- Oct 15, 2006
- 427
- 0
- 0
Most people are still recommending the 4870 over the GTX 260, which is a bit surprising to me.
Positive
The 4870 does have basically "free" 8X edge AA, support for the unproven DX10.1, overall puts out more FPS, kind of unknown OCing potential, and the mysterious Havok support on the way.
On the other hand, the GTX 260 has better cooling, uses less power (although not by much), a bit cheaper, has MUCH better 3rd party vendors, excellent OCing potential (near GTX 280 speeds), and support for PhysX (has been proven)
Negative
The 4870 runs HOT (but there is a fix for it), has a rather poor set of 3rd party vendors (IMO), a bit more expensive, DX10.1 and Havok physics unproven (although may end up being great, who knows?) OCing is currently capped, OCing doesn't seem to have as much benefit as the GTX 260.
The GTX 260 doesn't handle AA nearly as well as the 4870, longer card, generally at stock doesn't pump out as many FPS as the 4870.
-------------
From what I can gather, the GTX 260 although a bit slower, can be OC'd to be faster than an OC'd 4870 (at least currently). OCing on the 4870 doesn't seem to have as big as an impact on the performance as the GTX 260. Plus, the 4870 is already so hot that it's hard to believe that it could be OC'd much higher above the 700mhz cap on CCC anyway without 3rd party cooling.
In conclusion, I'm split 50/50. Both bring a lot to the table; both having pros and cons, but the point I'm trying to make is that many people don't give the GTX 260 as much credit as it deserves.
Alright, it's time to lock this train-wreck.
I don't have time to babysit each of you so I'll say this in general: those of you issuing personal jabs and attacks need to cut it out in the future or there will be consequences.
Video Mod BFG10K
Positive
The 4870 does have basically "free" 8X edge AA, support for the unproven DX10.1, overall puts out more FPS, kind of unknown OCing potential, and the mysterious Havok support on the way.
On the other hand, the GTX 260 has better cooling, uses less power (although not by much), a bit cheaper, has MUCH better 3rd party vendors, excellent OCing potential (near GTX 280 speeds), and support for PhysX (has been proven)
Negative
The 4870 runs HOT (but there is a fix for it), has a rather poor set of 3rd party vendors (IMO), a bit more expensive, DX10.1 and Havok physics unproven (although may end up being great, who knows?) OCing is currently capped, OCing doesn't seem to have as much benefit as the GTX 260.
The GTX 260 doesn't handle AA nearly as well as the 4870, longer card, generally at stock doesn't pump out as many FPS as the 4870.
-------------
From what I can gather, the GTX 260 although a bit slower, can be OC'd to be faster than an OC'd 4870 (at least currently). OCing on the 4870 doesn't seem to have as big as an impact on the performance as the GTX 260. Plus, the 4870 is already so hot that it's hard to believe that it could be OC'd much higher above the 700mhz cap on CCC anyway without 3rd party cooling.
In conclusion, I'm split 50/50. Both bring a lot to the table; both having pros and cons, but the point I'm trying to make is that many people don't give the GTX 260 as much credit as it deserves.
Alright, it's time to lock this train-wreck.
I don't have time to babysit each of you so I'll say this in general: those of you issuing personal jabs and attacks need to cut it out in the future or there will be consequences.
Video Mod BFG10K