Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ATI 4890 or GTX 275?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
May 4, 2009 6:08:17 AM

Ok, I know some of you say there are better alternatives to the ATI 4890, but my friend insists on choosing only between the 4890 or a GTX 275. Which GPU offers more bang for the buck in your opinion? My friend's display is a 22" 1680 x 1050.

More about : ati 4890 gtx 275

a b U Graphics card
May 4, 2009 6:14:43 AM

Well can you tell the rest of his config? And is he willing to crossfire/sli later, what games he plays the most ?
May 4, 2009 6:19:55 AM

Yeah can you and are you willing to sli or crossfire and do you mean it. And what games to you play the most would be a good way to decide.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
May 4, 2009 6:19:59 AM

His PC runs on a Q6600 and 2GB RAM, Windows XP 32-bit. He would rather live without the "hassle" (his word, not mine) of SLI/Crossfire. I'll try to get back with his mobo ASAP.

EDIT: Whoops, forgot to mention: he'd like to run games like Crysis sometime (only mentioned that since he considers it a game with the most steep requirements today). But not at max settings.
a b U Graphics card
May 4, 2009 6:32:34 AM

Hmm...for a single card solution, both the 4890 and GTX 275 are very good options...
Would depend more on the game he wants to play...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-275,226...
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3539&p=23
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4890,2262...

I am inclined to suggest the GTX 275. Reasons :
1. nvidia are pulling in many game developers to use their PhysX and other technologies...They might even succeed in doing that...So in future we may see many titles supporting those technologies...
2. nvidia have better driver support than the ATI...
3. Both cost the same...So here we dont have nvidia premium factor...
May 4, 2009 6:36:48 AM

gkay09 said:
Hmm...for a single card solution, both the 4890 and GTX 275 are very good options...
Would depend more on the game he wants to play...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-275,226...
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3539&p=23
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4890,2262...

I am inclined to suggest the GTX 275. Reasons :
1. nvidia are pulling in many game developers to use their PhysX and other technologies...They might even succeed in doing that...So in future we may see many titles supporting those technologies...
2. nvidia have better driver support than the ATI...
3. Both cost the same...So here we dont have nvidia premium factor...


I agree, though they are fairly similar in performance. I heard the 4890 can OC more, but the GTX 275 gets higher synthetic benchmarks (3DMark06, Vantage, etc.) which may mean it is more optimized for more intensive graphical effects.
May 4, 2009 9:01:07 PM

Well I say GTX 275 :) 

Why? For 30$ more than basic basic gtx 275 896 MB of RAM you can get gtx 275 1792 MB of RAM. I am waitting for 2x EVGA GTX 275 1792 MB.

+ if ur interested in benches... 275 outperforms 280. OCed 275 is in same performance range as GTX 285 (not overclocked).

Well but it your choise ;) 
a b U Graphics card
May 4, 2009 9:02:29 PM

Why on earth would you waste that much money on that much RAM??

896 is plenty...

Both cards are great, get whichever is on sale. If you are keen to overclock the 4890 is a tad better on average in taht area.. luck of the draw mind you. Generally if you can support only crossfire or SLI get the card that does that... if you can support both or neither.. then you cant lose either way.
May 4, 2009 9:37:47 PM

For driver support, ambient occlusion, PhysX, and a spot of fanboyism (dont flame me) i cast my vote for the GTX 275.

Although either one will get the job done
May 4, 2009 9:56:33 PM

I recently purchased my first ATI card ever, the 4870, for a new build, and am very pleased. Like others have said however, it depends on what games you play. I spend a lot of time on FSX with add-on aircraft, scenery, and utilities and the ATI is giving minor problems with artifacts and tearing. It's not even overclocked. Other than that I love the card and want another for CF.

For kicks sake, here's some FPS comparisons from another hardware site at 1680x1050 (ATI 4890, GTX 275 respectively):

COD WAW..............78.8, 66.8
Crysis Warhead.....37.9, 36.8
FO3........................60.2, 53.0
FC2........................42.1, 40.2
L4D........................98.9, 86.5

Of course ATI major pwns Nvidia on GRID.

E8400->4.2GHz || ASUS P5Q-Pro || 4GB G.SKILL PC8500 || ASUS HD 4870 512MB TOP || Zalman 9700LED || WD Velociraptor 300GB & Caviar Black 640GB || Pioneer DVD-R/W || Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro || Vista x64 || Corsair 750 W || Antec Nine Hundred
a b U Graphics card
May 5, 2009 4:08:05 AM

Completely off topic, but ATI does not play nicely with FSX. Then again, no card really does (but ATI is a little worse, especially with clouds). Also, DX10 mode has weird glitches on all cards.
May 5, 2009 5:02:46 PM

Quote:
no card really does (but ATI is a little worse, especially with clouds). Also, DX10 mode has weird glitches on all cards.


Not from what I've been reading on FS forums like flightsim dot com. In fact, users who switched from ATi to Nvidia went up several frames at the same settings. I'll find out this weekend on a friend's borrowed GTX 285 and temporary new install of everything on a separate HDD to keep things equal.
a b U Graphics card
May 5, 2009 10:19:57 PM

That's what I meant (sorry if I was not clear). NVidia does better in FSX, though no card/computer can get really high (say, 60FPS).
a b U Graphics card
May 6, 2009 12:03:01 AM

The cards are very similar in performance terms so in that regard the deciding factor should be if the bulk of your games are know to be Nvidia or ATI friendly. Here in the US the HD 4890 is generally a bit cheaper. Right now with mail in rebates figured in there are a couple that can be had for $215. The cheapest GTX 275 (rebate or not) I could find was $240.
!