PDA

View Full Version : New video card - HD5770, HD4890 or GTX260?



Agent_24
12-03-2010, 09:31 PM
I hope to be upgrading my video card in a week or two, it seems a toss up between these three:

HD5770, HD4890, GTX260

They're all about the same price, but I can only pick one...

I'll want to be able to run the latest games on decent graphics settings and at maximum 1280x1024 but most of the time I'll only be using 1024x768 or 1152x864 actually.

I currently have an 8600GT

Which would you recommend and why?

wratterus
12-03-2010, 10:24 PM
I've got a GTX260 and it's a great card, at the mo the next gen ATI cards seem to be the best bang for buck though. Any of those cards will be fine for what you've described. I'd go for the 5770 due to power savings/latest directx etc.

qazwsxokmijn
12-03-2010, 10:29 PM
At the res you're at, any of the three really, but for the best it will have to be the 4890.

Agent_24
13-03-2010, 08:26 AM
At the res you're at, any of the three really, but for the best it will have to be the 4890.

Why?


I've got a GTX260 and it's a great card, at the mo the next gen ATI cards seem to be the best bang for buck though. Any of those cards will be fine for what you've described. I'd go for the 5770 due to power savings/latest directx etc.

I'd have no problem powering any of them, but a cooler running card would always be nice.

DirectX 11 support would be good too I guess, but does the HD5770 actually have enough performance to back it up?

Ollie
13-03-2010, 08:28 AM
Why?



I'd have no problem powering any of them, but a cooler running card would always be nice.

DirectX 11 support would be good too I guess, but does the HD5770 actually have enough performance to back it up?

The 4890 is the best card for performance
5770 is about the same as a 4870 but with dx11 etc
GTX 260 is about the same as a 4870 but more expensive

Its hard to find a 4890 so id go with the 5770 and OC to 4890 speeds

SolMiester
13-03-2010, 08:44 AM
Hi Wrat, I guess its already said, the fastest is the older gen Radeon, 4890, the 5770 has dx11....BUT, none would break a sweat with the resolution you have so you might as well go with the one with the most features and that would be the GTX260, CUDA and PhysX...actually you could use the 8600 as dedicated physX

pctek
13-03-2010, 08:52 AM
I agree.
The first number is the generation of card.
The second number indicates performance.
48xx is better then 57xx, but the 57xx comes out around the same (ish) because it is a later generation. Among other things.
That's why benchmarks a good, look up the ones you are interested and see what performs better.

Although I never look at the x7xx anything.
As far as I am concerned the logical progression is 4890, 5890, etc.


Or even better, 5870x2.

Agent_24
13-03-2010, 10:18 AM
Hi Wrat, I guess its already said, the fastest is the older gen Radeon, 4890, the 5770 has dx11....BUT, none would break a sweat with the resolution you have so you might as well go with the one with the most features and that would be the GTX260, CUDA and PhysX...actually you could use the 8600 as dedicated physX

The GTX260 doesn't have DX11 though does it?


I agree.
The first number is the generation of card.
The second number indicates performance.
48xx is better then 57xx, but the 57xx comes out around the same (ish) because it is a later generation. Among other things.
That's why benchmarks a good, look up the ones you are interested and see what performs better.

Although I never look at the x7xx anything.
As far as I am concerned the logical progression is 4890, 5890, etc.


Or even better, 5870x2.

I looked up the performance of them, they all seem pretty similar. I'm just wondering which one makes the most sense.

A 5870x2 would be great but it costs too much and wouldn't fit in my case anyway :lol:

Battleneter2
13-03-2010, 12:08 PM
The GTX260 doesn't have DX11 though does it?



I looked up the performance of them, they all seem pretty similar. I'm just wondering which one makes the most sense.

A 5870x2 would be great but it costs too much and wouldn't fit in my case anyway :lol:

Yea the 5770 is about equivalent to a 4870 but maybe around 20% slower than a 4890.

No the GTX260 does not have DX11. I wouldn't worry about DX11 atm. Its unlikely most of the mid ranged cards like the 5770 have the grunt to run DX11 in all its glory when its fully utilised in a few years. Not talking about a few token DX11 effects we are getting added to a few games now.

As for PhysX, it does have some tangible benefits in a few games but the CPU could easily do the same work in most cases. The push to utilise it is a attempt by Nvidia to steer users towards there brand. The jury is out if this t attic will be successful long term. Its up to you what value you put on it.

qazwsxokmijn
13-03-2010, 08:17 PM
Why?
At low resolutions the video card has less to work for, at least on the memory side of things.....in quite a few games the difference between an expensive video card and a cheaper one can be negligible when you're playing at low resolutions.

My suggestion at 4890 still stands.....it's cheaper than a 5770, though it has no DX11 support you're not missing much right now, and it has some degree of future proofing. It's still a pretty nice card on its own term.

Ollie
13-03-2010, 09:46 PM
Yea the 5770 is about equivalent to a 4870 but maybe around 20% slower than a 4890.

No the GTX260 does not have DX11. I wouldn't worry about DX11 atm. Its unlikely most of the mid ranged cards like the 5770 have the grunt to run DX11 in all its glory when its fully utilised in a few years. Not talking about a few token DX11 effects we are getting added to a few games now.

As for PhysX, it does have some tangible benefits in a few games but the CPU could easily do the same work in most cases. The push to utilise it is a attempt by Nvidia to steer users towards there brand. The jury is out if this t attic will be successful long term. Its up to you what value you put on it.


I disagree with you, DX11 games WILL RUN FASTER on DX11 compared to DX10. Which means the 5770 will beat the 4870 on dx11 games. But the 4890 will still be faster. But the 5770 is capable of overclocking beyond the 4890 speed due to the the nnew design. Then it will beat the 4890 in dx11 games. The 4890 isn't a great card for ocing, as its ref design is the same as the 4870 but tweaked to higher clocks

I def would go for a 5770 if you want a brand new card, or opt for a second hand 4870. the old gen ati cards are impossible to find, and if you do manage to find one, i would imagine rmaing would be a problem

And if you want physx u can just add a physx card like the 8800gt and run the physx hack which allows you to use physx from that card and you can have an ati ass your primary card

qazwsxokmijn
13-03-2010, 10:01 PM
Of course the 5770 will beat the 4870 in DX11 mode. the 4870 is DX10!

Ollie
14-03-2010, 09:41 AM
Of course the 5770 will beat the 4870 in DX11 mode. the 4870 is DX10!

Yea thats my point, and you get the futureproofnesseseseses

Why go back to DX10 when games will be optimized @ dx11 cards, also some of the visual performance too

qazwsxokmijn
14-03-2010, 10:13 AM
Well, I'm not sure about now but when DX10 first came out games took a performance hit when played in DX10 mode, and when played in DX9 was much smoother and better overall.

So if that was the case again then I think it's better to have a 4890 playing in DX10 rather than a 5770 playing in DX10 because it craps itself doing DX11. :p

Ollie
14-03-2010, 10:33 AM
Well, I'm not sure about now but when DX10 first came out games took a performance hit when played in DX10 mode, and when played in DX9 was much smoother and better overall.

So if that was the case again then I think it's better to have a 4890 playing in DX10 rather than a 5770 playing in DX10 because it craps itself doing DX11. :p

You are totally wrong, the 5770 plays better in DX11 than it does in DX10

Battleneter2
14-03-2010, 01:27 PM
I disagree with you, DX11 games WILL RUN FASTER on DX11 compared to DX10. Which means the 5770 will beat the 4870 on dx11 games. But the 4890 will still be faster. But the 5770 is capable of overclocking beyond the 4890 speed due to the the nnew design. Then it will beat the 4890 in dx11 games. The 4890 isn't a great card for ocing, as its ref design is the same as the 4870 but tweaked to higher clocks



The problem is there are no games out built from the ground up with DX11 in mind and wont be for several years just like we saw with DX10 . Sure there are a few DX11 enabled tittles with a few strap on extras, hence not to impressive yet. I am not saying DX11 is slower than DX10 as thats not the case.

As most gamers replace there GPU at "least" every two years DX11 is not a major consideration.

I don't disagree with a 5770 over a 4890, id be leaning that way too below 1920x1200 and on a budget but not because of DX11, heat power and overclocking. In future DX11 titles with full on DX11 tessellation the 5770 wont stand a chance with full eye candy enabled and at decent resolutions.

pctek
14-03-2010, 03:04 PM
A 5870x2 would be great but it costs too much and wouldn't fit in my case anyway :lol:

Simple. Buy another case too.:clap

Agent_24
14-03-2010, 03:21 PM
I thought they called it the HD5970?

Tell you what, you give me the extra $1000 I would need and I'll buy it :D

Ollie
14-03-2010, 05:05 PM
The problem is there are no games out built from the ground up with DX11 in mind and wont be for several years just like we saw with DX10 . Sure there are a few DX11 enabled tittles with a few strap on extras, hence not to impressive yet. I am not saying DX11 is slower than DX10 as thats not the case.

As most gamers replace there GPU at "least" every two years DX11 is not a major consideration.

I don't disagree with a 5770 over a 4890, id be leaning that way too below 1920x1200 and on a budget but not because of DX11, heat power and overclocking. In future DX11 titles with full on DX11 tessellation the 5770 wont stand a chance with full eye candy enabled and at decent resolutions.

Find a 4890 for under $300 from a good store then talk

Battleneter2
15-03-2010, 08:05 AM
Find a 4890 for under $300 from a good store then talk

Ka? I didn't recommend a 4890

Thebananamonkey
15-03-2010, 12:20 PM
The new NVidia cards come out in two weeks, which is bound to shake prices up more than a little.

I'm waiting until then before I buy a new card. Most likely the 5770, which sits at a good price point and should run 1680x1050 smooth as butter for new games for the next year and a bit (as long as I'm still in NZ). Where can you still get 4890's?

Ollie
15-03-2010, 03:56 PM
The new NVidia cards come out in two weeks, which is bound to shake prices up more than a little.

I'm waiting until then before I buy a new card. Most likely the 5770, which sits at a good price point and should run 1680x1050 smooth as butter for new games for the next year and a bit (as long as I'm still in NZ). Where can you still get 4890's?

You can't that is the problem, and if it arrives doa or you need to rma it theyll probably upgrage you to a 5830 which is slower than the 4890 :(

Silver_Blade
15-03-2010, 04:29 PM
You can't that is the problem, and if it arrives doa or you need to rma it theyll probably upgrade you to a 5830 which is slower than the 4890 :(

OMG :eek: what has the world gotten to....

raydan42
15-03-2010, 05:32 PM
Very definitely the HD 5770. It is newer and better than the 4890, and the GTX 260, but for your resolutions it doesn't really matter. I run an HD4850 and it is really good at 1360x768. I prefer to buy ATI, because nvidea haven't got the cards to match at a similar price, so very often you will find that a card with similar prices to the ATI cards can not perform as well. Don't forget to look at reviews, and tests, that people have performed and posted online :D

SolMiester
16-03-2010, 08:22 AM
Very definitely the HD 5770. It is newer and better than the 4890, and the GTX 260, but for your resolutions it doesn't really matter. I run an HD4850 and it is really good at 1360x768. I prefer to buy ATI, because nvidea haven't got the cards to match at a similar price, so very often you will find that a card with similar prices to the ATI cards can not perform as well. Don't forget to look at reviews, and tests, that people have performed and posted online :D

If you go through life choosing via price, you will always come second place. IMO, NV has always had the more robust architecture over ATi and while Cypress is the fastest at the moment, Fermi is late to the party, but will soon show it up.....

Agent_24
16-03-2010, 01:08 PM
This thread is most interesting... Looks indeed like the HD4890 is the best choice, considering by the time DirectX 11 is commonplace another upgrade will be in order I suspect.

Now I just have to find one.

I wonder what impact the release of the GTX480 will have on prices?

Battleneter2
16-03-2010, 02:41 PM
I would'nt worry about Fermi, although released this month you'll be very lucky to see a card under NZ $500 for months.

Agent_24
16-03-2010, 03:06 PM
It's not the price of Fermi I care about, it's if the price of the older cards will drop or not...

Sweep
16-03-2010, 03:16 PM
It's not the price of Fermi I care about, it's if the price of the older cards will drop or not...

But that's not what you said when creating this thread.

Agent_24
16-03-2010, 03:29 PM
Of course I didn't, why would I?
My question was which card is the best out of the three I picked, it seems that the HD4890 is the best choice.

Now I know Fermi has a release date, I'm interested as to what is going to happen to the prices - though again, it has nothing to do with which card performs better...

If the HD4890 drops to $200 that would be nice, but I don't know what is going to happen...

Sweep
16-03-2010, 03:42 PM
Of course I didn't, why would I?
My question was which card is the best out of the three I picked, it seems that the HD4890 is the best choice.

Now I know Fermi has a release date, I'm interested as to what is going to happen to the prices - though again, it has nothing to do with which card performs better...

If the HD4890 drops to $200 that would be nice, but I don't know what is going to happen...

Join the throng. None of us know what is going to happen do we?
So are you getting a HD4890?

Agent_24
16-03-2010, 03:59 PM
It's looking that way.

The way I see it, the GTX260 is bigger, more expensive, and slower - and the HD5770 is cheaper, smaller but also slower.

I don't really care about DirectX 11 and hardly even care about DirectX 10 yet so I've decided that lack of DirectX 11 support on it makes no difference to me.

But I'm wondering now if I should wait for Fermi and then see if the price on the HD4890 comes down...

Sweep
16-03-2010, 04:23 PM
Well perhaps just keep wondering.

Or make a decision.

qazwsxokmijn
16-03-2010, 06:47 PM
Now I know Fermi has a release date, I'm interested as to what is going to happen to the prices
Fermi has a release date....but there are many rumours which are fairly substantiated that the chips will be in very, very low quantities and many speculates that the 26th date is probably just a paper launch. And if the recent benchmarks are reliable, then even the GTX 480 wouldn't be much of an upgrade from a 5870 unless it is priced competitively (which nVidia probably won't!)

Agent_24
16-03-2010, 07:00 PM
I read somewhere that a price of 450 Euros was expected

qazwsxokmijn
16-03-2010, 07:15 PM
For a GTX 480? Then expect around $1000 NZ. If that's the price we get I doubt ATI would see it as much of a threat, 5xxx cards will stay around the same price.

Agent_24
16-03-2010, 07:16 PM
Sounds about right. The GTX280 was about that when it came out wasn't it?

qazwsxokmijn
16-03-2010, 08:32 PM
Can't remember. Think it was closer to $800, not $1k.

Problem with Fermi is that it's quite an ambitious chip to manufacture. It's apparently much more complex than Cypress is, and if you remember the yield problems Cypress had at the start Fermi has it much worse. I believe they reserve chips with fully functional 512 cores only for Tesla cards, and I think now a 480 Fermi only has some 448 odd cores.

Ollie
16-03-2010, 09:22 PM
CL have the new fermis

http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=11916

http://www.computerlounge.co.nz/components/componentview.asp?partid=11915

I came buckets

SolMiester
17-03-2010, 07:45 AM
GTX470 FTW!

qazwsxokmijn
17-03-2010, 09:56 AM
$720 for a 470? Screw that, if the recent benchmarks are anything to go by, I'm sticking to a 5870.

Metla
17-03-2010, 10:18 AM
Back in my day $720 would have got you a Voodoo3.....

SolMiester
17-03-2010, 11:55 AM
$720 for a 470? Screw that, if the recent benchmarks are anything to go by, I'm sticking to a 5870.

I'd rather a 470 than a 5870, CUDA, PhysX and SLI that doesnt need profiles, and a card that beats the 5870 in 60% of games!

Cheapest 5870 I see on pricespy is $646

qazwsxokmijn
17-03-2010, 12:44 PM
I'd rather a 470 than a 5870, CUDA, PhysX and SLI that doesnt need profiles, and a card that beats the 5870 in 60% of games!

Cheapest 5870 I see on pricespy is $646
CUDA, PhysX.....don't care about that stuff. Meh. :p

SLI without profiles? What do you mean? My experience with 4830s in CF is pretty good. And I only hear about good things with crossfiring 5xxx cards. Not sure about the performance between a GTX470 and 5870, but I guess time will tell....

Battleneter2
17-03-2010, 01:34 PM
I'd rather a 470 than a 5870, CUDA, PhysX and SLI that doesnt need profiles, and a card that beats the 5870 in 60% of games!

Cheapest 5870 I see on pricespy is $646

CUDA and PhysX REAL handy (sarcasm) :P

SolMiester
17-03-2010, 04:04 PM
CUDA, PhysX.....don't care about that stuff. Meh. :p

SLI without profiles? What do you mean? My experience with 4830s in CF is pretty good. And I only hear about good things with crossfiring 5xxx cards. Not sure about the performance between a GTX470 and 5870, but I guess time will tell....

AFAIK, Xfire requires a game profile from ATi, SLI does not....

SolMiester
17-03-2010, 04:09 PM
You don't do folding at home or heavy encoding..too bad.. I like PhysX, however my card isnt powerful enough to handle it....there are now 15 games that support it and on a decent card looks excellent....

Ollie
17-03-2010, 11:32 PM
I'd rather a 470 than a 5870, CUDA, PhysX and SLI that doesnt need profiles, and a card that beats the 5870 in 60% of games!

Cheapest 5870 I see on pricespy is $646

Cuda fuda is nothing

and if u want physx just add another card like a 8800gt and run a physx hack. u can use an ati card as ur primary display aswell

and there are also leak drivers for physx support for ati cards

Battleneter2
18-03-2010, 08:09 AM
You don't do folding at home or heavy encoding..too bad.. I like PhysX, however my card isnt powerful enough to handle it....there are now 15 games that support it and on a decent card looks excellent....

Thats what a I7 is for :) ill leave my GPU doing GPU work, and Nvidia can keep there marketing gimmicks to themselves.

Hopefully the game developers will stop taking back handers from Nvidia soon and stop integrating that worthless unnecessary technology.

Agent_24
18-03-2010, 08:53 AM
Thats what a I7 is for :) ill leave my GPU doing GPU work, and Nvidia can keep there marketing gimmicks to themselves.

Hopefully the game developers will stop taking back handers from Nvidia soon and stop integrating that worthless unnecessary technology.

Thing is, GPUs can actually be faster than your CPU for doing some things.

Take RAR archive password cracking for example, much faster when running on a GPU than CPU.

I read this example once: "If the computer was to read a book, the CPU reads each page, then goes onto the next one, as normal. However the GPU tears each page up into 500 pieces and reads all the pieces at the same time"

Battleneter2
18-03-2010, 09:34 AM
Thing is, GPUs can actually be faster than your CPU for doing some things.

Take RAR archive password cracking for example, much faster when running on a GPU than CPU.

I read this example once: "If the computer was to read a book, the CPU reads each page, then goes onto the next one, as normal. However the GPU tears each page up into 500 pieces and reads all the pieces at the same time"


Sure I am being a little harsh, but its generally to counter the Hysteria, there are actually people installing second GPU's just to run PhysX for gaming lol.

Largely for gaming im not buying into it, the "small" improvements can 100% be handled by the CPU if coded to do so. PhysX is a artificially introduced need and I am in little doubt Nvidia pay developers to use it.

SolMiester
18-03-2010, 01:30 PM
Sure I am being a little harsh, but its generally to counter the Hysteria, there are actually people installing second GPU's just to run PhysX for gaming lol.

Largely for gaming im not buying into it, the "small" improvements can 100% be handled by the CPU if coded to do so. PhysX is a artificially introduced need and I am in little doubt Nvidia pay developers to use it.

Of course PhysX is just a luxury, something else to make the game fun, it certainly looks better with than without...!

Thebananamonkey
18-03-2010, 01:53 PM
Of course PhysX is just a luxury, something else to make the game fun, it certainly looks better with than without...!

There are next to no CUDA utilizing programs that you or I would want to use and PhysX only works in games that are coded for it (there are currently only 17 and chances are, you don't play them (http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html)). PhysX is nothing special as ATI have their own standard that's GPU independant (ie: you can use it regardless of hardware). Theres some suggestion that game studios are effectively bribed to use PhysX...

NVidia's upcoming cards are expensive and inferior and no amount of "value-added" PR spin can save them from that.

By all means, spend your cash on nVidia. Just know the facts before you get all nostalgic and spend your money on fancy marketing and rubbish products.

Battleneter2
18-03-2010, 03:18 PM
Of course PhysX is just a luxury, something else to make the game fun, it certainly looks better with than without...!

Its useful as Nvidia pay developers to use it and create a small false advantage..

The CryEngine 2 (crysis) is still the heaviest physics engine available and it doesn't use PhysX. The draw distance and amount of physics inside the sandbox is enormous.

When you look at a "vastly" inferior game engine like the one used in Batman Arkham, you seriously can't tell me the CPU cant do a few calculations for shuffling a few papers around on the floor and cape waving lol. Its almost insulting when you stop to think about it.

Uses like encoding and compression are another issue.

pctek
18-03-2010, 03:34 PM
Intel I7 920@4.0 GHz (1.2V)
Gigabyte GTX 275 O/C



Now there's something I see a lot with generic "gaming" machines.

If I was going to use a top CPU I'd pair it with the top graphics card.

GPU first, then CPU. Always. CPU first for gaming is pointless.

Agent_24
18-03-2010, 04:50 PM
There are next to no CUDA utilizing programs that you or I would want to use and PhysX only works in games that are coded for it (there are currently only 17 and chances are, you don't play them (http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html)).

Pretty true actually, the only one I have from that list is Mirror's Edge :lol:

hueybot3000
18-03-2010, 05:19 PM
I cant remember if ive posted in this thread or not but I'd go 4890. Best value for money and dx11 won't matter for a while yet. Good luck finding one though!

dian77
18-03-2010, 08:56 PM
GPU first, then CPU. Always. CPU first for gaming is pointless.

CPU bound games are rare I guess.

Agent_24
18-03-2010, 11:02 PM
The shop I was going to buy it off already sold it to someone else, it was their last one and I missed their email :( :(

Maybe I'll just get the HD5770, I'll probably have to, now.

Ollie
18-03-2010, 11:36 PM
Now there's something I see a lot with generic "gaming" machines.

If I was going to use a top CPU I'd pair it with the top graphics card.

GPU first, then CPU. Always. CPU first for gaming is pointless.

Lol @ this, try running BC2 with a dual core. I assure you a i7 920 OC will beat a core 2 duo with better graphics card

And more and more games are coming out opt for quads

Sweep
18-03-2010, 11:41 PM
The shop I was going to buy it off already sold it to someone else, it was their last one and I missed their email :( :(

Maybe I'll just get the HD5770, I'll probably have to, now.

Have a look at post 33 in this thread.

Agent_24
19-03-2010, 12:02 AM
And that has what relevance exactly?

Sweep
19-03-2010, 12:24 AM
The relevant post was Post #1 in which you asked a question.

All answers from there on are not relevant as you did not take some advice given or you asked a rhetoric question in the first place.

As you describe yourself as a Computer "Specialist" then why ask?

Agent_24
19-03-2010, 01:51 AM
I don't even know why I'm bothering to reply, but here goes:


The relevant post was Post #1 in which you asked a question.

Yet you told me to refer to post #33... not to mention the post in which you told me this, doesn't make sense considering the post you quoted from me.

Basic idea seems to be:

Me: Oh no, I missed out on buying an HD4890 because it got sold to someone else. Damn.

You: Keep wondering, or make a decision!

Doesn't really follow, does it?


All answers from there on are not relevant as you did not take some advice given or you asked a rhetoric question in the first place.

All answers are relevant in some way, and most provide information which is useful in making a decision. Hence my question "Which would you recommend and why?"

I am not going to blindly buy a card because someone says I should. I want to know WHY that card is considered good. After thinking a while and reading these posts, I came up with the conclusion that the HD4890 was the best suited.

I then proceeded to try and buy one, however as I previously stated, that didn't go so well, hence the statement "I might have to get an HD5770 instead"

Which advice was that?

The advice to get a HD5770, an HD4890, or an HD5870x2?

Yes, I will take all those advices and buy all three cards, that makes so much sense.


As you describe yourself as a Computer "Specialist" then why ask?

Back on this again? I thought I explained this to you already, last year.
http://pressf1.co.nz/showpost.php?p=746063&postcount=4

Sweep
19-03-2010, 02:03 AM
The relevance of my post #33 was related to the fact that you spent too much time wondering and not enough time doing so therefore you have to re asess the situation and settle for whatever.

You explained a little last year in that thread but not to my satisfaction then you say in that one that you sent a PM.

Battleneter2
19-03-2010, 07:56 AM
Now there's something I see a lot with generic "gaming" machines.

If I was going to use a top CPU I'd pair it with the top graphics card.

GPU first, then CPU. Always. CPU first for gaming is pointless.

lol well for a start your knowledge of PC gaming is about 6months outdated

50%+ of the latest big releases are basically console ports with massive CPU usage, probably due to some sort of Xbox360 code emulation bridge or simply crap coding.

if you are running a higher end dual core and a mid to high end SLi or CF your CPU is going to bottleneck you. That statement would not have been true 6 months ago, things have changed, time to catch up old chap! :)

Ollie
19-03-2010, 07:58 AM
lol well for a start your knowledge of PC gaming is about 6months outdated

50%+ of the latest big releases are basically console ports with massive CPU usage, probably due to some sort of Xbox360 code emulation bridge or simply crap coding.

if you running a higher end dual core and a mid to high end SLi or CF your CPU is going to bottleneck you. That statement would not have been true 6 months ago, things have changed time to catch up old chap! :)


Yup and ocing a 920 from stock will get you about 30% fps increase in those games

pctek
19-03-2010, 01:56 PM
lol well for a start your knowledge of PC gaming is about 6months outdated

50%+ of the latest big releases are basically console ports with massive CPU usage, probably due to some sort of Xbox360 code emulation bridge or simply crap coding.

if you are running a higher end dual core and a mid to high end SLi or CF your CPU is going to bottleneck you. :)

Console Ports - :yuck:
I did not say get a **** CPU now did I? I said GPU first then CPU. If we only cared about Console Ports we wouldn't bother gaming on the PC at all, we'd own a console instead.

And why would we be running SLI or CF now if GPU isn't important.
Geez. You buy what you like, I upgrade GPUs before CPUs.

Battleneter2
19-03-2010, 02:05 PM
Console Ports - :yuck:
I did not say get a **** CPU now did I? I said GPU first then CPU. If we only cared about Console Ports we wouldn't bother gaming on the PC at all, we'd own a console instead.

And why would we be running SLI or CF now if GPU isn't important.
Geez. You buy what you like, I upgrade GPUs before CPUs.

CPU is FAR more important than it was 6 months to a year ago. Just hope your not selling your customers Dual cores and high end GPU's for gaming rigs lol

Welcome to PC gaming in the late 2009+ and on, didnt say I like it!!, but things have changed. However have to admit Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 were pretty dam good, so its not all bad. Sumpreme Commander 2 is a crap console dumbed down turd fest.

For the record I am wating on Fermi although GPU requirements seem to be going backwards recently with these latest games, not even sure I need to upgrade my GPU any time soon :P

Agent_24
19-03-2010, 02:11 PM
The relevance of my post #33 was related to the fact that you spent too much time wondering and not enough time doing so therefore you have to re asess the situation and settle for whatever.

You explained a little last year in that thread but not to my satisfaction then you say in that one that you sent a PM.

I was waiting for enough information to make an informed decision.. once I had done that I was too late by a matter of hours to grab the last HD4890 in stock...

So I have gone to the next best card, the HD5770 which I ordered today and will probably get by next Monday.

My point is that the title Computer "Specialist" is a joke. I am not trying to say I know everything, I am saying that actually I don't know everything, despite having a large interest in computers and spending a lot of time with them etc.

Thebananamonkey
19-03-2010, 06:46 PM
CPU is FAR more important than it was 6 months to a year ago. Just hope your not selling your customers Dual cores and high end GPU's for gaming rigs lol

Not putting an i7 in a rig doesn't preclude an i5, which for most if not all games will run like a dream AND save you a ton when you take the MoBo, CPU and triple channel RAM into account.

Laughing at people based on an assumption makes you look like a fool. Also, Fermi is going to be an epic failure, the only thing to wait for will be any price drops that might happen to the ATI line.

Sweep
19-03-2010, 07:09 PM
I was waiting for enough information to make an informed decision.. once I had done that I was too late by a matter of hours to grab the last HD4890 in stock...

So I have gone to the next best card, the HD5770 which I ordered today and will probably get by next Monday.

My point is that the title Computer "Specialist" is a joke. I am not trying to say I know everything, I am saying that actually I don't know everything, despite having a large interest in computers and spending a lot of time with them etc.

Thanks for the reply. You have now explained your title as being a joke and *I* did not know that for which I apologise without reserve.

It looked ( To me ) that you were waiting too long to either poo or get off the pot as it were and you missed out on the card you had decided on because you missed an Email.

I hope you have got a card, when it arrives, that suits you.

Agent_24
19-03-2010, 08:18 PM
I guess I assumed that the Wikipedia article would explain the joke, I suppose it actually didn't. Sorry about that. If I came off as rude in post #64, I was tired and annoyed that I had missed out on that card. As you can see it was almost 2AM.

Truth be told I was waiting for some extra cash so I could get the HD4890, I ordered it Thursday morning and then went out.

Came back in the afternoon to find an email sent at 10AM saying that there was one card left but two other people were interested, and did I still want it, by the time I replied, I was told that it had already been sold.

As I said earlier, I have now ordered a HD5770 instead. If it's not good enough I'll probably sell it on Trademe and try to find a second-hand HD4890 somewhere, or maybe save some more money and get a HD5850...

Thebananamonkey
19-03-2010, 08:58 PM
If you get it and don't like it, let me know.

I'm probably going to buy one once nvidia let their new cards out.

qazwsxokmijn
19-03-2010, 10:29 PM
If the price of 720 and 1000+ for the 470 and 480 is set, and the performance of the former is between 5850 and 5870, and the latter only ~10% more than the 5870 I doubt the ATI cards will drop in price. Only time will tell I guess.

Sweep
19-03-2010, 10:36 PM
Thanks Agent_24.
All explained.

Battleneter2
20-03-2010, 11:14 AM
Not putting an i7 in a rig doesn't preclude an i5, which for most if not all games will run like a dream AND save you a ton when you take the MoBo, CPU and triple channel RAM into account.

Laughing at people based on an assumption makes you look like a fool. Also, Fermi is going to be an epic failure, the only thing to wait for will be any price drops that might happen to the ATI line.


woa where did I say that?? The I5 and the Higher end AMD quads are good value and will do nicely. Dual cores are the issue now with these latest ports, the bottom line is CPU grunt is more important in recent releases.

Yea I tend to agree on Fermi, but the problem is even on my last Gen card everything I play never dips below 50FPS @ 1920x1200 so there is no rush, hence waiting to see before a upgrade, seems very sensible to me no?

Did you read fully back b4 making an ass of yourself?

Thebananamonkey
20-03-2010, 12:55 PM
Did you read fully back b4 making an ass of yourself?

I was talking about your response to PCTek saying that i7 is overkill for a gaming rig unless you're relieving one hell of a 5970 bottleneck or something.

You said that this was 6 months old and behind the times.

I said it wasn't and that you lol-ing at her made you look like a fool.

I'm not trying to get into a war with you (not a worthwhile subject to argue about). All I was saying is it's bad form to laugh at senior members with fairly good track records.

qazwsxokmijn
20-03-2010, 05:53 PM
All I was saying is it's bad form to laugh at senior members with fairly good track records.
Self grandeur much? Not trying to make a war either here, but saying that makes you look so arrogant.

Thebananamonkey
21-03-2010, 12:46 AM
Self grandeur much? Not trying to make a war either here, but saying that makes you look so arrogant.

I wasn't referring to myself, more to PCTek, Wainui, Speedy and the other stalwarts of this site.

I meant knowledge, not just post count.

qazwsxokmijn
21-03-2010, 02:55 PM
I wasn't referring to myself, more to PCTek, Wainui, Speedy and the other stalwarts of this site.

I meant knowledge, not just post count.
Sorry, my bad. Thought you were referring to yourself:o

Battleneter2
21-03-2010, 09:50 PM
I was talking about your response to PCTek saying that i7 is overkill for a gaming rig unless you're relieving one hell of a 5970 bottleneck or something.

You said that this was 6 months old and behind the times.

I said it wasn't and that you lol-ing at her made you look like a fool.

I'm not trying to get into a war with you (not a worthwhile subject to argue about). All I was saying is it's bad form to laugh at senior members with fairly good track records.


Unfortunately if you read back it was Pctek that out of the blue posted my rig stats and made it personnel, I just responded to her in kind, a storm in a tea cup.

Seems very reasonable to warn high end gamers to start considering there CPU's more seriously (along with GPU upgrade) if they are running duel core's considering recent trends.




I wasn't referring to myself, more to PCTek, Wainui, Speedy and the other stalwarts of this site.

I meant knowledge, not just post count.

18 Year industry wholesale/Retail hardware experience now Corperate, built and repaired thousonds of PC's. Have MCSE, CCNA, and a few other industry qualifications . oh and far more importantly PC gamer for about 18 years actually maybe more cant remember when the Amiga got retired :P. Dont assume just because someone has 10,0000 posts here they have more "knowledge" than someone with 663 posts, I just tend to dwell in multiple forums time providing.

Ollie
21-03-2010, 10:54 PM
I wasn't referring to myself, more to PCTek, Wainui, Speedy and the other stalwarts of this site.

I meant knowledge, not just post count.

Wainui isnt a gamer, speedy isnt a gamer, PCTek isnt a regular gamer

So battleneter2 probably has more knowledge about games about them

Metla
21-03-2010, 10:57 PM
PCTek isnt a regular gamer

And boomfa, all your credibility gone in an instant.

Claiming a probability based on misinformation is a weak position to argue from.

Ollie
22-03-2010, 12:11 AM
And boomfa, all your credibility gone in an instant.

Claiming a probability based on misinformation is a weak position to argue from.

I know shes a gamer bcoz i bought one of her cards from her. But by regular i mean one that keeps up with the latest games

Battleneter2
22-03-2010, 12:02 PM
I know shes a gamer bcoz i bought one of her cards from her. But by regular i mean one that keeps up with the latest games

I think that's a fair statement as the increase in CPU requirements are really only with the latest games which are mostly co-developed console games. Not everyone has time to play a lot of games or spend time in the community forums.

SolMiester
22-03-2010, 01:43 PM
There are next to no CUDA utilizing programs that you or I would want to use....snip

You know what I want to use?

NVidia's upcoming cards are expensive and inferior
I agree with expensive, however inferior....PMSL!!...nV has always lead and Fermi will show once again why they are the best.


By all means, spend your cash on nVidia. Just know the facts before you get all nostalgic and spend your money on fancy marketing and rubbish products.

BM....I shall not be spending any money on Fermi, I have a young family to support, and I am very much up with the fact thanks, no need for the condescending paragraph


..

SolMiester
22-03-2010, 02:10 PM
Just checked how many apps there are for CUDA, but there are too many, most admittedly are scientific, rest are encoding, rendering or distributed computing.....
http://www.nvidia.com/content/cudazone/CUDABrowser/assets/data/applications.xml

Thebananamonkey
22-03-2010, 03:15 PM
You care a lot about this, don't you?

SolMiester
22-03-2010, 05:49 PM
You care a lot about this, don't you?

I guess so, but have been involved with graphic accelerators for a long time...I was a voodoo fan before the nV destroyed them...my 1st card was a 512KB trident ISA graphic card.

I am happy to admit ATi have the best bang for buck and fastest card at the moment, however they have always played catch-up IMO..

Agent_24
22-03-2010, 06:07 PM
Funny that, my first video card was also a Trident.

Trident Cyberblade 3D integrated into the VIA PLE133 chipset :D (not sure if that's its real name)

Thebananamonkey
22-03-2010, 07:00 PM
I guess so, but have been involved with graphic accelerators for a long time...I was a voodoo fan before the nV destroyed them...my 1st card was a 512KB trident ISA graphic card.

I am happy to admit ATi have the best bang for buck and fastest card at the moment, however they have always played catch-up IMO..

The reason I think the new cards are going to be inferior is fairly simple:

A GTX480 is aimed at beating HD5870. It does this, but only by about 10% on average. Or so early indications say.

You can get a 5870 on CL for $599. A GTX480 is $1099.

You can buy a 5890 for $1399.

I think the way ATI and Nvidia have worked historically has changed. ATI have a great manufacturing process that means more performance, less wattage(and heat), and cheaper to make. They've also been very clever at how they aim to different market segments.

I don't really care who's best, so long as we get prices lowering as a result of the competition. But I'll be surprised if Friday's launch does anything to shake the market particularly.

Agent_24
22-03-2010, 07:22 PM
This might change over time however as newer drivers appear, these usually increase performance.

Still no proper reviews yet though.

Ollie
22-03-2010, 08:58 PM
This might change over time however as newer drivers appear, these usually increase performance.

Still no proper reviews yet though.

There are also those who believe that ati 5xxx cards are "limited: to the 10.2 catalyst and the update to 10.3 will bring them to their full potential. We may see the 5870 nearly or beating the 480 if this theory of ati fanboys is correct

Thebananamonkey
22-03-2010, 10:23 PM
We may see the 5870 nearly or beating the 480 if this theory of ati fanboys is correct

Reminder:

This is physics, engineering and marketing. Not rugby or religion.

SolMiester
22-03-2010, 11:13 PM
There are also those who believe that ati 5xxx cards are "limited: to the 10.2 catalyst and the update to 10.3 will bring them to their full potential. We may see the 5870 nearly or beating the 480 if this theory of ati fanboys is correct

The 470 already beats the 5870 even with the 10.3 drivers

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=117000

Ollie
23-03-2010, 12:05 AM
The 470 already beats the 5870 even with the 10.3 drivers

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=117000

Fakkkkkke

The 5870 definatley beats the 470. It has been confimed by nvidia sources

SolMiester
23-03-2010, 07:41 AM
Fakkkkkke

The 5870 definatley beats the 470. It has been confimed by nvidia sources

Link ?, as I disagree!

Battleneter2
23-03-2010, 08:20 AM
The 470/480 were prob supposed to have more cores, may explain some lack luster early benches and confusion around expected performance.

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100322PD205.html

Personally I couldn't care a less who comes out on top, but have to say Nvidia's pricing is looking a little dodgy atm.

SolMiester
23-03-2010, 11:59 AM
Some more leaked benchmarks, this time 480 v 5870, if true, its a raping!

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=23032

pctek
23-03-2010, 03:42 PM
I think that's a fair statement as the increase in CPU requirements are really only with the latest games which are mostly co-developed console games. .

Mmm. So that's a reason to skimp on a GPU?
Some games are ports. Some are not.
Which is why we have gaming PCs. And don't all run ancient linux boxes only.
GPU first, CPU 2nd.

Which is NOT to say pair a great GPU with last years CPU.

And thank you, I do game. Perhaps not online so much but I DO GAME.
And not Solitaire either.

Battleneter2
23-03-2010, 03:55 PM
Mmm. So that's a reason to skimp on a GPU?
Some games are ports. Some are not.
Which is why we have gaming PCs. And don't all run ancient linux boxes only.
GPU first, CPU 2nd.

Which is NOT to say pair a great GPU with last years CPU.

And thank you, I do game. Perhaps not online so much but I DO GAME.
And not Solitaire either.

where did I say skimp on GPU, please quote??

Are you just being argumentative or twisting words again opposed to admitting your a little out of touch.

Agent_24
23-03-2010, 04:09 PM
Some more leaked benchmarks, this time 480 v 5870, if true, its a raping!

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=23032

Now that's what I'm talking about :D

Ollie
23-03-2010, 10:00 PM
Some more leaked benchmarks, this time 480 v 5870, if true, its a raping!

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=23032

You know those cards in the benchies are actually optmized a bit better than the actual product. Nivida likes to do this **** haha

Anyways yes the 480 will beat the 5870, but still loses against the 5970. And the 5970 is A LOT cheaper (you can get 2x 5870s for around 1k in NZ).

Nvidia will prob make 2x cards of the 480 (485 or some sort). And ATI will reply with their 5890 cards haha!

SolMiester
24-03-2010, 08:36 AM
You know those cards in the benchies are actually optmized a bit better than the actual product. Nivida likes to do this **** haha

Anyways yes the 480 will beat the 5870, but still loses against the 5970. And the 5970 is A LOT cheaper (you can get 2x 5870s for around 1k in NZ).

Nvidia will prob make 2x cards of the 480 (485 or some sort). And ATI will reply with their 5890 cards haha!

Yes, pinch of salt.....and we are talking about single GPU performance, NOT dual, CF or SLI which come with there own little quirks!

Ollie
24-03-2010, 02:42 PM
Yes, pinch of salt.....and we are talking about single GPU performance, NOT dual, CF or SLI which come with there own little quirks!

Who cares if its a single card, apart frm the fact it produces less heat and requires less power. AS long as performs better and cheaper i am happy LOL! And nvidias goal for the 480 was to beat the 5870, they have done that but at the same time made it so pricy you could get 2x 5870 and beat the **** out of it. As i said ATI will reply with the 5890 and crown king of the single card whilst being cheaper than the 480 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. ATI is in the better situation, nvidia soon will "try" to crown the king of single card soon, but at that time enthusiist will already have the 5890 LOL and nvidia prices does not justify to upgrade LO)L

SolMiester
24-03-2010, 02:57 PM
Who cares if its a single card, apart frm the fact it produces less heat and requires less power. AS long as performs better and cheaper i am happy LOL! And nvidias goal for the 480 was to beat the 5870, they have done that but at the same time made it so pricy you could get 2x 5870 and beat the **** out of it. As i said ATI will reply with the 5890 and crown king of the single card whilst being cheaper than the 480 LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. ATI is in the better situation, nvidia soon will "try" to crown the king of single card soon, but at that time enthusiist will already have the 5890 LOL and nvidia prices does not justify to upgrade LO)L

Yeah, okay junior...! Did you check out tessellation figures?....480 beats 2x5xxx series. In case you don't realise, the 5870 is fast enough for most monitors, even 25x16, the key will be the newer coding for new games and that is where Fermi rapes cypress.

Battleneter2
24-03-2010, 03:26 PM
Yeah, okay junior...! Did you check out tessellation figures?....480 beats 2x5xxx series. In case you don't realise, the 5870 is fast enough for most monitors, even 25x16, the key will be the newer coding for new games and that is where Fermi rapes cypress.

Dont get to excited with Tessellation figures, most of the recent releases are DX9 based and when they have added DX10/11 support its a token gesture with minor improvements to water or smoke etc, maybe shadows (thanks consoles).

DX11 Tessellation performance "Might" be important for the next generation of GPU's (we hope).

SolMiester
24-03-2010, 03:42 PM
Dont get to excited with Tessellation figures, most of the recent releases are DX9 based and when they have added DX10/11 support its a token gesture with minor improvements to water or smoke etc, maybe shadows (thanks consoles).

DX11 Tessellation performance "Might" be important for the next generation of GPU's (we hope).

Well, my card wont be doing any of it and I wont be getting Fermi, maybe Fermi III.....so I doubt I will be seeing any of it. However, I dont think junior sees the difference between Ati GPU speed and nV IPC GPU's....ATi have fast GPU's but only due to their established smaller die process...

As for DX10\11, depends what engine they use doesnt it!

Ollie
24-03-2010, 05:39 PM
Well, my card wont be doing any of it and I wont be getting Fermi, maybe Fermi III.....so I doubt I will be seeing any of it. However, I dont think junior sees the difference between Ati GPU speed and nV IPC GPU's....ATi have fast GPU's but only due to their established smaller die process...

As for DX10\11, depends what engine they use doesnt it!

Dude not many games take advantage of the nivida archetichure, and even in those games ATI doesnt perform too bad against nvidia counterparts. ATI is actually smart to make the GPU faster (GDDR5 since the 4xxx series) and decrease the memory bit as it costs considerably less, whilst nivida was still using GDDR3. Now Nvidia is using GDDR3, and has DECREASED their bit bus from 512 cause it costs a fuk load.

Said that, nvidia was good back in the 7xxx and 8xxx series. But after the 8800GT they have become ****, they should just shut the fuk down like the other companies did

qazwsxokmijn
24-03-2010, 06:41 PM
And their damn renaming scheme....seriously, they need to get a creativity team.

SolMiester
24-03-2010, 09:25 PM
Dude not many games take advantage of the nivida archetichure, and even in those games ATI doesnt perform too bad against nvidia counterparts. ATI is actually smart to make the GPU faster (GDDR5 since the 4xxx series) and decrease the memory bit as it costs considerably less, whilst nivida was still using GDDR3. Now Nvidia is using GDDR3, and has DECREASED their bit bus from 512 cause it costs a fuk load.

Said that, nvidia was good back in the 7xxx and 8xxx series. But after the 8800GT they have become ****, they should just shut the fuk down like the other companies did

OMG!...was?!..seriousl!...Nv is NOT using GDDR3 mate with Fermi, the ATi had to use 5, however their memory bandwidth wasnt even been used, do a bit of research mate, you are starting to get embarrassing. If nv finished, Ati would start price gouging, like they are now with no competition...the price of the 5 series has gone up since release!
Bandwidth is calculated via memory speed and bandwidth, NOT GPU speed..GPU speed is limited along with pipeline, IPC is NOT!.
Dont argue with me, I have been involved with IT since before you were born!

Ollie
24-03-2010, 11:08 PM
OMG!...was?!..seriousl!...Nv is NOT using GDDR3 mate with Fermi, the ATi had to use 5, however their memory bandwidth wasnt even been used, do a bit of research mate, you are starting to get embarrassing. If nv finished, Ati would start price gouging, like they are now with no competition...the price of the 5 series has gone up since release!
Bandwidth is calculated via memory speed and bandwidth, NOT GPU speed..GPU speed is limited along with pipeline, IPC is NOT!.
Dont argue with me, I have been involved with IT since before you were born!

Was typo bro meant to say GDDR5 haha. Who cares about specs? When performance is all it matters hahahaha LOL

qazwsxokmijn
24-03-2010, 11:48 PM
What's with all the hahahahahas and capital lols?

Battleneter2
25-03-2010, 11:23 AM
Really arguing Fermi vs Cypress is kinda pointless until we see the across the board performance numbers, and then its a value for money thing.

ATI and NVidia are now at the stage where developers are spending very little time and money enhancing the PC version of cross platform games, and the developers know if they want the big money they have to make the game for console too. The requirement for further GPU generations are seriously threatened, we have all seen it coming, unfortunately it has arrived, maybe they need to have a joint strategy :P

hueybot3000
25-03-2010, 11:34 AM
ATI and NVidia are now at the stage where developers are spending very little time and money enhancing the PC version of cross platform games, and the developers know if they want the big money they have to make the game for console too. The requirement for further GPU generations are seriously threatened, we have all seen it coming, unfortunately it has arrived, maybe they need to have a joint strategy :P

Sad but true

SolMiester
25-03-2010, 12:18 PM
<snip>

ATI and NVidia are now at the stage where developers are spending very little time and money enhancing the PC version of cross platform games, and the developers know if they want the big money they have to make the game for console too. The requirement for further GPU generations are seriously threatened, we have all seen it coming, unfortunately it has arrived, maybe they need to have a joint strategy :P

Ummm, i'm not convince of this at all, consoles are very poor versions of PC games, i doubt seriously the amount of R&D that ATI & NV put into hardware and NV to game development that this will happen...perhaps you are getting the wrong games?

hueybot3000
25-03-2010, 01:09 PM
Majority of games coming out now are console ports, its not very often now we get to see a game on pc before xbox/ps3 has it for a month or so

SolMiester
25-03-2010, 02:01 PM
PC games are far more sophisticated than console games, and require more powerful graphics. Sure there are any number of console ports but to say they are majority console before pc games is naff! ATi & nVidia just wouldnt spend the R&D on hardware if that were the case!

hueybot3000
25-03-2010, 02:08 PM
Ok I'm only speaking from the games I play. I think the last game that I bought that didnt come out on console before was Crysis. After that, Grid, Dirt 2, Prototype, GTA4 and most recently Just Cause 2. Its out on xbox but im still waiting on the steam download.

I don't really mind that games are out on console, consoles can be good. But when I sit down at my computer and have to put up with ****ty console style controls, auto aim that cant be turned off etc. It's just frustrating. Even Dirt 2 was arcaded up a bit which I can only guess is for console players.

I just think computer games are being dumbed down to cater for consoles. Less coding and more system support obviously makes sense if your tryin to sell a game as many times over as possible but it'd be nice to see someone put some effort into making good computer games that consoles just cant handle

Thebananamonkey
25-03-2010, 03:14 PM
This thread has gotten out of hand...

GameJunkie
25-03-2010, 03:51 PM
This thread has gotten out of hand...

x2

Battleneter2
25-03-2010, 03:55 PM
Ummm, i'm not convince of this at all, consoles are very poor versions of PC games, i doubt seriously the amount of R&D that ATI & NV put into hardware and NV to game development that this will happen...perhaps you are getting the wrong games?

Borderlands, Mass Effect 2, Bad Company 2, Dragon age, Supreme Commander 2, Assassin Creed 2, Dirt 2, Just cause 2, Metro2033, Modern Warefare 2.

Notice many big names there?, pretty much "most" of the biggest PC releases in the last 6 months

All of the above are Co-developed console games off the top of my head in the last 6 months, I am sure ive missed a few. Most of these games are built around DX9 with the odd DX10/11 improvement hardly pushing the visuals. Metro 2033 being the only notable exception from "near" DX9 visuals.


"Your doubts" or not there is your proof most major developers are no longer prepared to make PC only games. This has been known for several years, its just that these tittles are hitting the shelves now.

Its not my "opinion" its whats happening.

And yes maybe a thread on the state of PC gaming is a better idea than this one lol

hueybot3000
25-03-2010, 05:08 PM
We could talk about it for hours though, wont make a difference to the quality of PC games lol Will more likely just make us all depressed and wonder why we spend $ on our rigs when we could just go get a $500 console and be done

SolMiester
25-03-2010, 06:00 PM
Borderlands, Mass Effect 2, Bad Company 2, Dragon age, Supreme Commander 2, Assassin Creed 2, Dirt 2, Just cause 2, Metro2033, Modern Warefare 2.

Notice many big names there?, pretty much "most" of the biggest PC releases in the last 6 months

All of the above are Co-developed console games off the top of my head in the last 6 months, I am sure ive missed a few. Most of these games are built around DX9 with the odd DX10/11 improvement hardly pushing the visuals. Metro 2033 being the only notable exception from "near" DX9 visuals.


"Your doubts" or not there is your proof most major developers are no longer prepared to make PC only games. This has been known for several years, its just that these tittles are hitting the shelves now.

Its not my "opinion" its whats happening.

And yes maybe a thread on the state of PC gaming is a better idea than this one lol

From the above it appears so, however as I already said.....hardly makes sense for new GPU hardware does it?

pctek
25-03-2010, 08:18 PM
Got this months Atomic mag today. There is an interesting article in it about upgrades.
To summarise:

Best Gaming Upgrades
2004 Generation AMD:
Athlon 64 x2 4200+
ASUS A8n-SLI Deluxe
512mb Crucial PC-3200
Geforce 8800GTS 320Mb

2006 Generation Intel
Core 2 Duo E6400
ASUS P5B Premium
Geforce 8800GTS 320Mb
1GB Crucial PC2-5200


HD5770
In the AMD rig the minimum frame rates barely budged both before and after the upgrade.

If you're running an even more geriatric system with a slow CPU and little memory, it will provide practically no benefit.

HD5870
You might think that planting one of the better graphics cards on the market will reward you with some impressive frame rates in all the games on test, however this isn't the case.

This clearly illustrates that components elsewhere in the system are preventing the graphics card from unleashing it's full potential.

AMD
If you are running an older Socket 939 your choices are limited. You are looking at a CPU, motherboard and memory the best part of a complete rebuild.

Core 2 Quad Q9550
If you perform a lot of video encoding and image editing, then this upgrade would see you right.

Combing Memory and Graphics card upgrade

Upgrading to a HD5770 saw little or no performance increase in Crysis. Throw in some extra memory though and suddenly the graphics card fulfills more of it's potential.

A small amount of memory plus an older graphics card hinders your graphics card from operating at it's full potential.

Conclusion

No single upgrade will turn an old, stuttering PC into a powerhouse of performance. If you have been running a rig for 4 years or more, a complete rebuild is justified.
--------------

Yep, I agree with that. You can upgrade bits, and I still like to have a high end GPU with an affordable CPU but it's true. There comes a time when you bottleneck the system just changing bits here and there.


My son is in the old AMD PC situation and although he got an OK ish GPU upgrade a while ago and does have more than 512mB, it's past time for him to get a Core i5 system.

pctek
25-03-2010, 08:29 PM
. Metro 2033 being the only notable exception from "near" DX9 visuals.


there is your proof most major developers are no longer prepared to make PC only games.

Theres a bit in the mag about that too.
It says:
PC gamers are the most serious pirates around.
Sales-to-piracy ratio is much better than on the PC where direct disc access tools are freely available.

Upcoming titles from Ubisoft will feature a new DRM system.

This will require a constantly active Internet connection, should your connection drop for any reason the game will pause and wait for reconnection.
It also supports unlimited installs and stores your save games in the cloud, things many gamers have been looking for (really?), but probably not with such an onerous cost to play.
It is undeniable that game experience on a pirated version of these games will be smoother and less prone to misfortune, (for sure) but if piracy has reached a threshold where more illegal copies are doing the rounds than will ever be sold, this approach may be all that is left before the platform is abandoned by major publishers.


Which will suck. PC gaming, where it is written for PCs, and not ported beats the pants of consoles. Sigh......I think it's inevitable that we will end up with crap game boxes instead.

Well, the endless upgrade cost will be reduced, but so will my enjoyment too.

Oh and irrelevant to everything - I'm buying Metro 2033........

Battleneter2
26-03-2010, 10:45 AM
Well that Atomic mag article is on the right track. Not sure what games they tested, they probably didnt click many are the recent co-console games.

They basically reached the right conclusion but didn't identify what exactly was causing the bottleneck with the faster GPU's. We know it is processor power. You could in theory still rip out that C2D and put in a C2Q and they would see gains in those "no improvement new tittles. That 939 rig is a right off basically. There quad summary is a little outdated and almost contradictory, however decent mainstream media article :P



Yea I 100% agree the Ubisoft DRM is appalling and thankfully got slammed in a fair few reviews. PC gamers need to boycott these tittles imo.

Its not all bad though, I enjoy/enjoyed Dragon age, mass effect 2, Bad company 2, all of which are co-developed console.

pctek
26-03-2010, 01:16 PM
Well that Atomic mag article is on the right track. Not sure what games they tested, they probably didnt click many are the recent co-console games.

They basically reached the right conclusion but didn't identify what exactly was causing the bottleneck with the faster GPU's.
.

Of course they know whats a port and what isn't.

And they're not dumb, they do extensive testing and it's gaming related, not office - internet boxes.
That's not the whole article, you read the mag for all the details. It was a summary.

Battleneter2
26-03-2010, 03:28 PM
Of course they know whats a port and what isn't.

And they're not dumb, they do extensive testing and it's gaming related, not office - internet boxes.
That's not the whole article, you read the mag for all the details. It was a summary.

well they are a little dumb, there quad core summary statement deserves a bit of a flame.

But sure I appreciate you are just summarising and it may be a tad out of context.

Sweep
27-03-2010, 05:00 PM
I just read this lot:-

http://www.techspot.com/review/263-nvidia-geforce-gtx-480/

qazwsxokmijn
27-03-2010, 06:39 PM
Well now, the Fermi is out. :D

The GTX 480 sure is a monster, but not as much as nVidia claimed it to be. Still, I'm just waiting a few months until Fermi production cranks up and second hand 5800 cards start flooding GP and trademe. Too bad for nVidia, they won't have my money. Last nVidia card I had was an 8800GT.

Battleneter2
27-03-2010, 06:57 PM
yea list of review sites here


http://www.elitebastards.com/

SolMiester
28-03-2010, 09:27 AM
I think driver release will improve performance, however the card is a power hog with heat to go with it...Fermi II will be the card to get..

Least they have their crown back.....where it belonged.IMO

Trev
28-03-2010, 09:30 AM
Review here also. (http://www.guru3d.com/)
:)

Ollie
28-03-2010, 10:00 AM
Br4 look at the benchies. the 470 and 480 have massive power consumption!

Eevn the 470 uses more than a single 5870 LOL and the 5870 is much better

You'd think based on the 40nm their power consumption would be as low as ati if not lower.

SolMiester
28-03-2010, 10:35 AM
Br4 look at the benchies. the 470 and 480 have massive power consumption!

Eevn the 470 uses more than a single 5870 LOL and the 5870 is much better

You'd think based on the 40nm their power consumption would be as low as ati if not lower.

You need to re-read the benchies, the 470 competes with the 5870 in alot of games and beats it in several...the power consumption is due to the bigger die size, so it was never going to be the same.

The full 512 shader model isnt released yet and driver releases will only improve performance.
However, I will probably never have a 30 inch LCD so would never need such a powerful card.

Edit - Metro 2033, with new engine, the 5xxx are murdered!

Driftwood
28-03-2010, 10:35 AM
This could be a never ending thread.

Ollie
28-03-2010, 12:51 PM
You need to re-read the benchies, the 470 competes with the 5870 in alot of games and beats it in several...the power consumption is due to the bigger die size, so it was never going to be the same.

The full 512 shader model isnt released yet and driver releases will only improve performance.
However, I will probably never have a 30 inch LCD so would never need such a powerful card.

Edit - Metro 2033, with new engine, the 5xxx are murdered!

They reduced to 320b lol to reduce the production cost, but its already $700 for the 470, and $1000NZD for the 480? I can't imagine the price of the 512mb model lol.

I'm not sure what benchies you are looking at, but the GTX 480 SLI gets whooped by a single 5970 in most benchies. The 5970 is essentially 2 lwoer clocked 5870. So i would think 2x 5870 rapes the GTX 480.

The 470 doesn't beat the 5870 at all. And Nvidias intent was not to beat it. Its about on par with the 5850, which is only $450-500NZD while the 470 is $700. The 5870 is also around $100 cheaper than the 470 and beats the crap out of it. Your benchies your looking at are pretty questionable tbh.

And mehhh on the metro 2033 game tbh, its favoured by the nvidia architecture, and prob have extreme tesstelation support. lol

Battleneter2
28-03-2010, 01:26 PM
Well without cherry picking reviews (cause we could do that all week :P ), looks like the 480 is about 15% than the 5870.

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1506377

Most of the leaked benches and predictions were right on the money for once.


And agree with above the 470 is most definitely slower the the 5870 accept in a few instances. The 470 is fractionally faster than the 5850 but that will not translate into a better gaming experience for the most part.

SolMiester
28-03-2010, 01:37 PM
They reduced to 320b lol to reduce the production cost, but its already $700 for the 470, and $1000NZD for the 480? I can't imagine the price of the 512mb model lol.

I'm not sure what benchies you are looking at, but the GTX 480 SLI gets whooped by a single 5970 in most benchies. The 5970 is essentially 2 lwoer clocked 5870. So i would think 2x 5870 rapes the GTX 480.

The 470 doesn't beat the 5870 at all. And Nvidias intent was not to beat it. Its about on par with the 5850, which is only $450-500NZD while the 470 is $700. The 5870 is also around $100 cheaper than the 470 and beats the crap out of it. Your benchies your looking at are pretty questionable tbh.

And mehhh on the metro 2033 game tbh, its favoured by the nvidia architecture, and prob have extreme tesstelation support. lol

Dont know what you are talking about re: production costs
as for benchies, looks to me like the 470 competes very well against the 5870..

Still need convincing?

SolMiester
28-03-2010, 01:41 PM
oh, missed this one...

You cant say that the 470 doesnt compare with the 5870, and driver updates will make it better....You will have to get over ATi losing the crown, thats not to say they dont have a great GPU for the money.

Battleneter2
28-03-2010, 04:03 PM
SolMiester there is not a "huge" difference between a 470 and a 480, with the ATi 5870 in between the performance of those two cards as largely predicted.

You can say the 470 is competitive against the 5870 sure, but you can equally argue the 5870 is competitive against the 480 being only around 15% slower


http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24000&page=9

Average and min frame rate the most important
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24000&page=10

Again
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews.php?reviewid=950&pageid=5

SolMiester
28-03-2010, 10:18 PM
SolMiester there is not a "huge" difference between a 470 and a 480, with the ATi 5870 in between the performance of those two cards as largely predicted.

You can say the 470 is competitive against the 5870 sure, but you can equally argue the 5870 is competitive against the 480 being only around 15% slower


http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24000&page=9

Average and min frame rate the most important
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=24000&page=10

Again
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews.php?reviewid=950&pageid=5

yeah, some shaders and clocks, also memory bus...i dont think their has ever been a card that really dominates the other from a previous generation with the exception of perhaps the G80.....there are some big differences though where the 4x0 shine, as I would of thought so....the nv chip is a V8 to the turbo ricer of the ATi in a way...lol.

However, I was getting tired of ollie persistent stance of rubbishing the card...
It maybe hot, and power hungry, but it is the fastest, will get faster...

Ollie
29-03-2010, 10:29 AM
Dude nivida cards are crap as hell. They just make up for it with physx. That said they just pay the game publisher to make physx better.

An example is mirrors edge. Nvidia paid the game publisher to add a couple of flags here and there when physx is enabled. now really, how can you think that ati cards can't run that little eye-candy things ? if the publisher wanted to, he could have put those flags and other things to be there for everyone, not just for nvidia cards users.

SolMiester
29-03-2010, 12:29 PM
Dude nivida cards are crap as hell. They just make up for it with physx. That said they just pay the game publisher to make physx better.

An example is mirrors edge. Nvidia paid the game publisher to add a couple of flags here and there when physx is enabled. now really, how can you think that ati cards can't run that little eye-candy things ? if the publisher wanted to, he could have put those flags and other things to be there for everyone, not just for nvidia cards users.

Ollie, I cant be bother arguing with someone who's been gaming for 5 minutes. If you feel the need to trash NV because you have an ATi card, fine!

pctek
29-03-2010, 12:58 PM
Dude nivida cards are crap as hell.


Thats like the AMD versus INtel argument.
Competition is good. Having a choice is good.
I have no preference between Nvidia or ATI, I just want whoever has the best performing card at the time I make my purchase.

Sweep
29-03-2010, 01:09 PM
I like bigger and better cards coming out too. It means some prices get down to my level.

Ollie
29-03-2010, 02:33 PM
Ollie, I cant be bother arguing with someone who's been gaming for 5 minutes. If you feel the need to trash NV because you have an ATi card, fine!

Ive been gaming for about 9 years mate. my first card was nivida. i have always liked them before the new 9xxx cards

SolMiester
29-03-2010, 02:44 PM
Ive been gaming for about 9 years mate. my first card was nivida. i have always liked them before the new 9xxx cards

Really, 9 years?, amazing how you can now sum up the leading graphic manufacturer's products as crap?..meh!

Metla
29-03-2010, 02:56 PM
ATI and nVidia cards are Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eet.

Ollie
29-03-2010, 03:02 PM
Really, 9 years?, amazing how you can now sum up the leading graphic manufacturer's products as crap?..meh!

Yes the leading graphic manu only just got dx 10.1 and tessellation support in their 3xx cards. Ati got them since the 4xxx cards. Not to mention the delay in the dx 11 cards. And rebranding cards 2 or 4 times also works i guess.

And theyre only leading cause the were the first to re open the graphics industry. Ati followed after

And some of the games are "nvidia the way its meant to be played" made everyone like "OMG WE HAVE NVIDIA WE GOODDDDDDDDDD WERE SO COOL NIVIDA IS THE BEST" just like all the apple products. The logo should be edited to "nvidia the way its meant to be renamed" tbh

Battleneter2
01-04-2010, 12:14 PM
sorry couldn't help myself :P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If0Bkfnifi4