Warhammer Online -- HD 4850 or HD 4870?

[rakuhntur]

I'm just now gathering my list of components. I will be building a new PC (~$1,100 for everything) and mostly will be playing Warhammer Online with it.

Since I'm on a budget, I'm looking for the best GPU/Monitor "bang for your buck". I have found this http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16824236027 for the monitor and it looks pretty good IMO. The res is at 1440x900 so I'm assuming that'll be fine (I've always worked on laptops so 19" is a nice increase for me).

Now, onto the the GPU... after doing some research, the single HD 4850 seems to be a great deal but I'm wondering if I should put in the extra $ for a HD 4870. I'm new to this but from my understanding the HD 4870 is better for large monitors/high rez -- does my 1440x900 19" count as "high rez" in terms of gaming? Warhammer Online has some huge RvR so there are moments with 100+ people around fighting. I want to be able to play through this smoothly so I'm curious as to whether the HD 4850 will be enough.

Any input/advice/suggestions are much appreciated. If you think there is a better GPU/Monitor "bang for your buck" out there then please point me in the right direction. BUT, remember I'm on a budget.

Thanks!

 

[narcotic]

I just got a HD4850 card, it was an amazing upgrade from my 7600GT...
A HD4870 will also require a stronger PSU, so you might want to keep that in mind, because it can cost you more than the PSU you were planning to get.
For what you described you need your PC for, it seems like the HD4850 would be more than enough, but like with many other things, if you can afford it, then why not go for the best...

 

[IcePickFreak]

4850 should be fine, I play with my 8800GTS G92 on maxed out settings. OC'ing the card makes really no difference in this game, it seems the large RvR battles tax the CPU much more.

 

[rakuhntur]

Originally posted by: narcotic
I just got a HD4850 card, it was an amazing upgrade from my 7600GT...
A HD4870 will also require a stronger PSU, so you might want to keep that in mind, because it can cost you more than the PSU you were planning to get.
For what you described you need your PC for, it seems like the HD4850 would be more than enough, but like with many other things, if you can afford it, then why not go for the best...

I am looking at the Antec Earthwatts 500W PSU for this system. I've read that it can handle the HD 4850, but would it be enough for the HD 4870? Also, if I were to ever get another GPU and run them in Crossfire one day, would this PSU be enough?

Thanks!

Edit: Clearly off topic for my main question. Just post a link to another thread if this has already been answered and I'll try to stay on topic next post.

 

[narcotic]

Originally posted by: rakuhntur

Originally posted by: narcotic
I just got a HD4850 card, it was an amazing upgrade from my 7600GT...
A HD4870 will also require a stronger PSU, so you might want to keep that in mind, because it can cost you more than the PSU you were planning to get.
For what you described you need your PC for, it seems like the HD4850 would be more than enough, but like with many other things, if you can afford it, then why not go for the best...

I am looking at the Antec Earthwatts 500W PSU for this system. I've read that it can handle the HD 4850, but would it be enough for the HD 4870? Also, if I were to ever get another GPU and run them in Crossfire one day, would this PSU be enough?

Thanks!

Edit: Clearly off topic for my main question. Just post a link to another thread if this has already been answered and I'll try to stay on topic next post.

The HD4850 manual says it needs minimum 450w for single card and 550w for crossfire setup.
I don't know exactly what the HD4870 requires, but I'd say at least 50w-100w more.

 

[dguy6789]

Guys, don't exaggerate the power supply issue. Look at my signature, I run that on a Corsair 520HX. People who have not read this article should do so.

http://www.anandtech.com/casec...us/showdoc.aspx?i=3413

 

[blanketyblank]

no they are quite right about psu. Your corsair is a very good psu, but many cheap psus don't actually get their rated wattage in real life. That and you still need the right plug for a video card since some high end gpus require a 8 pin AND maybe a 6 pin as well. Not all psus will have 8 pins especially lower rated ones.

 

[Phew]

WAR is not very GPU intensive. I run at 1920x1200 with 4x FSAA (through CCC) and 16x AF, with everything maxed out, and it won't drop below 60 fps under normal circumstances. In the big battles, as soon as all the knockbacks start flying, the framerate sometimes dips into the 20-30s, but I am sure that is CPU-limited.

I say grab a good 4850 with a dual-slot cooler, but make sure you invest in a good CPU (dual or quad is your call, but make sure you can OC it to 3.6 GHz+).

At that resolution, your CPU will be more important than your GPU.

EDIT: That monitor is a good deal for the money, but I would pay the extra $60 or so for an LG L227WT. They can be found NEW on Ebay for ~200 shipped after 30% Microsoft Live Cashback. That LG is considered one of the best gaming LCDs.

 

[TantrumusMaximus]

I will go ahead and disagree on the not-GPU intensive comments.

If you care at all about snappy performance in Keep battles or intensive busy scenarios get the best you can afford.

Also there are some issues with the game as it stands where if you have the lighting turned on it will cause stutter/hitching.... go check the War forums at www.warhammeralliance.com for more information on that.

However if you're not too concerned about the snappyness in the very busy situations that will be the low end of the framerate spectrum get a midrange card. But be forewarned this game is all about PvP and that in turn leads to most of the game being intense graphics so where people will comment and say "only in the worst case scenario real busy moments will you stutter..." this game is all about BUSY moments so keep that in mind.

 

[Genx87]

I went from an 8800GTS640 that died to a 4850 and saw a decrease in performance. If you go with a 4850 try to find a 1GB version. Now the performance isnt terrible but there is clearly stuttering when you pan which sucks. Not sure if it is drivers, the GPU, or the smaller memory footprint from the 640. But the 640 ran it silky smooth 100% of the time.

I run the game at 1600X1200.

 

[TantrumusMaximus]

That is a good point I forgot to mention in my post. This game is very texture intensive and you'll even see textures load regularly. Get a card with 1GB on it if you can.

In response to your "panning" hiccups etc I had that too and did a lot of research on this. I didn't see why my system should stutter so much.

The end result was the lighting engine.

I chose "Fastest Framerate" and that disables the specular lighting and lightmaps (which honestly isn't too impressive to begin with it still looks fantastic.)

Next bump all your settings back to max but leave it on fastest framerate to leave the lighting off.

The game wont stutter at all and if it does your crossing a zone boundary.

 

[Phew]

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
I will go ahead and disagree on the not-GPU intensive comments.

When you are in a big battle cruising along at 75 fps, then someone hits an AOE knockback and 30 bodies go flying, and you drop to 20 fps for a few seconds, that is NOT your GPU. That is your CPU struggling to calculate the physics of those 30 bodies flying through the air and bouncing off stuff.

Any modern mid-range GPU will have no problem in Warhammer at 1440x900. If the framerate dips, it will be because your CPU can't handle all the action.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Phew

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
I will go ahead and disagree on the not-GPU intensive comments.

When you are in a big battle cruising along at 75 fps, then someone hits an AOE knockback and 30 bodies go flying, and you drop to 20 fps for a few seconds, that is NOT your GPU. That is your CPU struggling to calculate the physics of those 30 bodies flying through the air and bouncing off stuff.

Any modern mid-range GPU will have no problem in Warhammer at 1440x900. If the framerate dips, it will be because your CPU can't handle all the action.

What is there to calculate? The coordinates are calculated serverside. All you see is a rendering of where the coordinates are.

 

[rakuhntur]

Originally posted by: TantrumusMaximus
That is a good point I forgot to mention in my post. This game is very texture intensive and you'll even see textures load regularly. Get a card with 1GB on it if you can.

In response to your "panning" hiccups etc I had that too and did a lot of research on this. I didn't see why my system should stutter so much.

The end result was the lighting engine.

I chose "Fastest Framerate" and that disables the specular lighting and lightmaps (which honestly isn't too impressive to begin with it still looks fantastic.)

Next bump all your settings back to max but leave it on fastest framerate to leave the lighting off.

The game wont stutter at all and if it does your crossing a zone boundary.

Thanks for the replies everyone!

I think I'm going to go with the Asus 19" screen with the native 1440x900 resolution. Also, keep in mind that I'm most likely going to get the E8500 CPU. And last note, I'm not totally anal on how "jazzy" it the game looks... I really just want it to be smooth and I don't mind turning down some settings to achieve that. I've been playing games on laptops if that gives you an idea of what I've put up with. That being said, I'm still not sure on the GPU selection.

I can, if I must, spend a little extra money to get the HD 4870. However, you said that I should get a 1GB version GPU if I can. Newegg has this for $300 http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814102795
going right now and looks pretty good. Would the 1GB version really make a difference on a 1440x900 display? Or is there no relation between the two? The 1GB version is a good ~$50 more than the 512MB versions out there.

Another note: I am building my PC to have some room and support for Crossfire down the road. I won't be going Crossfire anytime real soon unless I buy something and it just can't handle WAR. But I do want some flexibility/future proof for down the road. However right now there are some Palit HD 4850s for $130 bucks (http://www.newegg.com/Product/...Tpk=palit%20hd%204850) AND, according to Tom's Hardware, the 2X HD 4850 is basically just as good as 2X 4870. Or am I reading this wrong?

And last question, would any of the above mentioned be total overkill for a 1440x900 display?? Because the display is pretty much decided on for now until I have more $$ to splurge.

Thanks for the help!

 

[Phew]

E8500 is a great processor choice for WAR. 1GB of VRAM will definitely be overkill at 1440x900. I still argue that 4850 vs 4870 will be no difference in FPS at that resolution. See link:

http://forums.tentonhammer.com/showthread.php?p=334628

That guy saw no difference in minimum FPS when turning off one GPU of a 4870X2. Even with a 3.6 GHz Quad, he was CPU limited. In fact, he said

"I would get the same FPS with 0xAA/0xAF as I did with 32xCFAA/16xAF.
I would get the same FPS with a 500MHz GPU as I would with an 800MHz GPU.
I would get the same FPS with both GPUs on as I would with one GPU on.
I would get the same FPS with 1024x768 resolution as I would with 1920x1200 resolution."

WARHAMMER NEEDS CPU POWER OVER GPU POWER! Especially at low resolutions like the OP. It also doesn't seem to get much benefit from quad cores. So the OP's choice of the E8500 seems perfect.

 

[Kingbee13]

I Just started playing WAR a couple weeks ago, and I was thinking about this very topic, I already own a 4850, and yet I'm getting sluggish performance in scenarios, but the 4850 is NOT the problem it never gets up above about 50% usage, according to ATIs control panel (if its right that is)


WAR is more memory and CPU limited, its built using the same game engine as oblivion so I have been using performance from oblivion as a sort of stand in for war enen though the games are much different, what I see in oblivion tells me that Nvidia cards (in general) are faster for oblivion, but at the same time the game is much more CPU limited than GPU limited.

if I were to buy a card JUST for WAR I'd get the GTX260 core 216, if I was going to get a card for gerneal gaming, I'd get the 4850.


I'm currently running thae game with the afore mentioned 4850 but only on a 7100 nvidia chipset with an E2200 OC to 3ghz, and only 2 gig of ram. (This is why I get stuttering in some scenarios when a lot of motion/spells is happening its CPU and memory constraints in my system)

But I do have an E7200 on the way from newegg with a new p45 board and 8 gigs of ram (yes I'm going to run Vista x64)

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: narcotic


The HD4850 manual says it needs minimum 450w for single card and 550w for crossfire setup.
I don't know exactly what the HD4870 requires, but I'd say at least 50w-100w more.

Don't tell my manual that my 4850 runs fine overclocked with a 380W power supply.

You can't choose a power supply based on one component. If you have an e5200 and 4870x2 your power requirements are quite different than an x2 6000+ and 4870x2.

http://www.anandtech.com/casec...us/showdoc.aspx?i=3413

is a good article showing some typical actual power consumptions. Reasonable CPU overclocks (i.e. not outrageous amounts of additional voltage) and good GPU performance are possible with a very normal sized power supply.

 

[Acanthus]

I can tell you that i dont hit 100% utilization with the rig in sig in war. ever.

I would say a moderate mix of GPU and CPU is the right formula for the best performance in large scale rvr.

Ive only had an issue with FPS in RvR once, it was an enormous battle, however.