Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Are 2x 8800 ultras > GTX 295?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 24, 2010 3:11:51 PM

I want to upgrade my graphics for gaming but I don't know what the best route is. I'm currently running SLi with evga 8800 ultras on my rig.

Will upgrading to one GTX 295 give me better performance? Or should I wait until a newer nvidia series? Which series should I look out for better performance?

More about : 8800 ultras gtx 295

a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 5:10:52 PM

yess a GTX295 would give you better performance.

The new nvidia cards are soon to be released, so you might want to wait until then.

You could buy a HD5870 with roughly the same performance as a GTX295 and costs less, has DX11 support, uses less power and produces less heat vs. the GTX295.

OR if you have deep pockets you could opt. for the 5970.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 5:15:07 PM

Dual 8800 Ultras = GTX 280

Wait till Fermi comes out (March 26th) and you will have better options to choose from..
m
0
l
Related resources
February 24, 2010 5:52:02 PM

Quote:
Don't hold your breath on the fermi option being "better." The 5870 would be a bit better than your current SLI, or get a 5970 for a clear performance boost.

We'll all have to wait for actual benchmarks and prices to be released before anyone can say that Fermi will be better.


With the specs that we already have ATM, it will be better ;)  performance-wise, price-wise not so much, the 470 will be priced at around 499.99$ and the 480 at around the same pricepoint as the 5970. The problem that AMD has is that the 5830 and 5970 are having issues and if they are not fixed before Fermi's launch it will hurt AMD when it comes to sales. The issue that Nvidia has is that Fermi will be sold in limited quantities, meaning if you are not able to get your hands on one once released, you will eventually see them overpriced on e-bay ;) 
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 7:07:09 PM

By no means I am saying that Nvidia will not have driver issues, when a new series comes out there will always be driver issues. My statement towards the 5970 has nothing to do with drivers, its the availablity =) . If someone is on the lookout for the best/fastest card and lets say AMD has no 5970's to offer I can betcha that the user will opt for Nvidia unless he is willing to go with a dual card setup.

Fermi will be faster than the 5870, I can betcha on that but of course it will cost more. The 480 will not be faster than the 5970 at the same pricepoint. Nvidia would not even dare to sell a card at 500.00$ with less performance than a 5870, this is common sense, but they will overprice regardless.

m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 7:10:42 PM

What was mentioned originally was EVERYONE would have 'better' OPTIONS when Fermi comes out, its you thats getting hostile at seeing the word better and Fermi in the same sentence.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 7:18:35 PM

Thx notty, that was my point from the beginning =) , didnt mean to jack the tread....
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 7:23:07 PM

notty22 said:
What was mentioned originally was EVERYONE would have 'better' OPTIONS when Fermi comes out, its you thats getting hostile at seeing the word better and Fermi in the same sentence.


Yeah, that what was being talked about until OvrClkr started talking crap about something that is unknown. It might well be better, but then again.... it might not!!! Unless OvrClkr has some new facts (in which case I appologise!!) then he does not know what he is talking about.
I wouldn't be stupid enough to make such a statment unless I knew that was the truth and could back it up with evidence (from an independant and reliable source).

Nobody knows how Fermi will perform, I believe the Fermi (I presume you mean the 480) will be quicker than a 5870 but I wouldn't want to start talking about it as if it were fact... UNTIL IT IS FACT!
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 7:25:55 PM

You already have a 5870, :) - You have NO worries, right ? enjoy !

wanted to add, the gtx295 is basically two gtx 275's, its why 8800sli is not in the same ballpark as a gtx295.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 7:43:04 PM

;) 
jibbermitch said:
Yeah, that what was being talked about until OvrClkr started talking crap about something that is unknown. It might well be better, but then again.... it might not!!! Unless OvrClkr has some new facts (in which case I appologise!!) then he does not know what he is talking about.
I wouldn't be stupid enough to make such a statment unless I knew that was the truth and could back it up with evidence (from an independant and reliable source).

Nobody knows how Fermi will perform, I believe the Fermi (I presume you mean the 480) will be quicker than a 5870 but I wouldn't want to start talking about it as if it were fact... UNTIL IT IS FACT!


You have no clue as to what we already know, stop being a troll and use some common sense.

GT400 "Fermi" Architecture GPU Specifications :

3.0+ billion transistors
40nm GPU by TSMC
384-bit memory interface (6x64-bit memory controllers)
512 shader cores (renamed to CUDA Cores)
32 CUDA cores per shader cluster
1MB L1 cache memory [divided into 16KB Cache - Shared Memory]
768KB L2 unified cache memory
Up to 6GB GDDR5 memory (1.5GB for GeForce and up to 6GB for Quadro/Tesla)
Half Speed IEEE 754 Double Precision
16 Streaming Multiprocessors (new name for the former Shader Cluster) containing 32 cores each

That right there^^ tells you that it will be superior to the 5870 ;)  , and I am not "talking crap" about anything.. I am just posting what we already know..

Nvidia is not going to sell a GPU slower than the 5870 at a much higher price, it aint happening ;) 
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 8:10:41 PM

Quote:
Here's the preorder price I was refering to:
http://www.sabrepc.com/p-174-nvidia-geforce-gtx-480-2gb...

GTX 480 = $680 ($700 without pre-order)
HD5970 = $650
HD5870 = $400

Nvidia isn't actually selling it, SabrePC is. But it looks like your $500 guess is a bit off. As is your expectation of just how overpriced the card will be for it's speculated performance.

Anyhow, please continue...


Hehe, I never said that the 480 was going to be priced at 500.00$.... The 470 is priced at 500.00$ on that same site ;)  , the 480 is priced at 680.00$, seems like you did not know that Fermi has 2 models ....

The 5970 is not priced at 650.00, that was the old price for the Sapphire model, now they will sell at 699.99$ once they are back in stock...
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 8:49:12 PM

Quote:
But the 470 doesn't have any benchmarks out... at all. And assuming it's slower than the 480 proportional to the spec sheet, the 470 will be slower than the 5870. Again, this assumes a lot, but still bases itself on the numbers Nvidia released comparing their GF100 (aka GTX 480) with the 5870.

Since you were talking about the card being faster than the 5870, I naturally assumed you were talking about the 480, not the 470.

You then said you couldn't imagine them selling a $500 card that has less perfermance than a 5870... yet there the 470 is.

If you want to tell me that the 470 actually is faster than the 5870, then link me plz.

...

A quick search of online vendors found me a 5970 for $660, in stock. $650 if you want a rain check at other places where they're sold out.


The specs for the 470 are mentioned above, that tells you that it will be faster than the 5870 at around 500.00$, the 480 specs should be a bit higher since it will be priced at over 650.00$ . Of course it is virtually impossible for a single chip GPU (480) to beat a dual chip GPU (5970). I am one that is waiting on the 470, once I get my hands on one I will test it out and post some numbers ;) 
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 8:53:33 PM

OvrClkr said:
Dual 8800 Ultras = GTX 280

Wait till Fermi comes out (March 26th) and you will have better options to choose from..


2 8800 Ultras are almost equal to a 5870, not a GTX 280. Dual 8800 GTs beat out the GTX 280 and the 8800 Ultras were 20% faster.

@OP The GTX 295 will not provide a very large amount of performance over your current setup and is not a recommend upgrade. The 5970 really is the only card that is fast enough to give a decent boost, and the GTX 480 likely won't be faster than the 5970.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 8:57:05 PM

Quote:
But the 470 doesn't have any benchmarks out... at all. And assuming it's slower than the 480 proportional to the spec sheet, the 470 will be slower than the 5870. Again, this assumes a lot, but still bases itself on the numbers Nvidia released comparing their GF100 (aka GTX 480) with the 5870.

Since you were talking about the card being faster than the 5870, I naturally assumed you were talking about the 480, not the 470.

You then said you couldn't imagine them selling a $500 card that has less perfermance than a 5870... yet there the 470 is.

If you want to tell me that the 470 actually is faster than the 5870, then link me plz.

...

A quick search of online vendors found me a 5970 for $660, in stock. $650 if you want a rain check at other places where they're sold out.


Again use a bit of comon sense....

The 5870 and GTX 295 are on par performance-wise (give or take) correct? Well then that means that the 470 and 480 HAVE to be faster than the 5870 because Nvidia is not going to produce a GPU slower than the 295 at a much higher pricepoint ;) 
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 9:01:41 PM

AMW1011 said:
2 8800 Ultras are almost equal to a 5870, not a GTX 280. Dual 8800 GTs beat out the GTX 280 and the 8800 Ultras were 20% faster.

@OP The GTX 295 will not provide a very large amount of performance over your current setup and is not a recommend upgrade. The 5970 really is the only card that is fast enough to give a decent boost, and the GTX 480 likely won't be faster than the 5970.


Negative SIR ;)  , dual GTX 275's are the equivalent of a 5870/GTX 295 (give or take) ... Dual 8800 GT's are the equivalent of a GTX 280.

You cannot compare a GTX 8800 ULTRA to a GTX 275 ;) 

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3334&p=11

There is no other card/cards i can compare to the dual 8800 Ultras's and that is why I used the 280 (give or take)..
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 9:01:59 PM

OvrClkr said:
Nvidia would not even dare to sell a card at 500.00$ with less performance than a 5870, this is common sense, but they will overprice regardless.

When figuring out what Nvidia would "dare" to do have you taken into account that the GTX 285 is about $100 more expensive than the HD5850?
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 9:03:49 PM

Im going to disagree with OvrClkr, as the Fermi has potential to be faster based off arcitecture, having read from Nvidia about the Fermi they have always talked about computing. I dont see them really touting their horn for gaming performance other than it will be great for tessellation, which is exciting but not the same as performance.

I'm excited to see when Fermi comes out, and as most have already said just stick with your setup for now until we know whats really what and not spectating.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 9:08:01 PM

jyjjy said:
When figuring out what Nvidia would "dare" to do have you taken into account that the GTX 285 is about $100 more expensive than the HD5850?


You are correct ;)  , now lets see how many 5850's have been sold vs. the 285's since the launch of the 5 series ;)  . I don't think Nvidia is looking to overprice and underperform once Fermi is released, on the contrary we should see very good performance at a high cost..
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 9:21:57 PM

OvrClkr said:
;)

You have no clue as to what we already know, stop being a troll and use some common sense.

GT400 "Fermi" Architecture GPU Specifications :

3.0+ billion transistors
40nm GPU by TSMC
384-bit memory interface (6x64-bit memory controllers)
512 shader cores (renamed to CUDA Cores)
32 CUDA cores per shader cluster
1MB L1 cache memory [divided into 16KB Cache - Shared Memory]
768KB L2 unified cache memory
Up to 6GB GDDR5 memory (1.5GB for GeForce and up to 6GB for Quadro/Tesla)
Half Speed IEEE 754 Double Precision
16 Streaming Multiprocessors (new name for the former Shader Cluster) containing 32 cores each

That right there^^ tells you that it will be superior to the 5870 ;)  , and I am not "talking crap" about anything.. I am just posting what we already know..

Nvidia is not going to sell a GPU slower than the 5870 at a much higher price, it aint happening ;) 


im sure most people here have read the anandtech article about the RV870 and the troubles they had with the 40nm process by tsmc. i think nvidia will have problems porting all these features new features to the gf100 on 40nm. also CUDA & stream processors dont scale perfectly. i think its almost pointless betting on what will preform better at this stage.

nvidia originally billed fermi as a product which did not have its main focus on the gaming market but a product for super computing. might there be a chance that all the features have been tailored for a market that we dont fit in?

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3740
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 9:26:31 PM

OvrClkr said:
Again use a bit of comon sense....

The 5870 and GTX 295 are on par performance-wise (give or take) correct? Well then that means that the 470 and 480 HAVE to be faster than the 5870 because Nvidia is not going to produce a GPU slower than the 295 at a much higher pricepoint ;) 

All that is fine and good, but if Nvidia can't hit their clockspeed targets, then they're stuck with whatever they can get, whether or not it is faster than the 5870. My guess is that it will be faster than the 5870, but probably not by very much. Nobody will know anything for sure until they release though.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 9:44:10 PM

OvrClkr said:
Negative SIR ;)  , dual GTX 275's are the equivalent of a 5870/GTX 295 (give or take) ... Dual 8800 GT's are the equivalent of a GTX 280.

You cannot compare a GTX 8800 ULTRA to a GTX 275 ;) 

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3334&p=11

There is no other card/cards i can compare to the dual 8800 Ultras's and that is why I used the 280 (give or take)..


So the 8800 GT SLI being 10% fater than a GTX 280 in Crysis is not equal.

Also 2 GTX 275s are faster than a GTX 295:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-sli,229...

An 8800 Ultra is over 10% faster than an 8800 GT:



Remember that the 8800 Ultra is about 10% faster than the 8800 GTX:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/xfx-gf88...

Therefor, the 8800 Ultra is at least 20-25% faster than the 8800 GT, putting dual 8800 Ultras about 20-25% faster than the GTX 280, which is 10% slower than the GTX 285. That is 5850 performance.

Now since that is an inexact science, I am going to say it is within 10% of the performance difference.

*Sorry my post has been fixed, I typed faster than I thought it appears.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 9:48:27 PM

All cards don't scale the same amount in crossfire/sli. Also a bit more powerful than the GTX 280 is more like an HD5850 than an HD5870.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 10:04:13 PM

Your off base on your 8800ultra/ sli its not close to GTX295


They have the 8800 ultra ~ 4850
edit: I would not upgrade to the GTX 295 from the ultra's either, unless there were some strange circumstances. (like free :)  )
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 10:26:14 PM

eleite said:
I want to upgrade my graphics for gaming but I don't know what the best route is. I'm currently running SLi with evga 8800 ultras on my rig.

Will upgrading to one GTX 295 give me better performance? Or should I wait until a newer nvidia series? Which series should I look out for better performance?


Yeah your not gonna want to upgraid to gtx 295 I say wait
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 10:32:21 PM

OvrClkr said:
Dual 8800 Ultras = GTX 280

Wait till Fermi comes out (March 26th) and you will have better options to choose from..


2x8800GT parried a GTX 280 in most games.
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 24, 2010 10:41:26 PM

notty22 said:
Your off base on your 8800ultra/ sli its not close to GTX295
http://i482.photobucket.com/albums/rr185/notty222/gpuheirarchy.png

They have the 8800 ultra ~ 4850
edit: I would not upgrade to the GTX 295 from the ultra's either, unless there were some strange circumstances. (like free :)  )


Did you REALLY use the hierarchy chart to try to prove a point? :lol: 
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 10:41:26 PM

jyjjy said:
All cards don't scale the same amount in crossfire/sli. Also a bit more powerful than the GTX 280 is more like an HD5850 than an HD5870.


Yes you are exactly correct, that was a typo. Its been fixed.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 10:51:09 PM

notty22 said:
Your off base on your 8800ultra/ sli its not close to GTX295
http://i482.photobucket.com/albums/rr185/notty222/gpuheirarchy.png

They have the 8800 ultra ~ 4850
edit: I would not upgrade to the GTX 295 from the ultra's either, unless there were some strange circumstances. (like free :)  )


Again the hierarchy charts are not very helpful in these circumstances. I have fixed the typo, 5850 performance was my intent.





As you can see the 8800 Ultra is a little below a 3870 X2 (the 8800 GTX used is likely at similar clockspeeds), which is close to the 4870 512mb. 2 4870s 512mb where about 10% slower than the 1GB versions used in the 4870 X2. This puts dual 8800 Ultras at about in between the 5850 and the 5870, which is too close to the GTX 295 to be worth the upgrade.

Going by this then the 5970 is about 40% faster than your current setup which is a pretty decent upgrade:

m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:05:37 PM

OvrClkr said:
;)

You have no clue as to what we already know, stop being a troll and use some common sense.

GT400 "Fermi" Architecture GPU Specifications :

3.0+ billion transistors
40nm GPU by TSMC
384-bit memory interface (6x64-bit memory controllers)
512 shader cores (renamed to CUDA Cores)
32 CUDA cores per shader cluster
1MB L1 cache memory [divided into 16KB Cache - Shared Memory]
768KB L2 unified cache memory
Up to 6GB GDDR5 memory (1.5GB for GeForce and up to 6GB for Quadro/Tesla)
Half Speed IEEE 754 Double Precision
16 Streaming Multiprocessors (new name for the former Shader Cluster) containing 32 cores each

That right there^^ tells you that it will be superior to the 5870 ;)  , and I am not "talking crap" about anything.. I am just posting what we already know..

Nvidia is not going to sell a GPU slower than the 5870 at a much higher price, it aint happening ;) 


just lol :whistle:  I wasn't trying to be troll.
And that proves what sorry?
never even mentioned pricing....... as we don't know.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:16:26 PM

OvrClkr said:
;)

You have no clue as to what we already know, stop being a troll and use some common sense.

GT400 "Fermi" Architecture GPU Specifications :

3.0+ billion transistors
40nm GPU by TSMC
384-bit memory interface (6x64-bit memory controllers)
512 shader cores (renamed to CUDA Cores)
32 CUDA cores per shader cluster
1MB L1 cache memory [divided into 16KB Cache - Shared Memory]
768KB L2 unified cache memory
Up to 6GB GDDR5 memory (1.5GB for GeForce and up to 6GB for Quadro/Tesla)
Half Speed IEEE 754 Double Precision
16 Streaming Multiprocessors (new name for the former Shader Cluster) containing 32 cores each

That right there^^ tells you that it will be superior to the 5870 ;)  , and I am not "talking crap" about anything.. I am just posting what we already know..

Nvidia is not going to sell a GPU slower than the 5870 at a much higher price, it aint happening ;) 


STFU, specifications mean nothing. How will it be superior to the 5870?
Since you didn't specify I'll use an off-hand one.
2 words why 5870's architecture is superior: clean code.
Clean code aims to make code as clear & readable as possible by:
As few dependencies as possible
All dependencies are grouped together
Code is written according to the language's published standards, strictly conforming
The style of the code if uniform throughout the application

By having few & close dependencies that means the 5-SP blocks can process at peak efficiency (5 or more parallel instructions per clock cycle per thread).
This means, by making good code, you are inherently optimizing for the 5-SP block arch (R600, RV670, RV770, RV870).
So if a very parallel app (F@H, encryption tools, transcoding) is used on the GPU, the 5870 will be 1600 SP's vs Fermi's 512.
That's 3.125 times more performance if there's no clock differences, memory differences, and everything is simple instructions.

Everything comes down to context & code.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:20:46 PM

cjl said:
All that is fine and good, but if Nvidia can't hit their clockspeed targets, then they're stuck with whatever they can get, whether or not it is faster than the 5870. My guess is that it will be faster than the 5870, but probably not by very much. Nobody will know anything for sure until they release though.


Agreed, my point is that Fermi will be superior to the 295.. According to the specs its should be, and if it aint.. It will be a MAJOR Fail for NV. Nobody is going to pay 500.00$+ for a GPU that performs equal or worse than the 295 just cause it has a shiney DX11 logo on it. To this date we have not seen anything special from DX11, well at least IMO i have not seen anything special. As a matter of fact Dirt2 plays better with a DX10 card as opposed to a DX11 card. <-- That right there is ridiculous if you ask me :pfff: 

But yea, I agree that we still have to wait n see the actual bench before we speculate (even though im convinced already :whistle:  ...
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:21:21 PM

sabot00 said:
STFU, specifications mean nothing. How will it be superior to the 5870?
Since you didn't specify I'll use an off-hand one.
2 words why 5870's architecture is superior: clean code.
Clean code aims to make code as clear & readable as possible by:
As few dependencies as possible
All dependencies are grouped together
Code is written according to the language's published standards, strictly conforming
The style of the code if uniform throughout the application

By having few & close dependencies that means the 5-SP blocks can process at peak efficiency (5 or more parallel instructions per clock cycle per thread).
This means, by making good code, you are inherently optimizing for the 5-SP block arch (R600, RV670, RV770, RV870).
So if a very parallel app (F@H, encryption tools, transcoding) is used on the GPU, the 5870 will be 1600 SP's vs Fermi's 512.
That's 3.125 times more performance if there's no clock differences, memory differences, and everything is simple instructions.

Everything comes down to context & code.


nVidia's SPs do 4 times the work of a single ATI SP meaning Fermi will have an equivalent value of 2048 of ATI's SPs.

In OvrClkr's defense, the specs that we are almost sure about tell us that Fermi should be in between the 5870 and the 5970. That said we don't know something worrying and important, clock speeds.
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:24:58 PM

AMW1011 said:
So the 8800 GT SLI being 10% fater than a GTX 280 in Crysis is not equal.

Also 2 GTX 275s are faster than a GTX 295:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-sli,229...

An 8800 Ultra is over 10% faster than an 8800 GT:

http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GTS_512_MB/images/perfrel.gif

Remember that the 8800 Ultra is about 10% faster than the 8800 GTX:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/xfx-gf88...

Therefor, the 8800 Ultra is at least 20-25% faster than the 8800 GT, putting dual 8800 Ultras about 20-25% faster than the GTX 280, which is 10% slower than the GTX 285. That is 5850 performance.

Now since that is an inexact science, I am going to say it is within 10% of the performance difference.

*Sorry my post has been fixed, I typed faster than I thought it appears.


IMO 10% is "give or take" :)  , you can over clock the GPU and equal the performance.. you get the idea..

would be nice to see an actual bench of dual ultras vs. the 4xxx and 2xx series...
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:34:04 PM

jibbermitch said:
just lol :whistle:  I wasn't trying to be troll.
And that proves what sorry?
never even mentioned pricing....... as we don't know.


Well just FYI when I typed that, it was in a very low tone of voice :na:  , i really meant stop being "ignorant" :lol: 

anyways I am 99% convinced that it will be more powerfull, of course drivers will be a PITA and we wont really see its full potential till they mature..
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:36:11 PM

OvrClkr said:
IMO 10% is "give or take" :)  , you can over clock the GPU and equal the performance.. you get the idea..

would be nice to see an actual bench of dual ultras vs. the 4xxx and 2xx series...


Right, these aren't the most accurate tests, but they clearly show that 2 8800 Ultras --> GTX 295 is a sh1ty upgrade.

It would be really nice to see a full review with benchmarks of all the cards from the G80 to present running the latest drivers in many of the more popular and newer titles, sadly that would be difficult, time consuming, and expensive. Since it isn't easy, no one is going to do it. :ange: 
m
0
l
February 24, 2010 11:38:07 PM

sabot00 said:
STFU, specifications mean nothing. How will it be superior to the 5870?
Since you didn't specify I'll use an off-hand one.
2 words why 5870's architecture is superior: clean code.
Clean code aims to make code as clear & readable as possible by:
As few dependencies as possible
All dependencies are grouped together
Code is written according to the language's published standards, strictly conforming
The style of the code if uniform throughout the application

By having few & close dependencies that means the 5-SP blocks can process at peak efficiency (5 or more parallel instructions per clock cycle per thread).
This means, by making good code, you are inherently optimizing for the 5-SP block arch (R600, RV670, RV770, RV870).
So if a very parallel app (F@H, encryption tools, transcoding) is used on the GPU, the 5870 will be 1600 SP's vs Fermi's 512.
That's 3.125 times more performance if there's no clock differences, memory differences, and everything is simple instructions.

Everything comes down to context & code.


Hold your horses son, Im just giving my opinion on what "I" am expecting. That should not bother you at all since you are 100% convinced that the 5870 will trounce Fermi :D  . One month from now we will see ;) 
m
0
l
a b Î Nvidia
February 25, 2010 7:35:44 AM

Both the 470 and 480 have to be faster than a 5870, IMO the 480 isn't a good deal if its $680 and slower than a 5970

The 470 would have to be a good margin faster than a 5870 to justify the extra $100 it costs.

If the 470 is between the 5850 and 5870 then its failed completely, If the 480 isnt equal toa 5970 then its also failed. Just have to wait and see.
m
0
l
February 25, 2010 1:59:53 PM

Rustyy117 said:
Both the 470 and 480 have to be faster than a 5870, IMO the 480 isn't a good deal if its $680 and slower than a 5970

The 470 would have to be a good margin faster than a 5870 to justify the extra $100 it costs.

If the 470 is between the 5850 and 5870 then its failed completely, If the 480 isnt equal toa 5970 then its also failed. Just have to wait and see.


Yea I agree completely, it will be a major fail for NV if the 470 comes out to be slower than the 5870, hopefully the 470 can equal or better the 5870 and the 480 should be around 10/15% slower than the 5970. Of course we all know that there is no way that the 480 will be able to give the 5970 a run for its money. NV's next dual GPU should be in the 800.00/900.00$ arena and by then the 6 series (28nm) will be mainstream....
m
0
l
February 25, 2010 2:50:01 PM

AMW1011 said:
2 8800 Ultras are almost equal to a 5870, not a GTX 280. Dual 8800 GTs beat out the GTX 280 and the 8800 Ultras were 20% faster.

OvrClkr said:
Negative SIR ;)  , dual GTX 275's are the equivalent of a 5870/GTX 295 (give or take) ... Dual 8800 GT's are the equivalent of a GTX 280.


No, you guys are both wrong. 2x8800Ultras are equal to a 5850. A single 8800Ultra is better than a 8800GTS 512mb, and about on par with a 9800GTX/GTS250 or a 4850.

2x 4850s ~ 1x 5850 so 2x 8800 Ultras ~ 1x 5850


AMW1011 said:
Right, these aren't the most accurate tests, but they clearly show that 2 8800 Ultras --> GTX 295 is a sh1ty upgrade.


It's basically upgrading from a 5850 to a GTX295 or 5850 to 5870...so ye, it won't be worth it. If it was a GTX280 to a GTX295, it will be worth it.

But then again, 8800Ultras are VERY power hungry. He should sell the Ultras get a 5850 or 5870.
m
0
l
!