Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4850 or 4870 for 1280x1024 resolution?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 27, 2008 6:36:55 AM

I have a standard 17 inch monitor that plays at 1280x1024.My next graphics upgrade will either be the 4850 or the 4870(or maybe the 9800 GTX+).Many of the reviews that i've seen of these cards have really high resolutions that i wont be playing,so can anyone recommend which one i should get cause i dont want to spend 100 bucks more and get the 4870 when the performance gain might be minimal. :pfff: 
June 27, 2008 6:45:47 AM

unless you're playing intensive games like Crysis and/or games with ultra high AF and AA settings, the the 4850 will probably be all that you need.
June 27, 2008 6:49:19 AM

I agree with arson94.
Another vote for the 4850. Spend the $100 saved on something better. New keyboard/Mouse for better gaming/computing experience? Whats the point of having a shiny new 4850 when your gaming on some $5 Rosewill mouse.
Think about it.
Related resources
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 6:50:21 AM

For 1280x1024 definitely gof or HD 4850
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 6:50:36 AM

^ agreed ....4850
June 27, 2008 6:50:48 AM

Get 4 4850's in crossfire.

...or just one will do for your purposes.
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 6:54:28 AM

4 HD 4850 for 1280x1024 ???? u must be kidding :) 
Even 2 of them aren't needed for this resolution
June 27, 2008 7:01:06 AM

thanks guys.ive made my decision.4850 ftw
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 7:07:38 AM

Good luck
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 7:56:25 AM

Spend the extra money on a new monitor :)  You won't believe how good a 22" is until you got one.
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 8:13:07 AM

Yeah, i had a 17" LCD with 1280x1024 resolution and when i moved to a 22" LCD with 1680x1050 resolution i really enjoyed it :)  Now i want a 24" LCD with 1920x1200 resolution :D 
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 8:35:32 AM

I would want one if I knew my 9600GT would run that res :p  Plus I don't have the money for one :( 
June 27, 2008 8:49:39 AM

I got a 20" and its just fine for me :p 
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 8:57:24 AM

But, you can just crank that eye candy to max in every game you play!!! And I mean, force it thru the drivers til it bleeds eye candy eye candy heheh
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 9:27:02 AM

True that. Eye candy over resolution for CRTs any day. For LCDs I'll generally drop the eye candy in favour of native res. Only exception is Crysis, it looks crap below high.
June 27, 2008 10:31:20 AM

I have a 22" Compaq CRT that I game on, a P1220 which I absolutely love (besides that fact that the back of it stretches into the next ZIP code)! Anyway, I was wondering if you could shed a little more light onto "Eye candy over resolution for CRTs". What res should I be rockin' right now? For reference, I have an 8800 GT @700/1000, but will be probably going to a 4870 or 9800 +.
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 11:40:28 AM

16x10 for sure or 16x12. 16x12 would fit better, and theres ahuge difference between the 4870 and the 9800gtx. The 4870 is a good 20% faster
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 11:59:18 AM

Well the HD 4870 is better than a 9800GTX,no doubts about it but the difference isn't really huge IMO

also to profle,dont change your card, the difference isnt worth the money IMO, 8800GT is a solid card
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 12:09:30 PM

Its 20%. To me that huge. The difference between the g280 vs the 260 is less than that. The GTX usnt a big upgrade from a GT, but going to a 4870 its over 30-40%.
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 12:14:19 PM

Well if somone hasn't buy a card and wants to buy, then i recommend the HD 4850/4870 but when someone for example has a 8800GT then i don't recommend him/her to upgrade to a HD 4870 because a 8800GT is still enough for good gaming :) 
a b U Graphics card
June 27, 2008 12:28:00 PM

max05 said:
I have a standard 17 inch monitor that plays at 1280x1024.My next graphics upgrade will either be the 4850 or the 4870(or maybe the 9800 GTX+).Many of the reviews that i've seen of these cards have really high resolutions that i wont be playing,so can anyone recommend which one i should get cause i dont want to spend 100 bucks more and get the 4870 when the performance gain might be minimal. :pfff: 


why does everyone get the idea that certain cards are "better" for certain resolutions or max resolutions etc? Its simple, if you can afford a high end card, buy a high end card, if you cant, get what you can.
June 27, 2008 1:17:42 PM

Well if you are using a monitor that only supports 1280 x 1024 then it doesn't make any sense to get a 4870 over a 4850 even if you have a million dollars. Performance difference isn't there.

(Although, I suppose if you had a million dollars you would be able to upgrade your monitor as well :-P)
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 1:26:20 PM

The only reason to spring for the 4870 is if you're going to upgrade your monitor in the near future.
June 27, 2008 1:45:08 PM

Maziar said:
Yeah, i had a 17" LCD with 1280x1024 resolution and when i moved to a 22" LCD with 1680x1050 resolution i really enjoyed it :)  Now i want a 24" LCD with 1920x1200 resolution :D 


No I won't!
If I'd buy such a monitor then I won't be able to work at office with that 17" Dell. :p  :D 
June 27, 2008 1:45:25 PM

definitely 4870.
heard of future-proofing ?
June 27, 2008 1:53:00 PM

prolfe said:
I have a 22" Compaq CRT that I game on, a P1220 which I absolutely love (besides that fact that the back of it stretches into the next ZIP code)! Anyway, I was wondering if you could shed a little more light onto "Eye candy over resolution for CRTs". What res should I be rockin' right now? For reference, I have an 8800 GT @700/1000, but will be probably going to a 4870 or 9800 +.


I am playing Quake Wars on 800x600 on a 24" CRT and driven by a GeForece 6600GT and it looks awesome even with the low resolution. Never liked high resolutions in games, makes everything so small.
June 27, 2008 1:58:59 PM

Save the $100 towards a new 22" monitor (watch for specials on newegg) and get the 4850 with the rebate.

That should drop your price to around $170.
June 27, 2008 2:52:29 PM

The reason for buying a something like a 4870 over a 4850 for a low rez isn't for the immediate future. No you won't see large difference. But as the hardware demands for new games increase you will start to see a performance gap open up between a 4870 and a 4850. So it depends how long you plan to keep the card.
June 27, 2008 4:42:24 PM

Gpippas you cant know that, maybe the memory bandwith will be more optimiced. The card have 500mb wich could be the problem in future also. And if you want more performance in the future is better to buy every 2 years, the best performing for the price.

200 dolar every 2 years.
600 dolar every 4 years for replace the whole system.
June 27, 2008 4:54:25 PM

I just went from a 19" Dell CRT (crap) to a 24" BenQ LCD (none of that TN **** either)...and yea, my socks are STILL blown!
June 27, 2008 5:12:07 PM

An OCed 8800GT can't even beat a 9800GTX and you say it can beat a 4850?
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 5:44:17 PM

Agreed^^^ HD 4850 > 9800GTX > 8800GT (However the difference isnt very much)
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
June 27, 2008 5:55:05 PM

Well 8800GT is a good card and before the HD 4850 was launched it was the best bang for buck GPU, also even if someone has a 8800GT now,i dont recommend him/her to upgrade to a HD 4850 because the difference isn't worth the money
June 27, 2008 6:19:39 PM

Quote:
Thanks for confirming that after all these years, ATI barely touched 8800 series, and it's Q2 2008 for god sake!!!! how old is 8800 again???


What does that matter? The 3870x2 kept up with the 8800GTX so ATI did have a lead for a short time. The GTX280 doesn't really beat out the 9800GTX2. Since the 8800GTX launch I don't think either company has been especially impressive.

The 4850 is a really nice card for the price point and seems to do fairly well in crossfire. The 4870 hasn't impressed me all that much in comparison since it's not a huge improvement on the 4850. If I were buying now I'd definitely consider a 4800 series card even though my last 2 builds have used nvidia cards.
a b U Graphics card
June 28, 2008 9:56:51 AM

lightzy said:
definitely 4870.
heard of future-proofing ?


exactly!!
July 1, 2008 11:52:11 AM

Thanks for the replies to my resolution question. Not to change the subject TOO much, but, since we are hashing out the differences between 88/9800s and the 4800 line, does anybody know if the 4850 or 4870 is compatible with the Accelero S1 Rev 2? I happen to have one, with the little fan module, and because I know it's compatible with the 9800 GTX+, I was considering the Nvidia over the 4800s so that I could use the Accelero.
July 1, 2008 12:42:50 PM

Spend a bit more and get the 4870. At least this card has a cooling solution, unlike the 4850 which uses coolers based on 5800 Ultra noise levels and passive cooling efficiency.
!