Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9800gtx or HD3870x2?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 2, 2008 12:58:24 PM

i am getting a new rig in two days but i am not sure of which gfx card to get. I've seen the 9800gtx performs better than the hd3870x2 in new games(i don't play old games) and there are no driver related issues. If i buy the gtx i will get a 780i mobo which is more expensive than the ASUS P5K pro or the gigabyte ga-x38-DS5 which is the cheapest x38 mobo i can find. Which card should i buy? This rig will last 2-3 years, i might add a extra hd3870x2/9800gtx and change to a quad core and i will be using a 22" 1680x1200 monitor.
Games i own and will own:
CoD4
Crysis
FFOW
Rainbow Six Vegas 2
BIA hells highway
far cry 2
some other shooters coming out in 08

My decision will be based on which card will become outdated earlier, i don't mean being replaced by a newer card but performance drops in newer games.

More about : 9800gtx hd3870x2

April 2, 2008 2:52:21 PM

they 9800gtx is more powerful in many reviews, apart from when they are both used in older games.
Related resources
April 2, 2008 3:03:25 PM

Look at Crysis. The 3870X@ beats the GTX and they can't get AA and AF to work w/Crysis, so it APPEARS that GTX is better there. WRONG. I can get AA to work @12x w/Crysis. Those idiots that can't even get that right and put out biased reviews are leading you down the wrong path.
Crysis is gonna be the game to look at for perf. comparisons. It is the way of the future for games. Now considering that, think about why ATi does better - 640 stream procs.

Better image quality will always beat out faster frame rates for me.
Especially cuz ATi cards are playing everything at playable FPS. AND will do better as more drivers/games are released to take advantage of the hardware's capabilities.
Keep in mind that nV. skips frames that are too hard to render, and that's why they appear to be faster. The quality suffers when they do that.
Everyone agrees that ATi has the better image quality. They render every frame as it was meant to be rendered. You miss nothing, and get very smooth awesome looking effects from ATi.
Anonymous
April 2, 2008 3:07:54 PM

Well if you are hoping your graphics card will last 2 yrs then its a no brainer to go with the dual GPU ATI. Game manufacturers are going to be utilizing the dual GPU more and more in newer games. The performance now with those 2 cards is close, but in near future games I would have to say the X2 is gonna woop the GTX's ass.
a c 147 U Graphics card
April 2, 2008 3:13:45 PM

I think the GTX is more solid. There are some issues with the x2 with AA and AF in some games. It also sucks way more power than the GTX.

Honestly I'd just get a 8800GTS 512 and Overclock the thing unless you plan to TriSLI the GTX or do not feel comfortable OCing it. My GTS sits at 750/1000. I havent' really messed with the memory yet. I might just to get it to the GTX speed.
April 2, 2008 3:13:51 PM

ok hd3870x2 it is, i might consider the asus hd3870x2 TOP
April 2, 2008 3:21:21 PM

darthvaderkenneth said:
i will be using a 22" 1680x1200 monitor.


Pft, your willing to spend that much and stick will that girlie mon' resolution! Be like arnold and get to the choppa now! No wait, get a 24" now! That way you can pump out the most of that $400+ video card yah!

Well, I guess 22" ain't so bad...
April 2, 2008 3:27:38 PM

That's what I did when I got my 8800gts 512 I went out and spent $500 on my new samsung 24" LCD.
April 2, 2008 3:28:49 PM

I haven't had any issues with AA or AF in any games, but it's true that you can't use AA with UT3, but I don't have it and don't want it.

I strongly disagree that Crysis is a good indicator of future games. No one is going to use their engine just like no one used the far cry engine. There will be many more games based on unreal tournament engine and source engine (most game developers will also be developing for console, so I think they'll use engines that will be able to produce good framerates on xbox360 and PS3).
April 2, 2008 3:42:18 PM

3870X2 of course..the 9800GTsuX is a huge pile of bitter stuff....
Anonymous
April 2, 2008 3:42:27 PM

San Pedro said:
I haven't had any issues with AA or AF in any games, but it's true that you can't use AA with UT3, but I don't have it and don't want it.

I strongly disagree that Crysis is a good indicator of future games. No one is going to use their engine just like no one used the far cry engine. There will be many more games based on unreal tournament engine and source engine (most game developers will also be developing for console, so I think they'll use engines that will be able to produce good framerates on xbox360 and PS3).



Now THAT, you can probably take to the bank !
a b U Graphics card
April 2, 2008 3:45:10 PM

does ur mobo have 2 pcie slot or 1. if to is it for cf or sli?
a b U Graphics card
April 2, 2008 3:45:30 PM

Well, the 3870X2 is a lot cheaper. Is cost much of a concern or do you have $500+ dollars burning a hole in your pocket.
April 2, 2008 3:45:41 PM

I own a 3870x2 and I like it. If I was building a system now though.... The 9800GTX for $100 less or more seems to be a better choice in my eyes. If games and ATI do some patching and driver improvements maybe we won't have issues like with UT3.

But UT3 sucks anyway. I would not pay for an update of the previous game with it's new "shinyness". But if you want to play UT3, you don't need this level of hardware.
April 2, 2008 3:54:09 PM

If it was my money i'd go with the 3870X2 no question.
An X38 board will be far cheaper than a decent Nvidia board and the X38 will give you the option to go to dual X2's in the future if you like :) 
April 2, 2008 4:14:00 PM

go with 3870x2. if you chose to sli\crossfire in the future, nvidia based chipsets are horrible and horribly expensive. with the ati card, you can cfx it with future 4850 or 3870 or 3870 etc down the road. i think multi gpu cards are the new way of the future. that is until dual core gpu hits the market.
a c 147 U Graphics card
April 2, 2008 4:20:37 PM

I think the Multi GPU technology still has some refinement to do. SLI and CF alike. It seems 2 cards in CF seem to do better than the X2 card. I will let that tech mature before I jump on that bandwagon. single GPU cards are solid. I prefer to stick with midstream and have less of a risk of issues.
If you are cutting edge there are benefits and consequences.
And I concur that SLI chipsets are costly, which they would fix that.
Anonymous
April 2, 2008 5:08:03 PM

jay2tall said:
I think the Multi GPU technology still has some refinement to do. SLI and CF alike. It seems 2 cards in CF seem to do better than the X2 card. I will let that tech mature before I jump on that bandwagon. single GPU cards are solid. I prefer to stick with midstream and have less of a risk of issues.
If you are cutting edge there are benefits and consequences.
And I concur that SLI chipsets are costly, which they would fix that.



I see the point you are trying to make. but he wants to invest in a card that has future proof. Both cards will run good for the near future with games etc... but the dual GPU card will "hopefully" make some leaps and bounds in games if the developers start to roll with it.

While both cards are comparible now, I hope to see what the future holds for our X2's
April 2, 2008 5:55:20 PM

For a great card that is cheap and will work wonders at that res...OC a 512MB GTS. If you want furture proof then go for the GTX and look for tri-SLI. The 3870X2 is better in some instances ut it draws a lot of power, and is a little more expensive. Still, as I said, the 3870 is better in some instances and is worth the extra money if those instances are what you use. Personally I'd save cash and go for the GTS.
April 2, 2008 6:31:18 PM

GTS512 no doubt is the best bang for your dollar.
April 2, 2008 6:50:55 PM

LukeBird said:
If it was my money i'd go with the 3870X2 no question.
An X38 board will be far cheaper than a decent Nvidia board and the X38 will give you the option to go to dual X2's in the future if you like :) 


Have you ever had an nvidia board? There is no such thing as a good nvidia board IMO I had the 780i and returned it to the store within three days. Cards yes Boards no.
a b U Graphics card
April 2, 2008 7:40:48 PM

nevasumma said:
Look at Crysis. The 3870X@ beats the GTX and they can't get AA and AF to work w/Crysis, so it APPEARS that GTX is better there. WRONG. I can get AA to work @12x w/Crysis. Those idiots that can't even get that right and put out biased reviews are leading you down the wrong path.
Crysis is gonna be the game to look at for perf. comparisons. It is the way of the future for games. Now considering that, think about why ATi does better - 640 stream procs.

Better image quality will always beat out faster frame rates for me.
Especially cuz ATi cards are playing everything at playable FPS. AND will do better as more drivers/games are released to take advantage of the hardware's capabilities.
Keep in mind that nV. skips frames that are too hard to render, and that's why they appear to be faster. The quality suffers when they do that.
Everyone agrees that ATi has the better image quality. They render every frame as it was meant to be rendered. You miss nothing, and get very smooth awesome looking effects from ATi.


I will be the one to correct this. Firstly nVidia got caught cheating in their drivers on 3DMark back in the day of the FX5000 series. Like you said, they were dropping frames. This was discovered. ATI made a huge deal about it. Then nvidia came out with the 6000 series. During this time ATI got caught for doing something very similar, nVidia made a huge deal about it. To my knowledge, neither company has dared cheat with their drivers since. They wouldn't dare, these companies products are too closely scrutinized by some very tech savy reviewers. So I call ******** on this one.

Secondly not everyone agrees that ATI has better image quality. In fact I have just recently seen this very thing contested on these forums. Maximum PC had an entire article dedicated to it recently as well. I have owned both, I am not a fan boy. I had an X1900XTX, I bought it, because at the time it was faster than the 7900GTX in most of the games I cared about. It died and was replaced with a HD2900XT. I have since replaced it with a 8800GTS 512MB. All were/are decent cards. I couldn't tell you the difference between any of them when it came to image quality, and believe me I tried. Maybe my eyes aren't as good as yours, but at least I have had the equipment in question running on the same hardware on the same monitor. I believe this makes my opinion more objective (the opposite of subjective = you). I could however tell you the difference with my eyes closed. Just turning on my computer, before it even POSTed the fans would make a hell of a racket on both ATI cards. They also made a huge amount of noise when I was gaming. This can not be said for the nVidia card I am now using.
April 2, 2008 8:14:06 PM

San Pedro said:
I haven't had any issues with AA or AF in any games, but it's true that you can't use AA with UT3, but I don't have it and don't want it.

I strongly disagree that Crysis is a good indicator of future games. No one is going to use their engine just like no one used the far cry engine. There will be many more games based on unreal tournament engine and source engine (most game developers will also be developing for console, so I think they'll use engines that will be able to produce good framerates on xbox360 and PS3).



Perhaps. But the fact is that Crysis is hard on hardware like the shader heavy games of tomorrow will be. The unreal 3 engine is great but I haven't seen it produce the same level of graphics that the Crytek engine does. Same with the source engine. I love them all really, but even those engines are going to be using more shaders and implementing a different way of delivering them too. It means that the video cards are going to have to be able to handle lots more stuff than those current engines allow. They will be on the level with Cry-engines at that point.
April 2, 2008 8:27:42 PM

You could always get a single 8800gt (or gts if you find one cheap) and a bigger monitor, 22in or larger and later on add a seccond one. I have a 22in monitor with 8800gt sli and performance matches the 9800GTX and will only improve in future games.
April 2, 2008 8:28:07 PM

depends on the mobo

ati with intel chipsets

nvidia with nvidia chipsets
April 2, 2008 8:32:41 PM

techgeek said:
I will be the one to correct this. Firstly nVidia got caught cheating in their drivers on 3DMark back in the day of the FX5000 series. Like you said, they were dropping frames. This was discovered. ATI made a huge deal about it. Then nvidia came out with the 6000 series. During this time ATI got caught for doing something very similar, nVidia made a huge deal about it. To my knowledge, neither company has dared cheat with their drivers since. They wouldn't dare, these companies products are too closely scrutinized by some very tech savy reviewers. So I call ******** on this one.

Secondly not everyone agrees that ATI has better image quality. In fact I have just recently seen this very thing contested on these forums. Maximum PC had an entire article dedicated to it recently as well. I have owned both, I am not a fan boy. I had an X1900XTX, I bought it, because at the time it was faster than the 7900GTX in most of the games I cared about. It died and was replaced with a HD2900XT. I have since replaced it with a 8800GTS 512MB. All were/are decent cards. I couldn't tell you the difference between any of them when it came to image quality, and believe me I tried. Maybe my eyes aren't as good as yours, but at least I have had the equipment in question running on the same hardware on the same monitor. I believe this makes my opinion more objective (the opposite of subjective = you). I could however tell you the difference with my eyes closed. Just turning on my computer, before it even POSTed the fans would make a hell of a racket on both ATI cards. They also made a huge amount of noise when I was gaming. This can not be said for the nVidia card I am now using.


I have had both as well, I used to be an nV fanboy. I noticed right away that the IQ was better w/ATi. It's not just my opinion. However, I think you have been misled if you think that nV still doesn't drop frames for better speed. They figure we can't see the difference so why not. How you can say I am the opposite of subjective is beyond me. I guess you need to know that I also fought tooth and nail to find a way that nV is better, so that I could stay w/them. I just could not find it. ATi has my full attention now. nV will still probably even admit to you if you ask them, about the dropped frames. It is done differently and is not considered cheating be me or them. I figure that they have a good excuse for it, they do, and I still realize that for now it means ATi is gonna be my winner. Future proof for game engines that right now it smokes the 9800GTX in. nV also doesn't hype up the fact that they still do not properly use the unified shader model as DX10 intended. ATi does, and since they will when games implementing this new tech. come out, who stands to win then, for future proofing? nV will have to make a new series of cards and like the price situation with the 8800GTX people buying the 9800GTX now will have to buy a new card when they can't use that one to play the new games coming out using shader model 4.1+ (and the unified shader tech)
April 2, 2008 9:13:21 PM

truehighroller said:
Have you ever had an nvidia board? There is no such thing as a good nvidia board IMO I had the 780i and returned it to the store within three days. Cards yes Boards no.

Perhaps you should have looked at my sig before posting that comment ;) 
The 570i SLi for AMD was my only real choice when I bought my board, AM2+'s were still too expensive and a 590i SLi board was too close to them price wise.
I'm happy enough with my board, but I don't OC and I don't use many onboard functions (I have a PCI RAID card instead of the onboard). :) 
April 2, 2008 9:42:03 PM

Anonymous said:
I see the point you are trying to make. but he wants to invest in a card that has future proof. Both cards will run good for the near future with games etc... but the dual GPU card will "hopefully" make some leaps and bounds in games if the developers start to roll with it.

While both cards are comparible now, I hope to see what the future holds for our X2's


Does this mean the Nvidia's 7950 GX2 card will start performing better as well?
April 2, 2008 10:09:19 PM

quanger said:
go with 3870x2. if you chose to sli\crossfire in the future, nvidia based chipsets are horrible and horribly expensive. with the ati card, you can cfx it with future 4850 or 3870 or 3870 etc down the road. i think multi gpu cards are the new way of the future. that is until dual core gpu hits the market.

April 2, 2008 10:22:53 PM

quanger said:
go with 3870x2. if you chose to sli\crossfire in the future, nvidia based chipsets are horrible and horribly expensive. with the ati card, you can cfx it with future 4850 or 3870 or 3870 etc down the road. i think multi gpu cards are the new way of the future. that is until dual core gpu hits the market.


Every time sli/crossfire have been explored with an "x2" card the results have not been good. If you're going with 1 card for now and wanting to crossfire/sli later, I'd say go with the 9800gtx, but if you're planning on staying with the single gpu and just upgrading to the latest flavor (throwing out your old card) when the time comes to get a better gpu, then go with the 3870x2, but I wouldn't even consider going the crossfire/sli route with an x2 card.
April 2, 2008 10:22:53 PM

with the low g92 prices i would look at 2 8800gt's or gts

or x2 and 3870 in triple

that increase the cost alot, but buy one card and add one
April 2, 2008 11:17:58 PM

I say you are better off with a 9800 GTX which is $100 cheaper and get what ever MB you want. Later when you need more power you will have more options. The next gen cards may be vastly more powerful making dual card solution far less attractive. Make your purchase for your needs today. The future of a year or more is too unpredictable and that's when I would assume you might start looking for other options.


@nevasumma

Nvidia from the 8 series to date, in gaming has the advantage in image quality, it's not debatable unless you're a fanboy. In DVD play back ATI has the edge. The difference are very subtle in gaming and unless everything else is equal shouldn't be a factor. While it is true that Nvidia had a problem or tried to pull a fast one with not rendering every reflection in Crysis this has long sense been resolved.

Duel card support should get better in the future but I wouldn't get overly optimistic. This is nothing new and still rather hit or miss. More important duel GPU, crossfire or SLI is a step in the wrong direction and as such I would never recommend any dual card or multi graphics solution. Support will always be lagging because they are stop gap measures to fill to void between generations of hardware. As the Ape said in another thread you should know if its for you or not.

April 3, 2008 1:57:36 AM

Poor O.P. How is this thread going to help? LOL
April 3, 2008 9:40:14 AM

i just want to know when a game comes out one year later which card will perform better. I might even consider the 9800gx2 but then i will have to buy the P5k mobo and some cheaper ram for it.
April 3, 2008 8:01:48 PM

bydesign said:
I say you are better off with a 9800 GTX which is $100 cheaper and get what ever MB you want. Later when you need more power you will have more options. The next gen cards may be vastly more powerful making dual card solution far less attractive. Make your purchase for your needs today. The future of a year or more is too unpredictable and that's when I would assume you might start looking for other options.


Duel card support should get better in the future but I wouldn't get overly optimistic. This is nothing new and still rather hit or miss. More important duel GPU, crossfire or SLI is a step in the wrong direction and as such I would never recommend any dual card or multi graphics solution. Support will always be lagging because they are stop gap measures to fill to void between generations of hardware. As the Ape said in another thread you should know if its for you or not.


The same could be said for either card really. Unless you consider that you'll have to buy a new nV card sooner than you think, to keep up. AND at what cost? The next big card is gonna cost more than this one, while ATi 3870X2 is still capable of playing the title that nV's can't. (cough..."10.1+/4.1+" cough...)
By what... exactly, do you mean about better support for duel cards, or even duel GPU cards? It's fine now. I know first hand that with one card Crysis=12+fps, 2 cards Crysis=21+fps@higher res.+all settings at very high.
Duel GPU does the same for improvement.
If this is the wrong direction...
April 4, 2008 1:08:01 PM

I got the 9800gx2 but i haven't tried it out since i spent hours looking for the right PSU. I got it quite cheap a Inno3D for $557 I'm kinda regretting it since i was gonna only get a hd3870x2 but they only had one left in stock, a sapphire card for $399 which is a lot more useful considering the 22" display i bought for it.
April 4, 2008 1:12:23 PM

specs:
P5K mobo
Intel E8400
A-Data ddr2-800 2x2gb
inno3d 9800gx2
antec 900

The only retarded thing I is that i'm using XP on this PC such a waste.

April 4, 2008 1:19:11 PM

i'm not even sure the driver disc it comes with works on XP
April 4, 2008 1:52:53 PM

8800GTS G92 revision. Got a 3870X2 humming behind this computer, but i'm with jay2tall. Wait for the technology to mature and jump on the 4870X2 when its out. 9800GTX isn't worth the money IMO. 3870X2 beats a 9800GTX by the way.
April 4, 2008 2:34:01 PM

darthvaderkenneth said:
erm i already bought the stuff?!


Don't feel bad. It seems that it doesn't really matter what you get these days.
April 4, 2008 2:47:46 PM

nevasumma said:
Perhaps. But the fact is that Crysis is hard on hardware like the shader heavy games of tomorrow will be. The unreal 3 engine is great but I haven't seen it produce the same level of graphics that the Crytek engine does. Same with the source engine. I love them all really, but even those engines are going to be using more shaders and implementing a different way of delivering them too. It means that the video cards are going to have to be able to handle lots more stuff than those current engines allow. They will be on the level with Cry-engines at that point.


I agree, Ive used both in the past and can't tell a difference in image quality, if there is some difference I am somehow not seeing obviously it isn't great enough to rant and rave about as a selling point. I get whatever card is fastest for my price range at time of purchase, end of story.
April 4, 2008 2:57:14 PM

Easy question the 9800gtx vs 3870 x2
The Ati 3870 x2 has 2 chipsets in the same pcb, well at first sight it might be the perfect choise but lets take a closer look.
2 chipsets in the same pcb makes it pci express 1.0 complilant... and thats a really hard puch in Ati's stomach.
This new tecnology might be good if Ati had Nvidia's coders working on their drivers. (another hard punch in Ati's stomach, hard to listen but it is the truth).
Ati is on a good path to retake the lead in Gpus, but their new tecnology still has a lot to be looked at.

Now the other card
For the 9800GTX even with only 1 gpu still beats up the 3870 x2 in overall(with AA and AF on and off):
http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/04/01/nvidia_geforce_9...

1 gpu, consumes less power, makes less noise and its still faster...
the only doubt there could be is IF Ati releases new drivers with a lot of improvements...
But based on history, that ain't happening.

Having tested both cards myself i think i can have 2 opinions here:

Since Gpu's are evolving so fast, these 2 are just a big step in the past.
If u really want a good card go for the 9800Gx2 since its the Fastest in the market.
But since gx2 is not in the 2 choises, i'd go for the 9800GTX because it delivers excelent performance, consumes less power than the 3870 (idle and load) and still makes less noise...

and since he is getting a nvidia mobo, later on he can go SLI :) 

is there any doubt? lol

Image quality?? Nvidia vs Ati?

Nowadays there is no such thing as image quality comparison...
Its all the same...
With AA and AF turned on, on both cards the image quality is the same...

other doubts?? Frames per second? Nvidia vs Ati??

Nvidia wins overall people...

Are u going to waste 400$ - 500$ or even more in a card to play a single game???
Wouldn't you want your pc to be able to play everygame at the max frame rate??

Nvidia wins again...

It is easy to say that 3870x2 is the best when you own one :) 
It is a very good card and i own one as well lol
but i still go for the 9800GTX :) 

that is all :) 

Hugo Francisco
April 5, 2008 3:57:04 AM

Well i chose the 9800gx2 since the hd3870x2 was out of stock. I'm using a 22" monitor and windows XP with it, will I be able to use the card with windows xp, i'm not doing quad sli
April 5, 2008 4:02:53 AM

9800 GTX the 3870 X2 has filtering problems. Crossfire isn't as effective as SLI.

Thats all. The only thing that 3870 X2 wins at is 3Dmark. Plus 9800 GTX has Tri-sli potential.

I've been put off the 3870 X2 since I read that the 3870s have Filter problems. AA and AT
April 5, 2008 4:03:15 AM

Well i chose the 9800gx2 since the hd3870x2 was out of stock. I'm using a 22" monitor and windows XP with it, will I be able to use the card with windows xp, i'm not doing quad sli
April 5, 2008 4:10:58 AM

well the 9800 GX2 is alot better than the 3870 X2 lol but it costs alot!
April 7, 2008 2:11:16 PM

Choosing the GX2 because the X2 was out of stock? Seems like you could have ordered from another vendor and saved the $200
April 8, 2008 12:24:48 AM

yes but it wouldn't be top of the line LOL:p 
!