Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4870x2 or GTX 280 SLI ?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 17, 2008 1:23:16 AM

Hello everyone! First time poster, long time reader.

I'm putting together a new dev / gaming rig fairly soon to replace an
aging P4 Northwood system and currently sussing out what components
will make up the system. Price is not too much of an issue, but i'm not going to throw
money at parts unless I can see some justifiable benefit from it. I'm looking to get the
best machine possible but within the bounds of reason, if you know what I mean.

Here's what im considering getting so far:

1000w PSU
Nforce 780i or Intel x48 motherboard depending on graphics card
Intel Q9550 2.87 Ghz - Plan to overclock it to 3.4 Ghz by raising FSB to 400 mhz
4GB DDR2 800 Mhz
Creative X-Fi sound card
1TB Barracuda HDD
Blu-ray and DVD-RAM Drives
24" LCD Monitor with 1920x1200 native resolution

I will be running Vista x64 on this machine also.

I'm in a bit of a pickle over what graphics card to get however and I'd be interested to hear
your thoughts about it. Basically I'm torn between getting the new 4870x2 and a dual GTX 280 setup.
I've considered a crossfire-x setup for the 4870x2 also but from what I've seen in the benchmarks it's either
a case of near zero gains in most cases, or even bad for performance in others- hence the reason I ruled this out.

I've drawn up a list of pros and cons for both options:

=== HD4870x2 - Pros ===

- Appears to be the fastest card in a lot of benchmarks
- Excels in image quality, does exceptionally well with anti-aliasing enabled
- Direct X 10.1 support
- Not tied to any particular motherboard platform (nforce/sli)
- Upcoming Havok GPGPU support ?

=== HD4870x2 - Cons ===

- Slower GPU cores, might not help so much in vertex limited scenes
- Performance and crossfire scaling higly dependant on crossfire profiles and driver optimisations
- Appears to be quite a bit hotter than a GTX 280

=== GTX280 SLI - Pros ===

- Fastest single GPU core available at the moment. May be more consistent in performance across
games with or without crossfire/sli profiles.
- GPGPU PhysX support. I'd say CUDA as well but ATI have their own API too so that's not really an
advantage, and OpenCL / DX11 will standardise this stuff too.
- SLI scaling appears to be quite good in most games, much more consistent than crossfire. Also
being able to choose the SLI method in the absence of a profile is an added advantage.

=== GTX280 SLI - Cons ===

- Higher overall power draw than a 4870x2 setup, need a bigger PSU
- Lacks DX 10.1 support
- Restricted to SLI compatible motherboard

I've probably been quite sloppy with this list so feel free to add to the pros/cons if you want. So what
do you think, should I go green or red ? Right now i'm leaning slighltly towards the 4870x2 setup, but
I haven't decided for sure..

Any thoughts ?

More about : 4870x2 gtx 280 sli

August 17, 2008 1:33:11 AM

Does cost come into consideration at all? gtx280 sli will certain outperform a single 4870x2 by a large amount. But it also cost much more.
August 17, 2008 1:33:31 AM

i'd honestly say getting the 4870x2 is good enough for your resolution.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 1:35:15 AM

Since the 4870x2 does as well and better in some games, and since it doesnt run hotter by that much, and when the G280 SLI wins, its not by much. Also, using nVidia chips have their own drawbacls, an sli mobo is premium cost, and everything bad on your list towards the 4870x2 would be the same for the SLI setup. Id actually look at the good review sites, see what theyve come up with. I dont mean dodgy sites that dont include AA or high res or slow clocked cpus, all these things contribute to the SLI setup, and take away from the x2. To clarify, the performance with sli isnt worth the cost ratio, and in many games the x2 does win out anyways, and at 19x12 itd be pointless for anything costing more, you wont ever see the difference, if there is any. Also, Id like to point out, ATI has commited itself to multi gpus for now and the future. Also, show me where CF scaling isnt at least on par with sli? Thats not what Ive seen. Just look at the 3870x2 to see what Im talking about, the improvements made there with that card
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 1:37:16 AM

its a close one. In my opinion the gtx 280 sli and 4870x2 perform around the same at 1600x1200 resolution while the 4870x2 performance is slightly better i believe at 2560x1080. Both very good cards but i would have to go with the 4870x2. less power requirement and one single card so less heating issues. oh ya did i mention gtx280 will run u around 800$ while the 4870x2 is around 560-580$
Good Luck. =]
August 17, 2008 1:41:19 AM

dagger said:
Does cost come into consideration at all? gtx280 sli will certain outperform a single 4870x2 by a large amount. But it also cost much more.


It does, but not to a large extent. I wont consider a tri-way SLI solution for instance because its very much a case of diminishing returns; likewise a quad-crossfire setup with the 4870x2 is just silly also.
August 17, 2008 1:41:51 AM

invisik said:
its a close one. In my opinion the gtx 280 and 4870x2 perform around same in the 1600x1200 resolution while the 4870x2 performance is slightly better i believe at 2560x1080. Both very good cards but i would have to go with the 4870x2. less power requirement and one single card so less heating issues. oh ya did i mention gtx280 will run u around 800$ while the 4870x2 is around 560-580$
Good Luck. =]

That's wrong. 2 gtx280 in sli will outperform either single 4870x2 or 2 4870 in cf across the board, just in different amounts. The overall performance lead is big enough to overshadow any perks. The real reason against the former is cost. But hey, we're not Communists, if he's rich, good for him. :sarcastic: 
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 1:44:38 AM

Better look at Annandtech
August 17, 2008 1:49:27 AM

dagger said:
But hey, we're not Communists, if he's rich, good for him. :sarcastic: 


I wish man.. :lol:  Nah I've been running this P4 rig for 5 years now (can't believe its lasted this well) and I've decided
to treat myself with something beastly for a change. Next upgrade will probably be in 2012/2013 or thereabouts.. :) 
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 1:53:50 AM

In my mind, the x2 will only get better, much like the 3870x2 has
August 17, 2008 2:00:45 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
In my mind, the x2 will only get better, much like the 3870x2 has


Good point- that's another thing to take into consideration as well. This argument is really starting to
look one sided so it is :) 
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:03:37 AM

IHMO, get 6 or 8Gb of RAM (Vista 64 sucks up big). I don't know bout the x48, but i'm sure 'bout the video card. Go for the 4870X2 (either in CF or single), since u're looking for a smart buy and not a fanboy/elitist-jerk buy, we all know that the 4870 is the card for the go. Well, Ati is getting better and better in a lot of ways, so it seems about right to give it a shot. There's a lot of room for the Catalyst drivers to get more juice from the 4870.

Also get a 1200W PSU (in case u might want to add a second 4870X2 in the short run and a lot of HDDs or who-knows-what-else =P) and go for a liquid solution since u're planning for a hardcore OC (wich means, a lot of heat). I don't have many details 'bout liquid solutions at hand, but i'm sure u can get a lot of references from around.

G'Luck with your build!
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:03:42 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
In my mind, the x2 will only get better, much like the 3870x2 has


+1
side port seems useful in the future.

1200w psu!!? overkill for one 4870x2 650w is enough and for cf i would recommend 850w.
August 17, 2008 2:09:48 AM

invisik said:
really they seem to beat each other here and there.
http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3372&p=5
(grid , age of conan elder scrolls IV)



JAYDEEJOHN said:
Better look at Annandtech


I'm looking at it, but you should keep in mind, the significant lead of 4870x2 in Age of Conan is due to the game's perks, not the graphics card itself. It displays differently in ATI and Nvidia cards. See here:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6192732/p-5.html

GRID is highly optimized for ATI cards and deliver much higher performance with it across the board compared to games on average, not only with the latest generation cards, but with older ones too. Ender Scrolls is similarily optimized, although not as much. Performance drops on high resolutions, despite x2's more ram, higher bus speed, and inherently better scaling of the high aa and af they used on that benchmark.

I can't help but feel those titles used in that benchmark is cheerypicked to mislead. Most of the titles they chose are not heavy enough in graphics to be typically used in benchmarking on other reviews. Yet they chose to use them, then bump up aa/af, which 4870 handles extremely well compared to others, to tank fps. Where is Call of Duty 4? Prey? Stalker? FEAR? Company of Heros? Supreme Commander? Or any number of heavier games typically used for benchmarks? Why the relatively light weight games?

It reeks of fanboyism. 4870x2 outperforms a single gtx280 by an average of 25%, as shown on countless benchmark reviews. How can it outperform a pair of gtx280 by the same 25%?
August 17, 2008 2:10:20 AM

darraghcoy said:

=== HD4870x2 - Cons ===

- Slower GPU cores, might not help so much in vertex limited scenes
- Performance and crossfire scaling higly dependant on crossfire profiles and driver optimisations
- Appears to be quite a bit hotter than a GTX 280




the hell you talking about the cores are clocked the same as the 4870 :pfff: 

the scaling is great on the x2.

and of course its gonna be hotter.

you have 2 freaking cores :pt1cable: 
August 17, 2008 2:16:49 AM

Yuka said:
IHMO, get 6 or 8Gb of RAM (Vista 64 sucks up big).


I don't think its that bad though.. I run Vista 64 at work and it uses about 800mb- close enough to what the 32-bit version was using. Then again it never hurts to have more does it ? :) 

Yuka said:
Also get a 1200W PSU (in case u might want to add a second 4870X2 in the short run and a lot of HDDs or who-knows-what-else =P) and go for a liquid solution since u're planning for a hardcore OC (wich means, a lot of heat). I don't have many details 'bout liquid solutions at hand, but i'm sure u can get a lot of references from around.


Is liquid necessary for a 3.4 GHZ overclock ? I would have thought it to be a light overclock (could get away with stock cooling), especially with the improved thermal dynamics on the new 45nm quad. Maybe I'm wrong..
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:20:37 AM

darraghcoy said:
I don't think its that bad though.. I run Vista 64 at work and it uses about 800mb- close enough to what the 32-bit version was using. Then again it never hurts to have more does it ? :) 



Is liquid necessary for a 3.4 GHZ overclock ? I would have thought it to be a light overclock (could get away with stock cooling), especially with the improved thermal dynamics on the new 45nm quad. Maybe I'm wrong..


4gigs would be more then enough.
no u dont need liquid cooling for only 3.4ghz oc. people r running near 4.0ghz with air cooling lol.
August 17, 2008 2:22:14 AM

Four gigs of RAM should be more than sufficient for Vista 64. And no, liquid cooling isn't necessary, I'd get a pretty heatsink though.
August 17, 2008 2:23:15 AM

Physicz said:
the hell you talking about the cores are clocked the same as the 4870 :pfff: 

the scaling is great on the x2.

and of course its gonna be hotter.

you have 2 freaking cores :pt1cable: 


Sorry for the confusion; I was talking about it's core / single gpu speed relative to the GTX 280- not a single HD 4870.
August 17, 2008 2:26:11 AM

clock for clock the 4870x2 is still faster mhz wise at 750mhz. while the 280 is i believe 650? or 625?


but the architectures speak for themselves.
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:27:20 AM

invisik said:

1200w psu!!? overkill for one 4870x2 650w is enough and for cf i would recommend 850w.


Well, i always make buys thinking about "not falling short" in any possible way. Think 'bout some time in the future when he might need to upgrade to a 4870X3 (zomg, it might happen, lolzorz) and get them in CF.

I don't have solid arguments to say "absolutely go for a 1200W PSU", but sounds about right to me =P

At the end, the +12V1-4 matters for SLi and CF with the 80% max out. So, getting a 850W or a 1200W with +12V1-4 with 20A on each, should be the same.

Esop!
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:32:15 AM

CoD here http://techreport.com/articles.x/15293/5 where the 4850 in CF wins over G280 slied. Not so sure about your suspicions. I wouldnt call Anands a fanboy site. At TPU, a site I know youre familiar with, they show the x2 getting 192 fps at 4xAA 16AF at 19x12 vs the single G280 getting 122. Even with 80% scaling with sli, thered be really no difference between the cards
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:38:09 AM

Yuka said:
Well, i always make buys thinking about "not falling short" in any possible way. Think 'bout some time in the future when he might need to upgrade to a 4870X3 (zomg, it might happen, lolzorz) and get them in CF.

I don't have solid arguments to say "absolutely go for a 1200W PSU", but sounds about right to me =P

At the end, the +12V1-4 matters for SLi and CF with the 80% max out. So, getting a 850W or a 1200W with +12V1-4 with 20A on each, should be the same.

Esop!


thats tru if he wanted to put 3! which is insane then 1200w would be reasonable. im just annoyed by ppl telling ppl to buy a high end psu with like 1000w for a system that only uses 500w peak. ppl were telling me to go get like 800w+ for my system but it runs perfectly fine with 500w. =]
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:53:45 AM

darraghcoy said:
I don't think its that bad though.. I run Vista 64 at work and it uses about 800mb- close enough to what the 32-bit version was using. Then again it never hurts to have more does it ? :) 


I onnly said it, cause 64bit apps scale bigger than 32bit apps. So when games come out in full 64bit, they'll suck up like 20% more. Then add up the rest of the Vista apps, the next gen apps on the background and who knows what else XD

And yes, i totally agree; getting a little more never hurts =D

darraghcoy said:
Is liquid necessary for a 3.4 GHZ overclock ? I would have thought it to be a light overclock (could get away with stock cooling), especially with the improved thermal dynamics on the new 45nm quad. Maybe I'm wrong..


Since we're prolly talking about a mid-tower case, the heat will stay very close to each component. And adding CF/SLi to it will make the system go BBQ-time. Air flow planning with so many cables/components gets really annoying... I'm telling you this by experience ~__~

Getting a liquid solution is the sloppy-easy-going solution for me to OC and keep the rig smooth and quiet.

Esop!
August 17, 2008 3:12:09 AM

I personally went with the 4870 X2, since I don't have room for either sli or crossX in my case because of the water cooling.

The 4870 X2 performs around the same as my Gx2 for now, at 1280x1024 (the only res I had time to do tests). It gets around 10-30 fps more than my old GX2.

Not much of an investment for now, but when I get my 1080p monitor in sept I'll have more use from the 4870 X2 I'll assume:D 
Till then I might just take it back or jut plug in the Gx2 and use it:) 
August 17, 2008 3:34:44 AM

GTX 280 SLI'd is the better solution. Unfortunately Nvidia's 780 is an unpolished turd compared to intels x48 board. Kind of a trade off.

Id stick with the X48 board, and either wait for a 55nm dual GTX solution (wishful thinking?), stick to a single 280, or go with a 4870x2.
August 17, 2008 6:13:00 AM

last time i checked. gtx280 sli driver dont give much scaling....certainly not enough to get ur money worth.......but that was a while ago and i dont no the current driver condition. maybe someone can shade some light on it......
but i have seen benchmarks where 4870x2 beats gtx280 sli in nvidia frendly games like crysis bcoz of poor scaling.

at ur resolution , 280 sli is a srs overkill.....hell, even a 4870x2 is a overkill.....i say 4850x2 is right for that resolution and since 4850x2 is not out yet.....go with 4870x2.....
but if u wana wait few weeks, 4850x2 will sell for $400.
August 17, 2008 6:21:30 AM

dagger said:
That's wrong. 2 gtx280 in sli will outperform either single 4870x2 or 2 4870 in cf across the board, just in different amounts. The overall performance lead is big enough to overshadow any perks. The real reason against the former is cost. But hey, we're not Communists, if he's rich, good for him. :sarcastic: 

You are actualy wrong, 4870x2 in most cases perform similar to 280 SLI, sometime loose, and sometime wind by huge ammounts.
Try to look at some tests for example on www.guru3d.com is one and i read 1-2 more but dont remeber where.

AND:
4870x2 cost 250$ less
dont need SLI or CF mainboard
use less power
takes only 2 slots on mainboard (1 with watercooling)


August 17, 2008 6:32:15 AM

darraghcoy said:
I don't think its that bad though.. I run Vista 64 at work and it uses about 800mb- close enough to what the 32-bit version was using. Then again it never hurts to have more does it ? :) 

Is liquid necessary for a 3.4 GHZ overclock ? I would have thought it to be a light overclock (could get away with stock cooling), especially with the improved thermal dynamics on the new 45nm quad. Maybe I'm wrong..


wow for me wista chew 1.4G ram doing nothing and several times i ended up using all memory and 2-6GB in swap because i am not using it only for movies and office. Try to use vista for longer period of time then few hours most of ppl use it.

As for using watercooling, well its up to you, either use huge cooler with fan running on high rpm or go for water for lower temperature and noise. I prefer my PC to be close to silent as its running 24x7 in my bedroom.


a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 6:38:06 AM

Vista uses a ton of memory because of Superfetch. It prefetches commonly used applications into memory to make them load faster, and the more memory you have, the more it will prefetch. This actually helps performance quite a bit, but it does make Vista appear to be a tremendous memory hog. If you want to see how much memory Vista actually uses, turn Superfetch off (the actual amount may surprise you).
August 17, 2008 7:42:50 AM

Oh heck......this is becoming more confusing than it has to be! Just go buy two 4840's on sale for 185.00 each. There's a lot of benches and games these two cheapos will eat the 280 alive in. Conversely in some the 280 will beat out the 4850's in untill you start bumping up the resolution AA and AF settings.
Just do it!
August 17, 2008 7:59:22 AM

4870x2 > GTX280 :D 
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 2:28:52 PM

honestly do wat i did pick up 2 gtx260 for 245$x2=490$ use the rest of the money on food, donate it to charity or something. trust me 2 gtx260 is overkill already unless ur running at 2560x1080.
=]
August 17, 2008 3:29:38 PM


It reeks of fanboyism. 4870x2 outperforms a single gtx280 by an average of 25%, as shown on countless benchmark reviews. How can it outperform a pair of gtx280 by the same 25%?[/quotemsg]

Accordint to tomshardware.com x2 outperforms gtx280 by 51% at highest resolution with aa.
August 17, 2008 4:42:43 PM

dagger said:
I'm looking at it, but you should keep in mind, the significant lead of 4870x2 in Age of Conan is due to the game's perks, not the graphics card itself. It displays differently in ATI and Nvidia cards. See here:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6192732/p-5.html

GRID is highly optimized for ATI cards and deliver much higher performance with it across the board compared to games on average, not only with the latest generation cards, but with older ones too. Ender Scrolls is similarily optimized, although not as much. Performance drops on high resolutions, despite x2's more ram, higher bus speed, and inherently better scaling of the high aa and af they used on that benchmark.

I can't help but feel those titles used in that benchmark is cheerypicked to mislead. Most of the titles they chose are not heavy enough in graphics to be typically used in benchmarking on other reviews. Yet they chose to use them, then bump up aa/af, which 4870 handles extremely well compared to others, to tank fps. Where is Call of Duty 4? Prey? Stalker? FEAR? Company of Heros? Supreme Commander? Or any number of heavier games typically used for benchmarks? Why the relatively light weight games?

It reeks of fanboyism. 4870x2 outperforms a single gtx280 by an average of 25%, as shown on countless benchmark reviews. How can it outperform a pair of gtx280 by the same 25%?


First of all, Age of Conan runs better because the 4870 X2 has more RAM, most online games would greatly benefit from it. GRID is NOT ATI optimized, it runs better for ATI, because the huge amount of HDR used which the 4xxx series eats up like it does AA. Elder Scrolls: Oblivion being OPTIMIZED for ATI?!?! Just because it does not have a TWIMTBP logo does not mean it is optimized for ATI! For as long as I can remember ES4: Oblivion ran terribly on ATI cards. How can a game be optimized for ATI when for many months it could not even support Crossfire!? You want to see benchmarks for Prey, Fear, and Company of heroes?! I don't care whether the GTX 280 in SLI gets 570 FPS or the 4870 X2 gets 550 FPS. The truth of the matter is there is only ONE game that can not be maxed out at 1920x1200 resolution by a single 4870, and that is Crysis. This is because Crysis is not only poorly optimized, but was so far ahead of it's time the developers guessed at where trends would be for future games and got it wrong. The truth is the 4xxx series will not only perform much better when they actually have real drivers, but will also perform much better in future games, where nVidia stubbornly ignored the future and built cards solely to play Crysis better, knowing the current high end can max out everything else. The truth of the matter is that more than HALF the time the 4870 X2 beats out the GTX 280 in SLI with drivers that are barely better than Beta.
August 17, 2008 4:51:41 PM

It seems some misinformed people haven't seen the difference between cards in Age of Conan at the exact same settings.
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6192732/p-5.html
Cheerypick games that's optimized for a particular brand to boost a model is one thing. Exploiting a game vulnerability/glitch just to spread misinformation is something else. A benchmark review that's based on this is not worth reading.
August 17, 2008 5:06:04 PM

Erm... first of all those are older ATI cards, second of all they are being raped by nVidia cards. So... its optimized for ATI? Could have been a driver issue, could have been fixed in a patch, or could have been a limitation of the 3xxx series' architecture. You have shown NO proof WHAT SO EVER that this effects the 4xxx series. However on Monday I'll load up a trial of AoC on my new 4870 X2 and see if I have any problems.
a b U Graphics card
August 17, 2008 5:06:24 PM

From your link " During our testing, we found that Age of Conan doesn't play nice with ATI video cards. Aside from performance concerns, the ATI cards we tested locked two of the view distance sliders permanently to their maximum settings, and there isn't much you can do about it yet. Because of the locked sliders, we could only directly compare ATI and Nvidia cards at high quality settings. The game also has two entirely different preset medium quality settings for Nvidia and ATI cards; as a result, the "medium" image quality for the two sets of cards look nothing alike. The main difference between the two sets of medium settings comes from the main view distance range setting. On Nvidia cards, medium settings force the main view distance range to 2000 meters, down from 2800 meters in high quality mode. The draw distance number plunges to 200 meters on ATI cards. We tested both GPU brands with matching high quality settings but had to separate out the rest into their own charts for the other quality settings" OK, now at HQ theyre even right? And theyre also NOT using a 4xxx series card at all in this review. Isnt it apples to apples when both or all cards are played at HQ?
August 17, 2008 6:21:09 PM

Well guys thanks for all your input, I think I've finally made my mind up and will go with the 4870x2 because it seems like an all round better solution. Both cards are fantastic but I think ATI's offering comes out better this time round.

Can't wait to see this beast in action :) 

On a side note, do you think some additional cooling for the card such as this (link below) would be worth while ? Its only around €10 but I guess it would help keep the X2 cool..

http://www.elara.ie/products/detailsfull.asp?productcod...

What do you think ?
August 17, 2008 6:43:48 PM

darraghcoy said:
Well guys thanks for all your input, I think I've finally made my mind up and will go with the 4870x2 because it seems like an all round better solution. Both cards are fantastic but I think ATI's offering comes out better this time round.

Can't wait to see this beast in action :) 

On a side note, do you think some additional cooling for the card such as this (link below) would be worth while ? Its only around €10 but I guess it would help keep the X2 cool..

http://www.elara.ie/products/detailsfull.asp?productcod...

What do you think ?

It won't help. If anything, it may make things worse. That slot fan works the same way as 4870x2's gpu cooler fan, drawing air from inside the case and venting it out. If anything, the negative pressure created inside the case makes the gpu fan less efficient. A internal circulation slow fan that blows against the card may help.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Or just an intake fan placed to draw cool air from outside and blow it at the card's intake can be effective too.
August 17, 2008 6:47:56 PM

dagger said:
It won't help. If anything, it may make things worse. That slot fan works the same way as 4870x2's gpu cooler fan, drawing air from inside the case and venting it out. If anything, the negative pressure created inside the case makes the gpu fan less efficient. A internal circulation slow fan that blows against the card may help.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Or just an intake fan placed to draw cool air from outside and blow it at the card's intake can be effective too.


Nice one; thanks for the advice!
August 18, 2008 1:30:22 PM

The 4870 X2 is 5%-30% faster than the 280 GTX, when you put the 4870 X2 in CrossX it maintains around the same score.

The only thing people might not like about the X2 is the idea of Quad GPU which is really a pain in most games.

I do think that tri-sli 280 GTX will kill the 4870 X2 ( well not kill but beat), but it will have atleast an extra 200$ price tag, and heafty Electricity bill.

Now I want to say this again because ppl aren't catching this.

THE 280 GTX is a very good CARD. It is an amazing card, but it doesn't reflect that because of the price. THe GX2 outperforms it at about 150$ less.

So this is to the Concrums out there, no one will take your nvidia pride, but we will put a price on it:) 

Who ever bought the 4870 X2 good job you have a wicked card for a decent price, who ever bought 260s ot 280 GTX awesome, you have blazing cards, you paid a little more (280 GTX) but you pay top for top of the line:) 
!