Comin back to PC gaming - confused

[jAkUp]

Originally Posted by Tr1cK

Shhhh, I know it's just me spreading the FUD the other direction.

People that are simple enough to think that more VRAM is better regardless of anything else due to it being a bigger number will probably also bite the hook on the shaders being better due to having more.

Shader units are completely seperate from texture memory.

Texture memory is texture memory and unless you are using ATI's compression algorithm, once you run out thats it. Games with high res textures, high AA/AF and resolution will run over the 512MB mark. The GX2 was more than proof of this.

Performance wise the 260 and 4870 are extremely close, but the 260 OC's pretty well

[jAkUp]

Also, another good point to bring up is the OP already has an SLI mobo, so he could add another 260 easily if he ever wanted to in the future.

Honestly I really don't see much advantage to a 4870 over a 260, they are so close in performance, the 260 has better features IMO.

Only way I can see maybe if you had an Intel board for future expandability.

[JohnEJohn]

Originally Posted by jAkUp

Also, another good point to bring up is the OP already has an SLI mobo, so he could add another 260 easily if he ever wanted to in the future.

Honestly I really don't see much advantage to a 4870 over a 260 except for plus or minus 2FPS in some games. The 260 has more plus's IMO.

Only way I can see maybe if you had an Intel board for future expandability.

Its not SLI but I am thinking of upgrading M/Board at the same time then getting a quad core when I can afford it. Either one of those 2 cards sounds good but I will proably side with the Nvidia card but not entirely sure just yet.

Also I see that things haven't changed much around here lol.
Could somone answer my questions on the XP/DX10 side?

[SH64]

Originally Posted by Krisray

Wrong, even at high res with AA the HD 4870 beats the GTX 260. The HD 4870 uses a whole lot more filters for its AA vs Nvidia's cards.

I know you are banned now so i'll just direct my response to the general public.

I still cant get a solid proof that 4870 512MB dosent get any kind of stuttering/hitching/hiccups in high res + AA. something most reviews dont care to check or report.

[Tr1cK]

Originally Posted by jAkUp

Shader units are completely seperate from texture memory.

Texture memory is texture memory and unless you are using ATI's compression algorithm, once you run out thats it. Games with high res textures, high AA/AF and resolution will run over the 512MB mark. The GX2 was more than proof of this.

Performance wise the 260 and 4870 are extremely close, but the 260 OC's pretty well

I know they are separate. I was implying that people who assume that a card with more physical RAM on it is better, should also assume that a card with more shader processors would also be faster than a card with less. The 4800s are a new architecture that is more efficient than the GTX200s and don't require as much VRAM when AA is applied. As far as total texture memory, it will still lose if AA isn't in the picture.


OP, I'd get the 4870 just to support ATI and the competitive market. The GTX200s are still great cards and have better driver support and Nhancer which is just awesome. You can't go wrong either way. Don't let anyone (hell_of_ doom227, perhaps?) try to convince you that either are junk.

Originally Posted by SH64

I know you are banned now so i'll just direct my response to the general public.

I still cant get a solid proof that 4870 512MB dosent get any kind of stuttering/hitching/hiccups in high res + AA. something most reviews dont care to check or report.

I've not noticed any more on my 4850 than my 8800-320.

[SH64]

Originally Posted by Tr1cK

I've not noticed any more on my 4850 than my 8800-320.

So there are some! thats my point about the higher VRAM.

[Tr1cK]

Originally Posted by SH64

So there are some! thats my point about the higher VRAM.

No, I mean I didn't have any on the 320 except on LOTRO which is notorious for it with any card and does it just as bad on my 4850. All other gaming is smooth.

[SH64]

Originally Posted by Tr1cK

No, I mean I didn't have any on the 320 except on LOTRO which is notorious for it with any card and does it just as bad on my 4850. All other gaming is smooth.

Can you try Oblivion with QTP3 @ high res + AA , or Crysis at v.high settings ?

these games would give a clear indication of vram limitations @ high resolutions + AA. (lets just say 1920x1200,4xAA).

[Tr1cK]

Originally Posted by SH64

Can you try Oblivion with QTP3 @ high res + AA , or Crysis at v.high settings ?

these games would give a clear indication of vram limitations @ high resolutions + AA. (lets just say 1920x1200,4xAA).

I don't have either right now. I also can't get over 1680x1050. TF2, COD4, LOTRO, and WoW is all I got right now. I did have AoC and it ran a ton better than the 8800 did. I was on the highest settings with 4xAA no problem.

[JohnEJohn]

Thanks for all the help guys, been reading up quite a bit and trying to get past all the fanboy crap on other sites.

Think I have decided to get a new sli M/B and get one 260 for now, then once I have the money a better processor and maybe another 260 later along the line when required.

Cheers