Best crossfire setup for x2 2.5?

[imported_D3v]

I'm running an x2 3800 at 2.5 stable, 2G OCZ platinum sync'd to fsb(250), and with an XFX 8800GT 512MB Alpha Dog, retardedly on an ASUS A8R32-MVP Deluxe (crossfire) board. I'd like to sell the 8800 and go crossfire. The 8800 plays all games I've thrown at it, crysis included, although at obviously kinda lower FPS for that one. I pull almost 10K in 3dmark which means not a lot but the average for a 2.66 core2 with the same card is only 12k, so I'm not too cpu limited, and don't see a reason to upgrade yet. Anyone know what two ATI cards I can pair together on this box for the best gaming performance without wasting my money on something TOO fast? I know 2GB more ram and a switch to 64bit OS will help too..

2 x 3870's?

2 x 4850's?

My PSU is up to the task (antec neoHE 650.. best PSU I ever bought)

Thanks in advance, I can't find this info anywhere by searching..

D3V

 

[biostud]

why do you want to upgrade if you can play your games fine?

If you can avoid CF you should, also your CPU will be quite limiting CF.

 

[imported_D3v]

I want to move from my 22" at 16x10 to a 24" or bigger for 1920 res, and I know the single card just wont cut it, or at least, that model. I'm pretty fond of AA as well, so I suppose I want to get the most you know? I might be a bit CPU limited, but that lessens at higher screen res, and even if the cards still have more overhead than I can use, that's where the AA comes in almost for free I'm thinking. Sorry, screen res was the thing I left out, makes a big difference when answering the question. I'm assuming you're quite happy with your system? Specs are very similar to mine, except for the watercooling. I've built countless boxes but this is the first one that has lasted so long, I'd like to extend it's life by a year or two with the right vid cards, if it can be done. Like I said yeah, it's fine now mostly. Far Cry 2 on all high with 4xaa plays great, massively better than crysis, but I know there are games coming in the next year or so that it just wont handle, and I don't like to turn the settings down much. I know a core2 or quad is pretty cheap now, and the ram too, but the premium mobos these days are just obscenely expensive, and the whole build is not likely to be an option for some time.

 

[imported_D3v]

maybe a single card is a better option? of course I do lose physx if I move to AT...er.. AMD

 

[Qbah]

A HD4870 512MB or GTX260 would be fine at that resolution. If you're a little paranoid you can get a HD4870 1GB or a GTX260 Core 216 You can also get a HD4870x2 which is the fastest single card right now (and the most expensive, by large margins ), though that's crossfire on one card. Read up on the scaling and drawbacks running a CF setup first though (if you haven't already).

My HD4870 runs fine on that resolution. Though I run stuff at 1920x1080 windowed. Everything I ran on it (except Crysis/Warhead and Stalker) ran fine at that resolution with everything maxed. Had to drop to 1680x1050 DX9 in Crysis (Crysis: High/Warhead: Enthusiast) and drop the details in Stalker to get smooth framerates.

If you want to have Physx, just get a GTX260 Core 216 and be done with your problem, I'd say.

 

[imported_D3v]

well I read and searched enough to answer my question and yes, a hd4870 or a 260 would do great, with essentially free AA, but I'll not be taking anywhere near full advantage of the card's potential. (minimum and average framerates being the biggest negative point) I was hoping there was a 'perfect match' but really, I pretty much already have it where I'm at now. Even with prices at what seems an all-time low, in the bang for your buck category, I think it's time to hold off and see what comes over the horizon over the next 8 or 10 months.. GPGPU stuff, physx/havok, and whatever Intel might throw in the mix too, I'm not gonna buy up the stuff they are trying so hard to get rid of right now. ~

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: D3v
I want to move from my 22" at 16x10 to a 24" or bigger for 1920 res, and I know the single card just wont cut it, or at least, that model. I'm pretty fond of AA as well, so I suppose I want to get the most you know? I might be a bit CPU limited, but that lessens at higher screen res, and even if the cards still have more overhead than I can use, that's where the AA comes in almost for free I'm thinking. Sorry, screen res was the thing I left out, makes a big difference when answering the question. I'm assuming you're quite happy with your system? Specs are very similar to mine, except for the watercooling. I've built countless boxes but this is the first one that has lasted so long, I'd like to extend it's life by a year or two with the right vid cards, if it can be done. Like I said yeah, it's fine now mostly. Far Cry 2 on all high with 4xaa plays great, massively better than crysis, but I know there are games coming in the next year or so that it just wont handle, and I don't like to turn the settings down much. I know a core2 or quad is pretty cheap now, and the ram too, but the premium mobos these days are just obscenely expensive, and the whole build is not likely to be an option for some time.

2 x 4850 are best bang for buck if you are going for 19x12 .. but make sure you get the 1GB version
- is you CF MB 16x+4x, 8x+8x or 16+8x?
.. P35 will limit you a little in a 16x+4x configuration, but the scaling is still decent

i would NOT recommend any single GPU for 19x12 if you like max details and AA/AF - especially in view of the upcoming games - nevermind current games.
--the 280GTX barely cuts it; X2 is perfect imo for 19x12

EDIT: and *definitely* upgrade your CPU, when you have the chance [!!]

 

[Ichigo]

I'm been looking up benchmarks for a while now. I haven't seen any to suggest that 4850 Xfire is the best price to performance setup.

Link me?

 

[imported_D3v]

A CPU upgrade has been almost impossible to come by at the right price. I'm just stuck on my current, old mobo, I love it too much to pass on it. Old, but it's still got E-Sata, everything. A new 3.0Ghz AMD x2 is about 90 bucks, but I'm on socket 939 and so people who paid something like 800 bucks for their FX-60s are extremely reluctant to part with them used at all, or for less than a couple hundred minimum. Maybe I should spend more time in the For Sale/Trade and get me one..

Thanks apoppin for the reply as well; my CF MB is 16+16 so no worries there. I knew someone would advocate CF or an X2; it does make sense as when I finally get a fast core/quad, I'll pretty much double my gaming performance.. I'm off the the for sale/trade, hoping someone's mobo has died and wants to sell/trade a fast 939 x2 cpu.. Thanks all for the replies

 

[n7]

I don't ever advocate CF/SLI unless you love lots of drawbacks like microstuttering, games with poor scaling, & driver issues, & are going top of the line, which you aren't.

I'd suggest a solid single card like the 4870 1 GB or GTX 260/GTX 260 216.

Unfortunately, you'll still be in big trouble for CPU heavy games like UT3, but you should be okay with less CPU intensive titles for a while.

 

[imported_D3v]

funny I just found an article on this almost exact question on another site from 10/24.. .. .. What was shown was that with a 2.8Ghz Athlon X2, using a 9600GSO(512MB, 96 SPs and 550mhz core) vs a HD4850 512MB, there was a massive, 100% increase or more (except for crysis which was about 50% increase) with the 4850, testing at 1600x1200 with 4xaa-16xaf. It's a little more complex than that, but they didn't run more than 3 or 4 tests on the faster card for some reason, and didn't include other cards. Regardless, the 9600GSO is fairly close (80%?ish) to the 8800gt, so I'd agree on the 4870 1GB card as the best upgrade, which leaves room for huge improvements when swapping to a core2 or better finally. I just wish they would have thrown a 260 or 280, and one CF setup, and a 3Ghz chip or faster. Regardless, if you have a socket 939 with 2gigs of ram and a 8800gt or less and want to game at 1920x1080 with aa and af, you definitely CAN toss in a higher end card such as the 4850/4870 or the GTX260/216, and get huge improvements. (if you are running an x2 3600 at 1.8, or anything below 2.4Ghz, dont bother going above the 8800gt/9600gt/HD3870 level. I think that's it. Pretty much answered, but not thoroughly explored enough ANYWHERE to get the absolute BEST answer to my original question.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

A 9600GSO is not 80% of an 8800GT. It is much slower, and I believe it would be much slower as you increased the resolution. But if you have benchmarks showing otherwise, I'd gladly accept the link and take a look at the results myself.

I'm going to throw out a new option for you, which I feel would be the most economical and still meet your needs: Crossfire a couple of the new HD4830s. You can find them for almost the same price as a 9800GT and a single HD4830 is faster than your 8800GT. It splits the performance gap between the 8800GT and the HD4850. For labout the same price as an HD4870 you can get a setup that will be faster, especially if a game scales well with Crossfire.

Edit: Haha, seems like there is a good deal for an HD4850 on newegg. $125 after rebate for an HIS model.

 

[imported_D3v]

that IS a good deal.. 125? Wow, I have a credit there too.. hmm... and yeah I was hoping to not get stomped for saying the gso is '80%' of the 8800GT, but based on SP's and clock speed/mem speed its not bad and sorta close to that mark; much faster than 8600 at least.. Anyhow, regardless, the x2's can DEFINITELY still get their game on big time, with new mid range cards, as long as you are ok with low 3dmark scores with are so, so CPU dependent..