Is the 4870 1Gb a good upgrade for my 8800 gts640?

It will be a significant boost over the old g80 8800gts. Although instead of the $420 gtx280 as a possible alternative to $300 4870 1gb, you might want to look at a better performing $280 9800gx2. $420 for the 3rd highest performing single card on market is rather poor value. $300 for 4th highest performer is mediocre value. $280 for the second highest performer is good value.
Stock:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814130338
Factory oced:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814133231

Performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=13
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=14
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=15
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=16
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=17
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=18
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=19

Microstuttering? That only happens when fps get bogged down to low 30s, and only for a few people. It depends on how good your eyes are. Microstuttering applies to all sli/cf setups just the same as x2 cards. Yet few people with sli/cf setups ever complain. That's because it never happen for overwhelming majority, and go unnoticed by most of the rest. It's disproportionally blew up by people who don't actually own x2 cards. Unless you're one of those people who won't go outside in the rain because you're afraid of getting hit by lighting, x2 cards, or sli/cf setups, are fine.

daggers a fanboy, you can take his advice with a pinch of salt, ur buying into a card with future games in mind

dagger. dont spit bs kthxbye.

The GTX 280 IS in fact the highest performing card on the market. That doesn't mean its priced outrageously. i would not recommend buying it to anyone.

The GTX 260 is on par with the 4870, i dont care what everyone thinks, they trade blows in benchmarks.

The GTX 260 Core 216 / Max Core, or any other name for it is the 2nd highest in performance. The boost in cores gave it enough oomf to get ahead of the 4870, and at times i have seen it beat the GTX 280. And at a stock price tag of $300, and prolly lower with rebates. Thats a damn good deal.

All current gen ATI cards run too hot for my preference. 90 at load.... is kinda ridiculous.

GTX 260 - $219 After rebates (Weekend Special, but will prolly be ~$250) - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814130370

GTX 260 Core 216 - Lookin at $299 before $20 rebate - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814130398

The Cheapest 4870 there is - $229 after $25 rebate - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814125225


That 4870 is also only a 512, so the 1gb will be more expensive, putting it more toward the $300 range



With those prices in mind, i would easily recommend the GTX 260 Core 216 from EVGA. On par price with the 1GB 4870, with a better performance in most situations. (I say most because the 4870 could pass the original gtx 260 with some AA at 1900x1600 and higher.) While that might not still be the case, I haven't seen the bencies to say otherwise.

There are some myth regarding vram amounts that needs to be cleared up. 512mb ram per core will not run out until extreme resolutions. See benchmarks of 750mhz 4870 512mb vs 800mhz 4870 1gb at 1920x1200 and 2560x1600, with AA and AF.
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Po [...] R5/?page=5
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Po [...] R5/?page=6
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Po [...] R5/?page=7
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Po [...] R5/?page=8
The small performance difference is consistent at 1920x1200 and 2560x1600, and is attributed to faster core and memory clock for the 1gb version, not ram amount. Once ram runs out, the difference will be far more drastic.

As for 9800gx2, it's 1gb total, or 512mb per core, not 256. Scroll down to second chart on each page, it shows up to 1920x1200 for Crysis, and 2560x1600 on the rest.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=13
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=14
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=15
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=16
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=17
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=18
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=19
Note that, at higher resolutions, the gap between 9800gx2 and the rest gets larger, not smaller. That's because lesser cards don't have the raw power and runs out of steam at higher loads.

You have to realize that vram size, beyond a reasonable level, is just gemmick. Processor itself matters far more than ram. A P4 with 8gb of ram won't outperform a quad with 4gb.

It's interesting that none of the fanboys can provide benchmarks to back up any of their claims. Could it be that such benchmarks don't actually exist?

Edit: Why do boys assume everyone else online to be a "he."

Those are actually using the hardware. It's not synthetic utilities like 3dmark we're talking about. Those are actual games(Call of Duty 4, Crysis, Bioshock...etc), on an actual system. Is hearsay a better rule to measure by? If you haven't used all the cards benchmarked yourself, on the same system with other hardware being the same, how can you know what performs better other than imagination?

And you would put forward your imagination over others' benchmark results obtained from actually using the card? That's rather arrogant, isn't it?

When you make claims that directly contradict the facts, it's just not that believable, especially since you haven't actually used the hardware.

You haven't provided any evidence to back up your claims whatsoever. And with 4870 against 9800gx2, it's just a lost cause anyway.

Wow, forum drama.

Anyways, from my point of view, swifty_morgan you really didn't back your conclusions up. Benchmarks aren't conclusive, but saying things based only on assumptions and what you've heard other people say isn't exactly warranted either.

It's like me buying my new car. I can read all about its performance such as 0-60 MPH in 4.5s, but it doesn't mean anything to me. I like how it handles and its responsive clutch, are those on benchmarks? No. However, I can't just say it's a very fast car without supporting numbers (fast is a relative term and its value is different for everyone). In this analogy, some people can consider 65 mph fast, but for others, anything under 100 mph is slow.

My point is, support your conclusions with some numbers. Otherwise you're just talking hot air.

dagger might not be right about everything, but at least he/she supports her statements.

Sorry if I was being a little assertive in my post. I didn't say you need to prove something, but support it a bit (you don't need to prove something in order to support it, I'm sorry for being a bit anal but I'm an ee).

Experience and reality are pretty abstract terms, it'll be better if you can describe it a bit more in detail. As someone who was reading this topic thread, I really didn't catch what you meant by reality in your previous posts.

Either ways, I'll end my post here.

this post is way out o whack.

First of all you guys flame ppl with proof of benchies.

Second of all, honestly swifty, do you have some sort of magical cards that give you drastic changes in benchies that will lead you to assume that all benchmarks aren't as good as personal?

I really didn't think you had 1 million $ to spend on personal experience in your "garage".

Does the 9800 GX2 fall flat on its face at resolutions that are over 1920x1200? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

And I'm sorry to bring this back, but ranger until you get rid of "yes i know fanboyish but who cares" in your favorite quot...your comments mean Jack all


NOw to the OP

both the 4870 1 gb and the 9800 GX2 are great cards. The 9800 GX2 could save you a couple of bucks and outperform the 4870 1 GB (2560 resolution might be a here and there factor...)

But since you game @ 1920X1200 resolution I see no problem here.

And remember that SLiing the 9800 GX2 is still an option. Many ppl might say low scaling, but even with its low scaling...It has a big enough gap to outperform the 4870 X2, the 4870 CF and the 280 GTX sli

P.S

If I were in your shoes I'd wait for the 4870 X2 as an option...although it doesn't outperform 2 9800 GX2s it still a very worth card especially since it has the extra 512 ram per PCB, and the DX 10.1 option....but thats just me

Buy your new card -after- the first of the year when all prices drop.

Getting the 4870 1GB is the way to go. Looks like upcoming games will be more likely to take advantage of that extra RAM so it will make a good longterm investment. For a right now solution though, the 9800GX2 has fallen so much in price that's it's a great buy. The 512MB per card may limit it in future games, but you can't deny that it provides performance now for a darn good price. There are cases though where it will experience a lower minimum frame rate when compared to a 4870 even though it will have a higher average one. It's small at 1600x1200 but the difference in minimum frame rates can be bigger at higher resolutions depending on the game. Check out this review

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/v [...] html#sect1

If you game at 1600x1200 or lower, the 9800GX2 may be better for you. If you have a crossfire capable board then it would be better to get the 4870 1GB now, and a second one latter. If you have a crossfire board, then my recommendation would be just get another 8800 GTS 640 and hold out till the next generation of cards comes out. nVidia will probably be rolling out 55nm G 200 chips in a few months.

Hah wrong review, my bad. Look at this one

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/v [...] 870_7.html

roflcopter

A nub user would kno better.....sigh....x-bit....sigh......

this was pretty damn funny though!

I've never used that website for jack.

Its always been, Guru3D, overclocked3D, Tweaktown, anandtech, driverheaven, and sometimes Madshrimps LOL!

anyways

dude watch ur mouth relax, say what you will but this is an all ages forum last I checked so at least censor it some how

:-P sh** happens.

better? ^^


i just find it funny, telling me im wrong, with no proof.

there are other factors than just the GPU mem, clocks, etc. There are a million different Hd, ram, cpu, combo's for these cards. and they all make a difference.

i showed the proof. but nice try ^^

not gonna lie, that doesnt make sense

The performance difference between gtx260 core 216 and 4870 is small enough that it can swing either way, within a small margin of error. It's not like 9800gx2 and 4870, where the gap is so large that the performance order was never in question.
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=3
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=4
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=5
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=6
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=7
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3408&p=8

The 4870 is 6% faster than the 260. The 4870 1 gug is around 8-10% faster than the 4870 512. The 260/216 is 8-10% faster than the plain jane 260. Get it? The reason why the 1gig 4870 is only 8-10% faster, its held back at lower res, but at higher res, the %'s go up over the 4870 512.

AC over 10%. Crysis over 10%. Oblivion, a scratch. ETQW 5-6%. If you average everything out, it 8-10%

with liquids fancy pictures above... those are maximum frame rates. with the extra 512 of memory on the 1gig card the minimum frame per second will be increased compared to the other card giving you more playable experience. crysis surely benefits from it and who knows what's going to happen when farcry2 hits the scene. from what I've seen over time, the game manufacturers are good at not providing the right information and it's only going to get more demanding.

The increases on the 4870 1Gig is seen in minmal fps. What Id really like to see is some of those games using mods. I know for certain Oblivions mods cramp a regular 4870 at high res, and welcome the 1 Gig. Its a simple explanation, and one anyone shouldnt hand down as an exception, GRID uses alot of memory,period. So thats why the higher increases. So, while you discount GRID, its the very reason to buy the 1 gig over the 512, and like Ive said, alot of games have mods that increase you memory usage, thus, again, the 1 gig will help. Any higher clocks over 6.7% is strictly due to higher memory, and thats giving you get 100% scaling on the core clock, which is highly debateable also.

actually those are avg frame rates

And were weren't arguing mods or anything we were arguing the game frames we get Those are them

I haven't seen any min frame scores for the 1 gig, if some1 has some please post em

from my calcs it gets 8% avg increase @ 2560x1600 which is really not what expect because since it has double the RAM, I'd think that the extra ram would give it like a 15-20% increase @ those benchies

Although I wouldn't go for the 512 over the 1 gig because even 8% is still a step up, if you payed anything thats 50$ more for the 1 gig than the 512 I really don't think it's worth it just yet

Anyways, if the choices are between the 260 GTX (which ever version) and the 4870 1 gig or 512, I'd still go with the 4870

Unless the user has a Sli board

Good day

cars in grid or Cards in store

Jks I kno what you wanted to say

All this aside I want to see DX 10.1 in use already, the 20% increase might make me take out the 4870 X2 out of my secondary PC

Any news on that yet?

hopefully it wont screw us and tease us like DX 10 did when it came out and perform dreadfully lol or was that a Vista prob? LOL I can't remember

Rofl