Will Radeon HD 4870 turn up the heat on the GTX 280?

[Zapablast05]

Meh, the HD4850 still looks like it can kick ass. It's just a hair slower than the GTX280.

[Fotis]

Originally Posted by slaWter

The X2 is not an alternative with its current release date. The 280 is the #1 card until then...

I agree.I just think that when X2 comes out GTX will become more affordable for those that want to buy it.

Originally Posted by SH64

The 4870X2 will be a XF solution which means all the dual card issues & performance troubles.

Maybe it wll have those problems and maybe it wont.Depends on whether the rumors about shared memory are true.

[Redeemed]

Originally Posted by pizzaguy

You have no clue as to what you are talking about and are completely missing the point by buying into the bs from the reviews which do nothing but show you the peak FPS rather than the average FPS and Min FPS. This is where the GTX 280 is miles and miles ahead of any SLI solution, a few guys here that have upgraded from the GX2 will gladly tell you what a better and much smoother gaming experience is provided to them by the GTX 280 over the GX2.

Let us not forget as well that the GTX 280 is on launch drivers while the GX2 on the other hand is on drivers that have had time to mature and optimize.

Also you are neglecting to acknowledge the fact that the GTX 280 has a major advantage over the GX2 with its much broader memory bus and more usable ram. Both of these factors will help the GTX 280 in high res situations with lots of AA and AF applied. Here is an example of what happens when the GX2 runs out of memory-





I do agree that the GTX 280 is overpriced but I am not to blind to see the obvious advantages that the GTX 280 has over any current G92 sli setup and you are only fooling yourself if you really think that the GX2 is the better card.

I find it odd that you chose WiC as the proof for your argument. RTSs don't need much more than 30fps to be very playable.

You're argument about hi-res + lots of AA and AF hold true though- the GTX280 will pull ahead in those situations... but to be clear hi-res is really 1920x1200 and above. At 1680x1050 and lower the GTX280 is an absolute waste of money. Heck, my dual 640MB GTSs barely stuttered even with Crysis playing at 1680x1050 w/2xAA, 16xAF, and all in-game options on "High". The GTX 280 wouldn't yield nearly enough gain to justify its price in this scenerio. I'd be better off dropping another 9600GT in my current rig than I would be to purchase the GTX280 right now.

When it comes to performance at the highest resolutions with the highest AA and AF settings, nVidia won this round. But the people gaming with such needs make up maybe 1% of the total PC enthusiast market. The rest of the PC Gaming crowd will be far more wise to invest in an HD4800 based setup as these cards offer significantly greater cost/performance ratio.

[walterman]

A couple of these cards with 1GB per card will do the job. And prolly still cheaper than the GTX280. It's going to be an interesting summer

[john19055]

I think AMD/ATI has a winner on its hand ,even if the 4870 is a few frames slower at $299 it is a great deal and the 4850 being as low as $150 is even a better deal.I think nvidia will have to drop there price because why would you buy a $650 card when you can buy two 4870's for $600 and they will be a lot faster then one GTX280.

[mcolbourn]

Originally Posted by walterman

A couple of these cards with 1GB per card will do the job. And prolly still cheaper than the GTX280. It's going to be an interesting summer

Yea I think for once its a win win situ for us. If we go for either Nvidia or ATI really.

[pizzaguy]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

RTSs don't need much more than 30fps to be very playable.

Thats completely besides the point Redeemed as the whole idea was to show the advantage of the bigger bus and more ram from the GTX 280.

[pizzaguy]

Originally Posted by Redeemed

At 1680x1050 and lower the GTX280 is an absolute waste of money.

Actually I think its a fine card for those at 1680X1050 (nothing less though) who do not plan to do any GPU upgrades for a long while. It enables those users to enjoy the absolute highest levels of AA and AF while maintaining a smooth FPS and will also help them with future titles as they become more demanding.

[nekrosoft13]

Originally Posted by Zapablast05

Meh, the HD4850 still looks like it can kick ass. It's just a hair slower than the GTX280.

more then a hair

[pizzaguy]

Originally Posted by nekrosoft13

more then a hair

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. LOL.

[shadow001]

Originally Posted by Xion X2

While 16fps isn't flying, it's still a 60% increase in performance over the GX2. That's a pretty big oversight on your part.

C'mon now,16 FPS still sucks and using the 60% value to make it sound better is just damage control.....By personal experience,anything below 30 FPS as an absolute minimum value sucks for gameplay smoothness,especially in fast paced games like first person shooters.

Hardocp sucks. Always has, always will. Put them on the same tabloid shelf as Tom's Hardware.

I'm no fan myself,but at least they do record min/average/max FPS values and have those graphs for each card,and they show both the GTX280 and multi GPU setups behaving much the same for the most part thru the entire run.

[mailman2]

Originally Posted by shadow001

C'mon now,16 FPS still sucks and using the 60% value to make it sound better is just damage control.....By personal experience,anything below 30 FPS as an absolute minimum value sucks for gameplay smoothness,especially in fast paced games like first person shooters.

QFT. These people that jump up and down for a 80% increase when it's still under ~40 FPS are just ignorant. I don't care what the increase percentage is if it's still not "playable" to me.