# HD 4870 vs GTX 260



## ShadowFold (Jul 15, 2008)

Ok.. These cards are pretty much the same and I cant decide. I was leaning towards ATi because of the free 2x AA thing but idk.. I think nvidia has some magical drivers up their sleeves along with ATi so is it best to wait or buy now?


----------



## kenkickr (Jul 15, 2008)

With the 4870X2 around the bend I'd wait.  One of those will trounce anything, then grab another later on!


----------



## Psychoholic (Jul 15, 2008)

Naah, waiting is stupid in the tech world, you can wait forever for the next best thing.  I say go for what you want now and enjoy it now.  The 4870X2 is about to come out, but the 4870 is an outstanding card, and wont set you back $500.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 15, 2008)

ShadowFold said:


> Ok.. These cards are pretty much the same and I cant decide. I was leaning towards ATi because of the free 2x AA thing but idk.. I think nvidia has some magical drivers up their sleeves along with ATi so is it best to wait or buy now?



Well TBH, looking at your monitor and it's resolution whichever you are considering will walk any game in high detail so IMO there is absolutely no point in waiting for R700 because you will pay double for no visual in game improvements......(unless you are a bench freak of course but guessing you aint or you would have a quadcore).

I really like the sound of the 4870 but the 260 is winning me over TBH, I like the PhysicsX thing (although I appreciate there may be something up someones sleeve for ATi owners).....my answer, taking into account the recently announced NVidia price drop down to $299 for the 260, go for whichever is the cheapest and has the better cooler!


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 15, 2008)

kenkickr said:


> With the 4870X2 around the bend I'd wait.  One of those will trounce anything, then grab another later on!



Way out of budget. I only have 200-300$. I know the 4870/260 would be a waste at my res but I want to get a future proof card for once..


----------



## Megasty (Jul 15, 2008)

Both of the cards are the same, performance & price wise. You won't go wrong with either. The 4870 does out-perform the GTX260 in some games, but you won't notice the difference - its like 2-3 fps. However, AMD is still saying the drivers for the 4800 series are junk so they must be preparing some pretty awesome stuff because they work damn well in my book. I can't say the same for NV. They release drivers so sporadically & you never know what they will do for the cards. Most of the betas never make it to the full release level either. Adding the PhysX drivers for me actually slowed down the GTX260  so I ditched them right off.


----------



## wolf2009 (Jul 15, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Well TBH, looking at your monitor and it's resolution whichever you are considering will walk any game in high detail so IMO there is absolutely no point in waiting for R700 because you will pay double for no visual in game improvements......(unless you are a bench freak of course but guessing you aint or you would have a quadcore).



i agree !


----------



## phanbuey (Jul 15, 2008)

I had to make this same decision...

I ordered both a 4870 and the ASUS GTX260 (for 320 off newegg).  I benched both cards and ended up picking the GTX 260 - mine overclocked to 762 / 1528 / 1215 (~30% overclock), it ran much cooler and quieter and got P9958 in Vantage GPU for a total score of ~12000 and kept its pace in COJ (ATI's best benchmark).  Not to mention, it has CUDA and a bigger framebuffer than the 4870 - 

BUT

the 4870 drivers are immature, and the 4870 GPU is capable of something like 1.2 teraflops while the stock GTX 260 is ~.6 and the GTX 280 is ~ .9.  So if the drivers mature and the XOC bios/drivers come out, the 4870 will rock and will most certainly be faster than my GTX 260. My 4870 artifacted at 815, so it didnt clock much at all and ended up getting stomped by the OC'd 260 in *edit: ALMOST all my benchies: the minimum FPS on the 4870 was always lower:

~ even in COJ the 4870 would get 39 FPS average @ 1600x1050 16xAF 4xAA while the OC'd GTX 260 would get 36, but the 4870 would dip to like 12 fps, while the OC'd 260 would get 23 in the same spot.

it was one of the hardest decisions i had to make, they are so similar ~ yet both cards absolutely dominate one another in different scenarios.  In new calyco in Vatage the 4870 beats the 260 hands down, while in Jane whatever (the first test) the 260 is just so much faster.  

Again I picked the GTX 260 primarily because of the sample i got that overclocked ~30%, and because my 4870 couldnt do past 815 even with a voltage mod in the bios(8.6% overclock).  Although the GPU on the 260 itself is less powerful, it is a better solution, with better drivers, better cooler, PhysX and insane OC capabilities and CUDA, which I plan to be using in the future.

(phew end of rant)


----------



## MilkyWay (Jul 15, 2008)

i didnt buy my 8800gt because i new it would be getting cuda drivers one day i bought it because it was the best value to performance card at the time

looking at the 4870 a lot of people have been satisfied some not

but physx drivers should be the only thing to sway you

ati are getting physx drivers and there own physics solutions

ill keep the 8800gt just now but i might get a 4870 just coz you can crossfire

wait till September and get the palit sonic 4870 because i PM palit guy and he said it will have non stock cooling and other goodies like oc capabilities and a special power circuit

its good to wait because by then drivers will have matured a little and heat wont be much of an issue with the new cooling


----------



## phanbuey (Jul 15, 2008)

MilkyWay said:


> i didnt buy my 8800gt because i new it would be getting cuda drivers one day i bought it because it was the best value to performance card at the time
> 
> looking at the 4870 a lot of people have been satisfied some not
> 
> ...



Its not just about CUDA... its the fact that i got a 30% overclock which made one card significantly faster than the other.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 15, 2008)

phanbuey said:


> I had to make this same decision...
> 
> I ordered both a 4870 and the ASUS GTX260 (for 320 off newegg).  I benched both cards and ended up picking the GTX 260 - mine overclocked to 762 / 1528 / 1215 (~30% overclock), it ran much cooler and quieter and got P9958 in Vantage GPU for a total score of ~12000 and kept its pace in COJ (ATI's best benchmark).  Not to mention, it has CUDA and a bigger framebuffer than the 4870 -
> 
> ...



Useful info.....thank you!


----------



## MilkyWay (Jul 15, 2008)

if the other card could clock would that make it better?
i mean these new sonic palits can usually clock great

it happens i had cards that clocked little in the past

either way all i know is that the 4870 should smoke the 260 and come close to the 280


----------



## lepra24 (Jul 15, 2008)

4870+1


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 15, 2008)

MilkyWay said:


> if the other card could clock would that make it better?
> i mean these new sonic palits can usually clock great
> 
> it happens i had cards that clocked little in the past
> ...



I agree but most benches are run at stock speeds cause most people dont overclock, if the average 4870 is say 10% faster than the 260 across the board but the average 260 overclocks 20% more than the 4870 then the tails are turned so to speak, all in all, for an overclocker the answer may be not quite as simple, I like the sound of both, for me I think it will be price that decides when I come to upgrade but I wont do that until I have a game that wont play at my resolution on reasonable detail levels.


----------



## J-Man (Jul 15, 2008)

kenkickr said:


> With the 4870X2 around the bend I'd wait.  One of those will trounce anything, then grab another later on!


 I'm getting the 4870 x2 on release then sell my 3870 x2 on eBay.


----------



## phanbuey (Jul 15, 2008)

MilkyWay said:


> if the other card could clock would that make it better?
> i mean these new sonic palits can usually clock great
> 
> it happens i had cards that clocked little in the past
> ...



oh it will, but the 260 @ the clocks i got is almost identical to the performance of the 280 at my resolution...

Yeah if the other card clocked up to 835 - 840 with 1150 - 1200 on the ram, then i would wait for the unlocked bioses and new drivers before RMAing... but when it artifacts at 800, with only 15MHz more with the highest voltage that bios mod would get me, then its pretty obvious that it wouldnt do much more.  

[SPECULATION!] - The new drivers from ATI will fix the bugs, like the stutter when you OC past the CCC allowance, and may yield 10% - 15% performance; but overall I figured that my 4870 wouldnt touch that 260 - not at those clocks at least. 

 At stock there is no question that the 4870 is faster.  The palit will be faster for sure - if it can get close to 870 core with 1GB of 4400Mhz memory then it will be in GTX 280 territory.


----------



## King Wookie (Jul 15, 2008)

Good to have options on the cards performance wise, but price will dictate.
As we are always a good few months behind the rest of the world in respect to price drops etc, the 4870 is nearly 20% cheaper than a 260, so no question my end.

Just need to accumulate the relevant shekels and stop spending money on everyone else's pc's.


----------



## Urbklr (Jul 15, 2008)

Well, i think you should wait for just a bit. The new Catalyst are coming out very soon, so then you'll know which performs better. If it doesn't make the card much stronger, then I would say it comes down to preference, such as drivers, and game bundles


----------



## oli_ramsay (Jul 15, 2008)

I say go for the 4870, it's cheaper and new drivers around the corner every month should give you a nice boost, plus it has a lot of potential with it's 1.2 teraflops!

If you get a good cooler, they overclock quite nicely too (if you're lucky).  I can bench at 880 GPU and 1175 (4.7 GHz effective) which is awesome.

Plus AMD needs the money!


----------



## phanbuey (Jul 15, 2008)

oli_ramsay said:


> I say go for the 4870, it's cheaper and new drivers around the corner every month should give you a nice boost, plus it has a lot of potential with it's 1.2 teraflops!
> 
> If you get a good cooler, they overclock quite nicely too (if you're lucky).  I can bench at 880 GPU and 1175 (4.7 GHz effective) which is awesome.
> 
> Plus AMD needs the money!



man that sounds like an awesome card you got... 880!?!? NICE.  Most people are stuck at 820-840.


----------



## erocker (Jul 15, 2008)

I'm waiting for the 4870x2... So I can pick up a GTX280 on the cheap!  For benching purposes of course!  Shadowfold, go with whatever.  They are both good cards.  Flip a coin?


----------



## Ketxxx (Jul 15, 2008)

HD4870 hands down.


----------



## MilkyWay (Jul 15, 2008)

exactly the 4870 is bound to clock better with a better cooler and a special power circuit

if the 4870 can beat the 260 at stock isnt it a better card?

anyway its not always that simple i know things like overclocking heat and power usage come into play and price

if it is just on price id wait till the palit sonic 4870 comes out get that and overclock it, bound to be cheaper than the 260 and 280 and will clock good


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 16, 2008)

4870 +1


----------



## Nkd (Jul 16, 2008)

ati seems to always improve performance overtime with driver releases, I think that is because they are not that much in bed with developers atleast for now, specially in the games that are slapped on with nvidia logo.

I got my hd 4870 up to 840(total stable in games-tested with hours of crysis and benches) and memory at 1100. but I got artifacts at 850, I think most people are getting around that overclock, may be it is a firmware thing, because diamond was talking about unlocked bios or something. 

they both have their pros and cons, the best thing I like about hd 4870 is that you can turn on   
8x MSAA and this thing flys off the shelves and beats the gtx 280 in most games or comes close just as shown in firingsquad.com review, and I have experienced it myslef.

the difference from 0 to 8xAA is about 4fps on average in all games, ofcourse crysis being an exception which kills any card with AA on.
I did think about gtx 260 coming down in price, and may be I should switch it out and see how that overclocks, but it is not worth it, but ati is known for having continous performance update, heck the cat 8.6 was the one where they claimed hell of a lot performance increase even for the hd 3870 in COD4


----------



## candle_86 (Jul 16, 2008)

See thats the Issue ATI does tend to fix preformance in the end, but it tends to take a long time.

Radeon 7200 didnt compete with the Geforce GTS till the Geforce3 was out

Radeon 8500 couldnt touch the Geforce 3 till the Geforce4 came out

Radeon 9xxx - x1k is an exception

Radeon HD29xx and HD38xx suffered horrid AA preformance untill just recently yet the core has been around since 2006 and it took them this long to fix the issue. I say get what preforms good today, or of course get the card that might get a driver update and out preform another in 2 years, thats up to you


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 16, 2008)

MilkyWay said:


> exactly the 4870 is bound to clock better with a better cooler and a special power circuit



I agree but I find this kind of ironic, when the 8800GT came out last November and outperformed the then recently released HD3870, everyone (especially ATI supporters)recognised the reference NVidia single slot cooler was totally crap and loads of us changed it for aftermarket coolers, those ATI supporters (read fanboi's) in this forum started shouting "a decent card wouldnt need a better cooler and hardware tweaks!" you know...shouting that the consumer pays enough for the card anyways and shouldnt need to do more to get it working to it's full potential..........seems things have changed to me :shadedshu


----------



## Wile E (Jul 16, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> I agree but I find this kind of ironic, when the 8800GT came out last November and outperformed the then recently released HD3870, everyone (especially ATI supporters)recognised the reference NVidia single slot cooler was totally crap and loads of us changed it for aftermarket coolers, those ATI supporters (read fanboi's) in this forum started shouting "a decent card wouldnt need a better cooler and hardware tweaks!" you know...shouting that the consumer pays enough for the card anyways and shouldnt need to do more to get it working to it's full potential..........seems things have changed to me :shadedshu



Coolers and heat with stock coolers are never a consideration for me. That's what all those aftermarket coolers are for. Most of them are pretty cheap too. Nobody can tell me that they can't eventually save $30 to improve their card's cooling if the stock cooling performance bothers them that much.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 16, 2008)

I'd say GeForce GTX 260. Comfortably achieve OC taking it to the level of GTX 280. 896 MB > 512MB. Moar....for moar textures. Upcoming titles could benefit from more video mem.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 16, 2008)

Wile E said:


> Coolers and heat with stock coolers are never a consideration for me. That's what all those aftermarket coolers are for. Most of them are pretty cheap too. Nobody can tell me that they can't eventually save $30 to improve their card's cooling if the stock cooling performance bothers them that much.



I couldnt agree more, it just seems to me that it can be a factor for others at times but just when it suits them!


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 16, 2008)

btarunr said:


> I'd say GeForce GTX 260. Comfortably achieve OC taking it to the level of GTX 280. 896 MB > 512MB. Moar....for moar textures. Upcoming titles could benefit from more video mem.



Yes, I really like the 4870 but I am kind of leaning towards the 260 but as I said, if ATI continues to win the price war they are going to get my money, IMO there is insufficient difference to make me want to spend more on either.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jul 16, 2008)

4870 is better than gtx 260 in all tests , i see it before week ago in tomshardware , right the gtx 260 have 449 bit and 4870 come with 256bit , but the memory bandwidth win , gddr5 win , so that what nvidia need now , go to gdd5 , gddr3 is them weak point


----------



## candle_86 (Jul 16, 2008)

the issue has nothing to do with bandwith concerens, actully. The card is more nuterned by the lock down on its SP's in reality. Nvidia could do what they did with GTS640 and make a new GTX260 but with more SP's active. They did that with the 8800GTS 640 there was a 112SP core though no way to tell it from the 8800GTS640 96SP one


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 16, 2008)

I'm just waiting on that driver release..


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 16, 2008)

seems the gtx260 cna be found cheaper than the 4870 now, chepaest 4870 on the egg is 300$ cheapest gtx260 is 279$ after rebate, which is the difference of a cooler or game. kinda makes the gtx260 a better buy considering the performance between the two is about the same (though specific titles change the results)


----------



## trt740 (Jul 16, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> I agree but most benches are run at stock speeds cause most people dont overclock, if the average 4870 is say 10% faster than the 260 across the board but the average 260 overclocks 20% more than the 4870 then the tails are turned so to speak, all in all, for an overclocker the answer may be not quite as simple, I like the sound of both, for me I think it will be price that decides when I come to upgrade but I wont do that until I have a game that wont play at my resolution on reasonable detail levels.




I bought a 4870 and liked it until it went belly up. I then almost bought a 260 but the price fell from 600 to 449.00 on a 280 so I jumped on it. When I compare the two, the 4870 runs alot hotter and the fan on the 4870 is good after the fan mod at 35 percent but still louder than the 280 fan at 70 percent. The 4870 overclocked at 790/1100 couldn't touch my 280 at 709/1500/1280. The 280 has direct fan control, no mod needed, and all the third party overclocking tools just worked. It has cuda and physx, and yes it costs 150.00 more than the 4870 , but it is flat out (at this current time) a better computer part. The 260 can overclock even higher than a 280 , because it has less shaders causing less heat and can surpass a 280 performance at stock speeds and thats something my old 4870 couldn't do. The 260 and 4870 are very close if you are only gonna run one card I would say buy the 260. I would buy a EVGA cards aswell and when the new 200b comes out  you can always step up. I intend to do the step up thing myself. I'm not bashing AMD. The 4000 series are very good cards and after some driver updates the 4870, very well might rival a 280, but AMD needs to put a better cooler on it for one,or put direct fan control in the CCC. They need to unlocking the overclocking slider and let AMD owner decide where the overclocking should stop. Then made Havock up and running and working. If they would have done these few thing I would have a 4870 in my machine now.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 16, 2008)

trt740 said:


> I bought a 4870 and liked it until it went belly up. I then almost bought a 260 but the price fell from 600 to 449.00 on a 280 so I jumped on it. When I compare the two, the 4870 runs alot hotter and the fan on the 4870 is good after the fan mod at 35 percent but still louder than the 280 fan at 70 percent. The 4870 overclocked at 790/1100 couldn't touch my 280 at 709/1500/1280. The 280 has direct fan control, no mod needed, and all the third party overclocking tools just worked. It has cuda and physx, and yes it costs 150.00 more than the 4870 , but it is flat out (at this current time) a better computer part. The 260 can overclock even higher than a 280 , because it has less shaders causing less heat and can surpass a 280 performance at stock speeds and thats something my old 4870 couldn't do. The 260 and 4870 are very close if you are only gonna run one card I would say buy the 260. I would buy a EVGA cards aswell and when the new 200b comes out  you can always step up. I intend to do the step up thing myself. I'm not bashing AMD. The 4000 series are very good cards and after some driver updates the 4870, very well might rival a 280, but AMD needs to put a better cooler on it for one,or put direct fan control in the CCC. They need to unlocking the overclocking slider and let AMD owner decide where the overclocking should stop. Then made Havock up and running and working. If they would have done these few thing I would have a 4870 in my machine now.




Very well put Tom!  But damn.....you got a 280 for $449 ????/wtf.....they are at least £350 over here and thats after a price drop, thats like $690


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 16, 2008)

I ended up just getting a 4850. You guys are crazy sometimes


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 17, 2008)

ShadowFold said:


> I ended up just getting a 4850. You guys are crazy sometimes



eyes too big for your wallet? lol


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 17, 2008)

GTX 280 449 + 30 mail-in = $419


HD4870 $274.99


----------



## trt740 (Jul 17, 2008)

Scrizz said:


> GTX 280 449 + 30 mail-in = $419



I also ended up with a 25.00 credit which lead to a free copy of supreme commander. So that made up for it.


----------



## trt740 (Jul 17, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> Very well put Tom!  But damn.....you got a 280 for $449 ????/wtf.....they are at least £350 over here and thats after a price drop, thats like $690



I can always mail ya one pm me. If ya want 260 are down to 269.00 after rebates


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 17, 2008)

yogurt_21 said:


> eyes too big for your wallet? lol



No I could buy a GTX280 if I wanted but I'm gonna start saving for a 24'' HD monitor


----------



## Wile E (Jul 17, 2008)

ShadowFold said:


> No I could buy a GTX280 if I wanted but I'm gonna start saving for a 24'' HD monitor



I think that's a wise choice. I skiiped on a mobo/ram upgrade for a 24" monitor, and I'm extremely glad I did. If you want a really good one, save at least 500-600 for it. The cheaper ones are all crappy looking in comparison.


----------



## HiddenStupid (Jul 22, 2008)

Psychoholic said:


> Naah, waiting is stupid in the tech world, you can wait forever for the next best thing.  I say go for what you want now and enjoy it now.  The 4870X2 is about to come out, but the 4870 is an outstanding card, and wont set you back $500.



yeah man waiting is stupid. 99, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 i always hear people in forum say wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait ect.... for a new best stuff. 

get it now!!!!!!!!!!! 4870 vs gtx260.... ill get gtx260 right now!!!!! now!!!!!!


----------



## hat (Jul 22, 2008)

the only way I can justify waiting is if something great is just about to come out, like in under a month


----------



## Nkd (Jul 22, 2008)

yea the good part it abot nvidia card, with bfg and evga that with in three months you will be able to step it up, and it looks like revised gt200 will be out with in a few months time frame.


----------



## StarYoshi (Jul 24, 2008)

I currently use a 8800GTS 640mb. I bought a HD4870 about a week ago, and I am RMA'ing it today. After moderate benching, I've decided that it isn't nearly worth a $300 upgrade, and I'm considering picking up sli 8800GTs, a GTX260, or just waiting like I should as a result. Here are the results of my benchies: (Pretty graphs are in progress and were not available as of post time)

Specs are E6600 (Stock and 3.0Ghz), 3GB DDR2-800, 8800GTS640mb/HD4870, Asus P5n-E SLI, Vista Home Prem 32 bit

At stock settings (E6600 @ 2.4Ghz, GPUs at stock) the difference between the two cards in five tests were:

3dMark05	9.3%
3dMark06	17.1% (8770 to 10583)
Half-Life 2: LC	2.3% (1680x1050, max settings)
Crysis 1280x1024 Avg	19.6% (all high)
Crysis 1680x1050 Avg	30.1% (all high)

Overclocked (E6600 @ 3.0Ghz, 8800GTS 640mb @ 640/955, HD4870 @ 790/1100)
3dMark05   8.9%
3dMark06   13.4% (10762 to 12425)
Half-Life 2: LC   4.5%
Crysis 1280x1024 Avg    22.4%
Crysis 1680x1050 Avg   19.6%

For Crysis and HL2: LC, the measure was average FPS. Crysis and 3dMark were the ONLY applications I tried where there was any discernible difference between the two cards. I don't know if it's because I'm on an oldish mobo or have mid-range specs, but that's what I found. Another thing to note that I've noticed with the HD48xxx series (tried the HD4850 too) is that they tend to have very low minimum frame rates. In these tests the minimum frame rate of the HD4870 usually dropped below the 8800GTS. Their averages are higher and their highs are higher, but their lows are lower. I didn't notice much more scaling with the Hd4870 than the 8800GTS when I overclocked my e6600, so I'm pretty sure it wasn't bottle necked much by my CPU much moreso than the 8800. After going through these tests, I cannot recommend an upgrade from the 8800 series to a single HD4xxx card as of this time... Unless you're playing at 1080p resolution. That's when this card shows a bit of muscle. the HD4870 ran Crysis at around 31 FPS average at 1080p on high, which is solid. The other neat feature of the hd series is HDMI audio out. That almost warrants a purchase itself if you have a HDTV as a second monitor as I do. Lastly, this card runs *HOT OR LOUD*, the choice is up to you. at stock fan speeds, it idles up near 80C in a very-well ventilated case. at 30% it drops down to about 50C idle, low 60's load. However, any fan speed over 35% is VERY LOUD and pretty much sounds like a hair dryer. It does move A LOT of air though, but I don't like this. During the summer months when it is almost 80F in my room I'd prefer to keep the hot air in the case, actually, and dumping all of that scalding air out into the world is annoying. In the winter it would be great, though. 

Note: I didn't OC past CCC's limit of 790/1100 (+40/+200) on the HD4870, but I have heard that the headroom on the core clock is pretty low anyway... and it was a diamond card so I'm sure they were saving the "special" parts for their XOC line anyway 

Conclusion: Only worth an upgrade from a 8800GTS if you play at resolutions higher than 1680x1050, otherwise have patience.


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 24, 2008)

3dmark lol only 2 games? My 4850 was a huge jump from my 1gb 8800GT. I only play at 1440x900 too.


----------



## StarYoshi (Jul 24, 2008)

Those were the two easiest games to bench. Having played others, there was no discernable difference. With my HD4850 I at least noticed better frame rates in CoD4 and TF2. WORSE in Mass Effect though. The HD4870 performed worse in non-artificial, non-crysis tests than my hd4850 did. Maybe I got a lemon... but idk it's not worth an upgrade right now anyway.


----------



## jaydeejohn (Jul 24, 2008)

Its known the 4870 is at least 50% faster than a G80 GTS. Something else is wrong here


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 24, 2008)

He probably didn't clean his drivers or reinstall windows.


----------



## Megasty (Jul 24, 2008)

I interchange NV & ATI cards all the time in my rigs & all I have to do is uninstall the drivers. The 4800 series do seem to have an influx of abnormally performing cards. 
Some of them could be due to the cards being duds but I contribute it more to user error than anything. It doesn't take alot of know-how to upgrade a card but it does take a bit of knowledge to tell whether a card is a dud or not. I can tell you one thing, a G80 GTS is the stuff you wouldn't want to step in when compared to a 4870. Looks like some body installed CCC on top of forceware


----------



## _jM (Jul 24, 2008)

OK all i can say is that the 4870s are the better card.. if you want physX .. then buy the card.. its accually better cause the card has its own chip/with its own ram.. pare up 2 4870s and a physx card and the  260/280  will be but to shame.. prolly even with 1 4870 paired with the physX card. Or Just wait for the 4870x2s


----------



## ShadowFold (Jul 24, 2008)

Mine performed like crap when I uninstalled my 8800GT drivers and just wrote over them. I had to reinstall windows to get the full performance.


----------



## StarYoshi (Jul 25, 2008)

This is on a fresh install of Vista. I am not teh n00b by any means, and there are no driver conflicts. It's not a power issue, as I have a corsair 620 watt psu. The card wasn't overheating either. Another thing that grinds my gears about the 4xxx series is that powerplay doesn't work a month after its release. My Crysis frames, when overclocked, line up with the benchmarks from various websites stock, which is fine because they use fatty CPUs, but I don't understand why non-Crysis games show no improvement. There are only two other things I can think of, and they are motherboard related. I'm on an old bios (March 2007) and using PCIE 1.1. I have time to sort things out before my 30 day return window closes and I kind of want to see if a bios update would help, but my CPU overclocks with such ease and I'm happy where it's at that I don't really want to play with it and f something up... I've got experience with everything but bios updates . IDK I just thought I'd post some real world benchmarks from someone with a typical machine, as opposed to the monster rigs most reviewers use.

By all means if anyone has any suggestions to improve performance, I'm all ears  I'm going to OC my CPU to 3.2Ghz tonight anyway. Otherwise this baby is going back.


----------



## trt740 (Jul 25, 2008)

_jM said:


> OK all i can say is that the 4870s are the better card.. if you want physX .. then buy the card.. its accually better cause the card has its own chip/with its own ram.. pare up 2 4870s and a physx card and the  260/280  will be but to shame.. prolly even with 1 4870 paired with the physX card. Or Just wait for the 4870x2s



thats total nonsense. You can pair a physx card with a geforce cards aswell, and  all it's doing is using the gpu to do physx. If you put a card in the gpu will even be faster on a geforce card aswell because the gpu will nolonger do the physx, the physx card will. How did you come to this conclusion? The 260 and 4870 are neck and neck speed wise especially when both are overclocked (which for now the 260 overclocks better) , it runs cooler, and every single third party software for overclocking works. *Having said this the 4870 is just as good a card but by no means is it faster*. Thats just total nonsense to say.


----------



## jaydeejohn (Jul 25, 2008)

There have been mobo conflicts. Your PCi is fine. 1 question, did you reboot Vista before you ran these, or go right into them after new install?


----------



## Franklinwallbrown (Jul 30, 2008)

So this is the 4870 v 260 thread, eh?


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 30, 2008)

Franklinwallbrown said:


> So this is the 4870 v 260 thread, eh?



Lol almost a mirror of yours


----------



## Franklinwallbrown (Jul 31, 2008)

Maybe I can learn something here too.


----------



## trt740 (Jul 31, 2008)

maybe we all can LOL!!!


----------



## paybackdaman (Jul 31, 2008)

Psychoholic said:


> Naah, waiting is stupid in the tech world, you can wait forever for the next best thing.  I say go for what you want now and enjoy it now.  The 4870X2 is about to come out, but the 4870 is an outstanding card, and wont set you back $500.



To go along with what he said; People have been saying "wait for the 4xxx series, it's due out in june/july. Now that it is here, people are saying, "wait for the 48XX x2, it's due out in August". At this rate we'll be on the HD6xxx series and the GTX5xx series which is really rebranded GTX4xx series....lol. 

But, I would go with the 4870. No technical babble about it. I am just partial to ATI this time around. Great numbers, and for once they hit a good price range....first.


----------



## MatTheCat (Jul 31, 2008)

ShadowFold said:


> Ok.. These cards are pretty much the same and I cant decide. I was leaning towards ATi because of the free 2x AA thing but idk.. I think nvidia has some magical drivers up their sleeves along with ATi so is it best to wait or buy now?



Free 2x AA thing???

You are kidding right?

I have a Sapphire HD 4870 512MB

Modded Very High Crysis running on XP64                = 25-40 FPS

Modded Very High Crysis running on XP64 + FSAA x2 = 8-18 FPS


----------



## Kursah (Jul 31, 2008)

Is that running JRob's Crysis mod? If so it has a 2AA effect on nearby plants and such that should be disabled when trying to run FSAA...I forget the reason but we were talking about it in his thread. I'm pulling about the same frames with modded very hi DX10 Vista x64, 25-40, it sticks closer to 30-35 mostly, that's at stock clocks tho...haven't tried the game OC'd on my 260 yet.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 31, 2008)

The prices of the 260 in the UK vary so damn much!  If your luck you can get one for around £190 and generally the 4870 tends to be a little cheaper but you can pay all the way upto £260 in the UK for one of the overclocked 260's   But hey!.......I have just found a 280 for less than £270!!!!!  gonna get me one


----------



## Wile E (Aug 1, 2008)

Kursah said:


> Is that running JRob's Crysis mod? If so it has a 2AA effect on nearby plants and such that should be disabled when trying to run FSAA...I forget the reason but we were talking about it in his thread. I'm pulling about the same frames with modded very hi DX10 Vista x64, 25-40, it sticks closer to 30-35 mostly, that's at stock clocks tho...haven't tried the game OC'd on my 260 yet.



He turns on 2x *M*SAA in his cfg. It comes at little to no performance penalty. FSAA, on the other hand, does.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 7, 2008)

a great review for comparison it uses a 280 gtx but in the bench marks both cards are listed   http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/08/07/evga-gtx-280-superclocked/1


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 7, 2008)

hey Shadow, how about a gx2, they're only $284 for EVGA's model on newegg and deliver performce on par with the gtx280


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 7, 2008)

BarbaricSoul said:


> hey Shadow, how about a gx2, they're only $284 for EVGA's model on newegg and deliver performce on par with the gtx280



You got shares in the GX2 fabrication plant????


----------



## ShogoXT (Aug 8, 2008)

Make sure to start up a monitor thread so people can pitch you deals on those! I helped a friend get one recently so I have some deals in mind.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Aug 8, 2008)

Tatty_One said:


> You got shares in the GX2 fabrication plant????



roflmao, nah man, it's just a great card at one hell of a price right now.


----------



## trt740 (Aug 8, 2008)

ShogoXT said:


> Make sure to start up a monitor thread so people can pitch you deals on those! I helped a friend get one recently so I have some deals in mind.



another natty boy!!! Welcome Shogo


----------



## ShadowFold (Aug 8, 2008)

BarbaricSoul said:


> hey Shadow, how about a gx2, they're only $284 for EVGA's model on newegg and deliver performce on par with the gtx280



Uhh I dont have that kind of money.. and my 4850 pwns I dont need a better card


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 8, 2008)

BarbaricSoul said:


> roflmao, nah man, it's just a great card at one hell of a price right now.



Sorry, just ordered me a Gainward 260 and a 28inch monitor, the 260 turned out £50 cheaper than the GX2 in the end, that nearly $100.


----------

