Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4870x2 in quadfire vs a 295 or the new 5800

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 4:59:13 PM

hi,

just wondering if anyone has seen a comparison in benchmark between the 4870x2 in quadfire config vs the 295 vs the new 5800?
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 5:08:18 PM

Generally speaking, a single 4870X2 keeps up with a GTX 295 in most cases, and usually beats a single HD 5870. From that we can conclude two 4870X2 will beat both of them. However, it's hard to find one and they use a lot of power. ;)  CrossFire 5870 will probably beat QuadFire 4870X2 however because of scaling issues; not sure about QuadSLi GTX 295. I wouldn't do two of either of the dual GPU cards because of the power and heat, personally. :/ 
m
0
l
a c 203 U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 5:13:11 PM

Well consider that 4 card setups dont scale very well, and a 5870 is approximately a 4870x2 and also approximately a GTX295, its slightly worse than both but close enough. Based on the toms review, the 5870 seems to have a 70-90% scaling factor when in crossfire, most quad chip setups are no where near that so the 5870's would pull ahead, while generating significantly less heat. As you can see from this chart, 2 5870s draw 70 watts more than a single 4870x2 and 80 more than a GTX295, thats a huge difference in heat output.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5870,2422...
m
0
l
Related resources
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 5:29:53 PM

so despite being over a year old, the 4870x2, a single card can still hold its own and adding a second in there is an overkill for anything today, i guess?
just wondering because I got this system in in july as a gift and my dad had it configurd with two 4870x2 and a core i7950..
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 5:34:22 PM

Quote:
so despite being over a year old, the 4870x2, a single card can still hold its own and adding a second in there is an overkill for anything today, i guess?
just wondering because I got this system in in july as a gift and my dad had it configurd with two 4870x2 and a core i7950..


If you're saying you already have two HD 4870X2 there's no forseeable need to upgrade in the remote future. If you're asking if the Quadfire HD 4870X2 is a good choice to buy right now I'd probably say no. Get two HD 5870 over it (or wait for the HD 5970/5870X2), skip the GTX 295.
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 5:38:21 PM

What im saying is I have 2 4870x2 in quadfire setup. I read a review a while back that stated that this config I have bested a single 295
m
0
l
November 15, 2009 5:50:03 PM

I think the notion that 4 card setups don't scale well is more theory than actual a proven fact. In fact if you look back to the last system builder marathon, it seems to disprove this idea.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-phenom-radeon,2...

notice that even though the system with 4 cards is somewhat handicapped by a slower processor, it does a good job keeping up with the system 3 much more powerful video cards. The video subsystem with 4 4850s played everything at the highest resolutions and with all the eye candy turned on for only $500, while the $600 subsystem in the much more expensive build performed about the same, once you take into account the difference in processor speed. I think though, all of this really only matters if you plan on using extreme high resolutions. At the typical 19x12, a single 4870x2, 5870, or gtx 295 is really all you need to get to the 60fps limit our eyes can see.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 5:51:16 PM

Quote:
What im saying is I have 2 4870x2 in quadfire setup. I read a review a while back that stated that this config I have bested a single 295


That's probably the case, but it is a waste of money due to the poor return of the third and fourth GPU scaling.

If there were more HD5870s available, I would say sell the HD4870X2 and buy two HD5870 [which you would likely have gotten at even money if the HD5Ks were more plentiful] and they would likely outperform that quadfire setup a vast majority of the time (likely something like 9 times out of 10).
m
0
l
November 15, 2009 5:53:53 PM

and yes, 4870x4 is WAY more powerful than a single gtx295, since a single 4870x2 can almost keep up with it by itself, and actually beats it in some games. There is about a 10% advantage for the gtx295 across a huge sampling of games, with a lot of that advantage happening above 60fps, which are wasted frames.
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 6:29:08 PM

heres another question for you belial2k, my dad also got me a 22inch monitor...i was told it isnt big enough to show the true horesepower in these games..
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 6:33:15 PM

Quote:
heres another question for you belial2k, my dad also got me a 22inch monitor...i was told it isnt big enough to show the true horesepower in these games..


Monitors are less about display size and more about resolution. Based on the size it's either 1920x1080 or 1680x1050 (if its lower-end). At 1920x1080 it'll put a decent amount of stress on it. 1680x1050 still isn't doing bad but with that graphics hardware it definitely won't be pushing any limits.
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 6:54:49 PM

yep its 1680....does it pay to get a new monitor or will I not notice a bit of difference?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2009 7:02:30 PM

Quote:
yep its 1680....does it pay to get a new monitor or will I not notice a bit of difference?


At 1680x1050 I really wouldn't recommend over a single HD 5870. :/  There's a bit of a difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1080 but I'm not sure if it's completely noticable. To be honest, I might recommend getting single/dual HD 5870s and buying a second 1680x1050 monitor with Eyefinity.
m
0
l
November 15, 2009 8:09:25 PM

^that would be great, if he didn't already have 2 4870x2s. It would be silly to spend $800+ for a slight downgrade in performance (in anything but a DX11 optimized game). To answer your question, you are way overbalanced on your graphics. Your 16x10 monitor does not fully use the potential of even one of your cards. You could be running 25x16 resolution with that setup. So the biggest upgrade you could make to your system right now is getting a new monitor. I suggest going BIG. 28" or better.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
or if you already have a big screen LCD HDTV you could use that as your monitor, and/or set it up for dual monitors and use both.
m
0
l
November 15, 2009 9:44:45 PM

Yeah go with a 28+ inch monitor thats running 25x16.
m
0
l
a c 236 U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 12:33:10 AM

Don't really understand the comparison. If you are comparing the three cards, they finish like this:

GTX 295
4870x2
5870

You want to look at them this way, they finish the same way:

Twin GTX 295
Twin 4870x2
Twin 5870

For example in Crysis Warhead @ 1920 x 1200 (Peak /Average / Min) - results from driverheaven.net

GTX 295 Quad (62/46/26)
4870 x2 Quad (43/24/23)

CoD

GTX 295 Quad (240/115/72)
4870 x2 Quad (223/123/65)

Left 4 Dead

GTX 295 Quad (294/170/99)
4870 x2 Quad (293/153/101)

Lost Planet

GTX 295 Quad (168/119/57)
4870 x2 Quad (106/73/45)

Tomb Raider

GTX 295 Quad (303/178/110)
4870 x2 Quad (119/63/35)

World in Conflict

GTX 295 Quad (209/150/115)
4870 x2 Quad (186/148/86)

To my mind, if you are thinking of tossing that expensive quad stuff, now is not the time to do it. The 295 will lose it's crown when the 5870x2 hits the streets though that's gonna cost you a cool $1,200. What you have is plenty to play anything and unless it's benchmarks driving your decision, I'd wait till the 5870x 2 and Fermi are not only out but reached maturity.




m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 12:41:48 AM

JackNaylorPE said:
Don't really understand the comparison. If you are comparing the three cards, they finish like this:

GTX 295
4870x2
5870

You want to look at them this way, they finish the same way:

Twin GTX 295
Twin 4870x2
Twin 5870

[snip]

To my mind, if you are thinking of tossing that expensive quad stuff, now is not the time to do it. The 295 will lose it's crown when the 5870x2 hits the streets though that's gonna cost you a cool $1,200. What you have is plenty to play anything and unless it's benchmarks driving your decision, I'd wait till the 5870x 2 and Fermi are not only out but reached maturity.


Regardless of whatever else you said (especially thinking the 5870X2 is gonna cost $1,200 :kaola:  ) it's silly to assume each card scales exactly the same.
m
0
l
November 16, 2009 1:05:31 AM

and all of that does not answer the question he posed, which was "does 4870x2 in quad crossfire beat a single gtx295"....we all agree the answer is yes. And it is also insane to recommend anyone with that powerful of a graphics setup "upgrade" to anything. It will be a very long time before ANY game game catches up to his setup, which is already more powerful than 2x5870s. It is stupid to buy something new just because it is new, especially when it would cost you $800 and be a downgrade in performance.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 1:33:57 PM

Crossfire 5870's will beat quad-sli 295's and quadfire 4870's, but no it's not worth upgrading to it if you have either of the others.
m
0
l
November 16, 2009 2:51:40 PM

If I remember right, Scaling problems actually made the Quadfire peform slower than Trifire, that's why i got a 4870 instead of a 4870x2 for my 2nd gpu, although drivers updates might have fixed that by now, plus you have a faster proc than I do though, so might not be the case for you. So I question whoever built this computers judgement to begin with based on that alone.

2nd, at 1920*1200 you are barely going to be stressing it at all. It looks like your dad spent a nice chunk of change on this PC for you. Tell him that in order to use it to it's full potential you need a 30" monitor capable of 2560*1600 resolution.

As far as performance, yes, you have more power than a single 295, less than SLId 295s, about equal to Crossfired 5870s.

Just worry about ugrading your monitor and have fun!
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 4:44:52 PM

JackNaylorPE said:
Don't really understand the comparison. If you are comparing the three cards, they finish like this:

GTX 295
4870x2
5870

You want to look at them this way, they finish the same way:

Twin GTX 295
Twin 4870x2
Twin 5870

Due to scaling issues, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 5870 CF beat both the 295 quad and the 4870x2 quad.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 5:32:56 PM

brockh said:
So the lesson is... just buy four HD 4890s. ;) 

not totally but as you can see 8th and 9th place is ocupieid by tri fire and quadfire 5870's respectively but the lack of an i9 is holding them back
m
0
l
November 16, 2009 5:45:50 PM

brockh said:
If you're saying you already have two HD 4870X2 there's no forseeable need to upgrade in the remote future. If you're asking if the Quadfire HD 4870X2 is a good choice to buy right now I'd probably say no. Get two HD 5870 over it (or wait for the HD 5970/5870X2), skip the GTX 295.


cypress is in shortage which means u cant buy it anywhere

gtx295 sli ftw
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 5:47:49 PM

cheesesubs said:
cypress is in shortage which means u cant buy it anywhere

gtx295 sli ftw


We've already established he has two 4870X2 already. Thread done: He doesn't need to upgrade.
m
0
l
November 16, 2009 6:07:38 PM

brockh said:
We've already established he has two 4870X2 already. Thread done: He doesn't need to upgrade.


4870x2 is hot and comsuming more power than a 295 plus 295 has physx exclusively. which 4870 has to relying cpu to simulate physical enviroment which cause cpu resource hog.

295 ftw. again!
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2009 6:19:26 PM

cheesesubs said:
4870x2 is hot and comsuming more power than a 295 plus 295 has physx exclusively. which 4870 has to relying cpu to simulate physical enviroment which cause cpu resource hog.

295 ftw. again!


That may be the case if he plays Batman Arkum Asylum exclusively. Regardless, I'm not about to have this conversation again...
m
0
l
a c 236 U Graphics card
November 17, 2009 7:32:04 PM

brockh said:
Regardless of whatever else you said (especially thinking the 5870X2 is gonna cost $1,200 :kaola:  )


The 5870x2 price has been published....it's $599.99

Two of them in quad is therefore a $1,200 purchase.
Quote:

m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2009 7:34:27 PM

JackNaylorPE said:
The 5870x2 price has been published....it's $599.99

Two of them in quad is therefore a $1,200 purchase.


Why would he buy two? One beats everything, unless it's 5870 in CF.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2009 10:47:00 PM

JackNaylorPE said:
The 5870x2 price has been published....it's $599.99

Two of them in quad is therefore a $1,200 purchase.


Which is not what you wrote: "The 295 will lose it's crown when the 5870x2 hits the streets though that's gonna cost you a cool $1,200."

You put it in the same sentence, with Quadfire in the other. The error is yours in your formatting, not anyone else's for not guessing what you were trying to say. :pfff: 

For the thread the comments were two HD5870 in Xfire would likely outperform 2 GTX295 in QuadSli due to scaling, you seemed to side-step that in your list with your guesstimate on scaling, which you didn't address. Two HD5870X2 would go far beyond the previou discussion, just like 4 HD5870 would.
m
0
l
November 18, 2009 2:08:11 AM

have their been any quad fore benchmarks out for the 5970 to see how well it scales? they are powerful enough i could see potential for CPU bottle-necking.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2009 2:14:52 AM

JackNaylorPE said:
The 5870x2 price has been published....it's $599.99
Two of them in quad is therefore a $1,200 purchase.
Quote:


I don't see how that makes any sense. A single 5870 costs $400, so two 5870s on 1 GPU should cost 2x the price = $800 at least. Factor in the fact that 2-in-1 GPUs have always been more expensive than 2 stand alone GPUs, I'd say it's gonna be over $800
m
0
l
November 18, 2009 2:24:20 AM

except it is a downclocked version that performs well under what two 5870s would do. There are already a few reviews out...so far performance is a little underwhelming considering the price and hype surrounding this.
m
0
l
November 18, 2009 2:26:48 AM

By the way, the official name is 5970, not 5870x2.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2009 3:09:57 AM

Maybe it's closer to the 5850x2?
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2009 1:05:20 PM

so to get the max potential out of my quadfire 4870x2 I would need a 28 inch monitor atleast?
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2009 3:10:38 PM

well would I need a 28" monitor or a monitor that may be capable of doing more than 1680x800 and maybe get away with 25 "?
m
0
l
November 18, 2009 3:29:19 PM

you don't have to do anything, but you are wasting tons of video power. As I stated before, just one of your cards is more than enough to run at 19x12, which is the typical resolution up to 28"
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2009 3:57:29 PM

no I guess I dont but I would like to get more out of my system if possible with a better res..

also I just saw the reviews on the 5890, the card tomshardware declared the fastest..and it compares to a single 4870x2 and outperfoms out by like 20 or so fps..
but what about adding a second 4870x2..

hmm interesting..
m
0
l
November 21, 2009 3:31:00 AM

If you want a better resolution, get a larger monitor. a 30" will give you 2560*1600 resolution. Unless you like to waste money that is the only upgrade you should do right now. Period!

Doesn't get any more simple
m
0
l
a c 236 U Graphics card
November 27, 2009 4:28:14 AM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Which is not what you wrote: "The 295 will lose it's crown when the 5870x2 hits the streets though that's gonna cost you a cool $1,200."

You put it in the same sentence, with Quadfire in the other. The error is yours in your formatting, not anyone else's for not guessing what you were trying to say. :pfff: 

For the thread the comments were two HD5870 in Xfire would likely outperform 2 GTX295 in QuadSli due to scaling, you seemed to side-step that in your list with your guesstimate on scaling, which you didn't address. Two HD5870X2 would go far beyond the previou discussion, just like 4 HD5870 would.


What I wrote was a response to the OP and the thread title. I would think that with a thread entitled "4870x2 in quadfire vs a 295 or the new 5800", it wouldn't be necessary to repeat the subject of discussion. The comparison should be obvious to anyone that the subject being discussed is quadfire"
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 27, 2009 11:05:35 AM

Like I said before Jack, don't complain about others, it's your writing that sucks there. :non: 

And had you read more of the thread (including the section you quoted) and not just the title, you'd know most people are comparing running even just two HD5870 in Xfire outperforming two HD4870X2 in Quadfire and two GTX295 in QuadSLi, so don't be so obtuse, and simply admit you made a mistake and stop blaming other people for what you wrote.

You also make alot of assumptions about performance and scaling in you previous posts which I just write off as ignorance since you provide no supporting evidence for your HD5870 #s just the GTX295 and HD4870X2 from an obviously OLD review since it included Lost Planet :sarcastic:  , and where follow-up review from the source you chose, proves your assumptions about performance to be incorrect :non:  , thus making Quadfired HD5Ks a non-sequitur to the rest of the discussion which speaks of scaling the 4 vs 2 from the first reply by brockh,

In any case, brockh commenting on the pricing is due to your mistake not anyone else's, and definitely is not defended either by the title, the OP or the rest of the discussion. :pfff: 
m
0
l
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
November 27, 2009 3:18:05 PM

so guys, I guess the consesus is that im good for a while, just need a bigger monitor to really enjoy gaming.?

I do play batman arkym asylum but not exclusively.
I play bioshock, fall out 3, red faction , nhl 09, call of cuty, and looking to forward to crysis 2
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 27, 2009 5:08:09 PM

I agree that LG is a decent company. Its not really the physical size of the monitor that matters, but the resolution. A 24" 19x12 monitor compared to a 28" 19x12 will produce the same FPS (assuming I understood the question correctly, I dont think I did).

Anyway that 1080 monitor will still give you great FPS with your 4870x2s.
m
0
l
a c 236 U Graphics card
November 28, 2009 12:24:56 AM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Like I said before Jack, don't complain about others, it's your writing that sucks there.


Whatever makes ya feel better ... luckily the rest of the peeps following didn't have so much trouble realizing the obvious.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
November 28, 2009 8:39:39 AM

Or so you like to fool yourself into thinking. :pt1cable: 

BlueScreen and Brock both commented on your poor post, and everyone else ignored you, which is probably better for them in the long run considering your errors in your guesstimates about performance. :pfff: 

Try to follow the thread next time, and then maybe you'll make more sense and possible make better predictions too. :hello: 
m
0
l
!