Worth upgrading from Radeon 4870 to Nvidia 460GTX?

[Qbah]

Is a GTX460 a great value card? Yes.
Is it worth it to go from a HD4870 to a GTX460? Definately NOT.

The difference in performance is hardly something to write about. You should aim for something faster IMO for the purchase to feel worth the money spent. And best to ignore Wreckage in general. That little list of his?

Just Cause 2 - no PhysX AT ALL (should tell you all you need to know about his "informed" posts)
Metro 2033 - absolutely no visual difference
Sacred 2 - crashes with PhysX on constantly (developer went bankrupt - unfortunately, a buggy game in general)

Mafia 2 recommended specs for advanced PhysX - GTX480 for rendering + GTX285 for PhysX alone. Yeah - those GTX470 and lower will handle rendering+PhysX fine... not.

So I'd say keep that HD4870 for now. It's still a very good card. Wait for ATi's new generation. Or a price drop for the current cards.

 

[Wreckage]

Just Cause 2 - no PhysX AT ALL (should tell you all you need to know about his "informed" posts)

I clarified in my post but I will link to it here. It's using CUDA for physics.

http://www.overclock.net/ati/683964-just-cause-2-5870-demo-results.html

"So, was all the hype about CUDA integration true, or does ATi get the same experience? The hype, unfortunately, is true. I deliberately made my way to areas that would use the new processing advantages of CUDA such as places that had many destructible objects (for physics, not PhysX), and to the upper right of the demo map to see the water features. In this Nvidia development video, you can clearly see the added particles in the water, sand, and ambient occlusion shadow effects.

These add a beautiful effect to a visually polished game, but ATi will not see any of this. In fact, other than distance-blur, soft shadows, and a good level of shading, the title looks only slightly better than a DX9 title using the same effects. Am I taking sides on this matter? No. Here's why."

Once again, another reason why the 460 is a solid upgrade. Unless you want new games looking like old DX9 games as the article suggests.

 

[guskline]

Thanks for all of the input. The monitor is in rig #2 and supports 1920x1080. My 4870 is the 1 gig HIS Turbo so suffice it to say the jump is NOT cost effective.

 

[Ancalagon44]

I clarified in my post but I will link to it here. It's using CUDA for physics.

http://www.overclock.net/ati/683964-just-cause-2-5870-demo-results.html

"So, was all the hype about CUDA integration true, or does ATi get the same experience? The hype, unfortunately, is true. I deliberately made my way to areas that would use the new processing advantages of CUDA such as places that had many destructible objects (for physics, not PhysX), and to the upper right of the demo map to see the water features. In this Nvidia development video, you can clearly see the added particles in the water, sand, and ambient occlusion shadow effects.

These add a beautiful effect to a visually polished game, but ATi will not see any of this. In fact, other than distance-blur, soft shadows, and a good level of shading, the title looks only slightly better than a DX9 title using the same effects. Am I taking sides on this matter? No. Here's why."

Once again, another reason why the 460 is a solid upgrade. Unless you want new games looking like old DX9 games as the article suggests.

A forum post about one game optimized for Nvidia because it was practically paid for by Nvidia?

How much are they paying you, anyway?

 

[DominionSeraph]

Once again, another reason why the 460 is a solid upgrade. Unless you want new games looking like old DX9 games as the article suggests.

A few additional effects != a worthwhile performance upgrade. The 460 GTX is not going to future-proof him. A game that chokes his 4870 is going to choke a 460 GTX.
He's better off waiting for the 560 GTX.

 

[KIAman]

Honestly, I would do the upgrade considering you could recover more than half the cost of the GTX460 selling of your HD4870. The performance and feature upgrade is worth the extra $50-$75 IMO.

 

[Kenmitch]

my big problem with those examples is that they use physX for just more particle effects... this is just fail. PhysX should be used for more complex first order physics...

The biggest problem with PhysX to developers would be the Nvidia only aspect of it. Why would you totaly tweak the game for PhysX when you are cutting out all of your ATI based customers.

On the other hand Nvidia could solve this problem by not having the Nvidia or the highway attitude by doing the disable PhysX if an ATI card is detected.

If it's just a matter of gread then why not just capatalize on it....Maybe make it so somebody whom has an ATI card as primary has to buy say a GTS 250 or above card to be able to use PhysX without hacking drivers etc.

 

[taltamir]

On the other hand Nvidia could solve this problem by not having the Nvidia or the highway attitude by doing the disable PhysX if an ATI card is detected.

I agree, nvidia should have gone out of its way to make it easy to run physX on an nvidia card with the graphics being done on an ATI card... that way they could have gotten a beefy GPU in every gaming system as a physX card... then, at that point, they could start forcing people to use an nvidia card for the graphics as well (which is illegal, but they could have, and are).

Anyways, nvidia handled physX poorly. Oh, they should have also stated that physX is free, only if you implement a GPU version of it... right now physX for CPU only is free, this made it the most use physics engine in the world... but only the CPU portion, very few of those games bothered implementing a GPU accelerated physics via physX

 

[heyheybooboo]

Thanks for all of the input. The monitor is in rig #2 and supports 1920x1080. My 4870 is the 1 gig HIS Turbo so suffice it to say the jump is NOT cost effective.

1) Snag another HD 4870 1GB for $140 and CF on the 790FX;

2) Move the HD 5850 to rig #2;

3) Enjoy.


(It would also give us -- and you -- some really interesting comparisons for which we will always be grateful :thumbsup: )




--

 

[Bill Brasky]

Not worth it. Just hold on until faster cards get cheaper. I would consider a worthy upgrade anything faster than a 5870 or 470.

And ITT: Obvious shill is obvious. Needs to be taken care of, IMO.

:thumbsup:

Thanks for all of the input. The monitor is in rig #2 and supports 1920x1080. My 4870 is the 1 gig HIS Turbo so suffice it to say the jump is NOT cost effective.

Good choice. My personal rule of thumb is to wait at least two generations before upgrading.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Good choice. My personal rule of thumb is to wait at least two generations before upgrading.

I rather like mine.

Went from a TNT to a Geforce 2 GTS to a Geforce 8800 GTS.
I think that's about a 10x performance increase on each upgrade.

 

[bryanW1995]

at the current rate of innovation that should put you with a new gpu sometime in 2037.

 

[Qbah]

I clarified in my post but I will link to it here. It's using CUDA for physics.

http://www.overclock.net/ati/683964-just-cause-2-5870-demo-results.html

"So, was all the hype about CUDA integration true, or does ATi get the same experience? The hype, unfortunately, is true. I deliberately made my way to areas that would use the new processing advantages of CUDA such as places that had many destructible objects (for physics, not PhysX), and to the upper right of the demo map to see the water features. In this Nvidia development video, you can clearly see the added particles in the water, sand, and ambient occlusion shadow effects.

These add a beautiful effect to a visually polished game, but ATi will not see any of this. In fact, other than distance-blur, soft shadows, and a good level of shading, the title looks only slightly better than a DX9 title using the same effects. Am I taking sides on this matter? No. Here's why."

Once again, another reason why the 460 is a solid upgrade. Unless you want new games looking like old DX9 games as the article suggests.

Wrong, again. It's not using CUDA for physics. There's an extra filter in the game that acts like DoF, that's written in CUDA. And the other thing is water - it looks a lot nicer and is simulated more realistically when you enable the CUDA-code-running version.

Now you could argue that the water's physics are created more realistically, but stating "the game's physics use CUDA" is flat out wrong. One aspect of the game can be improved when running a GeForce. With a solid performance hit. How big? Most likely the OP would need to choose at 1920x1080 - either the extra CUDA stuff or AA and other things maxed. Not all at the same time. So it is sacrificing one eye-candy for another. A GTX470 can't do AA at all with those two CUDA things enabled at FullHD. A GTX460 is quite a bit slower, so the OP would need to cut down on other things too.

A GTX460 is just not worth it when going from a HD4870 IMO. It's pretty much like going to a GTX285, performance-wise.

 

[evolucion8]

1) Snag another HD 4870 1GB for $140 and CF on the 790FX;(It would also give us -- and you -- some really interesting comparisons for which we will always be grateful :thumbsup: )




--

That's what I did, I bought two MSI Cyclone Radeon HD 4870 1GB with misflashed BIOSes for less than $140.00, flashed both and got fixed!! Kept one and did Crossfire with my card, the other one I sold it for $75.00 and a HD 3870 that I gave to my GF as a gift. In my CF setup, all the games that I've played scaled well with good performance except Assasin Creed 2 that runs well anyway, Bioshock 2 in DX10 mode plus SSAA Tool at 4x and still running great. Two HD 4870 in Crossfire can match and outperform a single HD 5870, if you can get one for cheap will give you great benefits at the sake of more heat dissipation and power consumption.

Wreckage, nobody likes you, just stay away with your brand loyalism, nobody will miss you here.

 

[MagickMan]

A forum post about one game optimized for Nvidia because it was practically paid for by Nvidia?

How much are they paying you, anyway?

He gets free crap, he's a focus group member. Since he doesn't have it posted in his sig, and is trying to come off as not being affiliated, he would also be classified as a shill.

 

[v8envy]

He gets free crap, he's a focus group member. Since he doesn't have it posted in his sig, and is trying to come off as not being affiliated, he would also be classified as a shill.

I thought they rejected him for the focus group? Lord only knows if I was responsible for nv's viral marketing I'd rather have Tweakboy or fleabag on the payroll. The person in question does nothing but make people go red with his over the top one-sidedness.

 

[bryanW1995]

I think that wreckage is an amd focus-group member. Think about it: he is so obviously nvidia biased that he actually turns people off to nvidia. The two ways he can help amd are to plug the greatness of 5xxx, SI, etc, or to piss everyone off so much at nvidia that they subconciously lean towards the red team. He's like an amd double agent. Unfortunately, just like most double agents, he is unappreciated in his time. All of the red-leaning forum members should thank him for all he does for the team!

 

[RussianSensation]

If you will not be overclocking the GTX460 1GB, then it is not worth it. You will get about 25-30% performance boost for $230. However, if you are going to be overclocking, there is a case for upgrading, if you can sell your 4870.

4870 1GB = 5770
GTX460 1GB @ 850mhz gpu = GTX470

Check out these Techreport benches at 1920x1080 with AA/AF:
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/19242/7

Alien vs. Predator
5770 = 21
470 = 37 (+76%)

Just Cause 2
4870 = 29
470 = 48 (+66%)

Dirt 2 (DX9)
4870 = 55
470 = 93 (+69%)

BF:BC2
4870 = 35
470 = 53 (+51%)

Metro 2033 (limited to 1680x1050)
4870 = 33
470 = 54 (+64%)

Borderlands
4870 = 44
470 = 70 (+59%)

I have also added benches from Xbitlabs of 4890 (from the 5830 Review) vs. GTX470 at 1920x1080 with AA/AF:

Far Cry 2
4890 = 45
470 = 78 (+73%)

STALKER: CoP
4890 = 21
470 = 37 (+74%)

Battleforge
4890 = 24
470 = 47 (+96%)

COD: Modern Warfare 2
4890 = 65
470 = 94 (+45%)

World in Conflict
4890 = 38
470 = 54 (+42%)

Mass Effect 2
4890 = 57
470 = 74 (+30%)

If you overclock GTX460 1GB to 850mhz or more, in other words achieving GTX470 speeds, you are looking at 45-50% performance increase on average over 4890 so about 55-60% over 4870 1GB. It's up to you to decide if it's worth it.

I have said for the last 9 months that it's too expensive to pay $300-400 to upgrade to a 5850/GTX470/5870 to get a 50% boost. However, with deals like the one today at TigerDirect.com where you can get a $200 GTX470, things are better: http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2127580

If you aren't going to sell your 4870 though, I think it's pretty steep to pay $200 for a 50-60% gain. I'd want at least 100%. If you sell your 4870 1GB for $90 for example and find a 5850 / GTX470 for $200, then it may be worthwhile depending on the games you play.

 

[happy medium]

I agree with Russian, if your overclocking its a ok upgrade, especially if you have a 512mb card. That gtx 470 deal is hard to beat.

 

[vshin]

If you don't play above 1680x1050 and don't need AA, then there's no significant reason to upgrade from a 4870 today.