9800GT and 9800GTX+ released: Should I still go for ATI4 4850???

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
D

darth_haggis

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2008
33
1
18,535
Looks like the 9800gt is nothing but a rebranded 8800gt. So its old tech but with a new name !! The 9800gtx+ is a little more powerful than the 8800/9800gt, maybe 10-15%. Out of those three cards I would go for the 4850.
 
okey dokey thanks!
my system will look something like this:
e8400 (will OC to 3.6)
asus p5k se
2gb corsair 800mhz
ati 4850
windows xp 😛
 
With the price of DDR2 being so cheap, I would try to go for 4Gbs (2x2Gbs) as well. Although Windows XP may not need it, I think eventually within the next 2 years you will probably upgrade to Vista, or whatever is next.
 
well im absolutely skint and 2gb is the only possibility at the moment.

bit noobish of me but is it possible to have 4x1gb sticks?
and do all 4 have to be same brand?
i may upgrade to 4gb novemberish when i get some birthday money.
 
I have 4 x 1 gig sticks, so yes. But I would recommend going with 2 x 2's.
This would allow you to upgrade to 8 IF You go 64 bit down stream.

Might be easier to get working if all 4 are the same (ie 2 matched pairs).
I had minor problem getting 4 to work, had to bump up FSB voltage and (g)mch by 0.1 V to get stable.
 
ok. im not a heavy multi-tasker and wont be alt+tabbing out of games much so 8gb isnt really necessary for me.

well iv ordered 2x1gb sticks. so looks like i may have to do your voltage tweak if/when i get 4gb and vista 64.

anyways thanks everyone for the help!
 
In a lot of tests, the 9800GTX+ is on par or better then the HD4850. It also has a better cooler, and as most people will agree, NVIDIA's brands tend to be better. However, the HD4850 has better technology, and will likely perform better in the future. With the hotfix drivers, even the HD 4850 with the single-slot cooler should stay within fairly decent temperatures. The HD4850 is also cheaper in most cases. I would go with the HD4850 just because it is more future proof, and is cheaper. Don't expect to get much overclocking out of it in comparison to the 9800GTX+, though.
 
If you can afford £140, get a 4870.

Do not get a 4850 unless you are prepared to invest in and install a new cooling solution for it. The native cooling solution is good for use only in a fridge, and then only on it's own.
 


or you could just turn up the fan speed
 
Even though I used to only like Nvidia, The 4850 brings much better results than the 9800 GTX+ (in most cases). It also uses up less power and costs alot less money. If I were you, I'd take the 4850 or even the 4870 if you have the money.
 



quite, the heat doesn't just evaporate into thin air - it has to go somewhere.

I have a 4850 in my Phenom box, and while it is a nice card - it has incredible heat production. Stable? Absolutely. But it does run hot and that could be a concern if you wanted to use 2.

Bear in mind HIS is launching an ICE-Q 4850 - which will use the same cooler as the 4870 (at least, it looks the same) - I would recommend the HIS ICE-Q 4850 if you can get it and want a 4850 with the option of stable crossfire later.
 
I'd definitely go for the 9800GTX+.

The reason is you get more bang for your buck:
I am not talking only about gfx performance. When you buy the 9800 you also get the added Physx (and CUDA) support. With all the Physx games that will come out, you will get better perf and experience from the nvidia card.

This alone is worth more than the 48x0.
 


I'm not sure just how much real value having PhysX acceleration on the GPU is going to bring. Keep in mind that when playing a game the GPU is going to be highly loaded just rendering the graphics and adding a physics processing thread in there as well is likely going to slow down the rendering or just run the physics really slow. I suspect that unless you are playing a game that your card can max out easily (i.e an older game) having the physics running on the GPU instead of the CPU is not going to make a noticeable difference. In fact, if the physics thread is taking GPU resources away from rendering it could potentially decrease game performance instead of increasing it.
 
I agree that it takes away from the gfx perf but it is all about balance. UT3 with physx perf is absolutely awesome and it looks amazing. Worst case scenario you get SLI with one card doing the physx/gfx and the other pure gfx.

In both cases it is better than CPU physics which slow down the computer even more.

Having the CUDA support is an added benefit and I am for one looking to use the badaboom video transcoder a lot.

I truly believe that the only reason 4870 managed to stay close to the 280 and as good as the 260 is because the nvidia cards have the added support for physx and CUDA.

Look at it this way: for the same price of the 4870 you can get a 260 AND a physx card :)
 
Something that really annoys me is when people talk about how hot a video card will make your case. Let's take a 4850, for example, which many people know can run in the 80 C range. Just because the TEMPERATURE is high doesn't mean that it's putting out more HEAT than another card running at 40 C. If you put a nice cooler on the 4850 (also single slot), and the card begins to run at 50 C, your case isn't going to be cooler... The card is still dissipating the same amount of heat, it just runs cooler in the latter case since heat is taken away faster by the better cooler. Same deal if you increase the fan speed on the 4850s stock cooler, the temps will go down and heat production will stay the same.
 



The 4850 has a cooler design which vents hot air inside of the system case, that does quite inherently make it raise the ambient temperature of your system case - that is the only point that I, or anyone has made, and its perfectly valid and honest. Don't try to sugarcoat the fact that this card DOES produce a great deal of heat and has a mediocre stock cooling method - I own this card and its great, but I wouldn't run it in crossfire on stock cooling.
 


Keep in mind that ATI also has a GPU transcoder as well. Furthermore, ATI's transcoder is available now for free download off of ATI's website while Badaboom is still not available and when it is you will have to pay to download it.
 
Ah, I remember the days when a card being a two-slot one was counted against it, rather than in its favor... Then again, I suppose that the 4850, at some 110w TDP, is above the mark where they'd started using two-slot coolers; if memory serves, the X800XT I have is some 89w, and the X850XT PE, which is pretty close to that, has a two-slow cooler to blow air out of the case.
could someone explain it to me. does the OP mean that even in games that have no physx support they someone lose performance because of it?
Click to expand...
Well, as we've seen in some benchmarks before, the addition of the PhysX card reduces the computer's overall framerate in that game as opposed to otherwise identical machines that lack said physics card... :pt1cable:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom