Which graphic card is better in games with high graphics ??

Which graphic card is better in games with high graphics like Crysis and FiFA09?

SAPPHIRE HD 4870 512MB GDDR5

or

GeForce 9800 GTX+

+1 to the 4870, however I'd get the 1GB verson.

don't go by toms' charts, they're completely horrible. but he's right, the 4870 is way better.

@0mg_1ts_m3: LOL at "completely horrible". Come on, they've put a lot of effort into them, be kind.

@OP: Here's another chart:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/sho [...] =3341&p=13
Crysis, 1680x1050, no AA, 35.6 fps for HD 4870 vs 31.6 fps for 9800GTX+.

Considering the prices, the 9800GTX+ looks good here. However, if you enable AA, the HD 4870 wins by a bigger margin. Check out the other charts in the review too. Don't base your decision on Crysis alone, OK?

Yeah, the closest nVidia equivalent to the HD 4870 is the GTX 260, not the 9800GTX+. The 9800GTX+ trades blows with the HD 4850 512MB.

Indeed, this is a no brainer, 4870 all the way.

This is not to say the 9800GTX is a pis* poor card, it is still a good card, just not when comparing it to the newer cards released such as 4850/4870 and gtx260/280

Lol i think this guy is a ATI fanboy like most of us recently. He just wanted to hear that Nvidia's latest cards sucks. Come'on we know whos the beast between those two.

nvidia doesnt COMPLETELY suck though lol. theyre just kinda screwed at the moment xD

I haven't seen a benchmark where the 4850 beats the 9800GTX+, explain.

I read that XFX and Gainward broke the partnership with nVidia, but I didn't know about eVGA. Is that over too? That would be major bad news for nVidia, because eVGA and XFX were the best manufacturers of nVidia-based cards. Now I guess BFG is the only one I'd trust for an nVidia card

The funny thing is Nvidia always manages to come out back on top and stay there much longer. I really don't care for a lot of the comparisons out there right now. 280 still romps the 4870 especially in Crysis (too much emphasis on performance in that game) and it takes two 4870's or X2 to really beat the 280. So what 2 against 1... don't think Nvidia is sleeping and a faster die shrunk version of the 280 is supposedly be due in the next few months. I would also expect a 260 or 280 X2 card after the die shrink. A lot of the preferences are based on price/performance and with prices changing daily it makes a lot of those statements invalid. Don't get me wrong... I like Nvidia but I have also owned Radeons and have gotten sucked into that Radeon is a little faster and cheaper than Nvidia trap before. At one point I paid $500 for a 512KB X1900XTX because it was a little faster and $300 cheaper than the 7900(?). Shortly after that Nvidia blew the shorts off ATI with the 8800GTX which reigned for a long time (and still gives a lot of the new cards a run for the money).

But to the original question I would for sure take the 4870 1gb over a 9800+. Actually I would probably take one of the now dirt cheap 8800GTX/Ultra's over the 9800.

correction: 4870x2 proves to be able to beat 2 gtx280 in sli.

Anarik nvidia only manage to keep Ati down with its 8 series before that it was competition all the way buddy with ATI on top most of the time. Do some reading. And after the 8 series ? Well i think you know btw eVGA isn't exclusive nVidia anymore

yah, ATI is and was leader for a lllooooonnggg time. the ati 9800xt totally owned everything nvidia had to offer and now ati has the 4870 for nvidia to try and handle.
and to think that one 280GTX is almost as much as a 4870 crossfire config or even a 4870x2... how much do you think TWO 280gtx on the same die is gonna cost..

yeh exactly

i miss my old 9700pro, that thing was fffaassssttttt. of course doesnt compare to a 3870 but still, technology that old being able to run crysis?? thats pretty fast...

Yuck, you paid $300 for zits