Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4870x2 or 9800GTX+ tri-sli???

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 27, 2009 8:31:51 PM

Going to buy either of these (for an i7 set up) as soon as I get some feedback from Tom's.
Done some research which shows that the 9800GTX+ in tri-sli is absolutely amazing, and such good value for money. I know the 4850 in trifire, but prefer games that 9800 does better on.
What do you guys think - AM PLAYING AT 720P (i.e. on TV) so don't have to worry about high resolutions.
Please help.

More about : 4870x2 9800gtx tri sli

February 27, 2009 8:48:32 PM

if you are running at 1280x720, you will likely only need one 4870 to hit 60fps on a Tv. Its like putting a 50hp motor on your lawnmower. Sure it has tons of gpu power but it only takes 5hp to cut the grass:) 
February 27, 2009 8:51:55 PM

Guys I know this, but there are many games today that require similar power to be pushed to their limits. I wont get to alter this system much, so when the big games of this and next year come out, these cards have to be able to stand up to the challenge.
Suppose we were trying to make this most mental lawnmower for the money, either a 4870x2 or three 9800gtx+? Whats it going to be and why?
Related resources
February 27, 2009 9:02:48 PM

Out of these two choices I would choose the 4870x2 as one day if you wanted you could add another.

If you fill it up with tri sli 9800's your replacing all of them to upgrade.
February 27, 2009 9:04:41 PM

just fear that quad sli/quad fire drivers are no good. 3x4870 dont scale as good...
February 27, 2009 9:09:34 PM

DiscoDuck said:
if you are running at 1280x720, you will likely only need one 4870 to hit 60fps on a Tv. Its like putting a 50hp motor on your lawnmower. Sure it has tons of gpu power but it only takes 5hp to cut the grass:) 


I think Disco Duck's point stands - you really shouldn't waste money on more than one 4870 for 720 res. It's pointless to do more.
February 27, 2009 9:15:05 PM

it really is pointless to get either of those setups for such a low resolution. a 4850 1GB or a 4870 would be plenty.
February 27, 2009 9:22:09 PM

either setup should run just fine at 720p.

personally i'd go with 1 gtx285 and add a second one later if needed. its pretty nearly identical price and performance to a pair of gtx+ cards in sli.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-char...

i'll pass on the whole ati vs nvidia discussion.
a c 106 U Graphics card
February 27, 2009 9:39:59 PM

Well, I'd rather go with the 4870X2 myself so that another one could be added down the line. If you aren't going to upgrade it at all later then the tri-sli 9800GTX+ setup would probably be better for you. I think that two 260 sp 216s would be a better option though but it's up to you. The 295 is also an attractive option untill you consider nVidias lackluster support of their previous dual GPU cards.
February 27, 2009 10:00:29 PM

4870 X2 or 2 260 GtXs, A+, why go tri sli with a lower form setup:) 

Especially for that resolution i would say 4870 or 260 GTX alone:) . Only reason I"m saying those is because some games are a bit more demanding than others;)

Enjoy!
February 27, 2009 10:11:37 PM

Both the X2 and tri-sli setups would be almost pointless at that resolution. The multi-gpu setups excel at the higher resolutions. You would want the go with a 1gb 4870 or a Gtx280/285 if your really worried about future games. I personally am going to get an X2 but i play at 1900x1200.
!