Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 400/500 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-20-10, 09:31 AM   #37
kam03
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 345
Send a message via MSN to kam03
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowk View Post
The fact that you can buy 2 X GTX285's in SLI for less money and get ~ the same performance as the ATI 5970, doesn't show me a major win for ATI. Plus I get to use PhysX without a hack that I'm sure Nvidia will break in a future driver...

I wish they would make PhysX avail to anyone that just owns one of their cards and wants to use PhysX.

You can get the GTX285's for about $300 each new if you know where to look.
LOL who in their right mind would buy 2x GTX285 and be limited with DX10? when they can buy a future proof DX11 graphics card with performance >= 2x GTX285 and cheaper then 2x GTX285?

2x Nvidia GTX285 costs £560 (£280 each)
1x ATi 5970 costs £530
__________________
i7 3770K @ 4.5ghz, Asus P8Z77-V,
8GB 1866Mhz CL9,
Gigabyte 7950,
Crucial M4 128GB,
Seagate 3TB,
Enermax Galaxy 1000W DXX,
Windows 7 Ultimate x64,
NEC LCD2690WUXi,
Yamaha RX-V667 Receiver,
Monitor Audio Vector 5.1
kam03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 09:34 AM   #38
Slytat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 354
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kam03 View Post
LOL who in their right mind would buy 2x GTX285 and be limited with DX10? when they can buy a future proof DX11 graphics card with performance >= 2x GTX285 and cheaper then 2x GTX285?

2x Nvidia GTX285 costs £560 (£280 each)
1x ATi 5970 costs £530
HOLD ON.

I never said you should buy them, I simply said that they are roughly the same speed.

At this time you are obviously better off buying a 5970/5870CF or holding out for Fermi.

I wouldn't purchase 28x GPUs at this point unless I already had 1 and I was adding SLI or whatever.

Of course "limited" by DX10 is a rather redundant statement as there is little in the way of anything significant in terms of DX11 right now or in the immediate future.

Yah, Yah I know, AvP, BF etc but will we actually be able to see the difference a la DIRT 2?
Slytat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 10:15 AM   #39
LydianKnight
Registered Knight
 
LydianKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Málaga, Spain
Posts: 977
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklash View Post
The nVidia GPU is going to be multi GPU by default? If so I'll never own one.

I would be interested in how much more powerful a single GF100 will be over a single HD 5870. I'm done with multi-GPU. I largely got into that due to hype and following the crowd.
Hold on... who said NVIDIA's GPU is multi-mode by default? The news goes on the contrary... GTX380, GTX360 and mainstream variations on single-GPU (GPU as in chip, not as a whole card), with GTX395 (or whatever the name ends being) the dual-GPU model...

Where did you read/hear it's gonna be multi-GPU by default?
LydianKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 10:30 AM   #40
Sowk
STEAM ID: OSE Killer
 
Sowk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 394
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklash View Post
The nVidia GPU is going to be multi GPU by default? If so I'll never own one.

I would be interested in how much more powerful a single GF100 will be over a single HD 5870. I'm done with multi-GPU. I largely got into that due to hype and following the crowd.
They will have single GPU units
Sowk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 12:00 PM   #41
hell_of_doom227
Registered User
 
hell_of_doom227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,387
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

I would not compare NVidia 200series with ATI 5000series cause it's stupid to do so. 200 series are DX10 and 5000 series DX11 cards. Speaking of DX10 and DX11, the current state of the market says that we don't need it. All games are still on DX9, pretty much. Maybe the reason behind it are Consoles and considering the fact that Sony and Microsoft wont replace their Consoles by year 2014 tells me enough. We ain't going to see fully utilized DX11 by year 2013, speaking of which i don't think Microsoft will push any new DirectX with Windows 8.
I am glad Doom 4 is going to be using OpenGL, it's time we revisit OpenGL again . If you already bought Crossfire ATI setup with 5000 series and even though Fermi is going to be faster then ATI counterpart, it's not worth replacing it. SSD Drives, USB3.0, SATA 6, 6 Core CPU, a bigger Monitor sounds a better deal.
__________________
System: eVGA x58SLI x16 4Way Classified, Intel Six Core i7 X980@4.00Ghz, 6Gb GSkill DDR3-1600, Tri Crossfire 3xATI Radeon 5870 1Gb, Raid1 - 2xSSD Intel 80Gb X-25M, Raid0 - 2xHDD Samsung 2Tb, Raid1 - 2xHDD Samsung 1Tb, LG Blue-Ray/HD-DVD Player, Silverstone 1100W PSU, Intel Stock Cooler (New One), Thermaltake Xaser VI, LG 27" LCD, Logitech Keyboard G15, G5 Logitech Mouse
OS: Windows 7 x64

35708 - 3DMark Vantage
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=2109601
hell_of_doom227 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 12:16 PM   #42
Slytat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 354
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hell_of_doom227 View Post
I would not compare NVidia 200series with ATI 5000series cause it's stupid to do so. 200 series are DX10 and 5000 series DX11 cards. Speaking of DX10 and DX11, the current state of the market says that we don't need it. All games are still on DX9, pretty much. Maybe the reason behind it are Consoles and considering the fact that Sony and Microsoft wont replace their Consoles by year 2014 tells me enough. We ain't going to see fully utilized DX11 by year 2013, speaking of which i don't think Microsoft will push any new DirectX with Windows 8.
I am glad Doom 4 is going to be using OpenGL, it's time we revisit OpenGL again . If you already bought Crossfire ATI setup with 5000 series and even though Fermi is going to be faster then ATI counterpart, it's not worth replacing it. SSD Drives, USB3.0, SATA 6, 6 Core CPU, a bigger Monitor sounds a better deal.
How is it "stupid to do so" (compare the two) if we "don't need it" (DX11)? You've totally contradicted yourself.

The fact is that 285 SLI offers comparable performance (vs 5970). If DX11 doesn't count (which it doesn't really at the moment as you quite rightly pointed out), then it's a completely legitimate comparison.

I would still buy a 5970 over 285 SLI at present, but that doesn't change the performance.

Yet another person trying to justify their expenditure while making absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Enthusiasts want the fastest cards, why would we stop at ATI if Nvidia turns out to be faster or vice versa? I'll take the cards AND the SSD, USB, SATA, Gulftown etc, not either or.
Slytat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 01:45 PM   #43
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slytat View Post
How is it "stupid to do so" (compare the two) if we "don't need it" (DX11)? You've totally contradicted yourself.

The fact is that 285 SLI offers comparable performance (vs 5970). If DX11 doesn't count (which it doesn't really at the moment as you quite rightly pointed out), then it's a completely legitimate comparison.

I would still buy a 5970 over 285 SLI at present, but that doesn't change the performance.

Yet another person trying to justify their expenditure while making absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Enthusiasts want the fastest cards, why would we stop at ATI if Nvidia turns out to be faster or vice versa? I'll take the cards AND the SSD, USB, SATA, Gulftown etc, not either or.

I need a much Faster CPU to unlock even more speed out of the HD5970's i have to begin with,yet such CPU doesn't exist yet,and the same goes for Fermi,so even with the eventual reviews happening where both ATI latest and Nvidia's latest are tested,that's something to keep in mind,and the fact that most software is a joke to run on such powerfull hardware is also another consideration.


Given how Nvidia implemented triple display support,regardless if you use 3D glasses or not,and that it'll require 2 cards,since each card only has 2 outputs,triple display comparisons,which would increase the workload on the GPU's by quite a bit,even with the current games,and reduce CPU limitation concerns,can be run with a single HD5870/HD5970 card,but can't be run with a single Fermi card


It's also possible to run 3 displays with a single HD5970 card of course,and also can't be done with a single GPU Fermi card,so will reviewers will be forced to use a single display when running benchmarks?,and ignore something that single ATI cards can do,while single Fermi cards can't do at all?....The reviews should be quite interesting to say the least.


And before i hear "Triple displays are a small minority of users" argument,we are talking enthusiast level cards here,and 3 LCD displays can actually cost less than 1 of these high end cards do,especially if we're talking about triple 22" LCD's,or maybe even triple 24" LCD's if you shop carefully.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 01:56 PM   #44
Slytat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 354
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001 View Post
I need a much Faster CPU to unlock even more speed out of the HD5970's i have to begin with,yet such CPU doesn't exist yet,and the same goes for Fermi,so even with the eventual reviews happening where both ATI latest and Nvidia's latest are tested,that's something to keep in mind,and the fact that most software is a joke to run on such powerfull hardware is also another consideration.


Given how Nvidia implemented triple display support,regardless if you use 3D glasses or not,and that it'll require 2 cards,since each card only has 2 outputs,triple display comparisons,which would increase the workload on the GPU's by quite a bit,even with the current games,and reduce CPU limitation concerns,can be run with a single HD5870/HD5970 card,but can't be run with a single Fermi card


It's also possible to run 3 displays with a single HD5970 card of course,and also can't be done with a single GPU Fermi card,so will reviewers will be forced to use a single display when running benchmarks?,and ignore something that single ATI cards can do,while single Fermi cards can't do at all?....The reviews should be quite interesting to say the least.


And before i hear "Triple displays are a small minority of users" argument,we are talking enthusiast level cards here,and 3 LCD displays can actually cost less than 1 of these high end cards do,especially if we're talking about triple 22" LCD's,or maybe even triple 24" LCD's if you shop carefully.
I respect your opinions guy but you're not making any points with me as far as benching on multiple monitors.

I don't care about benching or playing on Eyefinity/multiple monitors and never have. I freely admit that people do like and use that feature but I am not one of them.

You have a habit of responding to my posts in a defensive manner (as in defending your purchases) and you shouldn't feel the need to.

If you are happy with your choices, then don't worry what anyone else thinks. I've had several 5xxx series ATi cards and they aren't for me. For a start they are problematic in one of the games I play the most and then there is nHancer and Physx and plenty of other things that make me lean towards Nvidia in the final analysis.

I'll be going Fermi SLI/Tri SLI as soon as they are available (providing they don't turn out to be total garbage, which doesn't look likely).

One thing I will say, I spent a fair bit on the ATi 5 series so I am no fanboy, I've tried them and I am now eager to see what Nvidia has to offer.

PS : You can buy Gulftown ES on Ebay as we speak if you really want a faster CPU - Gigabyte offers a beta bios for compatibility as Im sure most other mobo manufacturers do as well.
Slytat is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 01-20-10, 02:16 PM   #45
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slytat View Post
I respect your opinions guy but you're not making any points with me as far as benching on multiple monitors.

I don't care about benching or playing on Eyefinity/multiple monitors and never have. I freely admit that people do like and use that feature but I am not one of them.

You have a habit of responding to my posts in a defensive manner (as in defending your purchases) and you shouldn't feel the need to.

Nothing to do with defending purchases at all,as i know i bought a pair of monsters,but the sad reality is,benchmarking cards as powerfull as these,on either HD5970's of Fermi cards,on a single display,even if it's a 30" LCD at 2560*1600 resolutions with 8X AA,will result in at least some cases that are CPU limited,so in those cases,we're not really testing the video cards,as it becomes more the video cards testing the rest of the system....Bank on it.


Not to mention that single 30" LCD is over 1000$ easy,and that 3 displays can be not much over 1/2 that amount,depending on what you choose,and the extra workload reduces the chances of being CPU limited,so it's not a matter of liking or disliking triple displays,it a matter of wanting to show what these GPU's can really do with current games.


ATI can do it with a single card....Nvidia needs at least 2 fermi cards in SLI,making it a more expensive option,and since you'll be running dual or triple SLI fermi cards,you're definitely going to need those 3 displays to uncork the speed potential of those cards.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 02:31 PM   #46
Slytat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 354
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow001 View Post
Nothing to do with defending purchases at all,as i know i bought a pair of monsters,but the sad reality is,benchmarking cards as powerfull as these,on either HD5970's of Fermi cards,on a single display,even if it's a 30" LCD at 2560*1600 resolutions with 8X AA,will result in at least some cases that are CPU limited,so in those cases,we're not really testing the video cards,as it becomes more the video cards testing the rest of the system....Bank on it.


Not to mention that single 30" LCD is over 1000$ easy,and that 3 displays can be not much over 1/2 that amount,depending on what you choose,and the extra workload reduces the chances of being CPU limited,so it's not a matter of liking or disliking triple displays,it a matter of wanting to show what these GPU's can really do with current games.


ATI can do it with a single card....Nvidia needs at least 2 fermi cards in SLI,making it a more expensive option,and since you'll be running dual or triple SLI fermi cards,you're definitely going to need those 3 displays to uncork the speed potential of those cards.
I have plenty of monitors, I just don't game on multiple monitors. I may well set something up for BlackShark but that's a future project.

As far as NEEDING multiple monitors to exploit the cards fully, well that's your opinion, and again, it sounds more like a justification but you are entitled to it.

We've agreed before that we have entirely too much GPU power and nothing to exploit it so talking about ATI's ability to use more monitors may be a selling point for you, but it isn't for me.

I'm not happy with ATi's offerings, you are.

The bottom line is that enthusiasts are the kings of overkill!

/end of
Slytat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 03:07 PM   #47
Sowk
STEAM ID: OSE Killer
 
Sowk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 394
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Well I'm buying a Dual Fermi for Graphics and a Fermi for PhysX.
Sowk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-10, 03:26 PM   #48
shadow001
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,526
Default Re: 5870/5970 vs. GF100 (Fermi)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slytat View Post
I have plenty of monitors, I just don't game on multiple monitors. I may well set something up for BlackShark but that's a future project.

As far as NEEDING multiple monitors to exploit the cards fully, well that's your opinion, and again, it sounds more like a justification but you are entitled to it.

We've agreed before that we have entirely too much GPU power and nothing to exploit it so talking about ATI's ability to use more monitors may be a selling point for you, but it isn't for me.

I'm not happy with ATi's offerings, you are.

The bottom line is that enthusiasts are the kings of overkill!

/end of

True,setups like these are overkill since they're well ahead of the curve in terms of software,no matter which side you pick,but as for the triple monitor issue,it's very much real,since i've been benchmarking my setup now for well over a month,and in many different games and benchmarks,and even in the highest and craziest settings,at the max resolutions that my single monitor supports(1920*1200),i simply can't make the cards slow down to the point where i'm fairly sure it's because i'm actually hitting their hardware limits.


I've ran benchmarks in Crysis at absolute max settings at 4X antialiasing and got the same result when benching with 8X antialiasing,using supersampled AA,not the lesser quality multisampling method.....The cards simply don't care,and they are running at stock clocks,imagine when i overclock them.


So in that scenario,and given than a 30"LCD isn't exactly cheap so i could raise the resolution even higher,there's the triple display option,which could extend resolutions to as high as 5760*1200 using 3 cheap 24" displays,and right off the bat,that's bout 65~70% harder than running on a single 30" LCD,when both are trying to sustain the same frame rate:


2560*1600 = 4.096 megapixels each frame.
5760*1200 = 6.912 megapixels each frame.


Yup,the cards will be definitely working harder in a pretty substancial way.
shadow001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2014, nV News.