Computerbase.de -- Graphics Card Evolution Performance: 7900GTX/X1800XT to GTX580

[RussianSensation]

Full Article provided by Computerbase.de

ATI cards compared:

X1800XT (2005) - $549
X1950XTX (2006) - $449
HD2900XT (2007) - $399
HD3870 (2007) - $219
HD4850 (2008) - $199
HD4890 (2008) - $259
HD5870 (2009) - $379
HD6970 (2010) - $369

Nvidia cards compared:

7900GTX (2006) - $499
8800GTX (2006) - $599
GTX280 (2008) - $649
GTS250 (2009) - $129 (512MB) / $149 (1GB)
GTX480 (2010) - $499
GTX580 (2010) - $499

Settings Tested: 1680x1050 with 0AA/0AF and 4AA/16AF

I wish they included more games. 1920x1080 resolution would have been nice too, but the older cards would probably be a complete slide show. Either way those of you 'lucky' enough to be gaming on an X1800XT or 7900GTX will find a lot of performance in a $160 GTX560 or an HD6870, and perhaps in a used GTX460

Most important takeaway for me: Buying a $500-600 graphics card and keeping it for 4-5+ years is the worst way to future proof. With graphics performance evolving so fast, for those who don't resell cards or can't afford to buy a new $500 card every 18 months, it's a lot better to buy three $200 graphics cards 2 years apart or two $250 graphics card 3 years apart, etc.

Now you can get at least 3-4x the performance of a 7900GTX/X1800XT for about $90-100 in an HD6770/6790; while a $430-450 GTX580 is 'only' 2x faster than an HD6790.

EDIT: *** Launch prices added *** (Feel free to correct me if these are off).

 

[Predicament]

Most important takeaway for me: Buying a $500-600 graphics card and keeping it for 4-5+ years is the worst way to future proof. With graphics performance evolving so fast, for those who don't resell cards or can't afford to buy a new $500 card every 18 months, it's a lot better to buy three $200 graphics cards 2 years apart or two $250 graphics card 3 years apart, etc.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...n-evolution/8/#abschnitt_benchmarks_directx_9

Great point you bring up.

 

[happy medium]

Most important takeaway for me: Buying a $500-600 graphics card and keeping it for 4-5+ years is the worst way to future proof. With graphics performance evolving so fast, for those who don't resell cards or can't afford to buy a new $500 card every 18 months, it's a lot better to buy three $200 graphics cards 2 years apart or two $250 graphics card 3 years apart, etc.

I agree, I always try to grab a good mid range overclocker every generation.
SO far ...
8800gt overclocked
5750 overclocked
gtx460 overclocked

 

[RussianSensation]

I agree, I always try to grab a good mid range overclocker every generation.
SO far ...
8800gt overclocked
5750 overclocked
gtx460 overclocked

:thumbsup:

One of my friends games on a budget. 6 months ago or so, he bought a brand new HD4850 1GB for $50 on Newegg. 5 years ago, that type of performance would have cost you $599.

Of course I realize that HD4850 is not impressive in today's world, but given the 12x lower price, I think that's good progress. How about a $50 card with GTX580's performance level or 6x the performance of a GTX580 in a high-end card by Nov 2016?

 

[R4in]

How about a $50 card with GTX580's performance level by Nov 2016?

Oh this day could not come soon enough lol. What will happen when our graphics power begins to plateau? I know its not anytime soon, but when we hit that threshold, the only thing to do is go with cheaper parts, thus GTX580 performance for $100 1 year after release vice 5 years

Oh the possibilities....

 

[-Slacker-]

Wow, at least 10 times faster in 6 years, even though 2 generations in between then and now have only been refreshes (hd3800s/9800s and hd6900s/gtx500s)

 

[Termie]

I really like comparisons like this. The x1900 series was truly forward-looking. At the time, it was similar in performance to the 7900 series, but now it's way ahead. On the other hand, I think there's something to be said for the later-generation nVidia cards, which appear to hold up over time just a bit better than AMD (8800 vs. 3870 being the most obvious example).

By the way, I don't totally agree that buying high-end isn't a good investment. Both the 8800gtx and GTX280 are still playable cards, and the 8800gtx is from 2006(!). I'm sure people who purchased it for full price are no longer using it, but in theory they could.

If anything, I think the take away message here is that nobody should be upgrading every generation. The year-to-year improvement is pretty minimal - it takes a good 2 generations to get a doubling of performance, which is where improvement becomes really evident. Witness 3870 (Q4 '07) to 5870 (Q3 '09) and with a greater spread both time-wise and performance-wise, 8800gtx (Q4 '06) to GTX480 (Q1 '10).

 

[happy medium]

the 8800gtx

I agree, but the 8800gtx was just a outstanding card and ahead of its time but very exspensive.

 

[RussianSensation]

By the way, I don't totally agree that buying high-end isn't a good investment. Both the 8800gtx and GTX280 are still playable cards, and the 8800gtx is from 2006(!). I'm sure people who purchased it for full price are no longer using it, but in theory they could.

I know what you are saying if you just want to buy a card and forget the hassle of upgrading (although for some upgrading is fun ). However, instead of buying an 8800GTX for $600, the same gamer would have been better served getting an 8800GT ($200), then GTX260 216/HD4870 ($200), then say GTX560Ti/HD6950 ($200) during the same 5-year- period.

Back then 8800GTX would have provided you with more cushion in games (i.e., say 70-90 fps when 8800GT would give you 50-60). But now both are too slow for modern games. Again, a GTX280 didn't really prove to be any better than GTX260 216 by the time modern games rolled around. Look at BF3:

The more expensive GTX275/280 cards are technically faster but do you really want to play this game at <30 fps? You would be better off having a GTX560Ti / HD6950 by this time.

Path #1: The 1st user is still stuck with an 8800GTX from 2006 to 2011 since he/she decided to future-proof.
vs.
Path #2: Get an 8800GT for $200 and get slightly worse performance in games in 2007-2008, but then this path would have resulted in much better performance during the the years (2008-2011) as he/she could have purchased an HD4870/GTX260 216 for $200 and then upgraded now to a GTX560 Ti/HD6950 for $200 earlier this year.

In other words, today's analogy would be: the GTX580 is not that much faster than GTX560Ti/HD6950 2GB today but costs a lot more. In 2-3 years, the difference between these 3 cards will amount to "all unplayable" in next generation of games (< 30 fps). So you end up spending $300 extra for the top card (that btw will still struggle in BF3). Yet, in future games a GTX580 might get 30 and GTX560Ti/HD6950 2GB will get 22-24 fps in those same games - both insufficient. I have little doubt that in 2 years a $250 will mop the floor with a GTX580 and in 4-5 years from now a $250 card will be about 3-4x faster than a GTX580. So a $500 GTX580 purchased today and held for 5 years will be pretty underwhelming and a lousy 'investment'. This is why the guys rocking top-end GPUs like to sell them right before the next high-end launches

 

[Termie]

I know what you are saying. However, instead of buying an 8800GTX for $600, the same gamer would have been better served getting an 8800GT, then GTX260, then say GTX560Ti during the same 5 year period. Back then 8800GTX would have provided you with more cushion in games (i.e., say 70-90 fps when 8800GT would give you 50-60). But now both are too slow for modern games. While the 1st user is still stuck with an 8800GTX, the latter path would have resulted in much better performance during the the years (2008-2011) and only slightly worse performance in the first 2 years of ownership (2006-2008) (8800GTX vs. 8800GT).

In other words, the GTX580 is barely faster than GTX570/HD6950 2GB today but costs a lot more. In 2-3 years, the difference between these 3 cards will amount to "all unplayable" in next generation of games. So you end up spending $200 extra for the top card to go say from 60 to 70 fps in modern games, but in future games a GTX580 might get 30 and GTX570 will get 24 fps in those same games - both insufficient.

I definitely see what you're saying as well. But I think people who spend $600 on video cards are likely to do so repeatedly, while people who spend $300 on cards will do the same, and likewise with people who spend $150. It's all a value-judgment. I guess my point was that in addition to your argument, I'd say you should delay that purchase two generations, and not do the 8000gt to GTX260 upgrade or the GTX260 to GTX560 upgrade, but just the 8800gt to GTX560.

By the way, the 8800gt came out a year after the 8800gtx...so you couldn't buy one instead of the 8800gtx. Also, if purchased at original introductory retail prices, your 8800gt ($250) to GTX260 ($400) to 560Ti ($250) upgrade path would have cost $900...more than the 8800 Ultra, the fastest card at the beginning of the cycle.

All good fun...thanks for the thread!

 

[formulav8]

The HD4850 had a msrp @ $199 when released. Although it was 512mb.

 

[Termie]

The HD4850 had a msrp @ $199 when released. Although it was 512mb.

Yes: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4850,1957-24.html

This card and the $300 4870 were what broke nVidia's back on the $600 top card pricing formula. Soon after, GTX260 and GTX280 prices came tumbling down.

At 1680x1050, the value proposition of the 4850 was undeniable: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4850,1957-14.html

We are all still reaping the rewards of this blip in history today. Huge performance can be had for $200-300. It wasn't always that way.

Russian - if you have extra time on your hands, it would be interesting to fill in the introductory pricing of each of the cards listed in the comparison. A lot of work, I know, but adds a lot to the picture.

 

[RussianSensation]

This card and the $300 4870 were what broke nVidia's back on the $600 top card pricing formula. Soon after, GTX260 and GTX280 prices came tumbling down.

I remember how impressed I was by GTX280's performance but didn't really like the $649 MSRP. 13 months later I bought an HD4890 for ~<$200.

Considering a quick glance at Newegg reveals a $199 Galaxy GTX480 (!!!), you can just imagine what will happen to a $430-450 GTX580 12 months from now.

 

[happy medium]

Considering a quick glance at Newegg reveals a $199 Galaxy GTX480 (!!!), you can just imagine what will happen to a $430-450 GTX580 12 months from now.

Just found the best bang for your buck BF3 card.

 

[Termie]

I remember how impressed I was by GTX280's performance but didn't really like the $649 MSRP. 13 months later I bought an HD4890 for ~<$200.

Considering a quick glance at Newegg reveals a $199 Galaxy GTX480 (!!!), you can just imagine what will happen to a $430-450 GTX580 12 months from now.

Wow - that's actually a pretty good deal - that's GTX570/HD6970 performance for $200 (plus electricity)!

Yes, the HD4890 sealed the deal - AMD was committed to value. And when it was selling for $125 at one point, it looked like there was no bottom to the VGA market. Alas, prices crept back up slightly on that card and its kin, but today an HD6870 can be had for $150 or less, which is pretty amazing (the cheap GTX460-768 cards were also quite impressive).

 

[bryanW1995]

I know what you are saying if you just want to buy a card and forget the hassle of upgrading (although for some upgrading is fun ). However, instead of buying an 8800GTX for $600, the same gamer would have been better served getting an 8800GT ($200), then GTX260 216/HD4870 ($200), then say GTX560Ti/HD6950 ($200) during the same 5-year- period.

Back then 8800GTX would have provided you with more cushion in games (i.e., say 70-90 fps when 8800GT would give you 50-60). But now both are too slow for modern games. Again, a GTX280 didn't really prove to be any better than GTX260 216 by the time modern games rolled around. Look at BF3:

The more expensive GTX275/280 cards are technically faster but do you really want to play this game at <30 fps? You would be better off having a GTX560Ti / HD6950 by this time.

Path #1: The 1st user is still stuck with an 8800GTX from 2006 to 2011 since he/she decided to future-proof.
vs.
Path #2: Get an 8800GT for $200 and get slightly worse performance in games in 2007-2008, but then this path would have resulted in much better performance during the the years (2008-2011) as he/she could have purchased an HD4870/GTX260 216 for $200 and then upgraded now to a GTX560 Ti/HD6950 for $200 earlier this year.

In other words, today's analogy would be: the GTX580 is not that much faster than GTX560Ti/HD6950 2GB today but costs a lot more. In 2-3 years, the difference between these 3 cards will amount to "all unplayable" in next generation of games (< 30 fps). So you end up spending $300 extra for the top card (that btw will still struggle in BF3). Yet, in future games a GTX580 might get 30 and GTX560Ti/HD6950 2GB will get 22-24 fps in those same games - both insufficient. I have little doubt that in 2 years a $250 will mop the floor with a GTX580 and in 4-5 years from now a $250 card will be about 3-4x faster than a GTX580. So a $500 GTX580 purchased today and held for 5 years will be pretty underwhelming and a lousy 'investment'. This is why the guys rocking top-end GPUs like to sell them right before the next high-end launches

But remember that 8800gt was released almost a year after 8800gtx came out. It was 90% of the performance for 1/2 the price, and many 8800gtx users "downgraded" to 8800 gt and got lots of cash back.

But we're also assuming that somebody timed the market just right. A just as likely scenario is x1900xt, 8800gts 512, gtx 260 core 216, and 6950 1gb. Huh, actually, that's pretty close to my scenario (x1950xt, 3870, gtx 260 core 216, gtx 460 768). I guess I have to agree with your approach overall!

 

[happy medium]

ooooops

 

[s44]

But we're also assuming that somebody timed the market just right.

Sure, but it's pretty obvious when something's going to happen.

The guy who went 8800GTX to 5870 to GTX680/7970 (or whatever it's called) really has/will have nothing to complain about.

 

[Vdubchaos]

I could never spend more than 250 or so on a Video card (even if money was no object).

800xl
6600gt
7900gt OC
4870
460
and now 460 in SLI

For $100 bucks (cost of used 460) my set up is equivalent (if not better) than 580GTX

 

[RussianSensation]

Sure, but it's pretty obvious when something's going to happen.

The guy who went 8800GTX to 5870 to GTX680/7970 (or whatever it's called) really has/will have nothing to complain about.

Of course, esp. if you sell your cards. However, without reselling, if purchased on launch date this type of an arrangement would cost you ~ $500-600 + $370 + $500 = $1370-1470.

That's a lot of $. If you just waited 12 months in each case, you'd be looking at an 8800GT for $250, HD6950 for $230, and most likely HD7970 for $250 (prob. 12 months from its release). If you can afford it, sure buy the best cards!

 

[Bryf50]

I remember how impressed I was by GTX280's performance but didn't really like the $649 MSRP. 13 months later I bought an HD4890 for ~<$200.

Considering a quick glance at Newegg reveals a $199 Galaxy GTX480 (!!!), you can just imagine what will happen to a $430-450 GTX580 12 months from now.

Holy shit I totally just impulse bought that gtx480. I can dump my 560ti for not much less then that and it's a significant boost in performance. Hell I see auctions for used 480s on ebay with bids more then that.

 

[MarkLuvsCS]

With a solid PSU I think multi GPUs is a decent upgrade path too. I mean pair your 2 year old card with another 2 year old card to get nearly double performance. multi GPU solutions seem pretty good nowadays. I personally haven't seen micro-stutters though, so for anyone who can't handle multi GPUs then it would be best to use a single GPU. 2x 2 year old cards should be ~30&#37; faster than a new card, especially nowadays since the speeds have been less impressive between generations.

 

[bryanW1995]

I remember how impressed I was by GTX280's performance but didn't really like the $649 MSRP. 13 months later I bought an HD4890 for ~<$200.

Considering a quick glance at Newegg reveals a $199 Galaxy GTX480 (!!!), you can just imagine what will happen to a $430-450 GTX580 12 months from now.

That is a freakin' insane price.

Um, just out of curiosity, are those things longer than a gtx 260...?

 

[Grooveriding]

That is a freakin' insane price.

Um, just out of curiosity, are those things longer than a gtx 260...?

A litle bit if I remember correctly, but not much. Maybe half an inch.

That is easily the best deal in a video card around right now @ 200 with a 150Mhz overclock (ymmv, but all 3 of mine can do it) you have a 580 for $200. :thumbsup:

I would buy a fourth at that price, but my motherboard doesn't support it. lol

 

[Bryf50]

A litle bit if I remember correctly, but not much. Maybe half an inch.

That is easily the best deal in a video card around right now @ 200 with a 150Mhz overclock (ymmv, but all 3 of mine can do it) you have a 580 for $200. :thumbsup:

I would buy a fourth at that price, but my motherboard doesn't support it. lol

Do your cards have the stock cooler? If so 150mhz would be amazing.