GTX470 or HD6870?

[Guest]

Hello,
I'm planning on buying a new PC and I just can't decide which card to pick, the HD6870 or the GTX470.
I have a Dell 2007WFP monitor (1680X1050), and from what I understand from the benchmarks, the 6870 is better, especially with this resolution.
However, I've also come across a lot of people saying that the GTX470 is better.
The price is not the issue by the way, he GTX470 costs only $20 more than the 6870.

Thanks!

 

[ahthurungnone]

Benchmark Reviews shows that the GTX470 is still faster than the HD 6870. And if you're not using an AMD cpu and northbridge mobo, you're better off with a GTX470. Developers always consider Nvidia when creating games, so I'd stick with the 470 simply for compatibility reasons.

 

[deweycd]

GTX470 due to the increased speed. Only slightly better but still a difference.

 

[17seconds]

Power Consumption
6870: 295 watts
470: 411 watts

Temps
6870: 68c
470 88c

Noise
6870: 41dB
470: 46dB

CODMW2
6870: 117 fps
470: 112 fps

Battlefield BC2
6870: 46 fps
470: 44 fps

Dirt2
6870: 70 fps
470: 62 fps

Far Cry2
6870: 69 fps
470: 71 fps

Metro 2033
6870: 22 fps
470: 21 fps

Anno 1404
6870: 66 fps
470: 58 fps

Crysis WH
6870: 44 fps
470: 42 fps

3D Mark Vantage
6870: P17387
470: P16313

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6850-6870-review/

 

[Guest]

Power Consumption
6870: 295 watts
470: 411 watts

Temps
6870: 68c
470 88c

Noise
6870: 41dB
470: 46dB

CODMW2
6870: 117 fps
470: 112 fps

Battlefield BC2
6870: 46 fps
470: 44 fps

Dirt2
6870: 70 fps
470: 62 fps

Far Cry2
6870: 69 fps
470: 71 fps

Metro 2033
6870: 22 fps
470: 21 fps

Anno 1404
6870: 66 fps
470: 58 fps

Crysis WH
6870: 44 fps
470: 42 fps

3D Mark Vantage
6870: P17387
470: P16313

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6850-6870-review/

Based on this, it appears that the 6870 is much better than the GTX470.
Why does everybody keep saying the GTX470 is better?

 

[17seconds]

Two different reviews yield two different results. If you play games that feature PhysX, the choice should be GTX470.

Power Consumption
6870: 354 watts
470: 382 watts

Temps
6870: 83c
470 85c

1680x1050
CODMW2
6870: 90 fps
470: 99 fps

Just Cause 2
6870: 55 fps
470: 57 fps

Res. Evil 5
6870: 110 fps
470: 118 fps

Far Cry2
6870: 94 fps
470: 101 fps

Metro 2033
6870: 35 fps
470: 37 fps

Batman Arkham Asylum
6870: 116 fps
470: 149 fps

Crysis WH
6870: 47 fps
470: 50 fps

3D Mark Vantage
6870: P17242
470: P16844

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/amd_6800series/

 

[ares1214]

I say neither. The 6850 overclocks to or past the 6870, as the 6870 doesnt OC much. The 470 is far less efficient than a 460. So IMO, the real debate is the 6850 vs 460. Between those 2 Id give the narrow win to the 6850, due to only needing 1 6 pin, new so performance will get better, yet already has slightly better performance, and its cheaper.

 

[deweycd]

Pick the card that has the highest FPS for the games you play.

 

[17seconds]

Here's a nice chart for you from Techpowerup.com

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/29.html

 

[ares1214]

Here's a nice chart for you from Techpowerup.com
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/images/perfrel_1680.gif
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/29.html

IMO, 4% doesnt say much for a lot more heat, more energy, and a higher price, but thats just me. All the same, i recommend a 6850 and OC it.

 

[Guest]

Here's a nice chart for you from Techpowerup.com
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/images/perfrel_1680.gif
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6870/29.html

So, what would you do?
I'm thinking GTX470 because of the physx, but on the other hand (allegedly), the GTX470's power consumption and temperature is significantly higher.

 

[ares1214]

So, what would you do?
I'm thinking GTX470 because of the physx, but on the other hand (allegedly), the GTX470's power consumption and temperature is significantly higher.

Physx TBH really isnt that useful. Its not used in many games at all, the games it is used in, most dont have much of it, and it is only really used in 2 year old games from the "TWIMTBP" era. Most games now are going to be coming with AMD coding unless Nvidia payed specifically for it, IE Hawx 2 and Crysis 2. One feature Nvidia does have you should be more concerned with is CUDA. If you dont use CUDA, than neither company has a standout feature than makes one better than the other. AMD has APP, Eyefinity, MLAA, amongst other things, and given time might develope their own CUDA. But like i said, if you want Nvidia, get the 460. Otherwise, get the 6850, which is the better card IMO.

 

[Guest]

Physx TBH really isnt that useful. Its not used in many games at all, the games it is used in, most dont have much of it, and it is only really used in 2 year old games from the "TWIMTBP" era. Most games now are going to be coming with AMD coding unless Nvidia payed specifically for it, IE Hawx 2 and Crysis 2. One feature Nvidia does have you should be more concerned with is CUDA. If you dont use CUDA, than neither company has a standout feature than makes one better than the other. AMD has APP, Eyefinity, MLAA, amongst other things, and given time might develope their own CUDA. But like i said, if you want Nvidia, get the 460. Otherwise, get the 6850, which is the better card IMO.

No, I don't use CUDA (at least not that I'm aware of lol).
I don't really get it, why would I want to get the 6850 instead of the 6870?
Is it really possible to oc it to the exact performance level as the 6870?

 

[17seconds]

So, what would you do?
I'm thinking GTX470 because of the physx, but on the other hand (allegedly), the GTX470's power consumption and temperature is significantly higher.

When overclocking one of the slower cards to meet the performance of a stock GTX470, power consumption differences even out dramatically. At stock speeds, the 470 will cost you about $20 more per year, compared to a 6870 with heavy gaming (5 days a week, 4 hours per day).

Heat differences are a more complex issue. The stock cooler on a reference GTX470 vents heat outside the case, so there is minimal impact on overall system temperatures. However, several companies offer very good custom heatsinks, including the MSI Twin Frozr, Gigabyte Superoverclock, Zotac AMP, etc.; which keep the card much cooler and quieter, but vent heat inside the case. Generally this is not an issue, and the temp of the actual GPU can be 10 -20c cooler. In general, since the GTX470 has been out longer, there are more custom options available than the just released 6870. Many reviews, in fact, suggest that the 6870 would really benefit from custom cooling.

As far as PhysX goes, take it from someone who actually plays games that feature PhysX (Unreal Tournament III, Metro 2033, Dragon Age: Origins, Mass Effect 2); it's a blast to see debris and body parts go flying when you frag someone!

 

[ares1214]

No, I don't use CUDA (at least not that I'm aware of lol).
I don't really get it, why would I want to get the 6850 instead of the 6870?
Is it really possible to oc it to the exact performance level as the 6870?

Ok, think of it like this. The 6870 can OC to about 1000 MHz tops. The 6850 can too, maybe a tiny bit higher. The shader deficiency is negligible, and yes, they will both perform about the same, yet the 6850 will use less power, cost less, and maybe run cooler depending on the card.

 

[ares1214]

When overclocking one of the slower cards to meet the performance of a stock GTX470, power consumption differences even out dramatically. At stock speeds, the 470 will cost you about $20 more per year, compared to a 6870 with heavy gaming (5 days a week, 4 hours per day).

Heat differences are a more complex issue. The stock cooler on a reference GTX470 vents heat outside the case, so there is minimal impact on overall system temperatures. However, several companies offer very good custom heatsinks, including the MSI Twin Frozr, Gigabyte Superoverclock, Zotac AMP, etc.; which keep the card much cooler and quieter, but vent heat inside the case. Generally this is not an issue, and the temp of the actual GPU can be 10 -20c cooler. In general, since the GTX470 has been out longer, there are more custom options available than the just released 6870. Many reviews, in fact, suggest that the 6870 would really benefit from custom cooling.

As far as PhysX goes, take it from someone who actually plays games that feature PhysX (Unreal Tournament III, Metro 2033, Dragon Age: Origins, Mass Effect 2); it's a blast to see debris and body parts go flying when you frag someone!

I had physx before, so i know. It doesnt really add much of anything noticable, and if it does, it seems unrealistic.

 

[17seconds]

"So then, I have to admit to like what I tested today. Overall gaming with PhysX adds a much more immersive experience to gaming."

"So in closing, hat's off to NVIDIA for what they did here. The features are good, your options in choosing whatever PhysX solution you want to compute in is wide-spread and then the gaming user experience is just great. If you own a capable card; heck, it's free to even try-out. The introduction of PhysX is additional value, no-matter how you look at it."

"PhysX is exciting technology."
http://www.guru3d.com/article/physx-by-nvidia-review/

"Turning on PhysX isn't necessary for gameplay, and you'll never miss it if you don't see the effects. However, when PhysX is enabled, it adds superlative nuances and really creates some “wow” moments. The chunky explosions, cloth effects, paper, fog, and environmental detail enhancements are very cool."
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/batman-arkham-asylum,2465-11.html

"Cryostasis utilize the PhysX from Nvidia to improve the overall ambience of the game. At times it is actually difficult to determine if some objects are real. The PhysX actually helps with object physics in the game, making the snow and terrain smoother. It is real hard to say that you can make compacted snow look colder. But with PhysX on the snow does actually look more like the deep, tightly packed snow that you see on the Discovery Channel or HDNet."

"The water affects are greatly improved with the PhysX on as well. The water will actually collect in warmed areas and pools will form around objects. These pools can even be disturbed by moving an object out of the pool or into it. Combined with the Thermodynamics the game allows for the same area to appear differently as with a formerly frozen towel being completely melted after the room has been warmed. Even when enemies are killed the liquid environment acts as it would in a natural seeing. The affects from PhysX can also be seen in the way objects seem to float in the water or sink in the water depending on their size or even what type of material they are."
http://www.motherboards.org/articles/guides/1507_1.html

 

[jasonp12]

get a 6850 and OC it best choice youll make

 

[ares1214]

"So then, I have to admit to like what I tested today. Overall gaming with PhysX adds a much more immersive experience to gaming."

"So in closing, hat's off to NVIDIA for what they did here. The features are good, your options in choosing whatever PhysX solution you want to compute in is wide-spread and then the gaming user experience is just great. If you own a capable card; heck, it's free to even try-out. The introduction of PhysX is additional value, no-matter how you look at it."

"PhysX is exciting technology."
http://www.guru3d.com/article/physx-by-nvidia-review/

"Turning on PhysX isn't necessary for gameplay, and you'll never miss it if you don't see the effects. However, when PhysX is enabled, it adds superlative nuances and really creates some “wow” moments. The chunky explosions, cloth effects, paper, fog, and environmental detail enhancements are very cool."
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/batman-arkham-asylum,2465-11.html

"Cryostasis utilize the PhysX from Nvidia to improve the overall ambience of the game. At times it is actually difficult to determine if some objects are real. The PhysX actually helps with object physics in the game, making the snow and terrain smoother. It is real hard to say that you can make compacted snow look colder. But with PhysX on the snow does actually look more like the deep, tightly packed snow that you see on the Discovery Channel or HDNet."

"The water affects are greatly improved with the PhysX on as well. The water will actually collect in warmed areas and pools will form around objects. These pools can even be disturbed by moving an object out of the pool or into it. Combined with the Thermodynamics the game allows for the same area to appear differently as with a formerly frozen towel being completely melted after the room has been warmed. Even when enemies are killed the liquid environment acts as it would in a natural seeing. The affects from PhysX can also be seen in the way objects seem to float in the water or sink in the water depending on their size or even what type of material they are."
http://www.motherboards.org/articles/guides/1507_1.html

Its entirely based on opinion. I can show a Mafia 2 Physx demonstration. I think its dreadfully unrealistic, and it looks like they are shooting rocks.

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

Like i said as well, its also not that used, nor used much where it is used.

 

[ares1214]

get a 6850 and OC it best choice youll make

Its not like something like the 460 is a bad choice, i just think the 6850 is the slightly better card. Hard to make a bad choice between the 2 of them.

 

[jasonp12]

agreed but 6850 is cheaper and better....not that the 460 is bad but the 6850 currently just beats it for the price

 

[ares1214]

agreed but 6850 is cheaper and better....not that the 460 is bad but the 6850 currently just beats it for the price

That i agree with.

 

[jasonp12]

my 6850 is upto 950mhz core and 1040mhz mem w/o a Voltage increase runs at 59C at 99% Load

 

[ares1214]

my 6850 is upto 950mhz core and 1040mhz mem w/o a Voltage increase runs at 59C at 99% Load

Do you have the Asus DCU?

 

[yesitsmario]

For 1680X1050, I'd go with the 6850 DCU version. At stock it would be fine for your resolution, but if you want more juice, it's a good overclocker.