Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

GTX 470 vs GTX 480 vs 5870 vs 5850 - Page 3

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

Which one do you feel is the overall best card for performance and the price?

Total: 0 vote

  • ATI 5830
  • 0 %
  • ATI 5850
  • 0 %
  • ATI 5870
  • 0 %
  • ATI 5970
  • 0 %
  • GTX 285
  • 0 %
  • GTX 295
  • 0 %
  • GTX 470
  • 0 %
  • GTX 480
  • 0 %
March 28, 2010 8:33:18 PM

Personally, I think the GTX 480 would be great if they would make it a hybrid video card / George Foreman Grill. This could be a great selling point. Just imagine the adds. They could have somebody playing Metro 2033 and cooking bacon. Then ATI would have to make a video card that can grill bacon. Whole new market.
March 28, 2010 8:35:15 PM

builderbobftw said:
Can you show me any Fermi cards for reatil prices?

thought so....


They are on the website. They are sold out. Google is your friend.
March 28, 2010 8:36:39 PM

So you can't find any in stock?

Common sense is you're friend.
Related resources
March 28, 2010 8:39:10 PM

Quote:
So you can't find any in stock?

Common sense is you're friend.


And it can be yours too.
March 28, 2010 8:49:34 PM

AMW1011 said:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
Quote:
Overclocking Results

In order to overclock our GTX 470, we used EVGA’s new GTX 400-series Precision tool while stress testing was done using the upcoming EVGA OC Scanner that provides an artifact scanner. If an overclock passed 30 minutes of artifact scanning, it was considered stable. Fan speed was set to 70% for the duration of these tests.

Also note that the fixed function stage clock (core clock) is directly linked to the speed of the processor clock (CUDA cores / shaders) and as such, you cannot overclock each one individually as you could do on the GT200 series. Basically, the fixed function clock is ½ that of the processor clock.

Final Overclocks:

Core: 721Mhz
Processors: 1442Mhz
Memory: 3974Mhz (QDR)


Our GTX 470 sample simply overclocked like the dickens and screamed its way past the clock speeds used on a stock GTX 480. The memory speeds also saw a significant increase with full stability. Considering the perceived limitations of the architecture, these clock speeds on a lower-end part are simply stunning in our opinion.


Try to base your points off of fact, it helps.


Though that is certainly useful information, and I am grateful you posted it, I'd prefer to see some actual benchmarks that show the comparable performance and stability for this card when overclocked, rather than simply showing voltages and MHz. Understandably, it may be a little while before we see anything credible charts like that. Especially considering the likely state of the drivers.

I'm not against biased against the GTX470. I simply said that what I read stated it was slower than what people are saying in this thread. If I can see evidence to the contrary, I'd certainly change my mind about that. But it would have to be along the lines of a metric involving actual performance in games compared to other cards. It might be a little before we see that, or it might be sooner.

Thanks for the info.
March 28, 2010 8:49:43 PM

Point still stands, no Fermi chips available at retail, or any price for that matter.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 8:59:01 PM

majesticlizard said:
Though that is certainly useful information, and I am grateful you posted it, I'd prefer to see some actual benchmarks that show the comparable performance and stability for this card when overclocked, rather than simply showing voltages and MHz. Understandably, it may be a little while before we see anything credible charts like that. Especially considering the likely state of the drivers.

I'm not against biased against the GTX470. I simply said that what I read stated it was slower than what people are saying in this thread. If I can see evidence to the contrary, I'd certainly change my mind about that. But it would have to be along the lines of a metric involving actual performance in games compared to other cards. It might be a little before we see that, or it might be sooner.

Thanks for the info.


Right in the article

March 28, 2010 9:03:06 PM

I heard that Unigine is a fun real world game that people play.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 9:15:57 PM

builderbobftw said:
I heard that Unigine is a fun real world game that people play.


Your a terrible troll you know that right?

Okay you hate nVidia, or maybe just the GTX 4xx series. I don't care, but if your going to troll around then go somewhere else.

If you actually tried thinking, careful you may hurt yourself, then you would realize that the use of the Unigine benchmark shows that 70% fan speed was plenty to keep the GTX 470 cool with those extreme clocks, even when loaded past what a real game would. It also shows the percent increase you can expect in the GTX 470 for rendering, whether in other benchmarks or games, about a 20% performance increase at those clocks. There is no reason that this should change much in other uses.

And now, troll away...
March 28, 2010 9:23:37 PM

So how about Furmark you (or somebody just like you) said that Furmark doesn't apply becuase it's a Synthetic.

And 70% fan speed to run stock speeds at ridiculous temps=Zero OC headroom

And I like Nvidia, just not the GT200 and Fermi products....

And I dislike ATi just no the R700 products and the Evergreen stuff.
March 28, 2010 9:24:14 PM

If I were to get the 470 I would get it from EVGA.com, and I would invest in a water cooling system that can cool these down. But its funny cause if you try and OC them your going to be to boiling point of water, so hopefully the water in your system does not boil lol.
http://www.evga.com/products/moreInfo.asp?pn=012-P3-147... 400 Series Family

I still wouldn't pay 500 for a water cooled 470, cause then I would need to spend atleast 200 on a thermaltake bigwater just to cool it.
I just don't think anyone can make real facts unless they have been given some by nvidia. So probably most the people who got the cards, have a deal with nvidia to make theres look better, I am not saying this is true but I beleive that it is entirely possible.
Ok here is my newest thought for the first of the day. K if your like me and your going to want to play with your card, the (asus)5850 is expandle and can be cranked to the roof(and still be quiet and cool) to catch up with the 5870. With this fact, when you talk about the 470, its already cranked so far that were not able to play with it, so to make things all fair by the end of the day, the fairest thing is to get the 5850 loaded out of its mind and crank it as high is it can go till its at boiling point, do you see what I am saying. ATI could of cranked the 5850 to the roof and put it in a book, if that was the case, how good would you think the 470 is compared to it?? So what I am saying is the 5850 is meant to have tons of head room, the 470 has already utilized its head room and is turned up all the way, and i honestly wouldnt turn it up anymore cause heat is already an issue. So if we were to use all the head room on both cards the 5850 would be just as good as the 470 if not better, cause it is a FACT that it can produce up to the levels of the 5870.
Finally if we were to do what I said I guarntee if we first cranked up the 5850 to the speeds of the 470 it would still have some breathing room, and once we have the 5850 caught up, try and get the 470 up any more, and we would probably only get a small amount out of it, so after that we would use the rest of the breathing room and have it fully clocked and I bet it would still be cooler.


March 28, 2010 9:35:33 PM

Exactly, the GTX 470 is like an 10% slower crappy 5850 that's been OC'd to the hilt and beyond.

(For 50$+ more)
March 28, 2010 9:42:57 PM

Plus it dose not have solid performance as far as longevity, and daily use.
No has had one for more than a week, I bet the average person that buys it wont have a good enough cooling system and burn a hole in his case and wallet.
I have been talking abou the asus 5850 it comes with the software to crank it up, not do it for u to mask it, so it looks superior, when its actually more like a 5830.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 10:37:23 PM

builderbobftw said:
So how about Furmark you (or somebody just like you) said that Furmark doesn't apply becuase it's a Synthetic.

And 70% fan speed to run stock speeds at ridiculous temps=Zero OC headroom

And I like Nvidia, just not the GT200 and Fermi products....

And I dislike ATi just no the R700 products and the Evergreen stuff.


Wow...

Yep because when I overclock my 8800 GTS 512mb to 9800 GTX+ speeds I put the fan to 70%, that means I have no overclocking headroom? So going from 650/1625/900 to 740/1850/1120 is no headroom at all? Going from their to 775/1935/1180 doesn't count either?

There is another 30% fan speed to overclock with, after a huge overclock without voltage mods. That extreme overclock only needed a 10% fan increase from 60-70%.

Also Furmark and Unigine are bad tests for power consumption and thermals because they raise both of those higher than any real world application, it really isn't that hard to understand.
March 28, 2010 10:42:44 PM

The 5850 comes with a 30% fan speed, and lower temps than the military grade GTX 470/480 coolers at 70%.

So what has more OC headroom again?

GTX 470=Factory Oc'd.
March 28, 2010 10:43:22 PM

AMW1011 said:
Dude... the difference between the 5870 and the GTX 470 won't cost you much at all.

If your electric bill is absolutely terrible and you pay the highest, 20 cents/kilowatthour, then you will spend a total of $15 a month. If you pay the average rate of 11 cents/kilowatthour then you will pay $8.50 a month.

Now lets compare the price of a 5870, it would be $13 a month at the highest and $7 at the average. Assuming you pay the maximum rate, you will save a total of $24 a year with the 5870 over the GTX 470.

This is all calculated with you having your computer at LOAD for 12 hours a day, this is impossible.

http://www.handymath.com/cgi-bin/electric.cgi

Calculate for 360 hours and the wattages, 180 for the 5870 and 220 for the GTX 470.

Now, lets assume you game 5 hours a day and have nothing in your life at all and you pay the maximum rate, worst case scenerio.

The GTX 470 will cost $6.50 for all of these sessions, the rest of the time at idle would cost you $2. That is a total of $8.50, worst case scenerio and assuming you have no life whatsoever.

Now for the 5870, it will cost you $5.50 worst case scenerio for your gaming usage in one month. and $1.25 for the idle time in one month totaling out to $6.75.

In a year you will save $21 with the 5870.

To check this, calculate 150 hours per month for your gaming, and 210 for idle. Have the GTX 470 at 220w load and 40w idle. Then have the 5870 at 180w load and 28w idle. All at 20 cents per kilowatt per hour.

So no it wont do anything to your electricity bill.




NV wants data centers to use these cards... Imagine 100,000 of these in a data center!!!! Just imagine what a big difference even 100,000 HD 5970 would make over GTX 480.
March 28, 2010 10:45:53 PM

Well, If I had a Nuclear Reactor, I could prehaps use 100,000 of those, with a small iceberg to keep them cool.
March 28, 2010 10:47:17 PM

AMW1011 said:
I could argue that the GTX 480 will play Crysis 2 at twice the framerates that a 5970 will, but thats just as useless.

If you want to paint everything in a light that just reflects your bias, then fine.

It is generally accepted that release day cards gain performance from better drivers, up to 5-10% within a few months of release. ATI has had 6 months.

Your right I'm guessing, but it is an educated guess based on history. It is extremely likely that the GTX 4xx cards that just came out will gain 5-10% more performance than the 5xxx series with driver updates, there are no reasons to think otherwise while all evidence supports it as does history. I know this, you know this, so what is the problem?



Pity AMD has new cards in 4 months time. Die shrink I to 28nm... think NV plans to release 28nm in 3-4 months time???????
March 28, 2010 10:49:47 PM

AMW1011 said:
Mathfail, 366-319 = 47 so Delta 47w in Crysis.

http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image//skymtl/GPU/GTX480123/GTX480-80.jpg

Delta is 30w here. Using the 3dmark benchmark

http://media.bestofmicro.com/1/O/242412/original/Power%20Consumption.png

Delta is 50w here using the Furmark benchmark that squeezes the most out of a video card.

30+50+47 = 127 / 3 = 42.33

Happy now?



So you do play Furmark after all!!! Looks like you alsoplay 3Dmark, another great game. They use physx????
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 11:04:26 PM

builderbobftw said:
The 5850 comes with a 30% fan speed, and lower temps than the military grade GTX 470/480 coolers at 70%.

So what has more OC headroom again?

GTX 470=Factory Oc'd.


Okay I'm going to say this as plainly as possible so that you can understand.

HardwareCanuks overclocked a GTX 470 by about the same amount as reviewers overclocked a 5850 both without modifying voltage. These are both extreme overclocks. Hardware canuks barely had to raise the fan speed to keep the GTX 470 within thermal spec, so it still has more to go when the voltage starts increasing. This means it can still overclock farther.

Does the GTX 470 have the same overclocking potential as the 5850? We don't know. What we do know is that it will be close because the GTX 470 obviously, at least when you actually think about it and look at the facts, is a good overclocker as well as the 5850.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 11:07:34 PM

sedaine said:
So you do play Furmark after all!!! Looks like you alsoplay 3Dmark, another great game. They use physx????


I totally agree, the power consumption won't be as high as in the benchmarks, but we were looking at the deltas between the GTX 470 and the 5850 and those were the only results I could find.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 11:08:36 PM

builderbobftw said:
The 5850 comes with a 30% fan speed, and lower temps than the military grade GTX 470/480 coolers at 70%.
So what has more OC headroom again?
GTX 470=Factory Oc'd.



The overclocking potential of both seems to be pretty good. The 5850 runs cooler, but the GTX470 seems to also have good overclocking headroom due to its low core speed.


Guru3d got a 119MHz overclock out of the GTX470 with a fan increase and no voltage tweaks:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-470-480-revie...


Guru3d got a 95MHz overclock out of the 5850 with two in crossfire.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-5850-review-cro...
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 11:10:52 PM

No offence AMW but it seems to me that every time you show 'evidence' in favour of the 470 it's from Hardware Canucks.





Notice how the 5870 seems to be artificially limited to 30fps in the second one? That's the only possibly explanation for the reoccurence of straight lines at 30fps. From that, I'd say the 5xxx cards have a bit to gain from drivers. We know Nvidia has put a lot of effort into unigine already.
March 28, 2010 11:29:29 PM

jennyh said:
No offence AMW but it seems to me that every time you show 'evidence' in favour of the 470 it's from Hardware Canucks.

http://www.headlinerkaps.com/0000/ForumPics/Unigine_Heaven_480-5870_comb.jpg

http://www.hardwareluxx.de/images/stories/galleries/reviews/GTX480/Verlauf_Unigine.jpg

Notice how the 5870 seems to be artificially limited to 30fps in the second one? That's the only possibly explanation for the reoccurence of straight lines at 30fps. From that, I'd say the 5xxx cards have a bit to gain from drivers. We know Nvidia has put a lot of effort into unigine already.

:lol:  at that first pic
March 28, 2010 11:30:02 PM

jennyh said:
No offence AMW but it seems to me that every time you show 'evidence' in favour of the 470 it's from Hardware Canucks.

http://www.headlinerkaps.com/0000/ForumPics/Unigine_Heaven_480-5870_comb.jpg

http://www.hardwareluxx.de/images/stories/galleries/reviews/GTX480/Verlauf_Unigine.jpg

Notice how the 5870 seems to be artificially limited to 30fps in the second one? That's the only possibly explanation for the reoccurence of straight lines at 30fps. From that, I'd say the 5xxx cards have a bit to gain from drivers. We know Nvidia has put a lot of effort into unigine already.


Hey how do i post photos?
March 28, 2010 11:31:37 PM

builderbobftw said:
Hey how do i post photos?


Theres an insert image button and you just put the URL in it.
a b U Graphics card
March 28, 2010 11:39:20 PM

If you are using firefox you have to right click on the pic then choose 'Copy image location'.

Now if you paste that, putting at the end, it should directly show to the image from its source.
March 28, 2010 11:58:11 PM

Someone needs to do a real comparsion test, someone who is not all about one side or another, cause its just crazy, you go to one site and then the next and the exact same test show completely different stats. I mean I want to see a test result not from nvidia or any of there partners, just from the guys who do tests all the time, like ones I trust for the most part, jonnyguru, and hardocp. There are a couple of others.
So its a real good battle and it looks like we have all decided on one thing and that this real battle is between the GTX 470 and HD 5850.
So I can start a second poll and maybe get it to work this time so, we can still write in hear but I will make a second one for those two to battle, and a poll just for those two.
March 28, 2010 11:59:31 PM

So how would I take a photo from my documents, and get it in this thread?
March 29, 2010 12:37:36 AM

Ok, Nobdy post in this thread anymore, Mods please lock it, We have a new one.
March 29, 2010 1:14:48 AM

builderbobftw said:
I heard that Unigine is a fun real world game that people play.

Very good point.
March 29, 2010 1:16:19 AM

Yep, The brick road level is amazing.
a b U Graphics card
March 29, 2010 1:57:04 AM

jennyh said:
No offence AMW but it seems to me that every time you show 'evidence' in favour of the 470 it's from Hardware Canucks.


Yeah, but their review was incredibly indepth as it was a stand alone GTX 470 review where the GTX 470 was the star, while most other reviews divided the attention.

But I could post up 3DGuru, Anandtech, and Tom's more to show the same, they all got basically the same results.
a b U Graphics card
March 29, 2010 2:00:45 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
XXXXXXXXXXXDONT POST HEREXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXGO TO LINK AND VOTEXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXX http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/284961-33-5850#t21106... XXXXX


This is such a dumb thread, the GTX 470 is a better buy than the 5870 but the 5850 is the best f&^king single card for the money hands down. You could put any card that costs more than it against it and it will be the 5850 everytime...

Now here is a hard one, 5770 CF or a 5850. Both have pros and cons for the same amount, that is a hard desicion.

But really, the 5850 is going to kick the GTX 470s ass for the money even if the GTX 470 is a decent upgrade and is a better deal than the 5870, its no big secret.
a b U Graphics card
March 29, 2010 2:04:22 AM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
Someone needs to do a real comparsion test, someone who is not all about one side or another, cause its just crazy, you go to one site and then the next and the exact same test show completely different stats. I mean I want to see a test result not from nvidia or any of there partners, just from the guys who do tests all the time, like ones I trust for the most part, jonnyguru, and hardocp. There are a couple of others.
So its a real good battle and it looks like we have all decided on one thing and that this real battle is between the GTX 470 and HD 5850.
So I can start a second poll and maybe get it to work this time so, we can still write in hear but I will make a second one for those two to battle, and a poll just for those two.


No the real battle is between the GTX 470 and the 5870, why does everyone see differently.

The GTX 470 is exactly between the 5870 and the 5850 in price and performance. However, it is going to gain more from drivers than the 5870 and 5850 so it will come closer to the 5870. It also has a nice advantage with tessellation making it faster already in that context. All of this for a bit less.

The truth is, it is a more compelling card than the 5870 for the price, but the 5850 is simply the price v. performance king.
March 29, 2010 2:56:05 AM

Well if you think that, then why isn't everyone voting for the 470 over the 5850?
I could of made it that way, but this way I give nvidia the upper hand and its up to the people to choose.
a c 125 U Graphics card
March 29, 2010 11:53:53 AM

AMW1011 said:
This is such a dumb thread, the GTX 470 is a better buy than the 5870 but the 5850 is the best f&^king single card for the money hands down. You could put any card that costs more than it against it and it will be the 5850 everytime...

Now here is a hard one, 5770 CF or a 5850. Both have pros and cons for the same amount, that is a hard desicion.

But really, the 5850 is going to kick the GTX 470s ass for the money even if the GTX 470 is a decent upgrade and is a better deal than the 5870, its no big secret.


I don't see how the GTX470 is a better buy than a HD5870, where I live they cost the same, The HD5870 is slightly faster, produces less heat and power and is quieter.

Now you can bang on about future driver improvements all you like, but at the moment a HD5870 is a better buy. You can't use history as "evidence" about whats going to happen in the future, because you just don't know.
March 29, 2010 3:47:46 PM

The 470 is 10-15% less performance than the 5870, so if your talking about the better card only the 480 is better but that is more of joke than a fact.
Yeah I would say the 470 looks all good, but I would wait until its released and used for atleast a week or two, to deciede if its burning up cases.
People are real strick on what they put in there case, some people wont even put a fan thats over 20dba, so to put a card that runs over 90*C when loading games, which is not good at all.
Check this when buyig a psu, you look at its power performance, but if you see that the that is a little cheaper is was good in a couple of tests, but overall like 10% less. Then you see the temps and it is sky high on all the load tests and tortue tests compared to the othe psu you were looking at. Would you still get it or would you read the rest of the review your reading to find out it dose not get an award from the person doing the review.
If people are not going to buy a psu that runs over 50-70C cause its to hot, why would they buy a video card that gets 92C just loading a game.
To be honest I like it, but god knows what is going to happen when you play Diablo 3 all night, it would probably get so hot that it would ruin your other parts cause "they were not made for those temps".
I don't know what part of the globe your in but everywhere I know, COOLING is the BIGGEST concern when purchasing parts, COOLER is BETTER.
So even if I had a super cooling system I wouldnt soil its good name by putting a something made from the sun in it.
I think it is a shame that it does this, cause all in all, the 400's would of been a two contender cards, instead they are the TERRIBLE TWO's, nvidia needs to put them back into the shop, they are not ready for release.
March 29, 2010 7:34:04 PM

Mod's please lock the thread, we have another one on the same damn topic.
March 29, 2010 9:51:14 PM

Radeon HD 5850: Overclocking

To check the overclocking capabilities of the HD 5850 we manually increase the fan speed of the HD 5850 in the Catalyst Control Center and use an additional 120 millimeter fan. The Overdrive menu of the CCC allows us to increase the frequencies to 775/2250 MHz (default: 725/2000). Both of our HD 5850 samples are able to run those frequencies stable at only 40 percent fan speed - the gaming performance is increased by about 7 percent.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,696250/Radeon-HD-585...


Conclusion: So you gain 7% from increasing frequency on HD5850 by 50Mhz and the fan is ONLY at 40%. This puts the performance of the HD 5850 at the same level as the GTX 470, but it is quieter and cooler than the GTX 470 and requires less power.

Nvidia pushed these new cards to the limit because they were not competitive with the HD 5800 at the same power levels.
March 29, 2010 10:31:19 PM

I don't think we can settle this untill we rasie both the 470 and the 5850 to a certain tempature, at 100% fan speed, and see how they OC.
April 5, 2010 12:37:39 PM

AMW1011 said:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...
Quote:
Overclocking Results

In order to overclock our GTX 470, we used EVGA’s new GTX 400-series Precision tool while stress testing was done using the upcoming EVGA OC Scanner that provides an artifact scanner. If an overclock passed 30 minutes of artifact scanning, it was considered stable. Fan speed was set to 70% for the duration of these tests.

Also note that the fixed function stage clock (core clock) is directly linked to the speed of the processor clock (CUDA cores / shaders) and as such, you cannot overclock each one individually as you could do on the GT200 series. Basically, the fixed function clock is ½ that of the processor clock.

Final Overclocks:

Core: 721Mhz
Processors: 1442Mhz
Memory: 3974Mhz (QDR)


Our GTX 470 sample simply overclocked like the dickens and screamed its way past the clock speeds used on a stock GTX 480. The memory speeds also saw a significant increase with full stability. Considering the perceived limitations of the architecture, these clock speeds on a lower-end part are simply stunning in our opinion.


Try to base your points off of fact, it helps.


Wait a sec, I'm no ATI fanboy, infact the 2 5850's I recently bought were the first ever ATI GPU's I've ever purchased, and I've been building PC's since voodoo graphics cards were supposedly the thing many years ago. But this single contradictory "fact" is really glaring to me. Hardware canucks claims that the GTX 470 "screamed it's way past stock clocks"? It REALLY doesn't seem like it to me. BOTH my 5850's OC'ed to 900mhz core clock, and 1275mhz mem clock, from 725 and 1000 respectively, with absolutely no over volting. One can actually do 920mhz and is perfectly stable with no artifacts, but ofcourse i have to dumb it down to crossfire with the other. I'm sure more could be done upping the voltage, but I really see no point. If you'd like, I could post a few screenshots if you don't happen to believe. Anyway, 175mhz extra on the core clock and 275mhz on the memory out of the two seems pretty good to me, but per hardware canucks, the GTX 470 that did so well only got 114 extra mhz on the core clock, and where they say "processors" I'm assuming they mean the shaders, so there it upped 227mhz, very respectable. On the memory clock they're using "effective clock", like where the stock 5850 clock is actually 1000 mhz equaling effective 4000, stock 470 is 3348. Using the same divide by 4 math for the ATI card, the actual OC for the memory clock on the 470 is 993.5mhz, VS actual stock clock of 837mhz, only 156.5mhz increase. This is considered screaming? Did I miss something? Were these same people saying the 5850 "overclocked like the dickens"? Did they say ATI's overclocking ability was" stunning"? If they did, I didn't see it anywhere. Sounds alittle biased to me, considering a GTX 470 failed to OC as much as either of my 5850's.
April 12, 2010 11:26:57 AM

Shutokou said:
Wait a sec, I'm no ATI fanboy, infact the 2 5850's I recently bought were the first ever ATI GPU's I've ever purchased, and I've been building PC's since voodoo graphics cards were supposedly the thing many years ago. But this single contradictory "fact" is really glaring to me. Hardware canucks claims that the GTX 470 "screamed it's way past stock clocks"? It REALLY doesn't seem like it to me. BOTH my 5850's OC'ed to 900mhz core clock, and 1275mhz mem clock, from 725 and 1000 respectively, with absolutely no over volting. One can actually do 920mhz and is perfectly stable with no artifacts, but ofcourse i have to dumb it down to crossfire with the other. I'm sure more could be done upping the voltage, but I really see no point. If you'd like, I could post a few screenshots if you don't happen to believe. Anyway, 175mhz extra on the core clock and 275mhz on the memory out of the two seems pretty good to me, but per hardware canucks, the GTX 470 that did so well only got 114 extra mhz on the core clock, and where they say "processors" I'm assuming they mean the shaders, so there it upped 227mhz, very respectable. On the memory clock they're using "effective clock", like where the stock 5850 clock is actually 1000 mhz equaling effective 4000, stock 470 is 3348. Using the same divide by 4 math for the ATI card, the actual OC for the memory clock on the 470 is 993.5mhz, VS actual stock clock of 837mhz, only 156.5mhz increase. This is considered screaming? Did I miss something? Were these same people saying the 5850 "overclocked like the dickens"? Did they say ATI's overclocking ability was" stunning"? If they did, I didn't see it anywhere. Sounds alittle biased to me, considering a GTX 470 failed to OC as much as either of my 5850's.


I haven't read every bit of information posted, however; I'm getting a new PC soon and I was waiting for the nvidia fermi GPUs. Now that they're out i'm not even sure I want to get one, the Ati 5850 just seems a much better bang for buck. You seem like you don't regret buying the 5850's, or if you had a second chance, would still stick with your ATi cards. Is this somewhere on the mark?
a b U Graphics card
April 12, 2010 12:03:20 PM

The Nvidia cards did get a pretty healthy clock but at the same time very loud fan speeds. Personally I won't overclock to a point where I can't hear anything. That is simply not a sensible thing to do.

The hardwarecanucks review didn't include overclocked Cypress cards. To me that is just not fair.

The cypress can go up to 1000mhz core (requires a healthy bit of voltage) but realistically 950mhz is the limit for low voltage operations.

With the same settings they used. They said Tesselation was "enabled" so I guess they used normal.
With a 5970 clocked at 950mhz/1200mhz. I got 51FPS. Thats 25% improvement. While the GTX 480 only gained just under 15% with overclocking
Also confirmed it was normal tesselation. My 5970 only scores 35FPS with extreme tesselation.

If the other Cypress cards recieve the same 25% performance gain, it would close in on the Fermi cards.
April 12, 2010 12:23:06 PM

sturticles said:
I haven't read every bit of information posted, however; I'm getting a new PC soon and I was waiting for the nvidia fermi GPUs. Now that they're out i'm not even sure I want to get one, the Ati 5850 just seems a much better bang for buck. You seem like you don't regret buying the 5850's, or if you had a second chance, would still stick with your ATi cards. Is this somewhere on the mark?



The only thing I regret is originally buying a 5850, and not just saving up for a 5970 in the first place instead of getting another 5850 down the road. That being said, the rest is really up to you. The 5850 and the gtx470 perform roughly even, and if I had to pick which was best performance wise, I'd say the gtx470 by a marginal amount, but the gtx470 uses a decent bit more power than the 5850. Here's the benchmarks from Tom's: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/geforce-gtx-480,review-31... Per newegg.com, they're running both nearly equal price wise, with the higher end 5850's being about the same as a baseline gtx470. If you plan on using only a single card, the power issue isn't really a problem for you, though if you planned to later SLI or Xfire, 2 gtx470's could possibly cause you to need a higher wattage power supply where 2 5850's might not. Remember, no matter what anyone else says, it's not about what is BEST, but what is best for you under your current circumstance. If you want to pay alittle more for a gtx470, you'll have the benefit of having PhysX in the few games that currently offer it, and a very slight performance increase on SOME games. If you want a 5850, you'll pay alittle less and IF you think you want to try 2 graphics cards, you MIGHT not need to buy a new power supply with it. I don't know what kind of power supply you have or will buy, so that very well could be a non issue for you. Like I said, it's all about what's best for you.





April 12, 2010 12:40:06 PM

i love these nerdy fan boys fights. Nvidia took so much time and the results are very poor. Nvidia is 6 months behind Amd. Nvidia is doing everything wrong..a 6 months old product provides almost the same performance..consuming less hit and lower price..wtf..
a b U Graphics card
April 12, 2010 12:53:50 PM

The common denomonator is money not which company is 6 months behind. Nobody is going to buy Nvidia just because they are handicapped.

On second thought. ATI released their cards 6 months ago. So the cards are the same generation. Just as consumers you get them 6 months late.

Same with their cards. I wouldn't buy their stocks because their quarterly reports are terrible. Other people are not going to buy because they feel sorry for Nvidia. People want a sound invenstment.
April 12, 2010 2:09:48 PM

rofl_my_waffle said:
The common denomonator is money not which company is 6 months behind. Nobody is going to buy Nvidia just because they are handicapped.

On second thought. ATI released their cards 6 months ago. So the cards are the same generation. Just as consumers you get them 6 months late.

Same with their cards. I wouldn't buy their stocks because their quarterly reports are terrible. Other people are not going to buy because they feel sorry for Nvidia. People want a sound invenstment.


How do you know that your nvidia warranty is going to be valid in 2-5 years or whatever! Companys as big as nvidia can fall, and they don't just fall, they collapse hard. Think of Circuit City, I never would of imagined they would be gone but, bong, there gone.

ATI is solid, ahead of the curve, and has an overall quality/performance/price. So the only thing is price, so if you have more get the 5970 or 5870, if you have less get the 5850 or 5830, either way all these cards are superiour products and you get what you paid for, even if its the 5830, which is damn good deal if your on tight tight budget.

I personally plan on either getting the 5870 or 5850. I do like the directCU 5850 which from what I read is outstanding, and I do plan on getting this. However if I have extra cash and will more than likely, then I will either get the Matrix or V2. The V2 isn't that cool but for its price its awesome.

All in All nvidia has really f'ed up, I can't believe they made people wait that long its un heard of. If I waited 6 months I would of expected cards that would of smashd the 5800's. But they knew exactly what ati put out and had the complete edge to win them over, but nvidia doesn't have
the capibilites to keep up with ATI. They just don't have the know how or brains to be in the game with a company like ATI.

Yeah intel is on top, but that has nothing to do with nvidia. Here soon when AMD is back on top, a combination of AMD and ATI will be the ultimate computer. cause who the F is going to spend 1000+ on a chip?!? So all I can say is Thuban, 890FX, and 5870!
!