570 as a replacement for 9800GX2 on Core2d?

[happy medium]

I'd be happy with the same framerate as DX9, but with most of the DX10 candy.

then grab a gtx460 1gb, overclock it, and crank up those settings.

 

[cadred]

So it seems the gtx 570 is overkill, and maybe a gtx 460 is more what I'm looking at, but what about something in between like a Radeon 6870? They are running about $240-250, only a little more than the 460.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

It's up to you. You get what you pay for. The 6870 will be faster than a 460 and slower than a 570 in Metro and Crysis.

Another good option is the HD 5870, which is a tad faster than the 6870.

 

[cadred]

Bah, I'm so conflicted. I don't really know what to get. I'm leaning towards the 460 because with rebates it's under $200, which is a good price, but I want to get at least 30fps in Metro and Crysis in DX10.

I just don't want to drop 2 bills and be disappointed.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

For Crysis improvement the HD 6850 or HD 5850 would be a good choice: Faster than the 460 and also under $200.

 

[cadred]

For Crysis improvement the HD 6850 or HD 5850 would be a good choice: Faster than the 460 and also under $200.

I've been looking at getting the EVGA Superclocked gtx 460 for $180 (after rebates) running at @763/1526, which should beat a stock 6850/5850, right?

That's $10 that the cheapest 6850's I've seen on newegg.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

That won't beat a 5850, but it will come close to the 6850, in Crysis.

Generally that should be faster than a 6850.

 

[cadred]

That won't beat a 5850, but it will come close to the 6850, in Crysis.

Generally that should be faster than a 6850.

A tad slower in Metro @1680 though. Too many choices.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

A tad slower in Metro @1680 though. Too many choices.

Just set a budget for yourself and get the fastest card you can find under that price. There are good options all the way up to $250. I would even consider the 570 a decent option despite it costing $100 more than the next fastest cards (470, 5870).

 

[cadred]

I think I've narrowed it down to either:

EVGA GTX 460 1Gb Superclocked @$179

or

HIS Radeon HD 5850 1GB @169

Not sure about the HIS brand, I've heard mixed things, but this card seems to be reviewed well. I would suspect that out of the box the 460 superclocked will be a bit faster, and I've heard this 5850 is a bit limited in overclocking potential, but should be able to match the 460 I would assume?

Still leaning towards the 460 because of Metro 2033 perf and I've heard that ATI drivers still suck. Thoughts?

 

[Concillian]

Here is a 6850 cpu (slower then yours) cpu bottlneck investigation. They use a gtx285 but thats about as fast as your setup. Your e8500 will easily push a gtx460 1g and more.
SOme quad core hungry games might give you a little trouble.

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=13454&all=1

This article basically shows what my opinion has been in these forums for many years. I gave up some years back.

People just don't understand well enough what they're looking at when using benchmark charts to make purchase decisions. I always advocate tests like BFG10k did to determine what your bottleneck is FIRST, so you know you're buying what you need. You don't even have to know how to under / over clock. Choose a lower resolution and your GPU load drops dramatically, but CPU load is pretty similar. If your FPS goes up dramatically by playing at a lowerr resolution, you are not CPU limited.

I always use OC'ed budget CPUs. The most expensive CPU I've ever bought was about $125 and I've NEVER since I owned my Paradise original 1st gen 3Dfx card, NEVER been CPU limited at the resolutions and graphics settings I actually play games at.

People blow CPU bottlenecks so out of proportion on the forums. I'm done trying to convince people though, they're just too stubborn to use their brains, for the most part.

 

[cadred]

Well I bit the bullet and bought myself the superclocked 460. If nothing else the standard VGA return policy applies.

I came in with the 570 in mind, but walked away with a 460. Thanks for everyone's help.

 

[BFG10K]

This article basically shows what my opinion has been in these forums for many years. I gave up some years back.

People just don't understand well enough what they're looking at when using benchmark charts to make purchase decisions. I always advocate tests like BFG10k did to determine what your bottleneck is FIRST, so you know you're buying what you need. You don't even have to know how to under / over clock. Choose a lower resolution and your GPU load drops dramatically, but CPU load is pretty similar. If your FPS goes up dramatically by playing at a lowerr resolution, you are not CPU limited.

I always use OC'ed budget CPUs. The most expensive CPU I've ever bought was about $125 and I've NEVER since I owned my Paradise original 1st gen 3Dfx card, NEVER been CPU limited at the resolutions and graphics settings I actually play games at.

People blow CPU bottlenecks so out of proportion on the forums. I'm done trying to convince people though, they're just too stubborn to use their brains, for the most part.

Great post there Concillian, and I agree completely, especially the bit about the CPU making little to no difference at the settings I actually play my games at. Even an E6580 underlocked to 2 GHz caused little to no performance drop with the GTX285 I paired it with.

The last time I was CPU limited to any meaningful degree was on the Pentium 4 in games like Unreal 2. There I’d drop the resolution even as low as 800x600, yet the performance hardly improved.