Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GTX 295 OC v.s. 4870X2 OC

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 17, 2009 11:36:42 PM

who has the best price performance ratio? i need to pick one because i intend to replace my msi 3870X2 OC in a couple of few days...

More about : gtx 295 4870x2

March 17, 2009 11:52:00 PM

4870 X2 is better p/P ratio

295 GTX is stronger

If you have Crossfire board, grab 4870 X2, if you have sli grab 295 GTX.

4870 X2 tends to have better frames rates when push to the limit with AA and Higher resolution seeing as it has 128 Megs of extra ram. Also DX 10.1.

Other than that, for raw power the 295 GTX is there, and they tend to balance themselves out for power sort of because of ATi's lead at the high resolution.

4870 X2 is reaching its Maturity while the 295 GTX still needs to gain maturity,

What resolution do you play @?
System
We need specs.

This card might be completely pointless for you, for a 3870 x2, even a 4870 1 gig is big step from that card.
March 18, 2009 9:52:26 AM

1280x1024 resolution

core 2 quad Q6600 stock clocked
asus maximus extreme
raptor 150 GB
seagate 500 GB
corsair HX620W
antec 900
lite-on DVD burner
trancend 1GB x 4 DDR3 1333


Related resources
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2009 10:19:30 AM

Well actually for tat resolution, both the cards are an overkill...
U can get the 4850X2 2GB for tat resolution
(actually even this is also an overkill...a 4870 1GB would be enuf)
March 18, 2009 10:21:19 AM

If you don't plan on changing monitor to a 24" 1920x1200, you should get a hd4850 1 Gb.

@1280x1024 the 4850 won't even be max out for 99% of the games on the market and mostly future games too...
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2009 10:33:34 AM

Well actually u can do this...
Instead of this
SAPPHIRE 100251SR Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB for $400

Get this

1. Intel Q9550: $279.99

2. Sapphire Technology Limited 4870 1GB: $194.99

Combo Discount: -$20.00
Combo Price: $454.98
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?Ite...

So for an extra $55, u will be improving the overall performance of the system...
The extra power of the X2 will anyways be wasted...But the power of the Q9550 wit the 4870 1GB will reflect in all the apps...
March 18, 2009 11:17:15 AM

4870 1 gig is alot better choice, the 4850 X2 just doesn't perform as it should, your better off grabbing 2 4850s.

I would suggest the 4870 1 gig for sure @ that resoluion. Alot of ppl might think even that is overkill, but play Crysis and Clear Sky, and you'll see it really isn't
a b U Graphics card
March 18, 2009 11:40:39 AM

Dont waste your money on anything over $250. It just doesn't make sense at resolution. The 4870 or 4850 are ideal spots for your purchasing power.
March 18, 2009 12:07:30 PM

i have another question can a GTX 295 OC run on a XFX nforce 610i?
a b U Graphics card
March 19, 2009 9:14:10 AM

hentaiboi_ said:
i have another question can a GTX 295 OC run on a XFX nforce 610i?

I wouldn't see why not, assuming you have the case space for it.
March 19, 2009 9:28:58 AM

hentaiboi_ said:
i have another question can a GTX 295 OC run on a XFX nforce 610i?

It will but again it is overkill for your resolution. If you are going nvidia stick with a gtx 260 or gtx 250.
March 19, 2009 10:39:21 AM

Overkill and bottleneck are two words that need to be banned from this forum.
March 19, 2009 11:40:24 AM

michaelmk86 said:
Overkill and bottleneck are two words that need to be banned from this forum.



Hahaha :D  I really loled at that :) 
March 19, 2009 11:51:16 AM

michaelmk86 said:
Overkill and bottleneck are two words that need to be banned from this forum.


And why is that?

Overkill and bottleneck can sometimes be used without reason, but they aren't false statements when used properly.

P4 1.8 ghz + 295 GTX does that seem like a bottleneck?
Pci E 8x + 295 GTX does that seem like a bottleneck?
Quake 3 + 295 GTX does that seem like overkill?

If the user is going to play specific games or in the area of that specific game, and he/she doesn't have the new tech hardware, why should it not be pointed out.

If the card is only using 50 or 60% or even 90% of its power it means that the 10% or 30 or 40% is money down the drain.

Personally I think Post like that are the ones should be banned since you give no reason for it.:) 

:hello: 
March 19, 2009 1:33:40 PM

L1qu1d said:
And why is that?

Overkill and bottleneck can sometimes be used without reason, but they aren't false statements when used properly.

P4 1.8 ghz + 295 GTX does that seem like a bottleneck?
Pci E 8x + 295 GTX does that seem like a bottleneck?
Quake 3 + 295 GTX does that seem like overkill?

If the user is going to play specific games or in the area of that specific game, and he/she doesn't have the new tech hardware, why should it not be pointed out.

If the card is only using 50 or 60% or even 90% of its power it means that the 10% or 30 or 40% is money down the drain.

Personally I think Post like that are the ones should be banned since you give no reason for it.:) 

:hello: 


Because Overkill and bottleneck are used a lot in this forums and I am sick of it.
Most of the time people use these words without a reason.

Instead of use this two words you can say:

P4 1.8 ghz + 295 GTX the card will only use 30% of its power
Pci E 8x + 295 GTX the GTX 295 will not perform at his maximum speed
Quake 3 + 295 GTX you do not need a GTX 295 to run Quake 3 or Quake 3 can run very good even with the GeForce2
March 19, 2009 1:43:22 PM

Well its kinda ironic, because look at your post.

You said overkill and bottleneck should be banned.

Thats basically the overkill statement, no facts not nothing.

If you would've said "overkill and bottleneck are being thrown around instead of stating the power decrease"

SO technically you fall under the same path, you didn't back up your facts, just like overkill and bottleneck don't say more than u see.

If you read, some people say, well that card is going to bottleneck your system, why don't you upgrade yoru CPU, or choose a weaker card to get better results for your money. Yes there are users that say it will bottleneck the system and not give information, but personally I think that the words overkill + a suggestion like the post above your, can save alot of time and get straight to the point, which is mainly what forums are about, getting your facts quick and accurate:) 

I just think your statement before was both ironic and kinda pointless. Nothing to do with the OP's question, and it wasn't constructive.

But thats My opinion.

P.S

regarding your 295 GTX + 1.8 = 30%, well we can't estimate that, I mean it can be less or it can be more, your asking us to go into specific detail, which we (most of us) can't because we don't own the hardware, and in many cases we haven't tested the hardware to give you detailed answers like that so we don't know the percent...but we do know its lowered so we use the word bottlenecked. Doesn't matter if its 40% or 10%, the money is still lost.
a b U Graphics card
March 19, 2009 3:47:07 PM

L1qu1d said:
And why is that?

Overkill and bottleneck can sometimes be used without reason, but they aren't false statements when used properly.

P4 1.8 ghz + 295 GTX does that seem like a bottleneck?
Pci E 8x + 295 GTX does that seem like a bottleneck?
Quake 3 + 295 GTX does that seem like overkill?
:


Less than a week ago, some dude with a Core2Quad Q6600 (2.4 stock) OCed to 3.0 GHz asked if his GPU was going to bottleneck two or even one GTX260. And some people said yes and that he should OC to 3.6 on his Q6600. lol :D 
March 19, 2009 4:25:54 PM

Have a look at the GTX 285 SSC as well. I've heard from many legit article publishers that 3 of those in Tri-SLI runs a bit faster than 2 GTX 295s in quad-sli and is around $200 cheaper.
March 19, 2009 4:28:11 PM

Lolic said:
Have a look at the GTX 285 SSC as well. I've heard from many legit article publishers that 3 of those in Tri-SLI runs a bit faster than 2 GTX 295s in quad-sli and is around $200 cheaper.



TRUE
a b U Graphics card
March 19, 2009 4:42:41 PM

michaelmk86 said:
Because Overkill and bottleneck are used a lot in this forums and I am sick of it.
Most of the time people use these words without a reason...


And I'm sick of people whining about it. If you don't like it, make a reasoned statement to counter the argument people are putting forward, don't b1tch about the use of the term bottleneck and overkill, especially when they're used correctly, like in this case. They have a place and are very focused words, even if their application is often nowhere near as focused.

There are MANY bottlenecks in a system, and likely a bottleneck of some kind in ALL systems, unless everything is running @ 100% efficiency and workload. Whether or not it matters or makes itself known is another story, a GTX 295 OC might be bottlenecking on a lower power system, however if the settings are so low that the person is getting 120fps instead of 180, it doesn't matter that the GTX 295 isn't maxing performance, but it then speaks to the idea of overkill, where someone paid for performance they don't need/use or where they could've spent that moeny elsewhere effectively.

In the case of the OP, both of the options he's looking at appear to be overkill at that resolution, and it will be bottlenecked in most cases, not just by CPU [which is less of an immediate concern], but by Xfire/SLi driver overhead, where at lower resolutions single cards outperform the multi-VPU solutions because they don't have that added workload that shows little, no, or even negative performance impact on the multi-GPU solutions, which shine in the areas where that overhead is the least of their worries and high AA with high Rez have more of an impact. But even then, the effectiveness of AA, especially on a low dot pitch, poorer colour, older monitor provides diminishing returns, where the AA is limited by the monitor's ability to show the smoothing/blending effectively.

So for this question where it's price/performance ratios, those factors are a major concern, because the performance/benefit at that resolution is greatly affected, so it's utility in a Price/Performance equation is greatly 'bottlenecked' and it's going to be 'overkill' in most situations where it's using far less than it's potential, which would be much better used for something like F@H than gaming at 1280x1024. For single card solutions it makes sense for longer term investments, but for multi-vpu solutions, it's tougher to justify over-reaching now on a system where they can't be used, versus saving the difference and then re-investing later with newer, more efficient/effective or cheaper options.

As much as the term is overused, this backlash against even the idea of bottlenecking is equally over-used and is suddenly in fashion for those trying to come off as knowledgable or prigishly '1337' without actually providing any reasoning to back that up, other than whining about the term itself. :pfff: 
a b U Graphics card
March 19, 2009 6:04:14 PM

LOL all I can say LOL
March 19, 2009 8:12:46 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
And I'm sick of people whining about it. If you don't like it, make a reasoned statement to counter the argument people are putting forward, don't b1tch about the use of the term bottleneck and overkill, especially when they're used correctly, like in this case. They have a place and are very focused words, even if their application is often nowhere near as focused.

There are MANY bottlenecks in a system, and likely a bottleneck of some kind in ALL systems, unless everything is running @ 100% efficiency and workload. Whether or not it matters or makes itself known is another story, a GTX 295 OC might be bottlenecking on a lower power system, however if the settings are so low that the person is getting 120fps instead of 180, it doesn't matter that the GTX 295 isn't maxing performance, but it then speaks to the idea of overkill, where someone paid for performance they don't need/use or where they could've spent that moeny elsewhere effectively.

In the case of the OP, both of the options he's looking at appear to be overkill at that resolution, and it will be bottlenecked in most cases, not just by CPU [which is less of an immediate concern], but by Xfire/SLi driver overhead, where at lower resolutions single cards outperform the multi-VPU solutions because they don't have that added workload that shows little, no, or even negative performance impact on the multi-GPU solutions, which shine in the areas where that overhead is the least of their worries and high AA with high Rez have more of an impact. But even then, the effectiveness of AA, especially on a low dot pitch, poorer colour, older monitor provides diminishing returns, where the AA is limited by the monitor's ability to show the smoothing/blending effectively.

So for this question where it's price/performance ratios, those factors are a major concern, because the performance/benefit at that resolution is greatly affected, so it's utility in a Price/Performance equation is greatly 'bottlenecked' and it's going to be 'overkill' in most situations where it's using far less than it's potential, which would be much better used for something like F@H than gaming at 1280x1024. For single card solutions it makes sense for longer term investments, but for multi-vpu solutions, it's tougher to justify over-reaching now on a system where they can't be used, versus saving the difference and then re-investing later with newer, more efficient/effective or cheaper options.

As much as the term is overused, this backlash against even the idea of bottlenecking is equally over-used and is suddenly in fashion for those trying to come off as knowledgable or prigishly '1337' without actually providing any reasoning to back that up, other than whining about the term itself. :pfff: 

you wrote so much without really saying anything...
March 19, 2009 8:18:48 PM

then I guess you can't read^
June 23, 2009 3:35:34 AM

^^ WORD
June 23, 2009 4:11:49 AM

michaelmk86, your statements are all overkills :D 
May 19, 2010 1:24:23 AM

you are all freaking ¬¬ over kill dont explain anything.... an over kill can be a radeon 5970 to play TIBIA or to play Doom 2 ... or to play Sim City, or to play command conquer 4, or to play HoN ... or to play Crysis... or to play any game... just because is the TOP VGA.... ¬¬ so this dont have footing, groundwork..... an over kill can be 1% above, or 5000% above the max requirements...
a c 271 U Graphics card
May 19, 2010 1:29:32 AM

vichiaverini said:
you are all freaking ¬¬ over kill dont explain anything.... an over kill can be a radeon 5970 to play TIBIA or to play Doom 2 ... or to play Sim City, or to play command conquer 4, or to play HoN ... or to play Crysis... or to play any game... just because is the TOP VGA.... ¬¬ so this dont have footing, groundwork..... an over kill can be 1% above, or 5000% above the max requirements...



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
!