HD 4870 vs GTX 260

[Blacklash]

To listen to ATi fans you would think the HD 4870 wins 99% of all benches out there now.

From what I have seen @ 1600x or greater-

HD 4870 wins: Assassins Creed, Grid, Oblivion, Bioshock, CoD4, Quake Wars, HL2, STALKER.

GTX 260 wins: Crysis, Lost Planet, WiC, AoC, CoH, Prey, SupCom, UT3, GRAW2, Frontlines: Fuel of War, Mass Effect, FEAR.

That's stock, once you OC both cards the GTX 260 gets more wins.

[SH64]

So it really comes down do what games you prefer .. i'd still give a thumbsup for the 260 for its higher framebuffer.

Well when the GTX 260 was $400, it was the clear loser. Now, if they all get down to $300, it's MUCH harder to say. Either way, they're both great cards IMO.

[Medion]

Originally Posted by SH64

So it really comes down do what games you prefer .. i'd still give a thumbsup for the 260 for its higher framebuffer.

Eh, but I prefer the Radeon for it's DX10.1 support. I like to upgrade GPUs every 2-3 years, so I try to find the one that I think will serve me best over that time period, in addition to figuring in IQ, performance, and cost.

[Xion X2]

1. 4870 is on a beta driver, GTX is on an official driver
2. 4870 has a VLIW architecture which is much tougher to code for, thus enhancing the importance of driver maturity
3. No Catalyst version for 4870 will allow over a 790 overclock, so it's too early to tell how well the card overclocks when it's software-limited
4. The current driver keeps the fan speed locked so that it doesn't spool up like it should--keeping the card hotter and, again, limiting overclocking potential

I mean, really.. this is a stupid thread at this point in the game. It is far too early to draw an accurate comparison between these cards.

[SH64]

Originally Posted by Medion

Eh, but I prefer the Radeon for it's DX10.1 support. I like to upgrade GPUs every 2-3 years, so I try to find the one that I think will serve me best over that time period, in addition to figuring in IQ, performance, and cost.

So far DX10.1 hasnt proved itself yet nor there are any games that supports it except AC perhaps (it didnt change much in AC either) , but i see your point.

[AthlonXP1800]

Originally Posted by Medion

Eh, but I prefer the Radeon for it's DX10.1 support. I like to upgrade GPUs every 2-3 years, so I try to find the one that I think will serve me best over that time period, in addition to figuring in IQ, performance, and cost.

I had Sapphire 4870 installed and played with it for 3 days since last Saturday, noticed IQ was the same as Geforce 8800GTX.

[Xion X2]

Originally Posted by SH64

So it really comes down do what games you prefer .. i'd still give a thumbsup for the 260 for its higher framebuffer.

Frame-buffer is not all that matters. It is one component that plays a role in memory bandwidth, and the memory bandwidth of the 4870 is a little higher than the 260 due to the GDDR-5.

[SH64]

Originally Posted by Xion X2

Frame-buffer is not all that matters. It is one component that plays a role in memory bandwidth, and the memory bandwidth of the 4870 is a little higher than the 260 due to the GDDR-5.

[Medion]

Originally Posted by SH64

So far DX10.1 hasnt proved itself yet nor there are any games that supports it except AC perhaps (it didnt change much in AC either) , but i see your point.

Not yet, but like I said, I do try to get 2-3 years out of my GPU, and DX10.1 support should start trickling in soon.

[Xion X2]

Originally Posted by SH64

SH64, this doesn't prove much since the GT280 has 30-40 GB/s on the 4870 in bandwidth. In fact, it only bolsters the point I was trying to make.

Now if you throw a bench of Crysis up here on a GTX260 that shows the same advantage it would be a different story since they are close in bandwidth. But no--what we see is that the 4870 outperforms the 260 on that game with high details and AA applied. At 1920x1200 and 2xAA, it outperforms the GTX260:

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...nce/page11.asp

If frame buffer were all that mattered, this wouldn't be the case.

[SH64]

There is no point of that FS bench since it dosen't show the min.fps

its obvious & logical that the GTX260's min.fps would've been higher if it was in that benchmark i posted (due to its higher Video Memory).