4890 overkill for 1440x900 gaming?

[Xarick]

I was going for a 4890 or 285 for my new card, but am beginning to wonder if that is overkill for gaming at 1440x900. I would eventually like to move up to a 22" screen and move to 1600x1050 gaming. I know that 4890s can be had for $170, but I have also seen some deals on the 4870 for as cheap as $130.
So I am wondering if the 4890 is worth the extra or not.
Right now I am also running a e6400 at 2.8ghz
6 gigs of ddr2 800 in sync
on a p45 mobo


Thoughts?

 

[Sylvanas]

Overkill indeed. 4850 will be a better match.

 

[toyota]

well with your cpu and at that res you should get 90%+ of what that card can do 1440x900. 1680x1050 would certainly be more balanced for your system. afterall that is a very cpu limited res with such a fast card. a couple games were dead even for me at 1440x900 as they were at 1680x1050 with my cpu at 2.66 which is equal to yours at 2.8. if you dont plan on getting the 1680 screen anytime soon then I would stick to a 4870 as the highest card to go with for sure.

 

[Tempered81]

Major overkill, but - 4890 crossfire, or two 4870 1gb's in crossfire for $220.

You'd be fine with one 48701Gb at that res for now. add one later for your bigger monitor - good that you have a p45.

If you like to max out crysis and farcry2 with AA and AF, go for the crossfire.

 

[Candymancan21]

get the 4890. imo

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: Candymancan21
get the 4890. imo

thats such a cpu limited res though and the 4890 is pretty darn fast. I wouldnt get it for that res without little more speed on his cpu. at 1680 sure but the 4870 would be more than enough at 1440 and give basically the same real world performance in more cpu intensive titles like Far Cry 2.

 

[dguy6789]

Get the 4890. Since you plan to upgrade monitors eventually anyway, might as well have the extra muscle. Games will never stop becoming increasingly complex with time either. One day a game will come along that is able to fully tax a 4890 at just 1440x900 and then you'd see the entire 30-40% performance increase it has over the 4850.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: Xarick

Thoughts?

Pump some more juice in the cpu. It will hold you back at that 2.8 ghz, no matter what card you get.
I agree with jaredpace, you can get the 4870 1gb today and it's cheap too and when you upgrade the monitor, grab another one and make a beautiful crossfire madness.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Get the 4890. Since you plan to upgrade monitors eventually anyway, might as well have the extra muscle. Games will never stop becoming increasingly complex with time either. One day a game will come along that is able to fully tax a 4890 at just 1440x900 and then you'd see the entire 30-40% performance increase it has over the 4850.

depends on what he means by eventually. next few weeks sure, more than a few months I would just get the 4870. also in a few months we will have new cards anyway that may offer new features he wants which will give him the upgrade bug again.

 

[MrK6]

OP, what are you currently running? I would grab the monitor first .

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Originally posted by: MrK6
OP, what are you currently running? I would grab the monitor first .

This, and there's no kill like overkill.

*Recently bought three 4850 1GB cards for builds and can say that even the 1GB 4850 can hold it's own at 1680x1050. Still love my GTX285 though, no crossfire OR sli issues to date!

 

[Gikaseixas]

4850 would be a good match for your cpu but since you're upgrading to a bigger monitor (and you can get one that has a res. of 1920x1080) i would get a 4780 or 4890. Save some more and later in the year get a better cpu.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
Get the 4890. Since you plan to upgrade monitors eventually anyway, might as well have the extra muscle. Games will never stop becoming increasingly complex with time either. One day a game will come along that is able to fully tax a 4890 at just 1440x900 and then you'd see the entire 30-40% performance increase it has over the 4850.

try running STALKER, Clear Sky at ultra DX10 settings with 4xMSAA
- a 4890 will CRAWL along at 16x10 with minimums in the mid-teens
:Q

 

[Zap]

What is this "overkill" word that everyone uses? I don't understand.

LOL, I run a GTX 285 in my LAN party rig with a 22" 1680x1050 screen. I'd say "if you can afford it" especially since you are already considering a bigger monitor. Heck, go 24" for that matter.

 

[Candymancan21]

You have never heared of overkill? It means to much for what you have or need or use basicly.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Candymancan21
You have never heared of overkill? It means to much for what you have or need or use basicly.

i have heard of it but it is meaningless in my HW world

sooner or later, overkill becomes 'insufficient'

 

[yh125d]

Originally posted by: Candymancan21
You have never heared of overkill? It means to much for what you have or need or use basicly.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sarcasm

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Candymancan21
You have never heared of overkill? It means to much for what you have or need or use basicly.

i have heard of it but it is meaningless in my HW world

sooner or later, overkill becomes 'insufficient'

Originally posted by: Zap
What is this "overkill" word that everyone uses? I don't understand.

LOL, I run a GTX 285 in my LAN party rig with a 22" 1680x1050 screen. I'd say "if you can afford it" especially since you are already considering a bigger monitor. Heck, go 24" for that matter.

there are different types of overkill. one is having way too much power than needed to run the average game at a certain res and the other is having a part that exceeds what the other parts can keep up with. nothing wrong with the first one if your system can take advantage of everything. the second can be a waste of money such has having a gtx280 for 1440x900 with a low end cpu.

the op can almost fully push a 4890 at 1440 and with a little more oc he could. if he truly isnt planning on getting a larger monitor soon though then the 4870 will do almost everything the 4890 can do at that res with his cpu clocked like it is.

 

[faxon]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819115206 and a 4850 or 4770 would be a better buy considering how cpu limited you will be at that res. if you need more crunching power later you can pop in a second one in crossfire for about $100 and it will be faster than a 4890 anyway

ed: holy hell there's a 4850 here for $85 ($92 in cali w/tax) shipped and a $10 MIR

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814102824

 

[zod96]

At that res go for a 4870.....

 

[NA1NSXR]

I would just wait and then get your new monitor and video card together. My feeling is that the next generation of cards due next year will conquer 1680x1050 on the whole like the way current gen cards can pretty much handle anything below that resolution. I am on 1680 now and I wouldn't even bother with a 4890. I think I might try to find a good deal on a 4870 1GB and get ready to pounce on a next gen card and 1920x1200 monitor next year maybe after the first or second price drop. Now is not that great of a time to be buying a video card for the long run. IMO the only good deals right now are the $100-150 ish range which can buy a great card to hold you over.