9800GX2 vs. 4830 in Xfire

[Rick James]

How good are the GX2's these days compared to the newer cards?

 

[alcoholbob]

I believe its just two 8800 GTS cards nailed together? It should be about GTX 280 level assuming you don't run out of video ram.

The only problem with SLI is that the not all games have profiles out the box (like Far Cry 2) but you probably know that already. If a game runs abhorrently slow on the 9800GX2 at say 1920x1200 and under I would say you probably would need to force alternate frame rendering on the nvidia control panel.

 

[Rick James]

Originally posted by: Astrallite
I believe its just two 8800 GTS cards nailed together? It should be about GTX 280 level assuming you don't run out of video ram.

The only problem with SLI is that the not all games have profiles out the box (like Far Cry 2) but you probably know that already. If a game runs abhorrently slow on the 9800GX2 at say 1920x1200 and under I would say you probably would need to force alternate frame rendering on the nvidia control panel.

Thanks ast. Maybe i'll just add another GX2 and be done with it.

 

[angry hampster]

9800GX2 SLi does not scale well at all. It's a bit of a money pit.

 

[alcoholbob]

Originally posted by: Rick James

Originally posted by: Astrallite
I believe its just two 8800 GTS cards nailed together? It should be about GTX 280 level assuming you don't run out of video ram.

The only problem with SLI is that the not all games have profiles out the box (like Far Cry 2) but you probably know that already. If a game runs abhorrently slow on the 9800GX2 at say 1920x1200 and under I would say you probably would need to force alternate frame rendering on the nvidia control panel.

Thanks ast. Maybe i'll just add another GX2 and be done with it.

Yeah definitely don't go quad SLi. It looks nice on synthetic benchmarks in real performance doesn't do great.

Quad SLI 295s vs Tri SLI 285s, the quad has more theoretical power by the tri runs it off a cliff in real game scenarios. Also I'd be worried about minimum framerates since you are basically doubling the latency (since frame rendering is alternating between 4 cards).

 

[imported_wired247]

forget adding another gx2. a logical upgrade is SLI gtx280's or 285's ... if the cost doesn't bother you.

If that sounds too expensive then I'd wait for next gen cards.

see anandtech's article on 2 gpu performance, compare 9800GX2 to the alternatives.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517

 

[SlowSpyder]

A 9800GX2 isn't fast enough for your 22" monitor?

 

[Rick James]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
A 9800GX2 isn't fast enough for your 22" monitor?

I'm going to a 26" lcd

 

[alcoholbob]

Originally posted by: Rick James

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
A 9800GX2 isn't fast enough for your 22" monitor?

I'm going to a 26" lcd

If you have AA on at 1920x1200 you're gonna run out of VRAM these days...I would get rid of the 9800GX2 if you plan on gaming at a higher resolution.

It's plenty fast, but its kind of like the 320MB 8800GTS. Just not enough video ram. Once you run out framerate just dives.

 

[Rick James]

What does everyone think about the Sapphire 4850X2?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Astrallite

Originally posted by: Rick James

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
A 9800GX2 isn't fast enough for your 22" monitor?

I'm going to a 26" lcd

If you have AA on at 1920x1200 you're gonna run out of VRAM these days...I would get rid of the 9800GX2 if you plan on gaming at a higher resolution.

Yea, 1920 res is kind of the boundry where 512MB can become a problem from the benches I've seen.

Originally posted by: Rick James
What does everyone think about the Sapphire 4850X2?

I have no first hand experience with it. But from what I've seen people generally complain about the noise, but it's great bang for the buck. It's usually faster than the GTX285 though cheaper. The down side is the multi-GPU issues, but I'm assuming you're ok with multi-GPU since you have a 9800GX2 now. Overall it's a great buy it sounds like.

 

[Rick James]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

Originally posted by: Astrallite

Originally posted by: Rick James

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
A 9800GX2 isn't fast enough for your 22" monitor?

I'm going to a 26" lcd

If you have AA on at 1920x1200 you're gonna run out of VRAM these days...I would get rid of the 9800GX2 if you plan on gaming at a higher resolution.

Yea, 1920 res is kind of the boundry where 512MB can become a problem from the benches I've seen.

Originally posted by: Rick James
What does everyone think about the Sapphire 4850X2?

I have no first hand experience with it. But from what I've seen people generally complain about the noise, but it's great bang for the buck. It's usually faster than the GTX285 though cheaper. The down side is the multi-GPU issues, but I'm assuming you're ok with multi-GPU since you have a 9800GX2 now. Overall it's a great buy it sounds like.

I have no problem at all with them. I was actually thinking about just doing a pair of 4830's in xfire. For 200 bucks they deliver a hell of a punch

 

[chizow]

PCGH low-end SLI/CF vs. mid-range single-GPU

They conclude the single card is the better overall option. In your case 4830 in CF would be a lateral update compared to that 9800GX2 with regards to performance, you'd just be trading one vendor's driver issues for the other's.

With such a fast system at that resolution you should just focus on the fastest single-GPU in your price range, if that's not enough, then SLI/CF that part.

 

[Rick James]

Hmm.... 4850X2 or 4830 in Trifire

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: Rick James
Hmm.... 4850X2 or 4830 in Trifire

Out of those two, X2.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Elfear

Originally posted by: Rick James
Hmm.... 4850X2 or 4830 in Trifire

Out of those two, X2.

Agreed. The 4850x2 is such good bang for the buck in that price range. But who knows, the GX2 is certainly no slouch. When you get your new monitor you maybe satisfied with it. If not the 4850 is certainly a step up in both GPU horsepower and having 1GB of memory for each GPU.

 

[Denithor]

WTF are you guys smoking?

Start here, read the next seven pages.

Change the charts to the 1920x1200 setting.

In one case, FC2, it stumbles pretty badly. In the six other games they test, the GX2 matches or kicks the shit out of the GTX 285.

Wipe the drool off your chin and keep that GX2 for a while longer.

The only cards you should even consider would be the GTX 295 or the 4870X2. Even the 4850X2 cannot beat up the GX2 convincingly across the board (actually loses in CoD: WaW and it's very close in a couple of others).

EDIT: And remember, these games were all run with graphics on Ultra/max/etc settings. So if you get a little slow-down you can always turn down the shadows a titch or something and your performance should be fine.

 

[alcoholbob]

Wow you just managed to insult everyone in the thread, lol.

 

[Dadofamunky]

He has to do that, being that he's merely a STEWARD of the throne and not the KING.

 

[Rick James]

Originally posted by: Denithor
WTF are you guys smoking?

Start here, read the next seven pages.

Change the charts to the 1920x1200 setting.

In one case, FC2, it stumbles pretty badly. In the six other games they test, the GX2 matches or kicks the shit out of the GTX 285.

Wipe the drool off your chin and keep that GX2 for a while longer.

The only cards you should even consider would be the GTX 295 or the 4870X2. Even the 4850X2 cannot beat up the GX2 convincingly across the board (actually loses in CoD: WaW and it's very close in a couple of others).

EDIT: And remember, these games were all run with graphics on Ultra/max/etc settings. So if you get a little slow-down you can always turn down the shadows a titch or something and your performance should be fine.

Awesome post. Makes me think about keeping the GX2 and adding another i found on CL for 200.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Denithor
WTF are you guys smoking?

Start here, read the next seven pages.

Change the charts to the 1920x1200 setting.

In one case, FC2, it stumbles pretty badly. In the six other games they test, the GX2 matches or kicks the shit out of the GTX 285.

Wipe the drool off your chin and keep that GX2 for a while longer.

The only cards you should even consider would be the GTX 295 or the 4870X2. Even the 4850X2 cannot beat up the GX2 convincingly across the board (actually loses in CoD: WaW and it's very close in a couple of others).

EDIT: And remember, these games were all run with graphics on Ultra/max/etc settings. So if you get a little slow-down you can always turn down the shadows a titch or something and your performance should be fine.

I did suggest he try out his GX2 first. But looking at your link the 4850x2 isn't as much of an increase as I thought it'd be, but it still is a small one. I agree with you, for the money he should probably go to a higher end card as the 4850x2 is faster, but not enough to really be much of an upgrade.

 

[Dadofamunky]

I would not go by just one review. I would check out half a dozen or so before making a decision. A GX2 for $200 is too much, in my view.

 

[Rick James]

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky
I would not go by just one review. I would check out half a dozen or so before making a decision. A GX2 for $200 is too much, in my view.

Agreed. I emailed him and offered 150

 

[Rick James]

Picking up a 2nd 9800GX2 tonight for 175. We'll see how much better quad SLI is

My new monitor should be here tomorrow