Damn good read and I think this should be noted and VERY interesting.
The INTERESTING caveat I get was that the last article was done on " 5 NVIDIA HAND-PICKED" games. He did use Crysis Warhead which aslooking at minimum FPS each card won a resolution and tied on the other.
Now he uses those same games for this review; again Nvidia-picked and NOT ATI-picked. They come out just about as even as you can looking at minimum FPS and the various resolutions. Then you throw in the non-Nvidia picked games and BAM the ATI card wins across the board in minimum FPS and in most cases avg FPS also.
In conclusion I think it shows the ATI driver updates goes well with a MUCH broader array of games; whereas Nvidia chose their hand-picked games for a reason
The INTERESTING caveat I get was that the last article was done on " 5 NVIDIA HAND-PICKED" games. He did use Crysis Warhead which aslooking at minimum FPS each card won a resolution and tied on the other.
Now he uses those same games for this review; again Nvidia-picked and NOT ATI-picked. They come out just about as even as you can looking at minimum FPS and the various resolutions. Then you throw in the non-Nvidia picked games and BAM the ATI card wins across the board in minimum FPS and in most cases avg FPS also.
In conclusion I think it shows the ATI driver updates goes well with a MUCH broader array of games; whereas Nvidia chose their hand-picked games for a reason
This isn't a surprise really, the 180 reviews everyone in this thread ignored already showed the C216 and 1GB 4870 performing similarly at stock speeds. Once a factory overclocked model was thrown in the mix the GTX 260 pulls away easily.
But ya it once again will come down to price, preference, cooling/power, warranty, overclockability, features etc. when choosing between these parts. At this price point they're both good buys if you want more performance now, but with the state of the global economy I'm sure prices will drop further sooner than later. And there's also the Nvidia 55nm parts in a month or so.
But ya it once again will come down to price, preference, cooling/power, warranty, overclockability, features etc. when choosing between these parts. At this price point they're both good buys if you want more performance now, but with the state of the global economy I'm sure prices will drop further sooner than later. And there's also the Nvidia 55nm parts in a month or so.
Yes its some amazing conspiracy that Nvidia directed reviewers to the top 5 selling PC games released within the last 2 months. I'm sure you'd much rather see Call of Juarez and Kane and Lynch benchmarks, but I guess the point they're trying to make is that their hardware runs the latest and greatest games better than the competition.Originally posted by: deerhunter716
The INTERESTING caveat I get was that the last article was done on " 5 NVIDIA HAND-PICKED" games. He did use Crysis Warhead which aslooking at minimum FPS each card won a resolution and tied on the other.
Now he uses those same games for this review; again Nvidia-picked and NOT ATI-picked. They come out just about as even as you can looking at minimum FPS and the various resolutions. Then you throw in the non-Nvidia picked games and BAM the ATI card wins across the board in minimum FPS and in most cases avg FPS also.
In conclusion I think it shows the ATI driver updates goes well with a MUCH broader array of games; whereas Nvidia chose their hand-picked games for a reason
OTOH, you should be asking yourself why it took so long for ATI to fix their drivers to perform on par with the competition in older titles. Hmmmm.......
I don't exactly agree with most of what you said, but I can see how the other things posted could go either way. But this one bugs me... this means absolutely nothing. There is a difference between heat and temperature. Because x GPU runs 10C cooler then y GPU means absolutely nothing, assuming they are different GPU's with different cooling solutions. The GPU that has the lower temp could very well still be creating more heat and putting into your case/living space.
Mucking around? You go to CCC, set the fan speed to 30%. Done.
My card idles at 48 and load never goes above 75 and my PC runs almost silent. After owning a 8800GT, I vowed never again would I deal with such a hot and loud card. Setting up Riva profiles isnt that hard, but its still not something I want to have to do. All I can say is, with a well ventilated case, the 4870 runs very quietly and cool with just 30% fan speed.
Red Storm
Lifer
- Oct 2, 2005
- 14,233
- 234
- 106
On the subject of warranties...
I've owned many video cards in my lifetime. Some came with a lifetime warranty, some came with a 2 year warranty, etc. Once you've had a card for 2 years, you can be sure there are better performing cards at great prices on the market. Warranties are really only useful while the card itself is "useful" (as in, gives you good performance).
Lifetime warranties are nice, but they're generally only useful for those first few years. If I had to choose between a 3 year warranty and a lifetime warranty, and the 3 year warranty card was cheaper, I'd go with that every time.
I've owned many video cards in my lifetime. Some came with a lifetime warranty, some came with a 2 year warranty, etc. Once you've had a card for 2 years, you can be sure there are better performing cards at great prices on the market. Warranties are really only useful while the card itself is "useful" (as in, gives you good performance).
Lifetime warranties are nice, but they're generally only useful for those first few years. If I had to choose between a 3 year warranty and a lifetime warranty, and the 3 year warranty card was cheaper, I'd go with that every time.
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
It looks like they still give the nod to the GTX260. Still faster overall, lower heat and power consumption plus PhysX. Or so they say in their conclusions.
This has pretty much been the consensus among other sites as well.
This has forced AMD to panic and cut their prices. Which is good for everyone.
This has pretty much been the consensus among other sites as well.
This has forced AMD to panic and cut their prices. Which is good for everyone.
Actually they do not. See the last sentence in this quote below.
To fine-tune our results a little bit more, let's take our highest-available resolution for each game, 2560x1600. This resolution is the most intensive available right now, and as a result, it's a good one to see where one GPU excels over another. If we take a look at performance data at that resolution for each game (1920x1200 for Dead Space), we see that ATI performed the best in four titles (Crysis Warhead, Fallout 3, Clear Sky and UT III), while NVIDIA lead the other four (Call of Duty: WaW, Dead Space, Far Cry 2 and Left 4 Dead). From that standpoint, the cards appear to be almost identical, each having their own set of games in which they excel.
If you are trying to get on nVidia's payroll, you should really tone it down a bit. I totally laughed out loud at your 'panic' statement. Panick isn't dropping MSRP ~$50, rather, panic is dropping MSRP ~$200 like nVidia did with the GTX280.
I would have thought World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King would be in the top five based on sales figures (2.8 million copies in its first 24 hours). Which list are you looking at places those particular five games as the top five?
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Here's a 260-216 with Far Cry 2 for only $247. That takes away the price advantage.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814130398
As stated in the article.
"On the other hand, NVIDIA's card costs $20 more, but it runs a bit cooler, is more power efficient, and supports PhysX, which may be a big thing next year."
Add to that the performance advantage and better drivers (as noted by many sites).
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814130398
As stated in the article.
"On the other hand, NVIDIA's card costs $20 more, but it runs a bit cooler, is more power efficient, and supports PhysX, which may be a big thing next year."
Add to that the performance advantage and better drivers (as noted by many sites).
1-2. For the people that do muck though ATi left plenty of room for cooling and power saving. One thread shown that idle power can be reduced 40W just by underclocking. Just put the new auto fan and idle clock speeds in the bios and flash, your done. I've posted these before but why not again.
idle - stock cooler
http://img83.imageshack.us/img83/6544/4870pszg7.jpg
gaming - stock cooler
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/736/4870oclu1.jpg
3. Sure your board can't properly run CF or SLI, but a second card just for PhysX is a waste. All your going to do is increase your machines idle power for some little gain in some physx games.
4. You got me here, Visiontek doesn't make a 1GB model for some reason. Recently my 9800xt fan died, honestly it wasn't even worth replacing the fan it was so useless. In most cases 2-3 yrs is plenty when it comes to gaming cards.
5. Nvidia is in a good spot right now with developers, but GPU PhysX is just filling the gap till DX11 comes out next year.
If the 260/216 generally uses less power than the 4870 (which is the case here), then the 260 will generally create less heat. Period.
Better drivers....? Reviewers have only been saying that for what 1.5 months? Only since about the Time Far Cry 2 came out with the whole ATI hotfix fiasco.
Performance advantage.....? The 260 has a performance advantage in the same amount of games as the 4870, which means there is no advantage.
There is some major "wreckage" going on with your credibility everytime you post. About time you work on some fixage
ROFL - fantastic post. I totally agree. The fixage when he blatantly pays no attention to where the article says they are EQUAL now with the new drivers.
It showed that the GTX260 used slightly more power at load (though there are too many variables to say one GPU uses more/less as there are other components that use power too). On a bigger GPU built on a bigger process. All I'm getting at is if a 4870 hits 85C at load and the GTX260 is at 70C at load, that doesn't necessarily mean the GTX260 creates less heat... those numbers are just a function of the cooler vs. the heat the GPU puts out. Ultimately it means nothing in this case.
Wreckage
Banned
- Jul 1, 2005
- 5,529
- 0
- 0
Your personal attacks aside, you ignored everything I quoted from the article.
Also I stated "other sites" I don't think anyone should base their opinion off just one review.
Many other sites, Hardocp, Techreport, etc. have shown the 260-216 ahead of the 4870. That's not even taking into consideration the large number of factory overclocked cards available that push it even higher.
aclim
Senior member
- Oct 6, 2006
- 475
- 0
- 0
Well its pretty obvious who is on ATIs jock here. That aside, both cards look pretty even. I do like less heat of the gtx260, plus they can OC very nice which would increase performance. I am looking to upgrade my gpu just dont know what to go with. Its either a 48701gb or a 216gtx260. Although the gtx280s are coming down in price fast so I dont know if I should get that instead.
Wrath would be in the top 5 however it was released Nov 13th, only a few days before Rel 180 when those reviews were conducted. Its probably better that it wasn't included since ATI apparently has some problems with flashing textures and WoW, at which point ATI owners would condemn the review and the game as being irrelevant and/or sucking.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter