UPDATE: 5850 vs 5870 vs 4870 CF

[ChorniyVolk]

UPDATE: This thread got big, so I thought I'd update the thread title and OP post with my current question: Which of the three should I go with, 5850 for the current prices, 5870 for the current prices, or two 4870's in CF for $330 minus what I can get for selling the PSU in the combo deal? Where does the 4870CF go in terms of a tier list for performance between the 2 5800 cards?

Just that I was about to buy a 5870 and then I started thinking that with what Nvidia have been doing with all the Physx exclusives and whatnot, I'm worried about their next series being better, even if it is through really shitty practices.

I'm just an uninformed consumer, what does the 5870 do to make it worthwhile other than be out way earlier?

Also, sidenote: Is Powercolor an okay company? A site has their 5870 at a great price and they offer 2 year warranty, but I've never heard of them.

 

[Borealis7]

we dont know anything about nVidia's next gen cards (GT300 Fermi) in terms of performance. we can only speculate and extrapolate according to transistor count, shader count etc.
it is expected that GT300 based cards will be faster than HD5800 series or at the very least equal at the mainstream-bottom end.
in any case, waiting to see what nVidia will bring to the table is always better. it could drive the Radeon prices down and the nVidia prices might also drop once ATI's X2 cards hit the market. so basically, wait till Xmas or Jan 2010 before buying if you're worried.

otherwise, buy the fastest single-GPU card on the market today, which is the HD5870.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Heh, I'm in the process of building a computer and was hoping to be done within the next week or two. I only asked because I was thinking of instead getting a weaker card to hold me over until nvidia unleashes their next line.

I mean, if the expected difference in performance between the 5870 and their high end card in that price range isn't very much, I'd get the 5870 to get top performance now instead of later, but otherwise, I'm just kind of worried. I expect the former is more likely though, right? Just a relatively small difference, or much higher price?

I guess I could sell the 5870 and buy the new line, it'll be like renting the card for a few months, and even if I lose out on $100-$150 or however much, I could just justify it as renting for $30 a month.

Hahahaha.

Any opinions on that Powercolor company?

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Also, maybe related question (as far as video cards and graphics) but I'm planning to get an i7 920 and overclock it. With HT I'd be able to run 8 threads at the same time, and I'm assuming most/all games don't use that many, so would I be able to use the extra processing power to run software physx and get comparable performance as if I had an nvidia card for physx? I know there's a workaround for ati+nvidia set up, it's on the front page, but if I do it by software, is it still restricted, and if it is, is there a workaround? Is it even worthwhile to process physx with the cpu (it'll be running at ~4GHz)? considering the cpu won't be used to it's full potential otherwise, I would think it is.

 

[MarcVenice]

You could wait for Nvidia's next card, but chances are they launch the high-end part first, which has a estimated die size of roughly 500mm2. That means it will be EXPENSIVE. More expensive then a HD 5870, which would be justified if it's faster. So the question is, do you need something faster then a HD 5870 and are you willing to pay for it? Also, even if the HD 5870 drops a few bucks in price, you could be enjoying it now, instead of having a shit card for lets's say 2/3 months?

Also, what physx are you so worried about that you might miss out on? Coz no, the cpu won't be able to run physx like a nvidia gpu can.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Can it run it at all? I was mainly looking at Batman AA

 

[AznAnarchy99]

I got a 5870 and its awesome. Is Phyx worth waiting 2-3 months to play?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ChorniyVolk
Can it run it at all? I was mainly looking at Batman AA

Running PhysX on even the fastest CPU in existence today will still only net you single to low teens fps digits. Batman AA is no exception.

If you can't wait, the 5870 is a sweet and powerful card. But you won't have PhysX capability unless you have a Nvidia GPU alongside it with a driver hack, and that isn't even guaranteed to last in future driver revisions. IMHO, you are better off picking up a 40.00 9600GSO for right now, until Fermi is released. When Fermi is released, you have the option of using your 9600GSO for a dedicated PhysX card. That is, if Fermi will even need the assistance of a dedicated card. Anyway, to hold you over, 40.00 isn't bad. Fermi could be more expensive than a 5870 as Marc pointed out, but if the price corresponds to it's performance, there's really no problem with that.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

You make a compelling argument, Azn, and if anything, I can get a cheap nvidia card for physx and use the work-around. Any suggestions?

Now I'm wondering if I even need a 5870 over say, the 5850, though running the numbers and looking at a few benchmarks, the price : performance ratio is only slightly tipped in the 5850's favor.

Probably going to stick with the 70.

Did a tiny bit of googling on Powercolor and reviewers order from them so that seems alright.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

9600gso until Fermi is released? Sorry guy, but I think if the nvidia card is worth it, selling the 5870 would be more sensible. A hold-me-over card would have to be something that wouldn't completely bottleneck my system like that. I think I will go with the selling the card option, again, if nvidia's is that much better.

But maybe I can pick up a $40 9600gso for physx with the workaround, unless there are better (cheaper?) options.

 

[Genx87]

My guess is performance will be about equal to a 295 in games. They have pushed for single GPU performance to match their x2 from the previous generation since the 7800 series.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: ChorniyVolk
9600gso until Fermi is released? Sorry guy, but I think if the nvidia card is worth it, selling the 5870 would be more sensible. A hold-me-over card would have to be something that wouldn't completely bottleneck my system like that. I think I will go with the selling the card option, again, if nvidia's is that much better.

But maybe I can pick up a $40 9600gso for physx with the workaround, unless there are better (cheaper?) options.

Ok, it was only a suggestion. Keep in mind though, that if you get the 5870 now at current pricing, and Fermi comes and destroys it, you won't get nearly what you paid for the 5870. If the money doesn't concern you, then no prob. Also, I have to stress again the fact that the PhysX driver hack may not always be doable, or prevented in future driver revisions. Only reason I mention this is because you singled out a PhysX title. Batman AA.
And no, I don't have Fermi gaming performance numbers, and couldn't release them if I did.
It's just speculation on my part. That's all.

 

[BenSkywalker]

If you are buying now, the 5850 is hands down the way to go IMO. The 5870 demands far too much of a premium given the relatively small edge it has in performance.

As far as what the nV boards are going to do, it is likely they will be a bit faster and a bit more expensive then the ATi parts, but that is just a guess based on what we know about the part. They may come out far slower then ATi, they may be way ahead, the may be obnoxiously expensive.... well, I guess it is a safe bet they won't be insanely cheap

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Well the way I see it is if I buy it now for $380, and sell it for say, $200, that'll have been $60 to rent top performance, if I even have to go that low.

And the physx driver hack only needs to last til the release of nvidia's cards, when they come out, I can weigh everything and see if it's worth it to buy their card, as opposed to now when I only know of things like physx.

So about that dedicated physx card, anything cheaper than the 9600gso for decent physx action?

Also, so what does an ati card offer on their side?

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
If you are buying now, the 5850 is hands down the way to go IMO. The 5870 demands far too much of a premium given the relatively small edge it has in performance.

As far as what the nV boards are going to do, it is likely they will be a bit faster and a bit more expensive then the ATi parts, but that is just a guess based on what we know about the part. They may come out far slower then ATi, they may be way ahead, the may be obnoxiously expensive.... well, I guess it is a safe bet they won't be insanely cheap

Small edge? What are the msrp's of the 5850 and 5870 cards? $280 and $380 or somewhere around there?

From the few benchmarks I've seen, the 5870 beats the 5850 by about 17-20%, and it costs about 36% more, is that not the usual deal?

I mean, the 295 has even worse numbers compared to the 5870, for instance.

On the other hand, I'd be playing at 1920x1200 with no AA (waste of performance if you ask me) and I haven't seen many (well, haven't seen any actually) benchmarks that have AA turned off, would that skew the results in the 70's favor?

 

[BenSkywalker]

Also, so what does an ati card offer on their side?

Eyefinity- it allows you to take up to 3 monitors and make them act like they are one huge display(3x1080p displays would be 5760x1080 resolution).

I mean, the 295 has even worse numbers compared to the 5870, for instance.

Absolutely, I would never reccomend the 295, 285 or 280 either(barring some exacting particular demands). Think of it this way, you could get two 5850s that utterly destroy a single 5870 for about the same percentage premium that a 5870 has over a 5850. It just isn't a good value at all to go with the 5870(as a general rule, it is almost never the best idea to buy the top performer in anything).

On the other hand, I'd be playing at 1920x1200 with no AA (waste of performance if you ask me) and I haven't seen many (well, haven't seen any actually) benchmarks that have AA turned off, would that skew the results in the 70's favor?

If anything, the 5850 would be closer still. That said, with these cards level of performance I think you will find that AA is well worth the performance impact in almost every situation.

 

[MarcVenice]

Oc the 5850 to 950MHz and it's on par with a 5870. And depending on the price of new nvidia cards, you can sell a HD 5870 for a lot more then $200. Hardware depreciates fast, but not that fast

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Well what kind of performance impact are we talking? Last time I checked, AA can cut a huge number of frames down, and at 1920x1200, how many jagged edges will I really see, and even then, how clear will they be unless I'm looking for them?

And aside from eyefinity, anything else? I'm not dogging ATI by the way, just in case it comes off that way.

and 5850 CF destroys a 5870 you say? By how much? I'll gocheck the anandtech benchmarks, but that sounds interesting. On the other hand, 560 bucks instead of the 380 I planned on, that hurts man, that really hurts.

EDIT: Hmm, seems you're right about 5850 being better in price : performance than the 5870 as far as price increases between them and the 5850 to 5870, factoring in an MSRP of $260, that is, which I got wrong originally.

Hmm, well now I'm confused.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Oc the 5850 to 950MHz and it's on par with a 5870. And depending on the price of new nvidia cards, you can sell a HD 5870 for a lot more then $200. Hardware depreciates fast, but not that fast

Overclocking huh, how big of an overclock would that be? I wouldn't want to do any damage considering I'd be sticking with stock cooling.

I'd probably have to keep fan speed way up...

And yeah, I know about the price, I was just exaggerating it to say "even if it was this bad, I'd be okay with it".

 

[ChorniyVolk]

For the record, how much does AA lop off FPS? I'm wondering if I'd even need anything above a 5870/5850OC to get 60FPS in most games at that resolution with no AA.

Which games would I not be able to get that high to, even with AA turned off? Crysis/Crysts Warhead, what else?

 

[BenSkywalker]

Well what kind of performance impact are we talking? Last time I checked, AA can cut a huge number of frames down, and at 1920x1200, how many jagged edges will I really see, and even then, how clear will they be unless I'm looking for them?

For the most part with a decent setup you are going to be pushing in the ballpark of 100FPS or more without AA, turning AA on is certainly going to reduce that, but if you go from 140FPS down to 80FPS it really isn't going to make much of an impact if your monitor can only display 60FPS

and 5850 CF destroys a 5870 you say? By how much?

Some numbers. 5850- 51FPS, 5870- 59FPS, 5870 CF- 88FPS. Just to give a general idea of what I mean, the relative price difference is about the same, but the 5850 CF is a much bigger jump. The nice thing about going that way, you can just buy one 5850 now and pick up another one when the prices come down if you like. Also, you should be able to get 2 5850s, even right now, for $520(some places are gouging, but you can find them for $260 each). If I was buying right now, I'd go with a single 5850 and have the option to go with a second one later on. Even if you just save the extra money you would have spent now, a year from now that would likely pay for the second 5850 and you will be much faster then a 5870.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

I see your point about the 100FPS to 80FPS, thought of that, I'm mostly concerned with titles that have FPS listed in benchmarks as 30-40FPS, I'd prefer to get the full amount of 60 and deal with (more like not notice) a few jagged lines.

And I think I prefer the 5850 overclocked idea to CF now, like I said, do I even need that much power? As far as the future, too many things to factor in, so I won't plan on CF, but I'll keep it in mind.

 

[BenSkywalker]

And I think I prefer the 5850 overclocked idea

If I was buying right now, that is the way I would go.

 

[ChorniyVolk]

So I'm just left with two questions: How much would AA lop off, and what games won't hit 60fps with the 5870/5850OC without AA?

 

[MrK6]

Originally posted by: ChorniyVolk
So I'm just left with two questions: How much would AA lop off, and what games won't hit 60fps with the 5870/5850OC without AA?

I did a quick glance through the thread and didn't see it, sorry if it was mentioned, but what resolution are you playing at? I agree with the above suggestions and also recommend going the 5850 overclocked route unless you're playing at 2560x1600. Maybe due to inefficiencies (architectural, driver, or otherwise), but the 5850 seems to come close to rivaling the 5870 when clocked to the same frequencies, nevermind theoretical computational equality, which, as mentioned, was at ~950MHz: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_5850/33.html

Games that are heavily reliant on the CPU (GTA IV, etc.) or are brutal on a system in general, due to inefficiency or utter demand (Crysis, etc.), still might not hit 60FPS even without AA, depending on your resolution. But, as mentioned, the extra 10-15% performance that a 5870 could give won't make that big of a difference. Also, as you overclock the 5850, you'll close the performance gap between the 5850 and 5870, even if both are overclocked (meaning a 5850 overclocked to it's average maximums is much closer to a 5870 overclocked to the same standards than a stock 5850 compared to a stock 5870).