GTX285 vs GTX280 vs 4870 1GB

[CurseTheSky]

To make a long story short, My 8800GTX just can't handle everything I throw at it anymore. I can spend $250-350ish, and I want the best bang for the buck at 1920x1200.

I see this GTX285 for ~$350 before MIR, and free shipping: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814130442

I know there are also some great deals on GTX280s. On the other hand, I could grab a GTX260 216 or 4870 1GB and save ~$100-130. The 256 bit memory interface worries me though; will it be a bottleneck? Finally, a lot of people have suggested just grabbing another 8800GTX for SLI - that would be the cheapest option, but I really don't want double the power consumption and the heat.

I'm looking for a card that's going to last me another 1.5-2 years.

Thanks.

 

[SlowSpyder]

The 4870 uses DDR5 so the 256bit bus is not a limitation. My 4870 runs the memory at 1150 (4600MHz effective) and I get almost 150Gb/s of bandwidth. The DDR5 speeds make up for the 256bit bus size.

I would think the 4870 will be ok for you and probably is the best bang for the buck out of your options. But if you're looking for a card to last ~2 years you might be better off with the fastest one of the bunch (the GTX285) even though it provides less bang for the buck, it'll probably serve you better in the future. Just my $.02

 

[Tempered81]

you could get gtx 260 core216 sli for $380 AR

 

[SunnyD]

How about a GTX260 216 for $189.99?

 

[Dkcode]

The GTX 285 will be the coolest out of the lot and also the fastest. This would be my option if i was looking to buy.

 

[darXoul]

19*12 is already quite a demanding res so I'd get the 285. Except for Crysis/Warhead and Clear Sky, it will handle everything out there in pretty much full eye candy glory. 2 years may be pushing it though, another Crysis (GPU devourer) or GTA IV (lord of CPU cores, or maybe simply a shabby port) can come any second and make your rig instantly obsolete.

Even the fastest card today, the GTX 295, is far from being as great and dominant as the 8800 GTX was 2+ years ago, so I think you shouldn't expect the same longevity from any cards mentioned in your post.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Thank you all for the suggestions.

Maybe 2+ years is unreasonable for the current generation of cards. However, I expect to get at least 1-1.5 years out of it, which I can live with considering I shelled out $600ish for the 8800GTX in November 2006, and the current cards are roughly half the price.

2x GTX260 216's is tempting, but yet again I'd run into the heat / power consumption issue, and I'd be just as well off grabbing another 8800GTX for cheap and saving even more. On top of all that, I'd be "locked" into a SLI board, and I'm considering upgrading to something new in the next year or so (either to Phenom II or i7, but most likely not a nVidia chipset, unless they have a significant lead).

The hardest part is determining if the extra $100-150 is worth the performance gain and longevity of the GTX285. Guess I'll do some benchmark hunting. Right now I'm mainly having trouble with framerates in World of Warcraft (can't believe I'm saying that...) due to the new shadows and view distance, and the obvious games like Crysis.

 

[alcoholbob]

It's hard to say. The 8800GTX was only about 30% faster than 7800GTX at launch, although it didn't take too long before drivers matured, and it ended up being about 2-3 times faster than the 7800GTX.

That said, GTX 285 is far more robust than the Geforce 7 era. The 7-series was struggling to stay above 40fps with a lot of games back in its day, and could barely do 20fps in Oblivion which was just a few months into the 7-series life-cycle. The 285 is doing far better with current generation games (actually, exemplary).

As far as playability goes, the AAA titles are all multiplatform these days and will run flawlessly on PC hardware. The high-end PC-exclusives aren't very good. Stalker Extreme? It doesn't even look that good and runs worse than Crysis on Very High. You might have trouble maxing out Alan Wake when it finally comes out of vaporware status but I don't foresee any game where you can't play on maximum settings sans AA for years to come.

The slow uptake on DX10 technology has made the Vista game features neat little tricks that are horribly optimized and should get better in time. With the pure DX9 paths framerate will be in the stratosphere for quite a while.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: CurseTheSky
Thank you all for the suggestions.

Maybe 2+ years is unreasonable for the current generation of cards. However, I expect to get at least 1-1.5 years out of it, which I can live with considering I shelled out $600ish for the 8800GTX in November 2006, and the current cards are roughly half the price.

2x GTX260 216's is tempting, but yet again I'd run into the heat / power consumption issue, and I'd be just as well off grabbing another 8800GTX for cheap and saving even more. On top of all that, I'd be "locked" into a SLI board, and I'm considering upgrading to something new in the next year or so (either to Phenom II or i7, but most likely not a nVidia chipset, unless they have a significant lead).

The hardest part is determining if the extra $100-150 is worth the performance gain and longevity of the GTX285. Guess I'll do some benchmark hunting. Right now I'm mainly having trouble with framerates in World of Warcraft (can't believe I'm saying that...) due to the new shadows and view distance, and the obvious games like Crysis.

All good suggestions so far, although I'd add that bolded portion is always going to be noticed sooner when you go with the slower/cheaper parts. Its like that old saying, how much of a premium are you willing to spend for that last 10-20% performance. If you're going for a long-term solution to last 1.5-2 years, I'd say it makes more sense to spend more now to delay the need for upgrading just a bit longer.

 

[Zenoth]

If you want to last one year or 1.5 years out of your single card get the best one available right now, the GTX 285 (single card that is). If its price falls within your budget's limit then why would you consider a lower performing solution (just saying), if you have the money to spend on computer hardware and nothing else and you want the best bang for your budget then throw your total budget on it if you saved that budget for the sole purpose of getting a good GPU, then your answer would be to get the GTX 285, I wouldn't even consider any others, unless of course you suddenly want to lower your budget's limit.

 

[badnewcastle]

I just stepped up to a GTX285 from a GTX260 c216... It runs everything smoother and allows you to push some details just a little bit further. While the 260 was for the most part smooth and flawless for the most part, it's the extra 15-20% that helps in Crysis, Stalker: Clear Sky and other demanding games.

Before the 260 I had a 8800GT oc'd and the improvement was amazing.

 

[CurseTheSky]

I'm disappointed to hear that the GTX285 is just as large as my 8800GTX - it's not a game stopper (obviously; I'm using the 8800GTX right now...), but I would have loved to gain some extra real-estate in my case.

The G80, and a lot of the dual slot G92 (IIRC) cards dump a considerable amount of heat back into the case - not everything is vented out the back. Does nVidia's GTX series or ATI's 4870 have any advantage in regards to heat (not just GPU heat, more like total combined heat), power consumption, and the amount of heat it vents back into the case? Most of my searches are turning up nothing more than long, heated GTX 260 216 vs. 4870 1GB threads. Depending on power consumption and heat, I'll either be getting a GTX285 (~$340), or a 4870 (~$220) and a new motherboard (~$130).

Thanks again for all the input.

 

[error8]

8800GTX (G80), GTX 280, 260, 285, ATI 4870, all these reference models ( not the custom cooled ones ) exhaust the heat outside the case, at least most of it. I don't understand why do you say G80 dumps a lot of heat inside the case, because that is not the truth. There is a small volume of hot air that is probably dumped into your case and some heat radiated from the card, but 90% of it goes outside.

GTX 285 consumes at load about the same amount the 4870 does. But runs cooler and has lower idle consumption, so based on this and the fact that it is quite faster, it's an easy choice.

 

[nOOky]

GTX285 without a doubt if you have the cash.

 

[badnewcastle]

Originally posted by: CurseTheSky
I'm disappointed to hear that the GTX285 is just as large as my 8800GTX - it's not a game stopper (obviously; I'm using the 8800GTX right now...), but I would have loved to gain some extra real-estate in my case.

The G80, and a lot of the dual slot G92 (IIRC) cards dump a considerable amount of heat back into the case - not everything is vented out the back. Does nVidia's GTX series or ATI's 4870 have any advantage in regards to heat (not just GPU heat, more like total combined heat), power consumption, and the amount of heat it vents back into the case? Most of my searches are turning up nothing more than long, heated GTX 260 216 vs. 4870 1GB threads. Depending on power consumption and heat, I'll either be getting a GTX285 (~$340), or a 4870 (~$220) and a new motherboard (~$130).

Thanks again for all the input.

With regards to heat, my GTX 285 throws a ton of heat out the back of my case. When I pump the fan up while OC'ing and playing games it could be considered a foot warmer because of the heat coming out of the back of the case.

I guess the best way to tell if it is throwing heat into my case is base the temps on the rest of my components... which have stayed about the same or maybe even slightly lower with the 285 when compared to the 260.

I think my 8800GT threw the most heat into the case. I have heard but have no experience with the 4870, that it throws more heat into the case because of the ati HSF solution.

 

[betasub]

Originally posted by: badnewcastle
I think my 8800GT threw the most heat into the case. I have heard but have no experience with the 4870, that it throws more heat into the case because of the ati HSF solution.

If you mean 4850, I can believe this, but the stock 4870 has a very good dual-slot cooling solution venting out of the case.

 

[Woofmeister]

The 8800 GTX dumps almost all of its exhaust back into the case, a real concern with your Antect P182 case. I'm running two heavily overclocked 8800GTXs in SLI and I actually have a 120 mm fan right over my graphics cards exhausting hot air from the case in order to address the problem. On the plus side, the setup functions as a very effective space heater in the Winter!

From everything I've heard, Nvidia apparently managed to address the heat dump problem with the GTX 200 series and they do exhaust almost all their hot air through the rear slots. Thus, you will certainly get both better performance and lower in-case temps with the new NVIDIA cards.

 

[badnewcastle]

Originally posted by: betasub

Originally posted by: badnewcastle
I think my 8800GT threw the most heat into the case. I have heard but have no experience with the 4870, that it throws more heat into the case because of the ati HSF solution.

If you mean 4850, I can believe this, but the stock 4870 has a very good dual-slot cooling solution venting out of the case.

Well I don't have experience with either I was simply going off what I read when I was trying to choose. I still have a slight bit of buyers remorse by not going with the 4870 and I get over that when I play nearly any game.

But with that said I'm extremely happy with my 285.

 

[josh6079]

It may just be the pressure of the case: http://www.silverstonetek.com/.../wh_positive.php?area=

Note the "Benefit 2" part.

 

[Leyawiin]

Originally posted by: nOOky
GTX285 without a doubt if you have the cash.

Agreed. With the O.P.'s CPU if you are going to upgrade from an 8800 GTX, do it right. The GTX 260 and HD 4870 just aren't a big enough bump imo.

 

[CurseTheSky]

Originally posted by: error8
8800GTX (G80), GTX 280, 260, 285, ATI 4870, all these reference models ( not the custom cooled ones ) exhaust the heat outside the case, at least most of it. I don't understand why do you say G80 dumps a lot of heat inside the case, because that is not the truth. There is a small volume of hot air that is probably dumped into your case and some heat radiated from the card, but 90% of it goes outside.

I'd estimate more like 70% out the back, and 30% into the case. The 8800GTX has a series of ventilation slots along the top of the heatsink near the exhaust at the back of the card (facing down when mounted). You can see the heatpipes through the ventilation slots, and I can feel a considerable amount of hot air coming from that area. When the cards first came out, I read many posts with people complaining about exactly that.

Originally posted by: error8
GTX 285 consumes at load about the same amount the 4870 does. But runs cooler and has lower idle consumption, so based on this and the fact that it is quite faster, it's an easy choice.

That's comforting to hear. I wish I could find some comparisons of what the 8800GTX consumes vs. the GTX285/280/260 or 4870. I'm just about sold on the GTX285 now; a good deal from XFX or eVGA will be the last straw.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: CurseTheSky
The 8800GTX has a series of ventilation slots along the top of the heatsink near the exhaust at the back of the card (facing down when mounted). You can see the heatpipes through the ventilation slots, and I can feel a considerable amount of hot air coming from that area. When the cards first came out, I read many posts with people complaining about exactly that.

Yep, had those vents on my GTS 640 as well.

 

[geno]

IMO, the 285 isn't worth the $50 or so price premium over the 280 when you're not gaining much more than a casual overclock and some heat/power savings. It IS a 280 with only minor changes (thinner core) but with a decent price jump.

Take a peek - Is $50 worth 3 FPS?

With the 285 ruled out : performance-wise, the 280 > 4870, so I'd vote for the 280 as being your best bang for buck card.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: geno
IMO, the 285 isn't worth the $50 or so price premium over the 280 when you're not gaining much more than a casual overclock and some heat/power savings. It IS a 280 with only minor changes (thinner core) but with a decent price jump.

Take a peek - Is $50 worth 3 FPS?

With the 285 ruled out : performance-wise, the 280 > 4870, so I'd vote for the 280 as being your best bang for buck card.

Best "bang for your buck" card would probably be the GTX260+ right now. At $179.99 for a heavily factory overclocked card, arguably cheaper than anything else out there, being competitive with the 4870 1GB, giving you PhysX out of the box - THAT is by far a better deal than even a GTX280. The next would be the 4870 1GB. At $270+ the GTX280 doesn't give you enough performance advantage to justify a $90 premium imho.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
The next would be the 4870 1GB. At $270+ the GTX280 doesn't give you enough performance advantage to justify a $90 premium imho.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814500053

GTX 280 for $285AR with CoD 5

Certainly worth the $15 premium.