Current GPU Pricing

[BD231]

lol GTX 460's running TW2 at 90 fps Not even close. Well, unless you play at 1280*720? Metro might be "suited for dual GPU's", but those GPU's are definitely not 460's. You have no idea what you're talking about. Just because you're cheap, doesn't mean the rest of us are.

Metro 2033, 90 fps with 2 oc'd 460's no problem on a phenom II x6. Nobody said anything in this thread about witcher running at 90fps.

Here's a pair beating a stock 670 ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT2CNhPQmRM

50fps lowest recorded frame which is clearly spanking a 670's ugly 20-30fps at max. Clearly you're the one who doesn't know what they're talking about.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Metro 2033, 90 fps with 2 oc'd 460's no problem on a phenom II x6. Nobody said anything in this thread about witcher running at 90fps.

I showed a link to Metro 2033 with two GTX 460s SLI on an i7 and it didn't get close to 90fps at anything beyond 1024x768 which is a resolution almost nobody is using these days.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_460_SLI/23.html

Also here is a link to a GTX 670 playing the same title.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_670_Power_Edition/18.html

So SLI 460s are faster yes, but not 3x faster and definitely not at any resolution people would be using today (1920x1080, 1900x1200, 2560x1600 etc)

 

[BD231]

So what you're saying is you're not a gamer because the gaming industry has held up Batman: Arkham Asylum and Arkham City in high regard.

Console skyrim isn't anywhere near the PC version. It has shorter view distances, lower texture details, lower resolution (it's not running native 1080p btw), lower framerate.

Do you know what field of view is? Sitting 2feet from a 24" monitor fills more of your FOV than sitting 6feet from 40" does.

Lastly, you said 90fps and have yet to produce evidence. No links, no charts, nothing. I produced evidence that shows way less than 90fps in the two titles you claimed.

Say what you want about my single GTX 670 but two games that run poorly on ALL hardware isn't exactly getting spanked in my book. You said an 800Mhz overclock? That means your GTX 460s were running 1578? Or you mean a 22Mhz overclock so you run at 800mhz?

Either way I'll wave to you in about a week when I'll be running SLI 670s.

Enjoy playing childrens games on your near $1,000 dollar GPU purchase, mr batman.

 

[BD231]

I showed a link to Metro 2033 with two GTX 460s SLI on an i7 and it didn't get close to 90fps at anything beyond 1024x768 which is a resolution almost nobody is using these days.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_460_SLI/23.html

Also here is a link to a GTX 670 playing the same title.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_670_Power_Edition/18.html

So SLI 460s are faster yes, but not 3x faster and definitely not at any resolution people would be using today (1920x1080, 1900x1200, 2560x1600 etc)

They're faster and they cost half the price [redacted], oc'd they get you the performance I quoted. If you don't believe me thats your problem but I achieved it myself and I wasn't wrong in stating 460's beat your overpriced crap.

No profanity and no personal attacks
-ViRGE

 

[javier_machuk]

The GTX 670 would be a better buy even though the initial cost is higher. It's faster by default than a 7950 and in my opinion has better driver support at this time.

I mentioned the Gigabyte card because it has an aftermarket cooling setup with three fans. It's generally considered a better card, but from Amazon it is a little bit more expensive than the EVGA FTW model.

that's what i though too.. but wouldn't that be the general case for eyefinity/surround since we are discussing pricing in this thread? considering the widespread of monitors without DP..

 

[cmdrdredd]

Enjoy playing childrens games on your near $1,000 dollar GPU purchase, mr batman.

lol...so I bet you don't play any games, don't watch anything on TV, see any movies, or listen to any music that isn't about sex and violence am I right?

Batman is hardly a children's comic anyway. In fact many comics from DC and Marvel are not marketed to children at all and have lots of complex themes in them that most children couldn't understand or relate to.

They're faster and they cost half the price [redacted], oc'd they get you the performance I quoted. If you don't believe me thats your problem but I achieved it myself and I wasn't wrong in stating 460's beat your overpriced crap.

haha wow...

http://memecreator.net/the-most-interesting-man-in-the-world/showimage.php/5332/u-mad-bro?-.jpg

that's what i though too.. but wouldn't that be the general case for eyefinity/surround since we are discussing pricing in this thread? considering the widespread of monitors without DP..

If you're going to do surround gaming then I don't think any single card is going to cut it (except a dual gpu card like GTX 690 or HD 7990). The massive resolution would need more power than a single GPU could handle, and memory does help too. The GTX 670 is only 2GB unless you specifically buy a 4GB model. Then the limit will be GPU power at such high resolutions. So the amount of memory needs to be taken into account when you are looking at multiple monitors and resolutions beyond 1920x1080(1200).

We're still not 4Chan
-ViRGE

 

[javier_machuk]

They're faster and they cost half the price [redacted], oc'd they get you the performance I quoted. If you don't believe me thats your problem but I achieved it myself and I wasn't wrong in stating 460's beat your overpriced crap.

what about highres scenarios with only 1 GB vram?

 

[SirPauly]

They're faster and they cost half the price [redacted], oc'd they get you the performance I quoted. If you don't believe me thats your problem but I achieved it myself and I wasn't wrong in stating 460's beat your overpriced crap.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-670/4/

The GTX 670 is 1.3 times faster than a GTX 460 over-all based on this site's findings. I am glad you're enjoying your GTX 460's but find your view difficult to believe.

One can over-clock a GTX 670 as well.

 

[Gordon Freemen]

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-670/4/

The GTX 670 is 1.3 times faster than a GTX 460 over-all based on this site's findings. I am glad you're enjoying your GTX 460's but find your view difficult to believe.

One can over-clock a GTX 670 as well.

But GTX 460 SLI is a far better value and performance than GTX 670. LOL when the GTX 670 comes down to $250 or less then it will be the mantra you are trying to proclaim but at $400+ the GTX 670 is kinda stalemate. GTX 480 @ 200 = a sexy deal that "Mantras" should be made of but forget about $400 to $600 just to max out a few top end games LOL.

 

[BD231]

what about highres scenarios with only 1 GB vram?

Metro 2033, Witcher 2, and Batman are all native 500-600mb vram games, with the exception of ubersampling you'd have to run 4000+ res to go over a gig on any of those titles.

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-nvidia-geforce-gtx-670/4/

The GTX 670 is 1.3 times faster than a GTX 460 over-all based on this site's findings. I am glad you're enjoying your GTX 460's but find your view difficult to believe.

One can over-clock a GTX 670 as well.

So is the nature of a game that is GPU limited. 1 high end GPU on metro is ugly compared 2 lower end gpu's, same goes for witcher. Haven't tried batman cus it's for 12 year olds of course.

haha wow...

You come off as a prude, and no I'm not mad I'm just treating you as such.

 

[Gordon Freemen]

So is the nature of a game that is GPU limited. 1 high end GPU on metro is ugly compared 2 lower end gpu's, same goes for witcher. Haven't tried batman cus it's for 12 year olds of course.

LOL this statement is full of Win! and I so agree and approve of this message ^

 

[BD231]

LOL this statement is full of Win! and I so agree and approve of this message ^

Sounds crazy I know, but when you consider a fast paced fps'r is using 5-600 megs of vram and it still runs [poorly] on top end GPU's the obvious answer is more gpu. Try it for yourself.

No profanity in the technical forums
-ViRGE

 

[chimaxi83]

Metro 2033, 90 fps with 2 oc'd 460's no problem on a phenom II x6. Nobody said anything in this thread about witcher running at 90fps.

Here's a pair beating a stock 670 ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT2CNhPQmRM

50fps lowest recorded frame which is clearly spanking a 670's ugly 20-30fps at max. Clearly you're the one who doesn't know what they're talking about.

You can honestly tell me you play batman and then say LCD tv's are for the kids? 1080p LCD TV picture quality is just fine. Metro 2033 sucks as far as shooters go and is clearly suited for dual GPU's just like witcher 2 as any 2 1gb gtx 460's will run that game at 90fps max settings, but I guess you don't care you spent $400 when you could have gotten triple the performance in that game spending around $200? I take it you just don't know any better.

You should probably learn how to form proper sentences.

 

[Gordon Freemen]

Sounds crazy I know, but when you consider a fast paced fps'r is using 5-600 megs of vram and it still runs [poorly] on top end GPU's the obvious answer is more gpu. Try it for yourself.

I have already and I completely agree. Further I just have to say Batman AC was a truly terrible game IMO a true testament to how consolized kiddy games have messed it all up for the more mature older school crowd.

 

[Gordon Freemen]

You should probably learn how to form proper sentences.

Yup please stop it I can easily understand what he was saying so perhaps you need to cool it on the hate sauce.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Metro 2033, Witcher 2, and Batman are all native 500-600mb vram games, with the exception of ubersampling you'd have to run 4000+ res to go over a gig on any of those titles.



You come off as a prude, and no I'm not mad I'm just treating you as such.

Batman 600MB vram? Really?

This screenshot is showing over 1.2GB Vram usage at 1920x1200

Insults and more insults...

 

[SirPauly]

But GTX 460 SLI is a far better value and performance than GTX 670. LOL when the GTX 670 comes down to $250 or less then it will be the mantra you are trying to proclaim but at $400+ the GTX 670 is kinda stalemate. GTX 480 @ 200 = a sexy deal that "Mantras" should be made of but forget about $400 to $600 just to max out a few top end games LOL.

imho,

Possibly in a few examples but not over-all to me. I don't think GTX 670 is the sexy deal mantra at 399 from a historical price/performance view but actually more-so on a premium scale based on a 28nm price/performance context. I believe gamers are paying premiums for their 28nm performance, including me, but it is what it is and needed an upgrade from my GTX 470.

There is no mantra I am trying to proclaim and must be a placebo effect by you when reading my post!

 

[Homeles]

No.

Great argument.

 

[BD231]

Batman 600MB vram? Really?

This screenshot is showing over 1.2GB Vram usage at 1920x1200

Insults and more insults...

On a vendetta to prove me wrong? Yes. All three of those games have a 512mb system requirement, quit twisting my words. I mentioned ubersampling which in batman terms is ultra maybe? I wouldn't know I don't play that game but I already told you that.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Ubersampling is unique to Witcher 2. Many titles at high settings and higher resolutions will consume more than 1GB vram. System requirements are pretty conservative.

I wonder though at what point 4GB cards will be priced in parity with 2GB cards or become the norm. Right now a GTX 670 4GB is almost $500 but my thoughts are that when running a resolution where you might need 4GB, is a single 670 even enough to keep up?

 

[SirPauly]

Metro 2033, 90 fps with 2 oc'd 460's no problem on a phenom II x6. Nobody said anything in this thread about witcher running at 90fps.

Here's a pair beating a stock 670 ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT2CNhPQmRM

50fps lowest recorded frame which is clearly spanking a 670's ugly 20-30fps at max. Clearly you're the one who doesn't know what they're talking about.

Am I missing something? How in the hell are you receiving such frame-rate when a GTX 670 or 680 SLi doesn't average 50 at 1080P with x4 AA.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_670_SLI/15.html

 

[twjr]

On a vendetta to prove me wrong? Yes. All three of those games have a 512mb system requirement, quit twisting my words. I mentioned ubersampling which in batman terms is ultra maybe? I wouldn't know I don't play that game but I already told you that.

I didn't really want to weigh in on this part of the discussion because it has been dragged way off topic but are you suggesting that because they have 512MB as a minimum requirement that is all those games will use?

More on topic.

I agree that the current prices of Nvidia cards are slightly inflated (680 is much more so than 670). I am unfortunately in a position which means I will have to get an Nvidia card (http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2253832&highlight=graphical+problems+7850). Ideally I would like to see Nvidia release a competitor to the 7800 series cards as a GTX 670 is more card than I need. But the GTX 660 is a bit of a phantom and no one seems to have any real idea when it is going to be released. I am sure someone somewhere knows...

 

[Homeles]

Ubersampling is unique to Witcher 2.

Pretty sure he's aware of that. He didn't state otherwise.

 

[blackened23]

Metro 2033, Witcher 2, and Batman are all native 500-600mb vram games, with the exception of ubersampling you'd have to run 4000+ res to go over a gig on any of those titles.

This statement is completely 100% false. The presentation stuff such as textures usually takes up 500-600MB at minimal settings but varies depending on which quality setting you choose for the game. You're also completely omitting anti aliasing. Nx AA costs you N * the framebuffer memory depending on resolution, with FXAA using slightly less.

Stating that any of those games use only 500-600mb is completely wrong unless you're playing with the absolute lowest settings, no AA, at a low resolution.

 

[toyota]

This statement is completely 100% false. The presentation stuff such as textures usually takes up 500-600MB at minimal settings but varies depending on which quality setting you choose for the game. You're also completely omitting anti aliasing. Nx AA costs you N * the framebuffer memory depending on resolution, with FXAA using slightly less.

Stating that any of those games use only 500-600mb is completely wrong unless you're playing with the absolute lowest settings, no AA, at a low resolution.

yeah no kidding cause I have ran both Metro 2033 and Batman AC at settings that easily exceeded 1gb of vram at 1920x1080.