3870X2 vs 9800GX2

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282

Originally posted by: Demoth
Keep in mind the enhanced DDR4 versions of the 3870 X2 will be arriving soon. I'd guess at least a 25% total improvement (with a end user OCed card and future drivers) from what we are seeing now in an optimized game.

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7447.html

Also, some unsubstantiated indications are coming the 4870 series will be more heavily geared towards performance increase. It may even be possible the number of TMUs will be more then doubled which alone would be big news.

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7434.html

This round ATI's goal of low power and cost was a giant leap in the right direction, even if top end single card performance is still behind Nvidia. The fact that it could contribute to the next gen., something Nvidia hasn't even indicated they are working on, makes for more flexible options and a higher resale value for current cards.

In the end, no real wrong choices. If your playing anything but Crysis, any of these cheap cards in a CF/SLI config should last quite a while if needed. Part of the reason is a good price vs performance right now, but mostly it's due to the 8800 Ultra being the limit for so long.

Yeah I heard about the DDR4 versions coming out. Is it really going to have a 25% performance increase from it though? I want to run Crysis the best it can possibly be ran right now. I figure if I have a setup that can run Crysis smoothly at 1680 with some eye candy turned on, then I will have no problem running any other game I throw at it.

Keep in mind the system I'm running right now is an a64 3500 and X850XT PE. I refuse to play Crysis and other new games until I have a kick ass rig again.

I posted this in another thread but it seems more appropriate here:




thank god my "fileserver" is right next to main rig. I don't think I could sit around for an hour or so and watch all these demos run again..

btw, I had to go down to 8 % oc. 3dmark 06 wouldn't run at a 9.4% memory oc . I've noticed that the past few cat releases have lowered my oc...bastards...

anyway, I'm doing the test at 2430 memory (default is actually 2250 so 8% oc exactly). core is 837 now instead of 850 (vs 776 default) for a 7.86% oc. curently almost done with the memory oc testing...halfway there!

on crysis I took the middle number from the last 3 demo runs. On all 3 video card settings these last 3 demo runs were within 8/100 of a second avg fps.

ok, all done. here's the data:

rig in sig with e6750 @3.4 on xp home
stock 3870 @776/2250

3dmark06 11171
crysis demo (14x9,all high, noAA/AF) 31.45



3870 @776/2430 (exactly 8% memory overclock)

3dmark06 11397
crysis demo 31.92



3870 @837/2250

3dmark06 11611
crysis demo 33.33


ok, so it's obvious that the core OC of 7.84% had a much greater impact than the mem oc of 8%. There was a 5.98% improvement in crysis and a 3.94% improvement in 3dmark with the core OC of 7.84 %. There was a 2.02% improvement in 3dmark 06 with the 8% mem oc and a 1.49% improvement in the crysis demo. how is that for scaling purposes?

core oc in 3dmark: 3.94/7.84 = 50.3% scaling.
core oc in crysis: 5.98/7.84 = 76.28% scaling.

mem oc in 3dmark: 2.02/8.00 = 25.25 % scaling
mem oc in crysis: 1.49/8.00 = 18.63 % scaling

according to this, the core scales twice as well in 3d mark and over 4 TIMES as well in crysis. Also, even using the higher scaling % of 25.25 from 3dmark06, a 25% memory increase would only net a 6.31% increase in performance.

Maybe someone with a 3870x2 can try to verify these tests for us with an 8% memory oc on his card?