Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GPU...which one to buy? Vote here and find out!

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • GPUs
  • Crossfire
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

Which Graphic card is the better buy?

Total: 80 votes (4 blank votes)

  • GTX-280-$500
  • 7 %
  • 9800GX2-$400-$500
  • 4 %
  • HD4850-$150-$200
  • 31 %
  • 9800GTX-$200-$300
  • 4 %
  • HD4870-$300
  • 50 %
  • 8800GT-$125-$200
  • 7 %
  • HD3870-$120-$200
  • 0 %
  • 3870X2-$299-$350
  • 0 %
July 5, 2008 5:47:11 PM

Choose which card would get your money! I left SLI and CrossFire out becuase i want to represent the mainstream of cards people would buy. Now people can come here when they need to know what the best card is for something and find out for themselves.

Lets keeps the flames out of here pick a card and tell us why you made that choice!

Thank you have a nice day!

More about : gpu buy vote find

July 5, 2008 6:14:45 PM

While the 4850 is probably a better choice for the money, I'd get a 4870 for the performance. The latest cards from Nvidia may be a bit better performance wise, but they are too overpriced for what they offer, in my opinion. The only problems with the 4870 at the moment seems to be getting one, as well as the heat they produce. The supply is rather small so far.
July 5, 2008 6:17:28 PM

I'm getting a 4850 because it has the best price/performance ratio of all of them. It is near the GTX260 at less then half the cost and beats the 9800GTX at about $30 less in price at the moment.
Related resources
July 5, 2008 6:32:53 PM

I agree with the above statements and I think the 4850 has the best price/performance ratio but I chose the 4870 due to the added performance. I am actually waiting for the 1gb 4870 to upgrade, I'm hoping that the added memory will give it a little more performance at higher resolutions since I play at 1920x1200.
July 5, 2008 6:39:24 PM

Unless you're a nVidia fanboy, or money isn't an issue, there is no way that you can recomend the nVidia GTX-280. It's simply to expensive compared to ATis offerings for the performance gained. The choice between the two ATi offerings in the HD48xx series however is a bit harder as the HD4850 is more than enough for most users but the extra performance of the HD4870 is kinda nice.
July 5, 2008 6:46:57 PM

dirtmountain said:
This 8800GTS 512 at $120.00 after rebate. It's in my price range and it does everything i need it to do.
http://fxvideocards.com/ZOTAC-GeForce-8800-GTS-G92-512M...


There's no question that that's a great card at a great price but I dislike Nvidia's questionable business practices and I don't feel I need to support them.
July 5, 2008 6:59:20 PM

ausch30 said:
There's no question that that's a great card at a great price but I dislike Nvidia's questionable business practices and I don't feel I need to support them.



same here but i would also add there overcharging which has come round and bit them on the arss
July 5, 2008 7:10:28 PM

rangers said:
same here but i would also add there overcharging which has come round and bit them on the arss


It's funny you said that because I was just thinking the same thing. It's amazing to me that in the last couple weeks the 8800GTS has almost halved in price and they are still making money, makes you wonder what the actual cost of a GTX280 is.
July 5, 2008 7:29:13 PM

ausch30 said:
It's funny you said that because I was just thinking the same thing. It's amazing to me that in the last couple weeks the 8800GTS has almost halved in price and they are still making money, makes you wonder what the actual cost of a GTX280 is.


Given the die size and the rumors about their horrible yields, I bet they are pretty damn expensive to make. That is going to be a big factor in the lowest possible price they can sell the GTX-260 and 280 for, which should give ATI an advantage in pricing.
July 5, 2008 7:48:07 PM

I'd get the 8800GT 512 or the HD4850, they offer the best bang for the buck right now.

I agree that at current prices recommending the GTX 2xx is out of the question.

ausch30 said:
There's no question that that's a great card at a great price but I dislike Nvidia's questionable business practices and I don't feel I need to support them.

Honestly I don't care about "business practices" as long as they provide a good product, your statement is just another way of fanboyism.
July 5, 2008 7:55:17 PM

SirCrono said:
I'd get the 8800GT 512 or the HD4850, they offer the best bang for the buck right now.

I agree that at current prices recommending the GTX 2xx is out of the question.


Honestly I don't care about "business practices" as long as they provide a good product, your statement is just another way of fanboyism.


I can see what your saying but I have a 8800GT in my system now. I will also go with the best product available but if given the choice between equal products I would go with ATI. I think it's less that I'm a fan and more just that I root for the underdog.
July 6, 2008 12:21:26 AM

If I believed in such things, I'd say my computer with the 8800 GTS was listening when I said I'd like a 4870, because the 8800 GTS died this afternoon. Now I get to find out how well EVGA backs their "Limited Lifetime" warranty.
July 6, 2008 3:11:18 AM

sailer said:
If I believed in such things, I'd say my computer with the 8800 GTS was listening when I said I'd like a 4870, because the 8800 GTS died this afternoon. Now I get to find out how well EVGA backs their "Limited Lifetime" warranty.

I just sent in one of my 8800GT's a couple weeks ago for replacement and they sent me back a Superclocked 8800GT so I would rate Evga pretty high as far as their service goes
July 6, 2008 3:25:20 AM

GTX280 OR 4870x2:

If you've been waiting to do a video upgrade for quite a while, then these are assuredly the best performance increase you will get for quite some time.


A lot of people make a mistake of going from value card to value card every 6 months which is a big no-no I think. An example of this would be going from an Nvidia 8800 GT to an Nvidia 9800GTX - the performance increase is just so nomimal that even with the 9800GTX's now reduced price it is just not worthwhile.

Likewise a similar analogy would be going from a AMD 4850 to an AMD 4870 - or going from an AMD 3870 to an AMD 4850. Good examples of not going high enough on the performance scale to really get a substantial upgrade for your dollar. On the other hand, going from an AMD 3870 to an AMD 4870 is in some cases more than 2x the performance, and it makes it an exceptional upgrade.

THG did a pretty good chart a while back showing various GPU generations and classing them so that you could see which cards were around which performance levels; the idea and point was to make an easily illustrated example of how going up the performance scale while good is not going to net a substantial performance increase unless you go up at least 2 grades in gpu performance~

Basically, the only time I think it is good to go with a value card is if you've made a well informed decision about a gpu/motherboard combination which you explicitly intend to pair up with a second of its kind for increased performance as needed. The other circumstance where value cards are good is if you are building a new low-budget system where pure bang for the buck is the goal. But buying a value card as an upgrade? Usually its going to end up being a pure money sink in a single gpu situation~
July 6, 2008 7:48:02 AM

the Gtx 280. BEcause it is still the fastest single card (and this used to mean something). Because it is going to be cheaper. Because it doesnt run as hot and doesnt consume as much energy when idle.

Because I run a 24inch screen and the gtx 280 is the best single card for this.
July 6, 2008 8:56:30 AM

ashkon52 said:
the Gtx 280. BEcause it is still the fastest single card (and this used to mean something). Because it is going to be cheaper. Because it doesnt run as hot and doesnt consume as much energy when idle.

Because I run a 24inch screen and the gtx 280 is the best single card for this.


Umm no it doesn't...Check the reviews man it still not as you say it is, silly simpleton!



Well lookie here, the GTX 280 is under load at 310, and idles at 126

Well lookie here, the HD 4870 is under load at 283, and idles at 153

Why does every noob come here look at the idle watts and say thats all that matter b/c u know I don't game!!!!



Only at idle does it look slightly better, but again not by much, once you consider how much the thing costs!!!



OMGZ, it consumes more power when you are actually gaming!



As you can see the thign runs a little hotter, oh noes, idiot, GPU's can take way more heat than cpu's do some research than talk...

Again if you game you want your money's worth

Quote:
While not as hot as the record-setting Radeon HD 4850, the HD 4870 was still rather hot at idle, with a GPU temperature reading of 70°C. But that poses no problem for the card, and remember that with its traditional double-slot design, the hot air is vented outside the computer case


Dude ashklon do some research, think about it, leave your fanboyish attitude at home, and you'll do just fine, continue to carry on this manner, nobody will ever take you seriously...





July 6, 2008 9:01:09 AM

Now that I got that off my chest, I sincerely apologize If I made it sound as if you didn't already state the obvious what you said was still true, but that does not make it better, not everybody can even afford a $500 space heater

most mainstream gamers are barely able to put down 200 ish to 300 ish, so seriously think about it, most ppl have to go for the best value, not just something that is the best, b/c that doesn't make any sense, you know if you have more money than sense, by all means buy the space heater...

But if you do, plz don;t recommend that as a "best buy" b/c than it's very hard to take you serious man, or for that matter respect your opinion....
July 6, 2008 11:33:47 AM

Ok FrozenGpu, if you cant have an adult conversation with someone without resorting to insults... you will never get anywhere in life.... no matter how smart you think you are.... Life lesson number one my friend.

MY god...what did I say?

"the Gtx 280. BEcause it is still the fastest single card (and this used to mean something). Because it is going to be cheaper. Because it doesnt run as hot and doesnt consume as much energy when idle.

Because I run a 24inch screen and the gtx 280 is the best single card for this. "


You went on your rant, posting all those charts and came to the same conclusion as I did.
Simple fact...
What I said was true, and your charts support this.
I havent done my research???!?
Who looks like the idiot here?


Your interpretation of the chart maybe different to mine because you have different needs and expectations. fair enough. But wait.... AHHHH ... this is a forum with different opinions.... hmmmmm hard concept for some.

My computer is on 14 hours a day doing relatively mundane things, Ill squeeze a game maybe 2 hours tops. And I wanted the fastest single card.

Im not a fanboy. I have had both brand of cards before. You assume too much. I dont give a crap about brands.
It seems to me that you are the fanboy. Ive seen you attack other people on these forums before for voicing their support for a Nvidia product.

If you want to worry about price performance ratio then the 4870 is no good either.

But then such is life... some people like the best ... and it might blow your mind that a $100-$200 difference is nothing considering what they spend on a day to day basis on other things like clothes, cars and alcohol.

You want to know my real opinion on the matter...

if you dont want to get ripped off.... If you are so worried about a few hundred dollars....dont buy a PC for gaming.

That makes more sense.

They bring out a new graphics card every 6 months... and every new generation of card is just that much less impressive than the last card.

Everything 6 months old is 'obsolete'
yet somehow
everything 6 months new is 'useless'.

Technology like GDR 5 and direct X 10... is not being utilized but somehow we are made to believe direct X 10.1 is something to worry about. We are made to believe we should have these specs for future games.

If you were really sane... you'd just buy a console and be done with it for a few good years... bar the FPS and RTS games.

Then there is the PC gaming community in general which has become completely oblivious to the sham that is SLI and crossfire. YOU are paying twice the amount for the same technology. The same Research and development.

And you have the nerve to twitch and scream to me about a few hundred dollars.... for which card is the better buy.

You my friend have got it all backwards.

The better buy for me... is the better card.





July 6, 2008 5:46:36 PM

Yeah, you gotta love when people break out "the charts" feeling like they need to defend even the most petty comments that just might suggest that the cards they don't support just might be better in some way.

And it is funny. No matter how hard certain benchies try, the truth is that the GTX 280 is still the beast of all video cards. Not only that, it is well built, does run even cooler than the 8 series, and it just seems like a lot more time was put into these things than people suggest. And I do think they are much more expensive to make than people think.

I don't care if the 4870 is only $2. No matter how cheap it is it doesn't change the fact that it just simply doesn't beat the GTX 280. Once again Nv can claim the most powerful card in the world. The only gripe people have had since day 1 is the price. Other than that, I haven't been seeing the same "error/glitch/heat/broken" reports coming from the 2xx series like I have from the 4xxx cards.

What has really been driving me nuts is how people are still stomping around and crying because the best card in the world is expensive. Well boo freaking hoo! And this is different from every other year in the history of all "top of the line stuff" in what way? It is no different for gpu's, or car's, or anything. I knew the 8 series spoiled people, just not this bad. What's worse is that the 8800 Ultra was well more expensive just weeks ago than some of these GTX 280's are now! And clearly the 280's are a ton faster!

Yes, that was just days ago! And people loved the 8 series cards, made shrines out of them, and gladly paid over $500 for them. Now we essentially have an 8 series on massive amounts of steriods plus other new features for the same price or less, just weeks later, and people are throwing fits!

In contrast, this was the card I've been dreaming of! And I just bought a superclocked GTX 280 for $460 US! 650mhz core & 2300mhz memory right out of the box! Already well above normal vanilla 280 standards. And when you get that sucker over 700mhz core and 2500mhz memory (which isn't hard to do), all of a sudden $460 for that much raw power, a solid card, and still good temps seems like a pretty damn good deal considering I paid less for it than my 8800 GTX KO!

You do pay more for brand name alone, you do pay more for quality. If you have done great things in the past, you can charge more. If you can boast having "THE BEST" thing about, you can charge more. If you have a history of releasing products that take giant leaps in technology, you can charge more. If you constantly beat the snot out of the competition how many years straight, you can charge more.

ATI hasn't earned the right to either boast the greatest card or even overcharge for them. They were so close this time around. If they maybe would have spent a little less time focusing on making the fastest but least expensive card possible and spent a little more time on making something that actually could be the king of all gpu's, then they would have taken a giant step forward rather than a midrange bargain step.

Now don't get me wrong. If you are looking at either the 2xx series or 4xxx series for a new card and can't afford anything more than a 4870, then clearly that is a great choice, or the 4850. Or, depending on your needs, the cheapest GTX 260 out there after these price drops could be the way to go (if you need more memory than 512mb or like what else the 2xx have to offer). Considering I just bought a superclocked 280 for $460, I have to think that you'll soon be able to find a 260 right in that $300 range or less.

Unlike many, I do understand how business works. Some of you seem to think Nv should give the 2xx away at cost, just to be nice or just because ATI put out better priced cards. I personally think it was already a huge step for them to drop GTX 280 prices by over $200 in some cases. I'm sorry but not a lot of companies are willing nor able to do that. Nv did. Of course it wasn't out of good will, their hand was forced, but they still did it. If ATI was in the same situation, they would just be screwed. They don't have the cash or tricks up their sleeve to combat something like this.

Furthermore, again from a business perspective, I think that in some ways ATI might have gone and screwed up the whole gpu industry with this 4xxx release.
Their marketing strategy was again, sell for the lowest possible price, gain customers for the future, and put out the cheapest possible card to make that will do well on benchmarks. Even if it means cutting corners on quality (i.e. cooling, ect.).

So, the fact that ATI chose to sell for dirt cheap was clearly a marketing ploy. People love these high performing mid range cards for such a low price, no doubt. However, for ATI to really make a ton of cash, they need to rely on a ton of people shelling out $200 to $300 on a gpu. And given the economy, the wonder is whether or not they sell enough quantity to really make out as well as they should. Not sure if that will happen, especially where there some great options for under $200 (ala 8800GT 512 which can play just about whatever you throw at it).

While $200 for a 4850 might be a no brainer to most of us, the casual mid range gamers still consider $200 a lot of money (and who can blame them). And ATI is walking that fine line of people unsure if they want to pay that much. While Nv with their 2xx series, its clearly marketed to dedicated gamers on the high end who are either going to buy or aren't, not such a fine line there. And again, Nv still has those 8 series cards that are now affordable, and have such a great rep, that should cover a good portion of that mid-range to low end market.

Furthermore, we all know how Nv works. Just when the time is right, you know they will come out with the "bang for the buck" 2xx card (ala 8800GT) as with the 2xx version of the 8800 Ultra, then followed up likely by a die shrink high end card, a 2x card, ect. And now that ATI's hand has been played, surely Nv will scheme all of this stuff just right, make the prices just right, and take back some of the momentum they recently lost.
Do I know this will happen? Not positive, but going by what they have been doing the last few years, we have no reason to think they won't.

And then of course it is usually this "6 months later" or "1 year later" stuff where ATI falls short and has nothing to compete with Nv's latest offerings. Again, just going by history here. And I do think ATI just played their best hand while Nv is currently upping the ante.

I do think it's a big deal that Nv was again willing and able to do these price drops. Owning the best gpu in the world for under $500 is amazing for those of us with the budget to buy them, considering that the 8 series best offerings from 2 years ago and up until recently have cost even more than that.
We are seeing deflation here rather than inflation, and yet, people still complaining.

Is it that people are just jealous that they don't have the fastest gpu in the world and want to crown the 4780 as kind just because it was in their price range and they bought it? Is it because a lot of people on launch day would have, in a heartbeat, bought the GTX 280 for $500 or less...and now that it actually is in that price range people are upset because they either didn't wait or bought something else in the meantime?

Because it is strange that all of a sudden the fastest gpu in the world is getting slammed. And as previous poster stated, doesn't the fastest gpu in the world mean anything anymore?
I know it did a few weeks ago.
People see the 4870's price, then see benchies and think "wow, this is only 10% slower (or whatever the % is) than the GTX 280 which is much more expensive" (although now only $160 less than my superclocked 280).

My problem with that is that 10%, even 5% is not insignificant. It is the difference between having the fastest gpu in the world, or not. It is often the difference between Crysis being playable at Very High some some AA cranked...or not.
You look at the 4870, regardless of price, and it is an amazing peice of technology. It really is. If Nv's 8 series didn't exist, the 4870 would just be mind blowing.
Which of course puts what Nv has done into better perspective. They came out with that 8 series architecture which in itself is a more amazing feat, by far, than what ATI's 4xxx cards have achieved. It was perhaps the largest gpu technology leap in the history of all leaps.

Now, with that same old 2 year old technology, they are still besting anything that ATI can put out, even 2 years later. Does not that mean anything anymore? Is that not a huge achievement? Taking 2 year old technology, strapping on 1gb RAM, smashing in 1.4 billion transistors, and still being the king of all cards by what, 10%, just with the vanilla line. And even more amazing is how you can OC these cards well and still have them running cooler than an 8800 GTX or Ultra. And believe me, I see no cpu bottlenecking here, and I don't have any expensive quad core's, just a C2D with a decent OC. And when I OC the 280 to beyond 700mhz and 2500mhz (again not hard to do), the performance gained is very notable. The results can really make you feel better about how much $ you spent for it when you see it performing a good 15% faster than anything else out there.

So is that extra 15%, even 10%, gain worth $160? For some of us it most certainly is. And I expect nothing but even better things as lots of future driver releases come out, as well as games built around the 2xx cards really utilizing everything packed in there. Even 10% is a large performance leap when you consider that this gpu is going up against some real beasts like the 4xxx series and even its own 8 & 9 series that also hold their own with any game you want to throw at them. 10% on its own, 10% in general, is not a large percentage. 10% in this day and age, when pitted against all these other great cards and amazing technology....now that 15% or 10% really means something, even 5% does. For me it is the difference between being able to play Crysis, DX10 @ 1680x, Very High game & optimal driver settings, at a smooth 30 fps with v-sync....or having to settle for 15 or 20 fps v-sync. Which no doubt does make a difference. And as we all know, we have some upcoming games that will be just as demanding and may well recommend more vid RAM than the 4870 has to offer. But I know I'll be in good shape as far as fps and vid RAM with my 1gb. Things are a bit more cloudy with the 4870 when it comes to upcoming demanding games. I want a gpu that will definitely have more than enough RAM for any game in the coming year or so, and call me crazy but I find that being able to hit 30 fps is a big deal.

Lastly (congrats if you read this far), going back to something I briefly touched on, I do think that ATI may have hurt the gpu market. With ATI's marketing ploy to gain customers by having prices as low as possible, it is great for consumers right now, but they might be sinking themselves into a hole as we speak. That is a risky thing to do because I think they easily could have charged 15% to 20% more for these 4xxx cards and still be winning easily in the "bang for your buck" category. Even if one gpu that performs exactly the same as another, despite brand name, is just $10 less than that other card, people will buy the one that is $10 less.

I think ATI made the mistakes is dropping prices way lower than they needed to. Any time you have a chance to beat out Nv in the bang for your buck category, you need to take full advantage of it. And they didn't. They won't rake in nearly the amount of profits that they could have, in my educated opinion. Especially when considered that Nv still has great "bang for buck" cards for under $200 that still can play any game out there with decent to max settings.

But that isn't the only problem. I said what they did could have hurt the entire gpu market. Why? Because of their extremely low prices, Nv was forced to drop 2xx prices well below what I'm sure they ever wanted to. Why is that bad? For those that really need an answer. You know how Nv did amazing things with their 8 series architecture? OK, then do you know how they were able to do what they did? They did what they did because they are a company that has made a ton of money to put toward technology and resources.

Where did they get all that money? From being able to charge, more or less, the price they saw fit for all their graphics cards, probably from the 7 series and whatever before that. But now, for the first time they really need to sell much lower than anticipated, much closer to cost because of what ATI chose to do. So not only will ATI likely kick themselves in the rear for charging too little, but they also possibly screwed Nv for the future. If Nv could have sold the GTX 280 for let's say $600 over the next 6 months, then dropped the price closer to around $500 over time, like they wanted to, and like they felt this card was worth when compared to the high end 8 series cards that sold for as much....then we might have possibly seen another incredible leap in gpu technology in the next generation or 2 of gpu's.
But now, with Nv (and potentially ATI) not making nearly the profits that they expected to, there is a good chance that they won't have the $$ for another great technological leap any time soon.

I might be wrong, but what is going on, while great for the consumer, just might not be so great for the guys that make 'em. Essentially, we all fund the next great gpu, and if they get too greedy or spoiled and start demanding cheaper and cheaper stuff, then that is exactly what we will get. Be careful what you wish for.

Personally, I'm willing to spend an extra $80 per year, or whatever the amount may be, that will help bring us the next great gpu. But if the big guns aren't making no money, or need to build cheaper, more generic stuff to suit the wants and needs of the masses, then don't complain if we never see that greap gpu technology leap ever again.

This is all my opinion, much based either on fact or educated guesses. I know some might not agree, some may find it sobering. But certainly is something to think about.
July 6, 2008 6:17:01 PM

NOT FOR LONG
July 6, 2008 6:36:32 PM

stopped reading half way through, and yes i know it hurts to have buyers remorse especially now the 280 has dropped in price
but if it makes you feel better you go girl, rant away till ur harts content
and when the r700 comes out you can say you still have the fastest single chip card and all you'll have to sacrifice is AA and FPS and 2x as much cash
July 6, 2008 7:01:48 PM

omg, who has time to write and read these dissertation's?

I don't know man, I'm not going to read that reply b/c well I've got a huge hangover and I really don't feel like explaining myself, if every time some noob is just going to question it, then you know what, I'm sorry, ok, Did you see that line where I apologized or did you gloss over it, b/c unlike you, I didn't write a 15 page essay on why I hate butterfly's, I kind of kept it short and sweet.

If I offended anybody I truly am sorry we are all entitled to have our own opinions no matter ridiculous they are, IF you've got more money than sense buy the GTX28, I'm not putting anybody down by saying that, Hey I used to have more money than sense everybody goes through that stage, I bought the EVGA 7900GTX I remember for like $600. Luckily somebody at work had my back and told me about the Ati x1900 AIW for about $200, For the resolutions I was playing at man it was almost as good and on top of that I also got to play around w/ tv tuner, radio tuner, all this video/audio creation software, etc, etc, etc. When did people start getting soo offended over nothing?

:lol: 

July 6, 2008 10:21:05 PM

you go girl
July 6, 2008 10:52:25 PM

I'm running on an 8800GT at the moment 1280x1024, it's a great card which runs all the games I play silky smooth, no need to upgrade for a while I reckon.

But if I were in the market now I would most definately get a 4870, performance to price ratio is just too good.

Peace
July 6, 2008 10:53:32 PM

I found a GX2 for 330$:)  I think thats a pretty good deal:D 
July 7, 2008 9:05:43 AM

ForzenGPU

Let me make this quick for you then

If you cant be bothered debating this... then shut up and stop insulting people for having a different opinion.

Shut up and stop calling people noob when you disagree with them.

Shut up and stop using the word noob in general.

If you have more sense than cash.. dont bother buying a gaming pc to begin with.

Now go and make an omlette for that bruising hangover... you party animal you.


Easy enough for you.


July 7, 2008 9:37:23 AM

No im not going to let you off that easily FrozenGPu.

Sometimes it takes more than a paragraph to debate a topic such as this...

You claim that you dont have the time to read... albeit you are an 'addict' on these forums.

So I split this up into two posts... so that we can compromise on your limited attention span.

Robx46, had some very valid points.

Up until 6 months ago nobody questioned the expensive price of the top end cards, which were selling for much more than the current 280GTX.

Given the economic slowdown, some of you might now be struggling to pay rent and I guess the best card is no longer your choice of card. Fair enough. I dont argue that.

The GTX 280 is still the best card and comes at a premium even with the new price drop. But that didnt stop people buying the 9800GTX or the 8800GTX.

What you fail to realize is that there are two sides to the equation.

ATI has changed the face of the competition.
ITs a price war now.

And while that looks sweet to all of you....

There is always a consequence with a price war in the future.

In the years to come, this war of attrition will result in...

Quality swapped with quantity.

Quality of parts and the technology invested in the research phase...
And the increase in quantity of parts... i.e. crossfires and SLi's

Already we have people thinking of getting 2 4870's in Xfire. These are people who would not have otherwise bought Xfire.

But they forget that with this comes the expense of bigger & better PSU, Case, Cooling and motherboards.

The expense is yours to bare not Ati's.

This will only get worse.

And the very harsh reality remains .... if you are concerned with price... dont bother buying a gaming PC to begin with... Buy a console and be done with it.





a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 10:50:33 AM

Hmmmm... Lets see. Single gpu, the G280 is the best in most games. DX10.1 is useful, it allows for higher fps and lower power consumption. If they did those power tests using AC, the 4870 would win in power consumption by a large margin, get better frame rates, and still save you lots of money. nVidia is going to DX10.1 soon anyways, so I dont understand why certain people think its pointless, nVidia surely doesnt. The R700 may have a few surprises for everyone, and still be the fastest card around, no doubt about it, period. The G280 uses more power, much more compared to the performance gains seen over the 4870 % wise. Then of course, we can discuss the price, which once again shows a complete waste of money vs performance gains, which I might add will be moot when R700 shows up. Is the G280 a good card? No doubt about it. Is it worth the price premium, even at these reduced prices (that really ticked off alot of early buyers before they were dropped) every review Ive read that includes the ATI solutions say no, they arent worth there current pricing.
a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 12:09:14 PM

a long term nvidia supporter here, but im ditching the new gtx... 4850 smells as good as pancake + sweet syrup during breakfast and a welldone steak at dinner.

not unless nvidia comes up with an uber sweet 55nm "gt" version with a soda on the side of these cards that will hit the 150$ price point that can probably reach the current gtx260's performance at least (geforce a la carte).
July 7, 2008 12:13:54 PM

Funny thing is people keep saying how hot the 4800 series runs, and saying that the GTX280 is so much better in this regard.

Yet, I've seen many reviews and videos of the GTX280 going past 105C under heavy loads. That's with the fan cranked and the computer sounding like Dulles International.

Strange that my 4870 has yet to break 55C at load with the GPU fan set to 50%, which is barely audible over my other fans. This is probably the least warm card I've played with, barring some old EISA's.

As far as the power consumption issue at idle issue, I believe that will be fixed as well with the appropriate drivers.

There are other issues with the drivers, such as very low overclocking capability through CCC. Virtually everyone I've seen has been able to throw both the GPU and RAM sliders to the max, and have no issue. There's a lot of room for overclocking, with the card running this cold.

There's a lot to be gained through simple driver fixes. There's also a lot to be gained through the release of DX10.1 titles, which will see huge performance gains over the Nvidia lineup.

Nvidia's cards seem to be just an old architecture pushed to it's breaking point. I think the GTX280 will succumb in time to the 1.2 TFlop 4870.
July 7, 2008 12:22:11 PM

jaydeejohn

There are people who would say... what is the point of directx 10.1 when there isnt a game that is based on the direct x 10.0 yet.
When games in direct X 9 are almost identical to their direct x 10 counterpart.

Microsoft and Crytek have both said the 10.1 is of no real value.

Some analysts guess that if 10.1 is utilised... we wont see it properly for another two years, until game companies take up on the technology.


Of course the 4870 is a better value card. I'd be stupid to say otherwise.
And the fact that they can gloat about the 10.1 support is a real plus.

Let me get it straight with some people here... Ati have made a great great card in the 4XXX series.

But ask me which card I will be buy... and it will be the GTX280 with the price drop because it is the fastest. Meh!

Malovane

I have read a few reviews of the 4870, which all mention that the 4870 runs incredibly hot... piping red hot.
I dont know... you have first hand account of this.... but I can only go on what the reports tell me.

My question is which card is going to run better framerate. Thats all I care about to be frank.
If in fact the 4870 is going to run future games (next 6months) better than the 280GTx than Im gonna go with 4870.
If it doesnt and the GTX 280 proves to be very good OC'd and memory capable... Im gonna go with 280 GTX.

What is the consensus on this ....

I ask people... who have an educated idea?

a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 12:42:07 PM

Thats cool, spend your money as you wish, but how much longer can you or anyone else say DX10.1 isnt an important part of DX10? Like I said, even nVidia has decided its time, even tho they didnt want to change their arch to support it. Better tech should be sought out, not denied as being unimportant. If nVidia had come on board earlier, we wouldntr even be having this conversation, as Im sure more than 1 game would currently support. That being said, I find DX10.1 as important, helpful and pushing tech forward. You see, true DX10 games CANT be made without DX10.1, because the DX10 we know is incomplete, and the DX10.1 was dropped early on, and screwed everything up, leaving the butchered DX10 model crippled and inadequate in regards to improvements with a software environment improving the HW side. Give me those links on those analysts if you still have them, as Id like to read up on that. As far as it being of value, buy yourself a 3xxx or 4xxx series card, buy AC, dont do the patch, and come back and tell me if the fps improvements of which Ive spoke arent worth it. This has all been alot of smoke and mirrors, and finally even nVidia have caved. Everyone thats said DX10.1 isnt worth it doesnt understand I guess that there was to be no DX10.1, but circumstances have led us to this. Go back and look at the DX roadmaps/upgrades, you wont find it there, not like this.
July 7, 2008 12:49:09 PM

Ok your info on DX10.1 is interesting... if it is true. that the 10.0 is crippled without it. Honestly. I havent heard that before.

As for the reviews... I dont keep links man... just did some background reading cause I am about to buy one of the two cards.

CAn you please look at the other thread I started about 280 Vs 4870

I'd like your opinion... as I am looking to buy one of these cards soon.

I just want people's non-bias opinion... without the bandwagons and the flags. Before I cave in and choose one.

From what I can understand... you would still buy the 4870 over the GTX 280 even if price was not an issue. Which is not for me.


July 7, 2008 12:49:18 PM

Well newbie, you keep pushing, and for what reason is beyond me, do you think that this forum is your life or something, if you don't get personal recognition you feel abandoned or something?

You may need some help...like professional help if you feel that validation on a forum will make you feel any better...

If you didn't already see this part I'll make it easier for somebody who is visually impaired, like yourself,

Dude, I am sorry I offended you but you know the whole 4870 is running so hot, omg, better call the FD b4 it burns down the house is simply uncalled for, and well you did start spouting off alot of crap that trollers like Monsta, Concrum, and the lot have been spouting off as well.

just because you dress it up and call it another name does not make you some victim, so stop painting yourself out to be one...

Be a man, act like it at least, if your gonna go cry about it, dude go ahead, if you want to be an adult about it, at least have the courtesy to read my entire post....



a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 12:49:50 PM

i sort of agree with ashkon, with the dx10 dx9 issue, at least on the unreal 3 engine. but everything is different comparing dx9 crysis to dx10 crysis
July 7, 2008 1:01:46 PM

FrozenGpu

I dont like you... simple. You are the classic 'addict' forum guy who likes to flame anyone new to the forums.

I have a different opinion than you... and apparently that makes me a troll or a noob... whatever. Enough with the cliche names.

I dont need personal recognition but you made it personal... you cant have a proper adult conversation with someone...so now I want you to eat your words and shut up. I dont care for your apology. If you were truly apologetic.. you would have edited your first post...and dropped the insults.

Im just trying to get the real lowdown on the cards like everyone else. And
screw you for blasting me for having an objective opinion period.


a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 1:07:12 PM

OK, looks like its needed to be posted again. This is from one of the M$ devs, his blog about DX10 before it was actually implemented. Because nVidias cards were out, and claiming to be DX10 capable, they went with nVidias HW, and dropped the .1 of DX10 in the process, this also caused problems for both cards (remember nVidia was sued, later dropped) because nVidia at the time couldnt do the revised DX10, and ATI's cards were made to run the real/old DX10 . Heres the link. http://blogs.msdn.com/ptaylor/archive/2007/03/03/optimi... Its just history, and its whats happened, dont need to blame anyone, but devying DX10.1 comes at a price, which we see using DX10.1 capable cards running Assassins Creed.
July 7, 2008 1:12:51 PM

Ok Jaydeejohn... finally im talking to someone that seems to know some stuff.

I can see what your saying, because I knew bits and pieces of that but didnt know the story in its entirety as you say it.

That being direct x 10.1....

IN the end

What is your honest opinion dude. If you wanted a single card GPu to run games on a 24 inch screen for the next 12 months... (buying a whole new computer soon) which one would you buy?

a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 2:07:14 PM

Honestly, if I saw the G280 at 350USD, Id snap it up. Until then, its a 4870, hands down
July 7, 2008 2:32:11 PM

ashkon52 said:
Malovane

I have read a few reviews of the 4870, which all mention that the 4870 runs incredibly hot... piping red hot.
I dont know... you have first hand account of this.... but I can only go on what the reports tell me.

My question is which card is going to run better framerate. Thats all I care about to be frank.
If in fact the 4870 is going to run future games (next 6months) better than the 280GTx than Im gonna go with 4870.
If it doesnt and the GTX 280 proves to be very good OC'd and memory capable... Im gonna go with 280 GTX.

What is the consensus on this ....

I ask people... who have an educated idea?


The 4870 does run hot, as the drivers aren't configured appropriately. The fans are configured to run at around 15-20% speed at idle, and don't kick in hard in games either. However, it only takes 5 minutes of your time to fix the issue. You just need to set up a CCC overclock profile, and edit the resulting profile with notepad. I went a little further than most, by applying thermique compound to the GPU. The results are an average of 44C at idle, 52C at load, with a max of 55C at a fan speed of 50%. I've seen various temperatures for "fixed" 4870's at similar fan speed levels, and they tend to average in the low 60's at load under 45-50% fan speed. For a GPU these days, this is pretty good. It also dumps the heat outside the case with a dual slot cooler, which keeps the rest of your components chilly.

As to which will have the better framerate, I've already voiced my opinion, but will elaborate:

1) The 4870 is around 10% shy (on average) of the GTX280 as it is.

2) DX10.1 will offer around a 20% improvement in speed over DX10.0.

3) ATI seems to be focusing heavily on driver development, which will help reduce the effects of developers optimizing for Nvidia.

4) ATI is pushing harder for deals with developers (like Blizzard), to optimize for their cards and not Nvidia's. This will improve with market share.

5) ATI has the better memory bandwidth possibilities. GDDR5 can be overclocked like crazy, and you can't increase the number of bits on Nvidia's bus.

6) The 4870 seems better suited for overclocking than the GTX280, the latter of which seems to heat to dangerous levels on the stock OC'd models.

7) Crossfire typically scales better than SLI.

8) No need for an Nvidia chipset to muck up the works.

9) Frame for frame, image quality is better on an ATI by most accounts.

*shrug* it just seems to me that in the future, the 4870 will be the better card to have. If that's not enough, slap it together with a 4870x2 when it comes out.
July 7, 2008 2:48:23 PM

Ok, i dont wana flame, but 280 is fastest atm, but only in some situations, i others 4870 beats it and this is gona also chnage.
1) ati have from my point of wiev more space for performance improvements with new drivers.
2) 4870x2 is comming soon and i have no doubts it will beat 280 badly as single 4870 is almost on par with 280
a b U Graphics card
July 7, 2008 2:55:11 PM

I didnt want to be so blunt, but there it is. Good call Malovane
July 7, 2008 3:07:16 PM

Malovane said:
6) The 4870 seems better suited for overclocking than the GTX280, the latter of which seems to heat to dangerous levels on the stock OC'd models.


The issue with the gtx200 series is that they require a decent level of airflow in order to operate properly simply because of their cooler design.; meaning at least 1 good intake fan on the front of your case is essential.

But honest to god, i'm running dual gtx260s overclocked to 670/1450/2400 which is anything but a small OC for that card - and they don't break 65-70 degrees basically ever.

There is only 2 circumstances I have seen where gtx200 cards have a heat issue; 1: Tri-SLI, but you better bet your balls that you would need some very serious case cooling for that kind of a solution. 2: Cases with poor intake as I mentioned before.

Or, of course, there is 3: running the cards well beyond factory OC levels without watercooling. That'll burn them up pretty good.
July 8, 2008 8:26:28 PM

ashkon52 said:
FrozenGpu

I dont like you... simple. You are the classic 'addict' forum guy who likes to flame anyone new to the forums.

I have a different opinion than you... and apparently that makes me a troll or a noob... whatever. Enough with the cliche names.

I dont need personal recognition but you made it personal... you cant have a proper adult conversation with someone...so now I want you to eat your words and shut up. I dont care for your apology. If you were truly apologetic.. you would have edited your first post...and dropped the insults.

Im just trying to get the real lowdown on the cards like everyone else. And
screw you for blasting me for having an objective opinion period.


See now that hurts, I like you, but you don't like me?

reciprocate the love baby, come on???

You know you want too!

Besides man you called me an addict, all that means is I put in x amount of posts that doesn't mean anything son, so go smoke a blunt, take a vikadyn but chill, seriously you don't wanna have a stroke at the tender age of 9, do you?

I only called you a newbie, b/c that what your profile says, it doesn't mean anything though, so seriously ashklon, w/e the fcuk your name is stfu, and gtfo....

But I say that w/ love, not w/ hate, for i can turn the other cheek, but can you?

To sin is human, to forgive is devine....


!