking....
I had assumed that using slang english, he would indeed have knowledge of english, but it was all an assumption so I apologise :D 
May 22, 2008 2:13:44 AM

i was in bangalore.. but now i am in chennai(INDIA)...... ya.. what u say is right about the 3GB switch...

But vista 64 is good... it can address 4GB... and more........:) 

Talking about vista.. the sp1 integrated vista is realy good.. but if you use RTM and then install SP1.. the performance is slugish....
May 22, 2008 2:16:55 AM

Hmm..... sorry for using slang... i will not use it, if you are not able to follow.

Anyway.. i was with Microsoft Bangalore.. but now working as a trainer for microsoft.. in chennai...

And about the /3GB... you are right M8
!