GTX 295 or 4870 X2?

[omber]

Hello folks, I am back with a question to gurus over here at Anandtech. I've been using my 8800 GTX for last two years and while it worked faithfully I now have the money to spend on an upgrade. I can not however make up my mind as to which card to choose - It has to be a single card option as I do not wish to buy new motherboard to get a crossfire/SLI setup.

GTX295 looks fine but there seem to be overheating issues, but on the other hand 4870 X2 is not as fast. Which card would you choose and why? Thanks for your help folks

 

[n7]

By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

 

[error8]

The big problem in your case is that a dual gpu videocard like the GTX295 will be bottlenecked by your PCI-E 1.1 slot. You should also change the mobo if you want to get that card. If you can't change it, you could get something like a GTX 260 c216 or 4870 1gb, which will not be that affected by your old slot.

It's pretty clear that the GTX 295 is faster then the X2, but it's also more expensive. Both cards run very hot and I don't think there are overheating issues, once you mess up with the fan speed.

 

[Antman56]

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I wouldn't worry about a Multi-GPU setup. I am running a 4850x2 with a 4850 in a 3-way crossfire and it is getting sick performance and is compatible in "every" game I have tried. Its better than a 4870X2! I actually get the same GPU Score as a Geforce 295 in 3DMarks Vantage.

 

[Antman56]

Originally posted by: error8
The big problem in your case is that a dual gpu videocard like the GTX295 will be bottlenecked by your PCI-E 1.1 slot. You should also change the mobo if you want to get that card. If you can't change it, you could get something like a GTX 260 c216 or 4870 1gb, which will not be that affected by your old slot.

It's pretty clear that the GTX 295 is faster then the X2, but it's also more expensive. Both cards run very hot and I don't think there are overheating issues, once you mess up with the fan speed.

Also, I am using a motherboard with PCI Express 2.0 (Double the bandwidth of PCI-E 1.1) and I can only run the slots at 8x when I have both cards installed (4850X2 in first slot and 4850 in the other). At 8x in PCI-E 2.0, my cards get the same bandwidth available to them as PCI-E 1.1 running at 16x (what you have)... so don't get to concerned about that. You'll be fine with an X2 or 295 on that board.

 

[techboie]

If you can wait a while go straight to a 5870. If not, then 4850X2 or GTX 280/285 and above is the minimum you should consider for a decent upgrade.

 

[palladium]

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I'd second that. Even if it is bug free SLi/CF still suffer ( at the moment at least) from scaling issues. The extra performance is not needed in most cases unless you game on a 30" monitor with everything turned up, or you fancy 8xAA/16xAF with all the eye candy maxed at high res ( some of us do),or you use 3DVision.

Also I do think your CPU might bottleneck a 4870X2 or a 295 ( I can't find the thread now, but IIRC someone mentioned here in this forum that in some games even a 3.33GHz E8400 can bottleneck a multi-GPU setup - I think it was a 4870X2+4870 CFX) - at 19x12.).

 

[Antman56]

Originally posted by: palladium

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I'd second that. Even if it is bug free SLi/CF still suffer ( at the moment at least) from scaling issues. The extra performance is not needed in most cases unless you game on a 30" monitor with everything turned up, or you fancy 8xAA/16xAF with all the eye candy maxed at high res ( some of us do),or you use 3DVision.

Also I do think your CPU might bottleneck a 4870X2 or a 295 ( I can't find the thread now, but IIRC someone mentioned here in this forum that in some games even a 3.33GHz E8400 can bottleneck a multi-GPU setup - I think it was a 4870X2+4870 CFX) - at 19x12.).

The reason multi-gpu setups haven't scaled as well in the past is because of the lack of processor power available. For instance, if you are running Crysis with a Quadcore at 3.5 GHz and a 4870X2, then you are going to experience a processor bottleneck. Game development in the past mainly used two heavy threads (utilizing up to two cores). This meant that some how two cores @ 3.5 were responsible for doing Physics, A.I., Sound, etc. while feeding two graphics cards with data. How could anyone expect for that to work out?!?

It is the same problem that people experience in 3DMarks 2006. It only uses two processor cores in the graphics tests (1-4) and uses up to four during the two CPU tests. That is why people need 5.0 GHz to push the graphics cards... it needs that much clock speed to get two cores to push those cards to their maximum frame rates.

If you want a real benchmark that allows for a quadcore to effectively push any GPU setup to its limit and acheive good scaling, run 3DMark Vantage, Devil May Cry 4, or Far Cry 2. At 3 GHz on my Phenom 2, I was maxing out my GPUs in TriFire, but that should be expected. With all 4 cores at your disposal... it pretty easy to keep video cards busy.

So, take advantage of all the recent price cuts and get a Q-something Intel processor and overclock to high 3Ghz to low 4 GHz. A quadcore is now the standard for game development from here on out and it makes multi-gpus setup scale like ridiculous!


If you guys are interested in a modern scaling article... I just wrote a review about a TriFire of 4850s.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=31&threadid=2270058

It should fill in all the gaps. The best scaling happens when you have "more than dual core" game. It gives my quad core the leverage to push the graphics to near perfect scaling. In the dual core games... I still have sick enough frame rates. I don't think getting 400+ is necessary.

 

[omber]

Ok so let me make some pointers for myself:

1. Multi-GPU setups will not scale well on my X6800 and they will be bottlenecked by the motherboard.

2. If I want to go with a Multi-GPU setup I should invest in a Q-core system with a new motherboard.

The reason I wanted to go with GTX295 or X2 was to get all the eye candy I could at 1680x1050 resolution.. possibly 1920x1080 when playing on my TV.

I suppose this is as good time to upgrade as any while I have the money..

I can afford Q9650 but Phenom II 940 looks nice and about 200 dollars less here in Canuckistan.. I`ll go read some reviews then look into motherboards then post what I found here . Thanks for the help guys, you just saved me from blowing 650 dollars on a card I couldnt use properly .

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: palladium

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I'd second that. Even if it is bug free SLi/CF still suffer ( at the moment at least) from scaling issues. The extra performance is not needed in most cases unless you game on a 30" monitor with everything turned up, or you fancy 8xAA/16xAF with all the eye candy maxed at high res ( some of us do),or you use 3DVision.

Also I do think your CPU might bottleneck a 4870X2 or a 295 ( I can't find the thread now, but IIRC someone mentioned here in this forum that in some games even a 3.33GHz E8400 can bottleneck a multi-GPU setup - I think it was a 4870X2+4870 CFX) - at 19x12.).

Could have been me talking about the scaling palladium:

MultiGPU loves i7

Even 4870X2 alone benefits from more cpu in multithreaded games:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...-performance-review/10

That said, either a 4870X2 or GTX295 will give the OP higher than any single GPU performance, by a lot, so it's a moot point. (i.e. Is it better to be CPU limited and have a much faster rig, or be more balanced and have much less performance?)

I lean toward GTX295 of these two for driver flexiblility, CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision instead of a little cheaper and DX10.1.

 

[Antman56]

Originally posted by: omber
Ok so let me make some pointers for myself:

1. Multi-GPU setups will not scale well on my X6800 and they will be bottlenecked by the motherboard.

2. If I want to go with a Multi-GPU setup I should invest in a Q-core system with a new motherboard.

The reason I wanted to go with GTX295 or X2 was to get all the eye candy I could at 1680x1050 resolution.. possibly 1920x1080 when playing on my TV.

I suppose this is as good time to upgrade as any while I have the money..

I can afford Q9650 but Phenom II 940 looks nice and about 200 dollars less here in Canuckistan.. I`ll go read some reviews then look into motherboards then post what I found here . Thanks for the help guys, you just saved me from blowing 650 dollars on a card I couldnt use properly .

If you need 1680x1050 and you want ALL details at MAX setting (Anti-aliasing included)... you could easily get away with a single 4870 1GB or Geforce 260. If you need to game at 1920x1200 (all highest settings), you will be fine with a 4850X2 (I love mine) or a Geforce 280. The GTX295 and 4870X2 are faster, but I am not sure if you will even notice the difference they would bring... your frame rates would be over 60 anyway (except Crysis of course).

I think that you are sitting on a platform with atleast as much potential in performance as a Phenom 2. Let us know what Intel you can get for the same price as a Phenom 940 X4... then we will figure things out. Overclocking that Intel is going to happen... so don't worry about getting the chip with the highest factory clock speed.

 

[omber]

Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition Quad Core 3.0 GHz with 8MB Cache is 290 here (Canadian dollars).
Core 2 Quad Q9400 is 300 which is the closest match pricewise.. I'd say Phenom is a better choice.

Another option - maybe I could get a motherboard that can run my current X6800 as well as Q9650 (which is 450 here) once I decide to upgrade?

Crysis is the main reason for upgrade (GTA4 is another) - it's managable on on 1680x1050 on high/medium settings without AA but trying to play it on my TV in 1080p results in near slideshow..

 

[Wreckage]

The reason I wanted to go with GTX295 or X2 was to get all the eye candy I could at 1680x1050 resolution.

At that res just get a 285. Fastest single GPU out there that handles 16x10 just fine.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: palladium

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I'd second that. Even if it is bug free SLi/CF still suffer ( at the moment at least) from scaling issues. The extra performance is not needed in most cases unless you game on a 30" monitor with everything turned up, or you fancy 8xAA/16xAF with all the eye candy maxed at high res ( some of us do),or you use 3DVision.

Also I do think your CPU might bottleneck a 4870X2 or a 295 ( I can't find the thread now, but IIRC someone mentioned here in this forum that in some games even a 3.33GHz E8400 can bottleneck a multi-GPU setup - I think it was a 4870X2+4870 CFX) - at 19x12.).

Could have been me talking about the scaling palladium:

MultiGPU loves i7

Even 4870X2 alone benefits from more cpu in multithreaded games:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...-performance-review/10

That said, either a 4870X2 or GTX295 will give the OP higher than any single GPU performance, by a lot, so it's a moot point. (i.e. Is it better to be CPU limited and have a much faster rig, or be more balanced and have much less performance?)

I lean toward GTX295 of these two for driver flexiblility, CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision instead of a little cheaper and DX10.1.

That's how I was thinking too. better than any single GPU, and you can put 8xAA and 16xAF all the time in every game (except maybe crysis).

 

[Antman56]

Originally posted by: omber
Phenom II X4 940 Black Edition Quad Core 3.0 GHz with 8MB Cache is 290 here (Canadian dollars).
Core 2 Quad Q9400 is 300 which is the closest match pricewise.. I'd say Phenom is a better choice.

Another option - maybe I could get a motherboard that can run my current X6800 as well as Q9650 (which is 450 here) once I decide to upgrade?

Crysis is the main reason for upgrade (GTA4 is another) - it's managable on on 1680x1050 on high/medium settings without AA but trying to play it on my TV in 1080p results in near slideshow..

What? Your motherboard does not support a Core2 Quad? If that is the case you could go in either direction and spend about the same amount of money. I have a Phenom 2 940 X4 @ 3.53 GHz (with some IMC mods to make it have a way better IPC), but you still have a higher potential for performance if you get a Q9400 (if you overclock). I am telling you from personal experience... so don't get disappointed when someone else gets higher framerates because they could get their Q9400 to 4.4 GHz while your stuck with a Phenom2 @ 3.7 GHz.

The one benefit with going AM2+ is that the CPU upgrade path is not about to get cut off (they will support AM3 processors too). So maybe that could justify the purchase...

Crysis requires clock speed. That's it. Its a dual core game, so it needs whatever processor you have better have two really fast cores. So a Quad core at 3.2 is used as a 3.2 GHz dual core... keep that in mind. You could probably reach 4 GHz with your dual core and it would be the same as this new quad you may buy running a 4 GHz. Meaning that your main reason, Crysis, will be remedied by a 4GHz overclock on your current setup.

GTA4 is completely different. Like Devil May Cry 4, it was designed to support systems with more than 2 cpu cores (XBOX360 and PS3). There are huge benefits to a quad core in that game and I could not recommend anything short of a quad core in those situations.

If you just need to see Crysis sore... overclock that CPU and boy a nice 4850X2, 280, or better GPU setup. I game at 1920x1080 with 4xAA at minimum (though now I am running a 4850 TriFire and I run nothing less than 1920x1080 8xAA).

 

[omber]

Hmm I think first order of the day then is to up the mainboard. MSI P7N SLI Platinum?

 

[Denithor]

If you read that article nRollo linked you will know that if you plan to SLI GTX 260 or higher (or CF 4870 cards) you're going to want as much CPU power as you can get. (If you didn't read it - shame on you, go read it, it's very applicable to what you're considering here!)

Now, the PhII chips cannot keep pace with slower-clocked Intel quads in games. Put those two concepts together and you will quickly realize you don't want a PhII if gaming is your primary concern.

Second, if you're planning to SLI cards, you're probably going to be best served with an i7 system, if you can swing it. Just look at those charts in the review for the reason why.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: palladium

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I'd second that. Even if it is bug free SLi/CF still suffer ( at the moment at least) from scaling issues. The extra performance is not needed in most cases unless you game on a 30" monitor with everything turned up, or you fancy 8xAA/16xAF with all the eye candy maxed at high res ( some of us do),or you use 3DVision.

Also I do think your CPU might bottleneck a 4870X2 or a 295 ( I can't find the thread now, but IIRC someone mentioned here in this forum that in some games even a 3.33GHz E8400 can bottleneck a multi-GPU setup - I think it was a 4870X2+4870 CFX) - at 19x12.).

Could have been me talking about the scaling palladium:

MultiGPU loves i7

Even 4870X2 alone benefits from more cpu in multithreaded games:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...-performance-review/10

That said, either a 4870X2 or GTX295 will give the OP higher than any single GPU performance, by a lot, so it's a moot point. (i.e. Is it better to be CPU limited and have a much faster rig, or be more balanced and have much less performance?)

I lean toward GTX295 of these two for driver flexiblility, CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision instead of a little cheaper and DX10.1.

nRollo I have the EVGA nForce 790i ultra motherboard, if I SLI lets say with a core 2 Quad @ 4Ghz will I get similar FPS to the i7? I believe you had an 790i ultra before any advice?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: MegaWorks

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: palladium

Originally posted by: n7
By getting an X2 or the GTX295, you are getting a Crossfire/SLI setup; it's just been pre-sandwiched for you.

I'd suggest a GTX 280 or 285, or for less, a 4870 1 GB...i don't recommend CF/SLI to anyone.

I'd second that. Even if it is bug free SLi/CF still suffer ( at the moment at least) from scaling issues. The extra performance is not needed in most cases unless you game on a 30" monitor with everything turned up, or you fancy 8xAA/16xAF with all the eye candy maxed at high res ( some of us do),or you use 3DVision.

Also I do think your CPU might bottleneck a 4870X2 or a 295 ( I can't find the thread now, but IIRC someone mentioned here in this forum that in some games even a 3.33GHz E8400 can bottleneck a multi-GPU setup - I think it was a 4870X2+4870 CFX) - at 19x12.).

Could have been me talking about the scaling palladium:

MultiGPU loves i7

Even 4870X2 alone benefits from more cpu in multithreaded games:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...-performance-review/10

That said, either a 4870X2 or GTX295 will give the OP higher than any single GPU performance, by a lot, so it's a moot point. (i.e. Is it better to be CPU limited and have a much faster rig, or be more balanced and have much less performance?)

I lean toward GTX295 of these two for driver flexiblility, CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision instead of a little cheaper and DX10.1.

nRollo I have the EVGA nForce 790i ultra motherboard, if I SLI lets say with a core 2 Quad @ 4Ghz will I get similar FPS to the i7? I believe you had an 790i ultra before any advice?

Depends on the game, settings, and GPU configuration. (not to mention the speed of the i7)

I don't have any stored benchmarks of the 790i to compare to, and I never really OCd the QX9650. I only had it a few months and ran it at 3.33GHz during that time.

There's a good article on the front page of AT today with a lot of Phenom vs Quad vs i7 benchmarks.

 

[omber]

So I decided to get the 295 and use it with current system then ugprade the rest of the components.

Q9650 it is for my upgrade I think, i7 is kinda expensive..

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: omber
So I decided to get the 295 and use it with current system then ugprade the rest of the components.

Q9650 it is for my upgrade I think, i7 is kinda expensive..

new motherboard is in order for overclocking.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: omber
So I decided to get the 295 and use it with current system then ugprade the rest of the components.

Q9650 it is for my upgrade I think, i7 is kinda expensive..

Just as an FYI, GTA4 is massively CPU bottlenecked, so a Quad would definitely help there over your X6800. Does your current mobo support 45nm Quads? If not and you have to buy a new board anyways, you may want to look at i7 and X58. It'll still cost you more, but mainly due to the DDR3.

Core i7 920 for $230 at MicroCenter. X58 board $250-300
Q9650 $330. Good P45 or X48 board $150-200.

Comes out pretty close, the main difference would be having to shell out for DDR3, which is ~$25-30 per GB from what I've seen lately. AT's review shows Phenom is competitive (mostly with 45nm Penryn), however, I still think i7 would be worth the premium if completely updating a platform due to both CF and SLI compatibility.

 

[alcoholbob]

Going with a top end GPU is always a good plan for a wide range of games. If you play single player RPGS for example (yes, people still DO) then a dual card has huge benefits even at lower resolutions, due to the nature of the huge gameworlds & vast view distance.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Multi GPU's can kiss my left nut.

 

[TidusZ]

I'm just gonna throw out there that that gtx295 is extremely loud. I haven't configured fan profiles yet to let it run hotter and quieter, but keeping it under 80c when playing crysis requires some pretty loud cooling that borders on disruptive. I'm gonna have to set it for 85 or 90 to keep the sound at a decent level, or else learn to get used to it. I had a 280 before, and it was a lot quieter - the fan itself is quieter, 60% on a 280 is not that loud, but its quite loud on a 295. 280 starts to get loud in the 60's - 70's, while 295 gets loud around 50.

Edit: but ya, it runs crysis 1920x1200 enthusiast buttery smooth mostly, so its got that down. 30 fps is the lowest it seems to drop to.