Replacing my 8800gts 512mb need advice

[pixels]

Im looking to replace my 8800gts 512mb for something better. Im planning on playing mostly Fallout 3 for awhile on max settings (which my 8800gts cant do at all without major slowdowns).

I would also like it to be able to run upcoming titles like Call of Duty 5 World At War on max settings with good fps. What card do you think I should get? I have been looking at the HD 4870x2 2GB card but maybe that is overkill? Also what kind of PSU would that card require?

I want a card that is quite alot better than my current 8800gts and will last me for awhile for upcoming games atleast.

My pc:

q6600
4gb Corsair XMS2 1024MB DDR2 (CM2X1024-6400)
Asus P5K Premium Black Pearl Edition MoBo
Corsair 620W HX ATX <- will this handle it if I would get a 4870 2gb?

Windows Vista x64

Thanks for any help guys

 

[blackwidow_rsa]

You forgot telling us your screen resolution

 

[dagger]

Yes, that psu will handle 4870x2. No idea about incoming games, they're not here yet. But chances are, 4870x2 will be overkill at typical resolutions.

4870x2 performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3372&p=11

Performance chart that includes your existing 8800gt, which is near the bottom:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=13
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=14
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=15
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=16
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=17
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=18
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=19
4870x2 is not included, but would've taken first place, just above 9800gx2.

 

[xnem3s1sx]

Your gonna need to overclock your Q6600 if you wanna get your money's worth out of the 4870x2, your probobly gonna be fine with a 4870 though, it handles pretty much anything on high, at some pretty good resolutions.
and Dagger, they asked about the 4879 2gb, not x2, which if i remember correctly, the 1gb is faster than the 2, and the 512mb, and you never need the 2gb.

 

[pixels]

You forgot telling us your screen resolution

Ah my bad. Im using a 22" at 1680x1050 res

 

[pixels]

ASUS ASUS RADEON HD4870 PCIE 1GB GDDR5 (EAH4870/HTDI/1G)

found that one on a swedish site ( here )

What do you guys think? Should be pretty good for quite some time running on 1680x1050 res right? Im also going to overclock my cpu to 3.0ghz which shouldn't be a problem according to a friend.

 

[blackwidow_rsa]

Just get an aftermarket cooler, the q66 can get hot

 

[yetyhunter]

If you had a SLI mobo you could get another 8800 GTS 512. I have two and I have no problems runing any game maxed out even crysis at 1280x1024 resolution.

 

[megamanx00]

^good idea

Of course Pixels doesn't have an SLi board ! Anyway, yeah a 4870X2 would be a huge upgrade. If you feel it may be a bit of an overkill then a single 4870 1GB would also be a pretty good card for you. I say go with the 4870X2 if you can afford it though .

 

[dagger]

^good idea

Of course Pixels doesn't have an SLi board ! Anyway, yeah a 4870X2 would be a huge upgrade. If you feel it may be a bit of an overkill then a single 4870 1GB would also be a pretty good card for you. I say go with the 4870X2 if you can afford it though .

The 1gb version 4870 makes no sense. The 1gb is useless until extreme resolutions that most monitors can't handle anyway. It cost almost $100 more than 512mb version, which performs the same until extreme resolutions, and $20 more than 9800gx2, which performs far better.

The 512mb version is fine.

 

[pixels]

Just get an aftermarket cooler, the q66 can get hot

I have a thermalright ultra 120 extreme

I just clocked the cpu with some help from a friend and im now running it stable @ 3.40ghz

the cores are closing in on 55 celcius during load though. Maybe abit to high or is it fine?

So Im looking to buy either the

Asus Radeon HD 4870 512MB GDDR5

or the

ASUS RADEON HD4870 PCIE 1GB GDDR5

I would want the card to last me for quite awhile.

How much would the 1GB really help at 1680x1050? Should I not bother?

 

[efeat]

55C with each core at 100% load is perfectly fine. When you're gaming, your cores aren't going to reach 100% load anyway so you'll be more than safe in regards to temperate. When you start hitting 60C on cores, that's when you need to start being more careful, and maybe think about lowering your OC or upgrading your cooling.

To answer your other question, 1 GB at 1680x1050 is largely useless. 512 is enough to handle all of today's games with plenty of filters on at that resolution. By the time 1 GB becomes useful/recommended for a 1680x1050 monitor, the 4870 will be too weak to keep up even if it did have that much memory. Anandtech did a review of the 4870 1 GB that you can see here. Note that the graphs they show are at an extreme resolution - 2560x1600 - and the table underneath shows the performance at your current resolution. The 1GB 4870 was ever so slightly faster in some tests, but nowhere near worth the extra money it would cost you. If you can find a deal on it, go for it, but otherwise stick with the 512.

 

[pixels]

55C with each core at 100% load is perfectly fine. When you're gaming, your cores aren't going to reach 100% load anyway so you'll be more than safe in regards to temperate. When you start hitting 60C on cores, that's when you need to start being more careful, and maybe think about lowering your OC or upgrading your cooling.

To answer your other question, 1 GB at 1680x1050 is largely useless. 512 is enough to handle all of today's games with plenty of filters on at that resolution. By the time 1 GB becomes useful/recommended for a 1680x1050 monitor, the 4870 will be too weak to keep up even if it did have that much memory. Anandtech did a review of the 4870 1 GB that you can see here. Note that the graphs they show are at an extreme resolution - 2560x1600 - and the table underneath shows the performance at your current resolution. The 1GB 4870 was ever so slightly faster in some tests, but nowhere near worth the extra money it would cost you. If you can find a deal on it, go for it, but otherwise stick with the 512.

Thanks for the info mate

Ill sleep on it but im pretty sure im going for the 4870 512 version!

 

[pixels]

Sorry for the double post but it says "You aren't allowed to edit this post" when I try to edit my post..

Anyways the BFG gtx 260 896mb version can be found where I live for almost the same price as the 4870 512 version. Is there something bad about the gtx 260? It even seems better? Or am I wrong here?

 

[efeat]

In the anandtech review I posted, they also tested the gtx 260 (both the standard and core 216 version) so you can see how that card would stack up. In short, It's a very comparable card, but is usually beaten in cost. If both the 260 and the 4870 would cost you the same, then it comes down to looking at some benchmarks on the specific games you want to play and see what would work better for you.

You mentioned call of duty: world at war in your first post. I never really played the COD series so I don't know much about that title, but if it's based off the COD4 engine then ATI would be your best bet (as seen here). I checked for some fallout 3 benchmarks, but couldn't find a whole lot other than this thread. Hard to say if it favors one card or another, but you'd probably be fine either way.

 

[pixels]

Just ordered a Asus 4870 1GB (it was only a couple of bucks more expensive than the 512 version ) card.

Thanks for all the help guys.