GTX 260 hits $149

[error8]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15651

At the highest settings they tested the "old" 260 beat the 4870 in the majority of the benchmarks.

In your review things are like this:

Call of Duty 4: 4870 is faster then GTX 260 in every setting, except 2560X1600 resolution.

Half Life 2: 4870 is faster then GTX 260 in every setting, except 2560X1600 resolution.

Quake Wars: 4870 is faster then GTX 260 in every setting and resolution, including 2560X1600.

Crysis Warhead: GTX 260 beats 4870 in all resolutions and settings. This is the only clear win for the GTX 260

GRID: 4870 chokes at 2560X1600, with 4XAA and this is the only test they've made here. Taking the resolution down, would probably turn the table in favor of the ATi card.

The thing is that 4870 512mb wins at resolutions bellow 2560X1600, over the GTX 260, except in Crysis. I don't think people buy a GTX 260 or a 4870 512 to use them at 2560X1600 and AA on. For that resolution you need the best card on the shelf and even that might struggle at times. People are buying these two cards to use them at lower resolutions and here is where 4870 shines.

 

[MustangSVT]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: error8
Looking at benchmarks, even with more ram, GTX260 is left behind the 4870 512. Isn't this the reason Nvidia released the gtx 260 C216?

http://www.tomshardware.com/re...n-hd-4870,1964-19.html

Originally posted by: error8
ATi catalysts have also improved since the great 180 drivers were released.

So can you please link me some benchmarks where the gtx 260 c192 is in front of the 4870 512!?
Saying that the card is faster doesn't make the card faster, is it? Prove that it is so.

Rofl, this is the point all the revisionists start selectively linking reviews. Again, if you're going to make the argument newer drivers benefitted equally on the 4870, why link older reviews with old drivers and old games to begin with?

Comparison thread with Big Bang 2 reviews

It was pretty well established in that thread based on 180 driver reviews that the 216 was convincingly faster than the 1GB 4870 and that the 192 260 traded blows depending on the game. Even if newer Catalysts improved performance for the 4870, its not going to magically overcome the shortcomings of less VRAM in situations where VRAM is an issue.

If it comes down to a few FPS difference between the 260 and 512MB 4870 for most games but a massive difference in a handful of games that require more VRAM, I'd certainly choose the 260 as that difference would be far greater in actual gameplay. Again, this situation is only going to bet worst, not better as newer games demand more VRAM.

interesting site. did they handpick games / settings just for nvidia? it it being an nvidia fansite doesnt help either.

and 4870 was $109 after rebate briefly.

I guess you really are a fanboy.

 

[AzN]

To bad it's only preorder. Chizow likes to argue more vram helps with resolution and AA but in reality it only helps in AA settings. Yet 4870 still outperforms 260 with 8xAA.

I've been also noticing that Nvidia cards have problems with smoke. Fire some artillery in BF2 all over the screen or play Grid and burn rubber and you will know what I'm talking about. Frame rates drop much further on Nvidia cards below 20fps at times when it's averaging 80+fps. This shouldn't happen but it does. Radeon cards have no problems with smoke.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: MustangSVT
interesting site. did they handpick games / settings just for nvidia? it it being an nvidia fansite doesnt help either.

and 4870 was $109 after rebate briefly.

I guess you really are a fanboy.

I wasn't referring to the single review, I was referring to the multiple reviews linked throughout the thread clearly showing the improvements from the 180 drivers. No point in digging up reviews to reinforce what we already know right?

As for the 4870 being $109, did I say it wasn't? Again, if you can get it for $109 it a no-brainer. If you did get it for $109, then why are you even concerned about what the price is on the GTX 260? You got your deal so you're no longer in the market right?

As for being a fanboy lol. The difference between myself and those who so love to point the finger and cry "Fanboi11!" or fancy themselves as "unbiased" is that I'm not going to pretend I'm unbiased. There's no need to hide behind the facade of being unbiased as Nvidia parts are consistently better than ATI's. That doesn't mean I'm not going to give sound advice or make buying decisions based on actual performance and well established realities though.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: error8
ATi catalysts have also improved since the great 180 drivers were released.

So can you please link me some benchmarks where the gtx 260 c192 is in front of the 4870 512!?
Saying that the card is faster doesn't make the card faster, is it? Prove that it is so.

Rofl, this is the point all the revisionists start selectively linking reviews. Again, if you're going to make the argument newer drivers benefitted equally on the 4870, why link older reviews with old drivers and old games to begin with?

Because I can't find any recent reviews with these two cards and with the latest drivers.

Originally posted by: chizow

Comparison thread with Big Bang 2 reviews

It was pretty well established in that thread based on 180 driver reviews that the 216 was convincingly faster than the 1GB 4870 and that the 192 260 traded blows depending on the game. Even if newer Catalysts improved performance for the 4870, its not going to magically overcome the shortcomings of less VRAM in situations where VRAM is an issue.

That is true.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: chizow
There's no need to hide behind the facade of being unbiased as Nvidia parts are consistently better than ATI's. That doesn't mean I'm not going to give sound advice or make buying decisions based on actual performance and well established realities though.

First phrase pretty much negates the second one.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: Azn
To bad it's only preorder. Chizow likes to argue more vram helps with resolution and AA but in reality it only helps in AA settings. Yet 4870 still outperforms 260 with 8xAA.

I've been also noticing that Nvidia cards have problems with smoke. Fire some artillery in BF2 all over the screen or play Grid and burn rubber and you will know what I'm talking about. Frame rates drop much further on Nvidia cards below 20fps at times when it's averaging 80+fps. This shouldn't happen but it does. Radeon cards have no problems with smoke.

Rofl, so how much faster is the 512MB 4870 faster in Fallout 3 with AA? Or GTA4 with a high textures and view distance higher than 20? Or Far Cry 2 with AA? It tanks compared to both the 1GB 4870 and GTX 260, plain and simple.

As for particle effects, both vendors have issues depending on the game (look up "Radeon soft particle problems") and its performance is significantly impacted by the CPU also as denser particle effects require significantly more CPU time.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: error8
First phrase pretty much negates the second one.

How so? Both statements are accurate.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Nvidia fanboys.

There is no faster AMD card. There are no benches clearly showing that the infidel 4870 is faster than the GTX260. The BigBang drivers have burried the Catalyst drivers. Nvidia Akbar!

The 4870 is still a better card than the GTX260 192. The 4870 is the better buy. The 4870 trades blows with the GTX260 216. I don't get the point of this thread.

 

[BFG10K]

Putting the bickering to one side for a moment, these kinds of deals are great for the customer. It?s amazing how much performance can be had for so little money.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: Azn
I've been also noticing that Nvidia cards have problems with smoke. Fire some artillery in BF2 all over the screen or play Grid and burn rubber and you will know what I'm talking about.

I just switched from a X1950XTX to a 9800 GTX+ and have not seen this at all in BF2. It's one of the games I primarily play too.

I never have frames drop below the 20s now, unless I run 32xS.

There's been absolutely nothing less than improvements all the way around. Less shimmering due to better AA/AF quality, better frames, much less audible noise, and lower temps. I run with 8xS or 16xS. 16xS can bog down frames occasionally, especially in high foliage areas with lots of action. 8xS runs very well though.

Frame rates drop much further on Nvidia cards below 20fps at times when it's averaging 80+fps. This shouldn't happen but it does. Radeon cards have no problems with smoke.

The only situation I've experienced that reflects what you're describing is in Quake Wars with soft particles enabled. I've noticed it can be pretty demanding, especially with all other settings cranked on full and depending on how much smoke is around. Hence, it should happen because it requires additional processing.


That said, ATi can't enable soft particles in that game, so there's no telling what performance would be like. This doesn't mean "Radeon cards have no problems with smoke", because not being able to use the feature is a problem.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: josh6079

That said, ATi can't enable soft particles in that game, so there's no telling what performance would be like.

I can enable it on my 4850, and there's a performance hit for doing so

 

[SlowSpyder]

That's a good price for the GTX260, no doubt. But between that and the 4870 @ $150, where does that leave the $150 GTS250? It's price has to drop, or it's a pointless part.

The 192SP unit wasn't good enough to beat the 4870 so Nvidia brough out the 216SP unit. It's a good match, I can understand why someone would choose either the 4870 or the GTX260 216. But at $150 nothing has changed.

Look here. A few 4870's for $150-$155 AR. That's still the best part money can buy for $150. The GTX260 192 is still a lesser card overall.

But since you posted this Wreckage, does that mean you know understand that the GTS250 cannot and was not meant to compete with the 4870?

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: josh6079

That said, ATi can't enable soft particles in that game, so there's no telling what performance would be like.

I can enable it on my 4850, and there's a performance hit for doing so

Guess I stand corrected.

Tweakguides must not have updated their ETQW section.

Note that this option doesn't work for ATI graphics cards at the moment, and is a known issue, so it is greyed out for ATI users.

I was mainly going off of that. The X1950XTX couldn't enable it either, but that's probably because of its lesser OpenGL support. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
The GTX260 192 is still a lesser card overall.

To each their own. :beer:

The difference in their performances only go so far before accounting for other factors.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
The GTX260 192 is still a lesser card overall.

To each their own. :beer:

The difference in their performances only go so far before accounting for other factors.

I was talking in regards to performance. I still see the 4870 as a faster card overall. But you are absolutely correct, each company has some unique features that could certainly influence someones decision beyond performance alone. :beer:

 

[Wreckage]

The GTX260 is a much better card than the 4870 and at these prices it's very hard to resist. Almost makes me want to grab a second one for SLI.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The GTX260 is a much better card than the 4870 and at these prices it's very hard to resist. Almost makes me want to grab a second one for SLI.

A hush falls over the crowd... who will be the first to take the troll-bait?

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The GTX260 is a much better card than the 4870 and at these prices it's very hard to resist. Almost makes me want to grab a second one for SLI.

Not the 192, you may be thinking the 216.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: Azn
To bad it's only preorder. Chizow likes to argue more vram helps with resolution and AA but in reality it only helps in AA settings. Yet 4870 still outperforms 260 with 8xAA.

I've been also noticing that Nvidia cards have problems with smoke. Fire some artillery in BF2 all over the screen or play Grid and burn rubber and you will know what I'm talking about. Frame rates drop much further on Nvidia cards below 20fps at times when it's averaging 80+fps. This shouldn't happen but it does. Radeon cards have no problems with smoke.

Rofl, so how much faster is the 512MB 4870 faster in Fallout 3 with AA? Or GTA4 with a high textures and view distance higher than 20? Or Far Cry 2 with AA? It tanks compared to both the 1GB 4870 and GTX 260, plain and simple.

Exactly AA settings. Isn't this what I mentioned in the first place. :disgust: 4870 isn't too far off from 260 that has more vram even in vram limited situations. Nvidia cards tank with 512mb but ATI cards don't tank like Nvidia cards do with less vram. We are talking about measly 8fps more for 1gig @ 1920x1200 4xAA in one or 2 games. If that. As for GTA4. It's not exactly a GPU limited game.

As for particle effects, both vendors have issues depending on the game (look up "Radeon soft particle problems") and its performance is significantly impacted by the CPU also as denser particle effects require significantly more CPU time.

Why don't you name a game where radeon cards exhibit this problem? You wouldn't know because you haven't tried a Radeon card since R300. I know for a fact Nvidia cards exhibit this problem. Radeon cards do not.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: Azn
I've been also noticing that Nvidia cards have problems with smoke. Fire some artillery in BF2 all over the screen or play Grid and burn rubber and you will know what I'm talking about.

I just switched from a X1950XTX to a 9800 GTX+ and have not seen this at all in BF2. It's one of the games I primarily play too.

I never have frames drop below the 20s now, unless I run 32xS.

There's been absolutely nothing less than improvements all the way around. Less shimmering due to better AA/AF quality, better frames, much less audible noise, and lower temps. I run with 8xS or 16xS. 16xS can bog down frames occasionally, especially in high foliage areas with lots of action. 8xS runs very well though.

Frame rates drop much further on Nvidia cards below 20fps at times when it's averaging 80+fps. This shouldn't happen but it does. Radeon cards have no problems with smoke.

The only situation I've experienced that reflects what you're describing is in Quake Wars with soft particles enabled. I've noticed it can be pretty demanding, especially with all other settings cranked on full and depending on how much smoke is around. Hence, it should happen because it requires additional processing.


That said, ATi can't enable soft particles in that game, so there's no telling what performance would be like. This doesn't mean "Radeon cards have no problems with smoke", because not being able to use the feature is a problem.

I have a similar card as you. It doesn't happen that it ruins the game but it does happen when artillery is blowing everywhere around you. I'm also using 16xS and averaging over 80fps @ 1080p. It lasts for all so 3-4 seconds if that. Radeon cards doesn't do this but Nvidia cards do.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: videogames101

Originally posted by: Wreckage
The GTX260 is a much better card than the 4870 and at these prices it's very hard to resist. Almost makes me want to grab a second one for SLI.

Not the 192, you may be thinking the 216.

Even the 192 has been proven to pass the 4870 at high resolutions. Throw in the multiple extra features and better image quality, it's a slam dunk.

 

[SSChevy2001]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Even the 192 has been proven to pass the 4870 at high resolutions. Throw in the multiple extra features and better image quality, it's a slam dunk.

Please just give it a break aready.

Mod please lock this thread already, as it's doesn't belong in this section.