Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question
Closed

GTX 470 vs GTX 480 vs 5870 vs 5850 - Page 4

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Gtx
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics Cards

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 %
April 12, 2010 5:35:13 PM

Hi

I don't wanna start a new topic and, to be hones, I don't wanna read all this one. I want to by a new video card and I'm wondering which one should I choose - ATI 5870 or GTX 470 ?
April 12, 2010 5:40:13 PM

I've always had a geforce card and always have been satisfied, though I've heard a lot of good opinions about 5870. Now I have gtx 260 core-216 but I would like to play in dx11 mode. Which of those two (5870 and 470) would be a better choice?
April 12, 2010 7:06:53 PM

rogigor said:
Hi

I don't wanna start a new topic and, to be hones, I don't wanna read all this one. I want to by a new video card and I'm wondering which one should I choose - ATI 5870 or GTX 470 ?


The 5870.

Now back on topic.
Related resources
April 20, 2010 8:34:58 PM

I picked up a Sapphire 5850 gamer edition for $250. Damaged box at Frys deal :) 

Overclocked easily to just under 5870 clock speeds on air under load fan setting at 50 percent was around 55 C. Well.......a lot of air. Nothing a Coolermaster HAF 922 couldn't handle.

I upgraded from Nvidia 275 just to have the direct x 11 support. This card kicks the crap out of every game I can throw at it and easily beats out the 275. I have been a fan of both ATI and Nvidia for years and have swapped out cards depending on who had the best bang for buck around, and here's my two cents. (Please keep in mind, I am not biased towards any manufacturer like a lot of people are) I'm just calling it as Ive seen it.

Nvidia was on top for most of the 90's 2000's even starting with the MX440 and up. They made solid cards that were cheap and outperformed everything ATI could muster up. This was until ATI driver base became a better package.

The last good card Nvidia made to me was th 9800GTX which held its own for over 2 years.

ATI took control and it hasnt slowed down since.

It kind of seems to me that Nvidia is trying to play the catch up game by matching the competition whose cards have been out for how long? They fail to sweep us off our feet like they used to do every time they introduced their new cards.

I really dont see ATI slowing down any time soon which is going to make Nvidia rush card production just to try and keep up in the game. Is it worth the extra dough to see a 4fps gain in games that require Phys-X? Most likely not..................

If I can run all games including newer such as Battlefield Bad Company 2, Metro 2033, Just Cause 2 at 60fps or higher maxed on a modest system using this $250 card. Spending 600 just to have "The best" doesn't even seem relevant to me anymore.

System Specs:
Phenom II 955 Black Edition
6 GB OCZ DDR 3
Sapphire Radeon 5850
OCZ 700 Watt modular
Cooler Master HAF 922 case with 3 200MM + 1 120MM fans
320 X 2 Seagate HDD in Raid 0




a b U Graphics card
April 20, 2010 10:00:45 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.


Really? I disagree buddy, yesterday a few 480's sold for over 750.00$ on e-bay ;) 

The 470's are also selling like hotcakes so I guess your assumption is incorrect.

Why would people spend over 750.00$ on a 480 when they can get a 5970 for 700.00$? Makes you think heh?










April 20, 2010 11:45:02 PM

OvrClkr said:
Really? I disagree buddy, yesterday a few 480's sold for over 750.00$ on e-bay ;) 

The 470's are also selling like hotcakes so I guess your assumption is incorrect.

Why would people spend over 750.00$ on a 480 when they can get a 5970 for 700.00$? Makes you think heh?


yeah, 470/480's are selling out within 30minutes everytime they come back on stock on newegg. I almost thought about getting myself GTX480 when my saphire hd5870 vapor-x was giving me GSOD trouble and no work arounds online could fix it. Eventually I RMA'd the card and gave one last try with XFX HD5870 reference card. I've been running it for 2 weeks now without any GSOD problems. happy as a clam. However, I heard this is a common problem for those with X58 boards (which is what i own). and when something doesn't give you a consistent performance(in terms of crashing), i would have absolutely no problem switching over to something slightly more expensive, heat, and power, if it can deliver stability.

now although alot of people claim that GPU temps for 5870 almost matches gtx480 by 7 degrees c. How are people getting this? I run my HD5870 with 35% fan speed at all times and it never breaks 70C even when playing BC2 on 1920x1200 maxed out. and my vapor-x use to be at 55C on load and 29 idle with 30% fan speed which was virtually not audible.

Can anyone here who owns GTX480/470 tell us what their GPU temp is for idle/load? I'm wondering if people would actually report lower temps than the reviews found online cause I certainly seems to observe temps lower than what is reported online.
a b U Graphics card
April 20, 2010 11:53:14 PM

Of course the temps are much lower than what you see in the benches. Most if not all used "AUTO" fan speed to test the heat threshold.


May 9, 2010 5:14:25 PM

Just bought the GTX 480 single card and I don't know why ppl would knock it unless your an ATI poster child (fanboy). the card is quiet, yet belts out a little heat but not enough to be concerned about. Drivers out of the box "good". Played MW2 for 3 hours "Stable" all turned up at 1920X1080, room was still nice and cool. Age of Conan 1920x1080 100-250 fps (depend what zone I was in), 8 hours, temp normal. Crysis 1920x1080 50-60 fps avg, 2 hours everything maxed, the cards fan actually made some noise, but drowned out by the noise of the game, only noticed it between the loading screens. I have no idea why some ppl complain about the most trivial things "it's to hot it's to noisy" it's like listening to ppl complain about the weather, "it's to cold it's to hot" "cant wait till summer cant wait till winter" I think most ppl will never be just happy with what they got.

P.S. no need for O.C. I want my PC to last for more than a year, heck I don't even have a fan on my proc and it's been 2 years, been using a Cooler Master Hyper Z600R, still running just fine.
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2010 5:32:20 PM

The poll says best performance for price.

No where else to put this, so ,.... I noticed the 5830's are down on price. Theres a saphire for 219.00~ or 199.99 after rebate. Thats not bad.
There at a point now where two of those would be about the same price as a 5870 and crossfire together would be better.
Another 20 dollars , and I might buy, lol :) 
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2010 5:36:46 PM

Desi26 said:
I picked up a Sapphire 5850 gamer edition for $250. Damaged box at Frys deal :) 

Overclocked easily to just under 5870 clock speeds on air under load fan setting at 50 percent was around 55 C. Well.......a lot of air. Nothing a Coolermaster HAF 922 couldn't handle.

I upgraded from Nvidia 275 just to have the direct x 11 support. This card kicks the crap out of every game I can throw at it and easily beats out the 275. I have been a fan of both ATI and Nvidia for years and have swapped out cards depending on who had the best bang for buck around, and here's my two cents. (Please keep in mind, I am not biased towards any manufacturer like a lot of people are) I'm just calling it as Ive seen it.

Nvidia was on top for most of the 90's 2000's even starting with the MX440 and up. They made solid cards that were cheap and outperformed everything ATI could muster up. This was until ATI driver base became a better package.

The last good card Nvidia made to me was th 9800GTX which held its own for over 2 years.

ATI took control and it hasnt slowed down since.

It kind of seems to me that Nvidia is trying to play the catch up game by matching the competition whose cards have been out for how long? They fail to sweep us off our feet like they used to do every time they introduced their new cards.

I really dont see ATI slowing down any time soon which is going to make Nvidia rush card production just to try and keep up in the game. Is it worth the extra dough to see a 4fps gain in games that require Phys-X? Most likely not..................

If I can run all games including newer such as Battlefield Bad Company 2, Metro 2033, Just Cause 2 at 60fps or higher maxed on a modest system using this $250 card. Spending 600 just to have "The best" doesn't even seem relevant to me anymore.

System Specs:
Phenom II 955 Black Edition
6 GB OCZ DDR 3
Sapphire Radeon 5850
OCZ 700 Watt modular
Cooler Master HAF 922 case with 3 200MM + 1 120MM fans
320 X 2 Seagate HDD in Raid 0


You're missing a lot of history here.

From what you said it would seem like nVidia was better all the way until the 9800GTX, as you started off saying they were good with the MX440, and skipped around 5 generations of cards.

I agree nVidia was clearly better up until ATI's 9700Pro, which was outstanding performance and perfectly timed with the driver's really getting better & timed with the GeForce FX's failure propelled ATI onto center-stage, afterwards the 2 would both have their up's & down's.

To me the 9800GTX was a failure, most were expecting it to be called the 8900GTX because it was, simply, an overclocked 8800GTS 512MB.

nVidia's massive GT200 chip could not compete with the nimble RV700, allowing ATI smash the older G92 chips with nVidia unable to do a thing other than at the high end.
The exceptional 4000 series would break the bad streak & raise attention, and then right when the world was looking ATI delivered again with the amazing 5000 series.
May 10, 2010 3:43:50 AM

~~+1~~
Well put. I do think that the 5000 series was quite amazing. I think with the thubans out and th 5850/5870's, AMD and ATI are both on top of the pottem pole. Yeah intels chip that is twice & three times more are better but, 300$ for a Hex core w/ 5850, it doesn't get any better than that for that price.
May 19, 2010 8:49:07 PM

3D Vision, Cuda, and PhysX make NVIDIA the leader. But ATI has Eyefinity which is extremely bad ass, but unless you're wanting this there is no other reason besides saving money. Then however, if you buy ATI you must also buy a PhysX card or your games will be lackluster. I have a 480 with stereoscopic 3D vision monitor which is the only way to game after you tried it.
May 26, 2010 8:51:16 PM

Sorry guys, gonna have to disagree with all the ATI guys out there. I owned a Sapphire 5870 for about 2 weeks. Got a gsod once a day at least for the first week. Tried different drivers vbios etc, nothing helped at all. RMA'd it and got an EVGA 470. Perfect out of the box with almost identical performance. Sure, ATI hardware is nice, but wtf good is awesome hardware with bad drivers? Thats like putting a retard driver behind the wheel of a Ferrari. =/
a c 329 U Graphics card
May 26, 2010 9:07:25 PM

cam0385 said:
Sorry guys, gonna have to disagree with all the ATI guys out there. I owned a Sapphire 5870 for about 2 weeks. Got a gsod once a day at least for the first week. Tried different drivers vbios etc, nothing helped at all. RMA'd it and got an EVGA 470. Perfect out of the box with almost identical performance. Sure, ATI hardware is nice, but wtf good is awesome hardware with bad drivers? Thats like putting a retard driver behind the wheel of a Ferrari. =/

Someone likes to live dangerously don't they? [:mousemonkey] :lol: 

Welcome to the forum and I hope you continue to tell it how you see it.
a b U Graphics card
May 26, 2010 9:17:40 PM

cam0385 said:
Sorry guys, gonna have to disagree with all the ATI guys out there. I owned a Sapphire 5870 for about 2 weeks. Got a gsod once a day at least for the first week. Tried different drivers vbios etc, nothing helped at all. RMA'd it and got an EVGA 470. Perfect out of the box with almost identical performance. Sure, ATI hardware is nice, but wtf good is awesome hardware with bad drivers? Thats like putting a retard driver behind the wheel of a Ferrari. =/


And the ironic thing? If the drivers and bios aren't fixing the problem, the hardware is the problem. You probably should have sent the 5870 back for a replacement, which usually fixes it. But, oh well, you ended up with a similar performing card that costs less so all's well that ends well.
a b U Graphics card
May 26, 2010 10:16:50 PM

cam0385 said:
But wtf good is awesome hardware with bad drivers? Thats like putting a retard driver behind the wheel of a Ferrari. =/


+1 :lol: 
May 28, 2010 1:32:21 PM

Salt-City_Slasher said:
Well if you want to base your opinions off of onw diagram, there are plenty of benchmarks in games were the 5970 isn't that much better, I am not saying the 480 does better in performance, but I would say its right up there with it.
Then the 470 beats the crap out of the 5850 in everything period, and then gets higher FPS's in pretty much every games benchmarks, I am not writing this out of my azz, yeah there is certain if ands, and, buts, but in general I wouldn't place the 5970 as the route to go when buying a card, for many reasons. Also with that stated if I wasn't getting it why would I get 5870 when for $350, I could get a GTX 470 and with out OCing it get just as good fps in 1920x1200 then the 5870, not to mention I could get the asus 5850 and oc also and it would perfrom just as good as the 5870.
Plus if you want to talk about heat and wattage, I am not sticking them in my stock dell computer from k mart, so that isn't even a problem in my case.

And since your not satisfied with the "small" gain in fps, I would consider that your not interested in 3D or PsyX, which is what nvidia is offering a complete package, that actually works out of the box, how long has it taken them to get the newest driver out to get things the work, there lucky they did cause that would take that "small" increase a lot higher.
Obviously if your all ATI then nothing Nvidia has to offer will be good enough for you even if it did spank the 5970. The ATI cards were the best around cause there was nothing around, and I just hope ATI fans aren't scared of a "little" competition.
Intel is on top of AMD-fact, Nvidia is on top of ATI-fact. Intel with Nvidia on top of AMD with ATI-fact.


please stop posting to the forums if you don't know what you're talking about.
a b U Graphics card
May 28, 2010 2:14:19 PM

jayrq2o1 said:
please stop posting to the forums if you don't know what you're talking about.


Thats pretty darn bold for someone thats only joined today posted 1 time :pfff: 
a c 329 U Graphics card
July 20, 2010 3:42:23 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
      • 1
      • 2
      • 3
      • 4 / 4