Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Do I really need a HD4870x2 Video Card
SomeOldBloke
Member UncommonPosts: 2,167
in Hardware
I'm just wondering if it will be overkill and a HD4870 will do the job fine... I'm putting together a wish list for a new system, see link... too much?
Comments
How big is your monitor?
--------------------------------
Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
It's a wish list, why would it matter. What are you trying to figure out and for what game? If it's just a look at my wish list type of thread then whatever floats your boat I guess.
Who let you in the VIP section?
Current Monitor is 20" but at some point I'll probably get a 26"... although it's currently a wish list, it's contents will be purchased next motnh for a new build.
The HD4870x2 is the only video card out now that can support every single game at maximum settings and resolution with a 30" monitor at a playable frame rate. However, the upcoming HD4870 1GB edition should be enough to play any game with a 26" monitor since the main deficiency with the HD4870 in games it can't play at a playable framerate is the lack of memory.
I think you're right... the HD4870x2 is overkill for my monitor so I'll just get the HD4870 1Gb when it's released, I can always slap another one in later should I need more power.
Thanks all for your help.
26inch LCD monitor is same as the 24inch which is 1920x1200. The 4870CF isnt starved for memory at that resolution and every review site is showing the 4870x2 with 1gb for each gpu on the pcb and the 4870 512mb Crossfire are even at 1920x1200. Even 2560x1600 without AA the 512 does fine because ATI is more efficient than nvidia with swapping once full on the vram without noticeable slowdowns.
It is 2560x1600 with AA that the 512 slows way down. 1920x1600 with high AA the 4870 512mb one dosent flicker a inch of pain.
Get a seagate drive with 32mb cache. Some of them are just as fast as raptors. A 3870 would be ok but could be pushing it if you past a 26 inch monitor. Try to get a sapphire card if possible with vapor x cooling. I would get an LG monitor one of the newer 10,000:1 contrast ratio models.
26inch LCD monitor is same as the 24inch which is 1920x1200. The 4870CF isnt starved for memory at that resolution and every review site is showing the 4870x2 with 1gb for each gpu on the pcb and the 4870 512mb Crossfire are even at 1920x1200. Even 2560x1600 without AA the 512 does fine because ATI is more efficient than nvidia with swapping once full on the vram without noticeable slowdowns.
It is 2560x1600 with AA that the 512 slows way down. 1920x1600 with high AA the 4870 512mb one dosent flicker a inch of pain.
Oops you are right, just went through the reviews and double checked. Although thier is substantiation it makes an effect since in some benchmarks the HD4870X2 shows more then a 100% performance increase over the HD4870.
One the bigger problems with AMD right now is that game companies are not support the better architecture the HD video cards offer. Some of this is doing tried and true as well as getting better support. However, some of it malacious like in the case of Assassins Creed and Unreal Tournament 3 where patches went out of thier way to make the game perform worse on ATI cards. This is evident with UT3 since games based on its engine run drastically better on ATI machines(BioShock and The GRID), but after a patch to UT3 a few months into the game; suddenly all ATI machines had a drop in performance.
26inch LCD monitor is same as the 24inch
Oops you are right, just went through the reviews and double checked. Although thier is substantiation it makes an effect since in some benchmarks the HD4870X2 shows more then a 100% performance increase over the HD4870.
One the bigger problems with AMD right now is that game companies are not support the better architecture the HD video cards offer. Some of this is doing tried and true as well as getting better support. However, some of it malacious like in the case of Assassins Creed and Unreal Tournament 3 where patches went out of thier way to make the game perform worse on ATI cards. This is evident with UT3 since games based on its engine run drastically better on ATI machines(BioShock and The GRID), but after a patch to UT3 a few months into the game; suddenly all ATI machines had a drop in performance.
That's interesting, so if I want to play games based on the Unreal 3 engine I should stick with NVidia?
Noes, go ATI. All though it pains me to say, the 4870 is like what the 9800 Pro did back in em days and 8800GT did for Nvidia. I dont regret swaping my Evga 8800 for my new ATI card.
Nvidia is going to hit rock-bottom, heh. I bought myself an 4850 512 MiB, and can play lotro at Ultra High quality (16x AF, not sure about AA, 4x or 8x I think) with a framerate of 30-40. Knowing that the 4870 has GDDR5, it should be able to play any MMO and most of the other games out without any problems.
On a side note, the 4850 doesn't get all that hot, I suppose it's mainly a Nvidia fanboi rumour. It's GPU is at 80°C when doing nothing, 89°C at full load. That's not nearly enough to overheat anything.
You know it, the best way to realize your dreams is waking up and start moving, never lose hope and always keep up.
26inch LCD monitor is same as the 24inch which is 1920x1200. The 4870CF isnt starved for memory at that resolution and every review site is showing the 4870x2 with 1gb for each gpu on the pcb and the 4870 512mb Crossfire are even at 1920x1200. Even 2560x1600 without AA the 512 does fine because ATI is more efficient than nvidia with swapping once full on the vram without noticeable slowdowns.
It is 2560x1600 with AA that the 512 slows way down. 1920x1600 with high AA the 4870 512mb one dosent flicker a inch of pain.
Oops you are right, just went through the reviews and double checked. Although thier is substantiation it makes an effect since in some benchmarks the HD4870X2 shows more then a 100% performance increase over the HD4870.
One the bigger problems with AMD right now is that game companies are not support the better architecture the HD video cards offer. Some of this is doing tried and true as well as getting better support. However, some of it malacious like in the case of Assassins Creed and Unreal Tournament 3 where patches went out of thier way to make the game perform worse on ATI cards. This is evident with UT3 since games based on its engine run drastically better on ATI machines(BioShock and The GRID), but after a patch to UT3 a few months into the game; suddenly all ATI machines had a drop in performance.
Hmm... Not really, not sure if it was Assassin's Creed (certainly was Bioshock too) a simple 4850 Crossfire outperformed the 280 GTX, a single outperformed the 260 GTX. But honestly UT3 is a crappy game engine, if I remember correctly, Fury was made with that, we all know how that turned out. If you don't, expect you'd need a 4870 Crossfire to play it at high detail without having an awful performance.
Maps loaded for over a minute, etc. And that was not only on ATI cards! Nvidia cards broke their teeth on it too. Thank they tried to fix that, still has a few memory leaks though.
Next, ATI's framerate is way more stable. Even if the max FPS is lower, the min. FPS is usually higher (on benchmarks).
And finally, don't forget it's normal Assassin's Creed performs slightly worse. It uses DX 10.1, and ATI is the only company actually making cards using that. While it's pretty impressive, improved lighting (makes DX 10.0's lighting look like a joke honestly), edge-detect anti-aliasing (only for crossfire systems I think), and a few more goodies.
You know it, the best way to realize your dreams is waking up and start moving, never lose hope and always keep up.
Ubisoft released a patch that removed the DirectX 10.1 in Assassins Creed so unless you're playing an unpatched version your not getting the full quality.
I have an 8800 GTX and although im derailing here since the OP wants a ATI, i recently built my rig and brought the 8800 GTX knowing its 2 years old, and i dont regret it, its alot better than the 3870's (only avaialble a couple of months back) and ATI drivers are'nt upto scratch as the Nvidia ones are.
UT3 Uses the unreal engine which is used in many games and is also used in Aion (IIRC basing it on Lineage II's engine which is also unreal and developed by the same company, NCSOFT) Doom 3 used the unreal engine, it truely is a faultless engine.
On topic, however i did purchase a motherboard that supported crossfire simply because ATI are putting out great cards and low prices, and until the drivers for ATI cards are developed enough at the moment (GTX 280/4870 are overkill) one Nvidia card > 2 ATI's (8 Series > 2x3800 Series)
26inch LCD monitor is same as the 24inch which is 1920x1200. The 4870CF isnt starved for memory at that resolution and every review site is showing the 4870x2 with 1gb for each gpu on the pcb and the 4870 512mb Crossfire are even at 1920x1200. Even 2560x1600 without AA the 512 does fine because ATI is more efficient than nvidia with swapping once full on the vram without noticeable slowdowns.
It is 2560x1600 with AA that the 512 slows way down. 1920x1600 with high AA the 4870 512mb one dosent flicker a inch of pain.
Oops you are right, just went through the reviews and double checked. Although thier is substantiation it makes an effect since in some benchmarks the HD4870X2 shows more then a 100% performance increase over the HD4870.
One the bigger problems with AMD right now is that game companies are not support the better architecture the HD video cards offer. Some of this is doing tried and true as well as getting better support. However, some of it malacious like in the case of Assassins Creed and Unreal Tournament 3 where patches went out of thier way to make the game perform worse on ATI cards. This is evident with UT3 since games based on its engine run drastically better on ATI machines(BioShock and The GRID), but after a patch to UT3 a few months into the game; suddenly all ATI machines had a drop in performance.
Well we are both right in many ways. For the person who plays 1920x1200 and dosent upgrade for a few years the 4807x2 is a better way to go. For me, at 1920x1200, who upgrades and resells their old card when a big jump happens, 4870 512 CF is good for me.
I wouldnt tell someone who has 500-600 to spend not to go for the 4870X2 if they are asking unless they are below 1920x1200 because if they knew their upgrade timeframe they wouldnt need to ask which one to get.
One big issue with alot of the review sites is that, like anandtech's disapointing one, they copy and pasted their 4870, 4870 CF, 260gtx, and 280gtx results from earlier reviews. Only the 280gtx SLI and 4870X2 were on latest drivers since the 4870x2 ships with 8.8 Beta on the disc. I think tech report or another did all of the 48xx cards with 8.8b and gave a better comparison.
I am also familiar with the "slips some money from nvidia and..." issue with the game patches. Thankfully ATI is doing really well in their WHQL driver releases and overall I am extremly happy with my choice. Crossfire works in just about every game I have and I get 100% scaling in more than I expected. Devil May Cry 4 showed 100% scaling over a single 4870 with 8xAA w/ Edge detect, making it 24xCFAA against the Crossfire.
But your right that the HD4870x2 is right now the only single slot setup that can max the most games at the 2560x1600 resolution and below out of all out there currently. When we get into triple SLI and Quad Crossfire the 4870x2 Quad-fire also decimates. Even in crysis the 4870x2 Quad-fire beats the 280GTX Tri-SLI with a cheaper price. Radical things indeed. Of course at that high of a resolution you've spent 1500usd on a monitor and are already out of the ballpark of most pc gamers. Alot of segments of pc gamers out there and the 4870x2 nor 4870CF is for everyone. I see alot of wasted GPU power vs smaller resolution lately its almost sad.