Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GTX 260 vs HD5770

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 28, 2010 9:09:10 PM
a b U Graphics card
January 28, 2010 9:24:17 PM

So why are you even considering the 5770?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
January 28, 2010 9:27:50 PM

the 5770 will perform about two times better than the 260

Score
0
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a c 376 U Graphics card
January 28, 2010 9:32:09 PM

Physx over DX11 is a really bad call imo
Score
0
a c 376 U Graphics card
January 28, 2010 9:32:49 PM

Upendra09 said:
the 5770 will perform about two times better than the 260

lol, no. Are you thinking of the GT 240 maybe?
Score
0
a c 228 U Graphics card
January 28, 2010 9:34:34 PM

For the low down on the 5770 versus the 4870 / 260, this pretty much sums it up.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3658&p=14

The value of the 5770 in particular is clearly not going to be in its performance. Compared to AMD’s 4870, it loses well more than it wins, and if we throw out Far Cry 2, it’s around 10% slower overall. It also spends most of its time losing to NVIDIA’s GTX 260, which unfortunately the 4870 didn’t have so much trouble with. AMD clearly has put themselves in to a hole with memory bandwidth, and the 5770 doesn’t have enough of it to reach the performance it needs to be at.

If you value solely performance in today’s games, we can’t recommend the 5770. Either the 4870 1GB or the GTX 260 would be the better buy.

So here’s the bottom line for the 5770: Unless you absolutely need to take advantage of the lower power requirements of the 40nm process (e.g. you pay a ton for power) or you strongly believe that DirectX 11 will have a developer adoption rate faster than anything we’ve seen before for DirectX, the 1GB 4870 or GTX 260 is still the way to go.


Two things have changes since this article was writen, the first probably a result of this (and other similar) articles being written:

1. The price of the 260 has skyrocketed.

2. Note the bolded part.....a big kabosh on that statements comes from new game reviews (like THG's Dirt2review) which show that the 5770 can't do DX11 at 30 fps at 1920 resolution.

PhysX is either soemthing you like or don't like so it's an individual decision that no doubt depends at least in part bwhether you consider yourself a member of the "green team" or "red team". However, like DX11, PhysX puts additional strain on your GFX system. I'm not a big gamer, but I did play Batman on a system equipped with a GTX 295 and the PhysX effects were quite impressive. But you better read the THG review

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/batman-arkham-asylu...

Adding 4xAA provided the Nvidia cards with an advantage over their Radeon counterparts, and at 1920x1200, only the GeForce GTS 250, Radeon HD 4870, and GeForce GTX 260 were able to maintain minimum frame rates over 30 FPS.

Turning on PhysX isn't necessary for gameplay, and you'll never miss it if you don't see the effects. However, when PhysX is enabled, it adds superlative nuances and really creates some “wow” moments. The chunky explosions, cloth effects, paper, fog, and environmental detail enhancements are very cool.

And that's where things get expensive. A single GeForce 9600 GT isn't going to cut it if you want a 30 FPS minimum frame rate. You'll need a GeForce GTS 250 to play at 1680x1050 with normal PhysX enabled, and a GeForce GTX 260 can just handle 1920x1200. With PhysX set to High, even the GeForce GTX 260 can't handle a minimum frame rate of 30 FPS at 1280x1024, so you should consider a dedicated PhysX card if you want high resolution play (and you have a free PCI Express slot available on your motherboard).

The good news here is that a GeForce GT 220 can be had for as little as $65 online, and as a dedicated PhysX card, it will guarantee that the High PhysX setting won't bottleneck performance. Even at 1920x1200, the GT 220 produced a minimum frame rate of 36 FPS as a dedicated PhysX card. Using more expensive solutions as dedicated PhysX processors didn't produce appreciably higher frame rates, so the GeForce GT 220 is a real PhysX champion for the price.

Once hardware-accelerated PhysX is enabled, this is another matter entirely, and those of you who want the best high-resolution PhysX performance will need to consider an Nvidia graphics card more powerful than the GeForce GTX 260 or a dedicated PhysX card such as the GeForce GT 220. There is a high price to pay for PhysX performance, but I have to admit that the eye candy is a lot of fun to watch. Once you've turned it on, it's not something you'll turn off if your hardware can handle it.
Score
0
a c 376 U Graphics card
January 28, 2010 9:48:31 PM

JackNaylorPE said:
Two things have changes since this article was writen, the first probably a result of this (and other similar) articles being written:

1. The price of the 260 has skyrocketed.

2. Note the bolded part.....a big kabosh on that statements comes from new game reviews (like THG's Dirt2review) which show that the 5770 can't do DX11 at 30 fps at 1920 resolution.

First off there were no similar articles. This is the same ONE review you keep trotting out over and over when almost every other tech site gave the HD5770 glowing reviews. The initial articles are all based on beta drivers and there have been some lately saying the HD5770 has already entirely made up the performance differce vs the HD4870.
Second, stop blaming the price increase of the GTX 260 on the HD5770, it's just dumb even if you don't account for the existence of the HD4890.
Third, Dirt 2 is one game. It's extremely short sited to make broad assumptions on the future of DX11 based upon the first game to implement it. There are actually two other DX11 games and they both have higher frame rates with DX11 compared to DX10 FYI.
Fourth, Physx has been around for years and is a notably useful feature in precisely one game as far as I can tell.
Score
0
January 29, 2010 1:01:58 AM

Upendra09 said:
the 5770 will perform about two times better than the 260


o rly
Score
0
January 29, 2010 8:02:24 PM

So can someone sum up this thread in one sentence please? GTX 260 or HD5770? And if the GTX 260, which one? After considering DX11 vs PhysX, I'm thinking I'm going to go with DX11.
Score
0
January 29, 2010 8:24:41 PM

In my opinion DX11 is more important than PhysX. Why? because DX11 is the microsoft standard, and will eventually be included by both the red and green camps. Because of that wider support it will be used more in games, though not immediately. PhysX, while interesting, is nVidia only, and therefor tends to be used in less games.
Score
0

Best solution

a b U Graphics card
January 29, 2010 8:25:52 PM

go for the 5770 - lower power consumption - less heat - equal performance - better scaling in Xfire when it becomes needed - DX11 support so you don't have to toss it and buy a new card in 1-2 years to play games with it supported. Plus with Nvidia wanting to keep Physx as a propeitary implementation any game that uses it will only use it as an addin to please Nvidia and all you'll ever get is a bit more smoke, etc. that you'll never miss anyway and half the performance in game.
Share
a c 271 U Graphics card
January 29, 2010 10:29:21 PM

JDFan said:
DX11 support so you don't have to toss it and buy a new card in 1-2 years to play games with it supported

If it's still as badly implemented then as it is now but a lot more widespread, then he will have to toss it most likely.
Score
0
February 7, 2010 2:46:37 PM

Best answer selected by Mugabuga.
Score
0
December 17, 2010 12:30:44 PM

GTX 260 HAS 448BIT INTERFACE,HD 5770 HAS 128BIT,GTX 260 IS DDR3,HD 5770 HAS DDR5,GTX 260 HAS BETTER MEMORY BANDWIDTH THAN 5770 SO,IF YOU DONT CARE ABOUT DX11,GTX WILL BE GAMING MONSTER.
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
December 17, 2010 6:47:49 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!