FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

4870x2 vs 280 gtx SLI (drivers)

Post Date: 2008-08-28
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
MarkNY View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 476 		  Quote MarkNY Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Topic: 4870x2 vs 280 gtx SLI (drivers)
    Posted: 28 Aug 2008 at 4:05pm
Hey,
 
I don't mean to beat a dead horse, or whatever that expression is, but I am trying to decide between 2x 280 GTX or 1x ATI 4870x2.
 
I currently play on a 30 inch monitor.  I would have gone with the 4870x2 because of the huge price difference, but I noticed Nvidia recently came out with new drivers for their graphics line that better utilizes the PhysX engine and increase overall performance in many games.
 
Given the driver difference, am I going to notice a huge difference between the cards?  I realize that base performance wise, they will perform rather similiarly at high resolutions.
 
Thanks
Back to Top
rai-zero View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 13 Aug 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 98 		  Quote rai-zero Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 30 Aug 2008 at 2:32pm
bump, I'd like to hear about this also but for a 24" monitor Wink

Edited by rai-zero - 30 Aug 2008 at 2:34pm
Back to Top
widdlecat View Drop Down
DS Veteran
DS Veteran


Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 840 		  Quote widdlecat Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 30 Aug 2008 at 2:54pm
From a bang for buck aspect, I would go with ATI HD 4870x2... you could crossfireX two of them and get even more performance if you needed for a 30in monitor.
Still I think I'm biased. I've been waiting for AMD and ATI to get their stuff in order. I've always favored their architecture and basic company mindsets. Then again, I'm not an enthusiast and have only been a hardcore gamer for about 8 years now.
Back to Top
MarkNY View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 13 Dec 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 476 		  Quote MarkNY Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 30 Aug 2008 at 4:59pm
haha! only 8 years??! thats a pretty long time!

Anyway, I have the 790i MB, so I wont be able to crossfire (Xfire, SkyR?) them, even if they develop drivers that use quad GPU better. Right now, I don't think it really does much to have 4x. Even 3x SLI doesn't seem to be well supported.
Back to Top
Axel Daemon View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 623 		  Quote Axel Daemon Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 30 Aug 2008 at 8:12pm
This pretty much sealed the deal with me getting Triple SLI personally lol.

Triple SLI seems to be working just fine :V
"People believe in people who believe in others."
Back to Top
Tyler Lowe View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 14 May 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyler Lowe Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 30 Aug 2008 at 11:39pm

If you can afford it, go with the GTX280. I believe you will see a better return on that investment over time. I look at the last time NVidia drastically increased the size of the memory bus on their flagship GPU, and that was in Dec 2006 when they released the 8800Ultra if memory serves correctly. We are looking at the last half of 2008 here, and were it not for the fact you game on a 30" display, those cards would probably carry you well into next year (and even at that resolution still provide an excellent experience). That, is an amazing haul for a GPU. Over two years of decent performance, delivering a top notch experience. I believe the GTX280 has the same potential. Given this, and your motherboard, I would go with the GTX280 in SLI.
Back to Top
Axel Daemon View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 623 		  Quote Axel Daemon Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 31 Aug 2008 at 12:06am
Hrrrm Nehalem processor, tri channel memory, the mobo being from ROG Asus.  Triple SLI GTX 280, (or GTX 280 x2 potentially, but then I'm not sure how the support for Quad SLI is anyway, might be more a headache then it's worth.  But if it working wonderously then rock on I'll go with that lol )

64-bit, it's a wonderful year to become decently techno savy heheh.

Isn't Crysis still gonna be set as the "scaling standard" for most demanding in graphic processing for quite awhile still?  (Everyone would say.  If it can play Crysis, it'll play just about anything else.)  And Triple SLI did just that lol.

Then again there's also Far Cry 2....  I wonder how scary that's gonna turn out.


Edited by Axel Daemon - 31 Aug 2008 at 12:08am
"People believe in people who believe in others."
Back to Top
Tyler Lowe View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 14 May 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyler Lowe Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 31 Aug 2008 at 12:19am
Pure opinion:
 
I honestly do not believe anyone else will make the sort of blunder that Crytek made with Crysis for a very long time. The "average" gaming PC is equiped with X1900 level graphics and a Pentium D. That means game developers have to cater to that level of tech, while at the same time, delivering a little extra to the people that spend the cash to be "bleeding edge". When you go out, as a consumer, and spend $6000+ or even $2500 on a PC, you expect to be able to push all the little sliders to "MAX" and not experience so much as a hiccup in a load screen. Crytek ignored this and put out something that even a $12,000 system built at the time the game was released would not play smoothly at max settings, even without AA and AF.
 
From the standpoint that Crysis is likely to be the most demanding thing out there on hardware for a while, I suspect you're right about it remaining a standard of sorts. I don't believe that FarCry2 will be anywhere near as taxing on PC's. It's probable the developers of FarCry2 actually want to sell some copies as opposed to watching their game pirated for the sole purpose of benchmarking.Tongue
Back to Top
Axel Daemon View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 623 		  Quote Axel Daemon Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 31 Aug 2008 at 12:34am
Heh, every single video card review within the past two or three series of graphic cards would ALWAYS have Crysis in their video one way or another.  And probably will be regardless how old that game will get.  Well till some single card solution GPU can make Crysis run at a 24" or 30" resolution maxed out on ALL settings, with so much as an average of 30-45 fps in the most graphic intensive spots of Crysis. 

Since like that one review on Triple SLI.  Those results were taken in some of the most graphic intensive spots. so in general your FPS is actually gonna be higher than usual, it's only when you got a dozen of enemies on you simultaneously more or less that that chart is taken into consideration right?  But anyway regarding how long till it takes for GPU to completely dominate Crysis.

Just to throw out ridiculous theories here..  Probably take another year for a set of GPUs in Crossfire or Dual/Triple SLI to handle Crysis at 60 fps and up with a 30" monitor.  And maybe another year for a single card GPU to handle Crysis with ease?;  Or the rate of technological advancement for computer parts isn't THAT quick yet?  (Then again, forget that, what about Quantum Computers?  Lol)

Edit: Actually hold up at the moment, even WITH a QX9770 overclocked as high as stability can get by water cooling means, it STILL was acting as a bottleneck for Tri-GTX 280s and so on right?;


Edited by Axel Daemon - 31 Aug 2008 at 12:36am
"People believe in people who believe in others."
Back to Top
Tyler Lowe View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Email address used to purchase matched with forums account email.

Joined: 14 May 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyler Lowe Quote  Post ReplyReply bullet Posted: 31 Aug 2008 at 1:12am
Those reviews are showing an average framerate at a specific point in the game, or, possibly, in a time demo. You hope if it is a demo, that it is at least a cutom demo, and not the canned demo all the GPU manufacturers chea... er, *a-hem* "optimize" their drivers for. Tongue The reviewer in this case does not tell us where in the game those framrates are achieved, but I am going to guess that is not in the final levels of the game. Crysis is a killer. Do not be surprised if at the highest settings, you see some areas in that game where even a system built with an unlimited budget struggles a bit, even with 3 GTX280's.
 
I will throw out a ridiculous theory- three years more before a system with a single midrange card maxes that game out on a system that would equate to a $2000 system today. 5 years before someone playing on a desktop they picked up at Walmart and dropped a GPU into will do the same. Wild guess, but there's my best shot at it.
 
I am probably not the best person to ask about exactly when bottlenecking will or will not occur with a triple SLI system. Kelly has some extensive first hand knowledge on this one. My understanding of it is that this will vary by application. How intensive the use of the CPU is, and what resolution you are playing at, as well as how much image enhancement you have selected (AA and AF). I think the reality is, you won't notice any sort of bottleneck outside of benchmarking with an overclocked QX9770 and synthetics don't matter if gaming is what you're after.Wink
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.0625 seconds.