Thinking about a gpu upgrade

[Adrenaline]

My specs:
GA-P55-UD4P
i7-860
4 GB RAM
XFX 4890
ASUS VW266h

I play older games sometimes along with newer games. I play some BF: BC2 and will be playing SC2 when it finally arrives (may try out newer games as well).

I do a lot of stuff on the computer outside of gaming but thhis would be for my extra time. I was looking at gtx460 reviews and they looked good, and faired better than what I have and use DX11. So I am wondering if I should upgrade now or put it off for a while. Also, I would have room for SLI if I decide to go that route, but I don't think I will have the need for it.

Any input is helpful and appreciated.

 

[Termie]

The gtx460 is almost a sidegrade from the 4890. You would barely notice the difference in actual gameplay. Wait until you can get a bigger jump, either by spending more or getting the next generation.

 

[OCGuy]

SC2 is already around, and a 460 is a big improvement over a 4890 in that game.

 

[ace55]

Sounds like you don't really need a card right now, I'd wait until the end of the year when Southern Islands and possibly more nvidia cards hit.

 

[Adrenaline]

SC2 is already around, and a 460 is a big improvement over a 4890 in that game.

Sorry, I worded that wrong. I have SC2 on order and it is due in the mail any day.

 

[Keysplayr]

http://www.guru3d.com/article/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-gpu-graphics-performance/8

 

[Termie]

SC2 is already around, and a 460 is a big improvement over a 4890 in that game.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-gpu-graphics-performance/8

Yes, a GTX460 will beat a 4890 in SC2. But when you're talking about at least 60fps at 1920x1200 on either card, it's not a reason to upgrade from last year's high-end.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Don't upgrade before trying out the games you want to play. If you don't like the performance you get once you play the newer games, including SC2, then upgrade.

 

[Keysplayr]

Yes, a GTX460 will beat a 4890 in SC2. But when you're talking about at least 60fps at 1920x1200 on either card, it's not a reason to upgrade from last year's high-end.

4890 gets about 60fps at 19x12 without AA
GTX460 768 gets 91fps at 19x12 without AA
GTX460 1GB gets 105fps at 19x12 without AA
then
GTX460 768 gets 54fps at 19x12 with 4xAA
GTX460 1GB gets 67fps at 19x12 with 4xAA

So, at least in SC2, GTX460 768 at 4xAA at 19x12 is almost as fast as a 4890 without AA
and the GTX460 1GB is faster at 4xAA at 19x12 than a 4890 without AA. When ATI releases the AA hotfix for SC2, what kind of performance hit do you think it would take when used? If it has 60fps at 19x12 without AA, can you speculate where it will be when brute force AA is used?

It's pretty hard not to see which favors in this game, with or without AA.

 

[Termie]

4890 gets about 60fps at 19x12 without AA
GTX460 768 gets 91fps at 19x12 without AA
GTX460 1GB gets 105fps at 19x12 without AA
then
GTX460 768 gets 54fps at 19x12 with 4xAA
GTX460 1GB gets 67fps at 19x12 with 4xAA

I haven't seen SC2, so I don't know if AA is really critical in the game, but if it is...then nvidia is the only answer (and a relatively fast one at that).

As for BC2, I'd say an upgrade from the 4890 to the GTX460 would not be warranted.

 

[Termie]

http://www.guru3d.com/article/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-gpu-graphics-performance/8

Here's some more data from Techspot: http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page7.html. Looks like they were running into a framerate cap. Interestingly, Techspot said the following: "Please note that vsync was not turned on and the maximum frame rates did reach over 90 on many of the high-end cards." Seems like it's a CPU-limited game for all the high-end GPUs. They ran an i7-920 at 3.7, so it was a strong CPU.

It looks like CPU upgrades are going to be warranted for SC2: http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html

 

[MrK6]

I don't think a $230 investment for 4xAA in one game is a wise purchasing choice. First, wait and see how you like your 4890's performance in SC2, and how AMD's forthcoming hotfix works out. I'd also suggest checking out AMD's 6000 series in a couple of months as the series might offer more over your 4890 for $230.

 

[Keysplayr]

I don't think a $230 investment for 4xAA in one game is a wise purchasing choice. First, wait and see how you like your 4890's performance in SC2, and how AMD's forthcoming hotfix works out. I'd also suggest checking out AMD's 6000 series in a couple of months as the series might offer more over your 4890 for $230.

That's with or without AA, Mrk6. Without AA at 19x12, the 460 768 is 50% faster than a 4890. And the 460 1GB is about 75% faster. And the 460 768 is 199. The 1GB version can be had for the same as well if you find rebate deals and BCB. Otherwise, it's 230.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

That's with or without AA, Mrk6. Without AA at 19x12, the 460 768 is 50% faster than a 4890. And the 460 1GB is about 75% faster. And the 460 768 is 199. The 1GB version can be had for the same as well if you find rebate deals and BCB. Otherwise, it's 230.

None of this information really disputes his point. It's silly to upgrade for a single game which he hasn't even played (tested, as in performance) yet. If he was building from scratch, then 460 all the way. But the OP isn't. He's better off waiting for the next generation or next refresh, unless he ends up completely unsatisfied.

 

[Keysplayr]

Isn't the 460 even faster than a 5830? I'm talking across the board? On the order of around 10% for the 768 version and 15% for the 1GB version? Is the 4890 faster than a 5830?
I'm a little confused as to why you think the benefit only extends to this one game. I would not recommend a card for a single game either. But that is not what is happening here.

 

[Adrenaline]

I plan on playing more than just SC2. I have been working so much lately that I haven't had a chance to look at the other games I would like.

Thanks for the charts.

 

[MrK6]

None of this information really disputes his point. It's silly to upgrade for a single game which he hasn't even played (tested, as in performance) yet. If he was building from scratch, then 460 all the way. But the OP isn't. He's better off waiting for the next generation or next refresh, unless he ends up completely unsatisfied.

Pretty much.

Isn't the 460 even faster than a 5830? I'm talking across the board? On the order of around 10% for the 768 version and 15% for the 1GB version? Is the 4890 faster than a 5830?
I'm a little confused as to why you think the benefit only extends to this one game. I would not recommend a card for a single game either. But that is not what is happening here.

There isn't that big of a performance difference to warrant spending $230. I mean, check out the GTX 460 review and all the games Anandtech tested (pretty good mix, IMO): http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/nvidias-geforce-gtx-460-the-200-king/5 . Most of the time the 4890 is within +/- 5-10% of the GTX 460 1GB. Beyond Crysis, there aren't many games where the GTX 460 would produce noticeable results, and it seems silly to sidegrade for $230.

I plan on playing more than just SC2. I have been working so much lately that I haven't had a chance to look at the other games I would like.

Thanks for the charts.

Definitely check out reviews then and decide if the cost is worth it to you. As I showed above, it's usually 5-10% difference and that's a lot of scratch for minor improvements. If you can find a 5850 or a GTX 470 for $250 or less, those would bring much more noticeable improvements, and there have been some pretty good deals recently that have dropped both of those cards in that range.

 

[ZimZum]

Isn't the 460 even faster than a 5830? I'm talking across the board? On the order of around 10% for the 768 version and 15% for the 1GB version? Is the 4890 faster than a 5830?
I'm a little confused as to why you think the benefit only extends to this one game. I would not recommend a card for a single game either. But that is not what is happening here.

No, they trade blows in most reviews that directly compare the two. In the tech power up review below they tested a wide gamut of games. 4890 outperformed the 460 in 8 games and the 460 came out on top of the 4890 in 8 games.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GeForce_GTX_460_Cyclone_OC_768_MB/17.html

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Isn't the 460 even faster than a 5830? I'm talking across the board? On the order of around 10% for the 768 version and 15% for the 1GB version? Is the 4890 faster than a 5830?
I'm a little confused as to why you think the benefit only extends to this one game. I would not recommend a card for a single game either. But that is not what is happening here.

I don't consider a 15% difference worthy of an entire video card upgrade. This is just my opinion and it doesn't really matter who the vendor is. Upgrading for a 15% difference isn't what I'd call an upgrade, it's more like what hardcore enthusiasts would do to get that extra little bit (e-peen). For midrange cards it seems pointless. It's best to wait for at least a 50% increase in performance although I prefer this number to be closer to or above 100% for the average gamer.

Also:
http://techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_460_SLI/25.html

4890 = 768MB version
1GB version is about 7.4% faster than a 4890

And of course you know, and I know, this will vary from game to game. So for this user he would have to just look up all the benchmarks he can find on the exact games he will be playing.

The over-riding factor in all of this is the user. If he values SC2 above all else and wants more performance no matter what, then he should upgrade. I just don't like the idea of preemptive upgrades for a single game.