Can you post a link to this list?
I heard that "lots of games were coming" now that PhysX has a large installed base but I haven't seen any specific titles so I haven't given many extra points for PhysX support when deciding on a card.
Can you post a link to this list?
I heard that "lots of games were coming" now that PhysX has a large installed base but I haven't seen any specific titles so I haven't given many extra points for PhysX support when deciding on a card.
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Well then you should edit the site to note that a 9800GTX+ is a NVIDIA card.
The same could be said regarding a 4850 to 48709800GTX is a FarCry from GT260
http://www.sapphiretech.com/us/support/warranty.php
2 year warranty and no mention of overclocking. good luck.
Is that what you are trying for with your new site?
That list, do they all get hardware acceleration or are most software? Lots of those are current titles but when I hear PhysX card support the only games that frequently come up are UT3 and that GRAW2.
I have MOH:AA, it installed the software and does it through the CPU.....I had solid framerates on my old GTS 320.
That being said, do all those games support hardware accelerated physics but they just aren't too intense physics wise and hence offloading it to the GPU or PPU isn't so important? Besides UT3 (especially that tornado map) and GRAW2 of course.
So now we have an Nvidia sponsored Moderator flat out trying to convince us that a 4870 is no faster than a GTX260? All the while claiming that I'm the one making things up?
Nice.
Yeah, there's no conflict of interest there.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Creig, before you go any further, the fact that I am a moderator has no bearing on this discussion. I'd like to know, or better yet, explain to one of the video mods why you chose to
bring this up?
And, back OT. what do you make of this:
GTX260 stock and GTX260 OC 640MHz compared to 4870
Mem
Lifer
- Apr 23, 2000
- 21,476
- 13
- 81
keysplayr2003 with all due respect maybe he thinks MODs should be neutral,one reason why I turned down being a moderator since its not easy to be neutral and keep everybody happy,as to the GTX260 OC I like to see it compared to an 4870 OC version.
As to benchmarks between 260 and 4870 ,I think Anandtech's review on the 4870 says it all with 4870 winning more benchmarks then the 260 card.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Mem, please don't get yourself sucked into this. Creig stated something he shouldn't have as it has no bearing on anything we are discussing. It's something Creig has done time and time again. When a conversation goes south, attack the poster. We'll, his choice.
Now, no more OT please.
And, I'd like to see o/c 4870 scores also.
Keys, I can tell you what I make out of that link you posted. The GTX260 beats a stock HD4870, big deal? What does the OC-ed gtx260 cost? And only at 2560*1600 does the gtx260 beat a HD4870.
Btw, asking again, because you probably missed it, NAME some triple aa titles. For more specific deatails look at the post a bit up, or check the parts you qouted...
Btw, asking again, because you probably missed it, NAME some triple aa titles. For more specific deatails look at the post a bit up, or check the parts you qouted...
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
mods are allowed to have an opinion, he is not even a VIDEO mod. he mods CPUs. So the only thing his modship means in THIS discussion is that he is a respected memeber of the community. Attacking him is silly, argue against what he posted.
When a mod is acting in their capacity as mods they will edit a line in bold into the offending post with a signature. I see no such edits here.
the GTX260 fares a lot better compared to the 4870 when looking at min frame rates. Regardless, various games favor different makers. So it is hard to say which one dominates.
I would say:
9800 < 9800+ = 4850 < GTX260 = 4870 < GTX260
So look up the prices of those in your country and choose.
When a mod is acting in their capacity as mods they will edit a line in bold into the offending post with a signature. I see no such edits here.
the GTX260 fares a lot better compared to the 4870 when looking at min frame rates. Regardless, various games favor different makers. So it is hard to say which one dominates.
I would say:
9800 < 9800+ = 4850 < GTX260 = 4870 < GTX260
So look up the prices of those in your country and choose.
I can't find too many reviews that compare min frames...but here's one:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews...00-series-review.ars/2
In that the 4870 most of the time beats a GTX 280 in min frames and sometimes ties. Judging from that, the 260 would lose in min frames to the 4870.
EDIT:
Here's a more thorough review:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...200-games_3.html#sect1
You can see from that the 260 isn't a "lot better" than the 4870. They are fairly equal most of the time in terms of min frames, especially at the higher resolutions.
I can't tell which driver version the Ars review was using but the xbitlabs one was using a beta catalyst.
As it is most of the time, the 2 reviews I've linked unfortunately don't show the same results but it's to be expected I suppose.
As thilan29 said the 4870 is similar if not better than the 2600 and added to the fact it has 10.1 and supports hardware tessellation"Dx11 feature".. I would recommend the 4870!!
Also am OCed 4870 behaves almost like a OCed GTX260 but keep in mind that 4870's memory bandwidth can surpass the GTX260's when OCed...!!
Also am OCed 4870 behaves almost like a OCed GTX260 but keep in mind that 4870's memory bandwidth can surpass the GTX260's when OCed...!!
no keys, it doesn't depend on where you look, the HD4870 is faster then the GTX260, easy enough. Just like the 8800gt was faster then the HD3870, although that was a LITTLE more clearcut then the gtx260 vs HD4870 comparison.
Keys, again, tripple a game that is going to use physx, in a way that warmonger uses physx, and will thus be unplayable on a ATI card. Which clearly means that if I want to play the yet to be named game, I have to buy a nvidia videocard or I can't play it. Thats the whole point you're making, THE selling point of a gtx260 over a HD4870. WHAT game(s), please, throw me a bone here. Saying this year 10 or so titles will support it and next year 50 games will means jack shit. Dozens of game allready have physx, software emulated, and those run just fun, and physics don't play such a big role in those games. So name a game where physx is going to play a HUGE role ?
Keys, again, tripple a game that is going to use physx, in a way that warmonger uses physx, and will thus be unplayable on a ATI card. Which clearly means that if I want to play the yet to be named game, I have to buy a nvidia videocard or I can't play it. Thats the whole point you're making, THE selling point of a gtx260 over a HD4870. WHAT game(s), please, throw me a bone here. Saying this year 10 or so titles will support it and next year 50 games will means jack shit. Dozens of game allready have physx, software emulated, and those run just fun, and physics don't play such a big role in those games. So name a game where physx is going to play a HUGE role ?
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Mine was $225
That's almost like saying name a game where AA/AF is going to play a HUGE role.
PhysX will make the game better, how much so is maybe more of a personal opinion.
I really can't understand all the complaints from people about something that NVIDIA is giving it's costumers for free. Unless of course you can't use it, then you are just crying sour grapes.
I for one look forward to downloading and enjoying the game pack next week. But then I like to play video games and I am looking forward to the new physics aspect of game play.
Exactly.
Of this HUGE list of PhysX games, only 2 benefit a great deal from offloading the physics calculations to the GPU or PPU. Atleast thats all I've heard.
If there were games coming out in the NEAR future that improved performace a significant amount (unplayable to playable, not 70 FPS to 90 FPS), NVDA would be shouting from the rooftops this fact in order to give the GTX 260 extra points when the consumer is making a decision.
Right now you have only 2 games, and not even super popular games, that benefit greatly from offloading the calculations to GPU or PPU.
If PhysX is such a big deal Nvidia should be showing off game demos of upcoming products, not tech demos of some falling water. Intel has tech demos on real time raytracing, why not get a quad socket system getting ready for the upcoming realtime raytracing games?
In my mind it is not much different.
apoppin
Lifer
Originally posted by: Wreckage
Well then you should edit the site to note that a 9800GTX+ is a NVIDIA card.
The same could be said regarding a 4850 to 48709800GTX is a FarCry from GT260
http://www.sapphiretech.com/us/support/warranty.php
2 year warranty and no mention of overclocking. good luck.
Is that what you are trying for with your new site?
Trying for what .. wreckage spewed everywhere?
too bad you can't find it on their site; Right on my Sapphire HD4870's box it says:
And a 4850 is not such a far cry from 4870 - in THIS thread .. it is what the OP asked about .. You are the uninvited 260 salesman in this case.
i always strive for accuracy. In the interests of it, AlienBabelTech is not strictly "my site" .. i would be the Editor and a partner. And on upcoming ABT articles all of the 9800GTX series is listed as Nvidia. We correct typos as they are pointed out; otoh you appear to have a continuing inability to read or comprehend the topic's title that has never been corrected by you.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
@thilan29: the definition of "fares a lot better compared to" means it competes better, not beats.
In most articles I have seen the GTX260 wins in more games, the article you linked to tested 4 games only. Of almost 20 different games I have seen in various articles, the GTX260 won most in min frame rate, and the 4870 won most in average frame rates.
However, I decided to say it the way i did, instead of saying "beats the 4870", because it is really game dependent, and review dependent.
The difference between an nvidia favoring game, and an AMD favoring game, is huge.
When the GTX260 wins over the 4870, it wins by a comparable amount to when the 4870 wins of it. When the GTX280 looses it is typically by a very small amount, and it wins by larger margins.
look through the benchmarks YOU posted more carefully, xbit labs @1920x1200 (as you insisted) minimum framerates (except when not available, noted as such):
Battlefield 2142 :
GTX260 min: 76
4870 min: 67
GTX260 wins by 13.4%
bioshock:
GTX260 min: 42
4870 min: 44
4870 wins by: 4.8%
Call of Juarez
GTX260 min: 14
4870 min: 11
GTX260 wins by 27%
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
tie @ 37fps
Crysis:
tie @ 10 fps (interestingly @ 1280x1024 the GTX wins 20 to 12 min fps. but you did say 1920x1200)
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars (no min fps, only average on this game):
GTX260 min: 76.4
4870 min: 67.5
GTX260 wins by: 13%
Half-Life 2: Episode Two: (no min fps, only average on this game)
GTX260 min: 69.4
4870 min: 70.3
4870 wins by: 1%
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl
GTX260 min: 35
4870 min: 16
GTX260 wins by: 119%
Lost Planet: Extreme Condition:
GTX260 min: 11
4870 min: 21
4870 wins by: 91%
Tomb Raider: Legend
GTX260 min: 42
4870 min: 36
GTX260 wins by: 17%
Hellgate: London:
GTX260 min: 36
4870 min: 22
GTX260 wins by: 64%
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (indoor / outdoor)
GTX260 min: 61 / 30
4870 min: 59 / 36
oddly ALL the nvidia cards (9800GTX, GX2, GTX260 and GTX280) had exactly 30fps min outdoors. while the AMD ones varied from card to card.
And at lower resolutions they all had 40. And then at lowest resultion all the AMD cards suddenly "matched" their min FPS as well. odd test.
GTX wins by: 3% indoors.
4870 wins by: 20% outdoors.
Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts
GTX260 min: 8
4870 min: 22
4870 wins by: 175%
Command & Conquer 3: Kane?s Wrath
GTX260 min: 24
4870 min: 26
4870 wins by: 8%
World in Conflict
GTX260 min: 10
4870 min: 12
4870 wins by: 20%
and finally, the artificial tests.
Win summary:
GTX260 wins by: 119%
GTX260 wins by: 64%
GTX260 wins by: 17%
GTX260 wins by: 13% (average fps)
GTX wins by: 3% indoors.
4870 wins by: 175%
4870 wins by: 91%
4870 wins by: 20%
4870 wins by: 20% outdoors.
4870 wins by: 8%
4870 wins by: 1% (average fps)
So this is not exactly a case of the GTX260 being "totally outclassed" like make it sound. its wins are a big heftier, but it also looses its fair share, sometimes by a lot.
If you go only by average FPS though, (which, frankly, doesn't matter). then the 4870 does appear a lot better then the GTX260, instead of slightly better overall, or a lot better in some games and a lot worse in others.
Also, play a physX enabled game? the GTX with its GPU processing will get 4x the FPS (physX can be done entirely on the CPU, it just sucks on it). And physX titles EXIST. try a DX10.1 title? well none exist, but reports are that when some do arrive, it will be no more then 20% faster then DX10.
Either way, I would say that overall, the 4870 is a little faster, but still comparable to the 260. The 280 on the other hand kicks its ass in min FPS.
In most articles I have seen the GTX260 wins in more games, the article you linked to tested 4 games only. Of almost 20 different games I have seen in various articles, the GTX260 won most in min frame rate, and the 4870 won most in average frame rates.
However, I decided to say it the way i did, instead of saying "beats the 4870", because it is really game dependent, and review dependent.
The difference between an nvidia favoring game, and an AMD favoring game, is huge.
When the GTX260 wins over the 4870, it wins by a comparable amount to when the 4870 wins of it. When the GTX280 looses it is typically by a very small amount, and it wins by larger margins.
look through the benchmarks YOU posted more carefully, xbit labs @1920x1200 (as you insisted) minimum framerates (except when not available, noted as such):
Battlefield 2142 :
GTX260 min: 76
4870 min: 67
GTX260 wins by 13.4%
bioshock:
GTX260 min: 42
4870 min: 44
4870 wins by: 4.8%
Call of Juarez
GTX260 min: 14
4870 min: 11
GTX260 wins by 27%
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
tie @ 37fps
Crysis:
tie @ 10 fps (interestingly @ 1280x1024 the GTX wins 20 to 12 min fps. but you did say 1920x1200)
Enemy Territory: Quake Wars (no min fps, only average on this game):
GTX260 min: 76.4
4870 min: 67.5
GTX260 wins by: 13%
Half-Life 2: Episode Two: (no min fps, only average on this game)
GTX260 min: 69.4
4870 min: 70.3
4870 wins by: 1%
S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl
GTX260 min: 35
4870 min: 16
GTX260 wins by: 119%
Lost Planet: Extreme Condition:
GTX260 min: 11
4870 min: 21
4870 wins by: 91%
Tomb Raider: Legend
GTX260 min: 42
4870 min: 36
GTX260 wins by: 17%
Hellgate: London:
GTX260 min: 36
4870 min: 22
GTX260 wins by: 64%
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (indoor / outdoor)
GTX260 min: 61 / 30
4870 min: 59 / 36
oddly ALL the nvidia cards (9800GTX, GX2, GTX260 and GTX280) had exactly 30fps min outdoors. while the AMD ones varied from card to card.
And at lower resolutions they all had 40. And then at lowest resultion all the AMD cards suddenly "matched" their min FPS as well. odd test.
GTX wins by: 3% indoors.
4870 wins by: 20% outdoors.
Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts
GTX260 min: 8
4870 min: 22
4870 wins by: 175%
Command & Conquer 3: Kane?s Wrath
GTX260 min: 24
4870 min: 26
4870 wins by: 8%
World in Conflict
GTX260 min: 10
4870 min: 12
4870 wins by: 20%
and finally, the artificial tests.
Win summary:
GTX260 wins by: 119%
GTX260 wins by: 64%
GTX260 wins by: 17%
GTX260 wins by: 13% (average fps)
GTX wins by: 3% indoors.
4870 wins by: 175%
4870 wins by: 91%
4870 wins by: 20%
4870 wins by: 20% outdoors.
4870 wins by: 8%
4870 wins by: 1% (average fps)
So this is not exactly a case of the GTX260 being "totally outclassed" like make it sound. its wins are a big heftier, but it also looses its fair share, sometimes by a lot.
If you go only by average FPS though, (which, frankly, doesn't matter). then the 4870 does appear a lot better then the GTX260, instead of slightly better overall, or a lot better in some games and a lot worse in others.
Also, play a physX enabled game? the GTX with its GPU processing will get 4x the FPS (physX can be done entirely on the CPU, it just sucks on it). And physX titles EXIST. try a DX10.1 title? well none exist, but reports are that when some do arrive, it will be no more then 20% faster then DX10.
Either way, I would say that overall, the 4870 is a little faster, but still comparable to the 260. The 280 on the other hand kicks its ass in min FPS.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Apparently, it does depend on where, and how, "I can tell you what I make out of that link you posted", you look.
I wasn't referring to the o/c'd version of the GTX 260, but the stock version.
CoD4
1680x1050
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..93.4
GeForce GTX 260 stock....91.0
1920x1200
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..76.4
GeForce GTX 260 stock....77.1
2560x1600
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..48.1
GeForce GTX 260 stock....53.5
------------------------------
Crysis - Low
1680x1050
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..101
GeForce GTX 260 stock....99
1920x1200
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..84
GeForce GTX 260 stock....83
2560x1600
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..53
GeForce GTX 260 stock....52
Crysis - High
1680x1050
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..37
GeForce GTX 260 stock....32
1920x1200
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..30
GeForce GTX 260 stock....26
------------------------------
Unreal Tournament 3 - Maximum
1680x1050
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..104
GeForce GTX 260 stock....106
1920x1200
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..98
GeForce GTX 260 stock....103
2560x1600
Sapphire Radeon HD 4870..78
GeForce GTX 260 stock....76
So yeah, it does depend on where you look. These cards are even. If you throw the old HL2 bench in there, the frames are so ridiculously high, as is Q4, it wouldn't matter which card you have.
I posted a list from Nvidia's site of some Physx enabled games. If that means Jack shit to you, more power to you.
Downplay it, Glorify it, do what ever you wish. Physx is and we have a taste of it now. At least those of us who can run it. What are you going to say to me when the games start to arrive? It sucks? You don't think any of this is cool? Not at all? I'd love to know why not if that is indeed the case.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter