Replacement needed fot radeon HD4870x2


Mar 11, 2009

USAGE FROM MOST TO LEAST IMPORTANT: Gaming (FarCry3, MW3, Crysis2) not necessary full settings

CURRENT GPU AND POWER SUPPLY: ATI Radeon HD 4870x2 and Antec EA-650 650W PSU
current card stoped working.

CPU: intel i7 920 cooled with a scynthe mugen 2
MoBo: Asus p6t Deluxe
memory: 12Gb (6 x 2Gb Kingston HyperX DD3-1600Mhz CL9 240pin DIMM)


PARTS PREFERENCES: no real preferences


MONITOR RESOLUTION: 1680x1050, probably upgrade in the future
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Must run run the latest games such as FarCry3 or MW3. This card has to get me back in business for the next 2 years.
I'd recommend the GTX670. Interms of raw framerates, your card is still pretty powerful by modern standards. Anything lower than a GTX670 wouldn't be much of an upgrade. And going higher than that, 7970 won't give any noticeable gain for the added cost. Even GTX680 is only around 6% faster on average, so probably not worth the added cost.
GTX660 is better value when you're upgrading from something low-end (or from nothing at all) but from a high-end card you're not gonna see a huge improvement. I'd estimate maybe a 25% framerate gain. If you're happy with that then GTX660 is a good choice. If you want to see a bigger improvement, GTX670 is the way to go.

EDIT: Regarding resolution, OP said he's planning a monitor upgrade and wants this card to last him.
the 4870x2 WAS a top end card back in 1942. It's next to useless in anything from Crysis on up that have real demands.

you can't judge a cards performance solely on frame rates. it never tells the entire story of how a card performs. the x2 cannot hold it's own against the 66o series.

What are you thinking?
What am I thinking? That a 4870X2 delivered similar results to a 5870, which is still a capable card today. So what are you thinking? That any current gen card is faster than an old gen card? That's complete idiocy. To give an extreme example, 6800 Ultra (2004) will outperform a GT610 (2012). In this case, we've got a dual-GPU DX10 card, hardly ancient history.

As for judging performance solely on framerates, read my post properly. "Interms of raw framerates..." - I made that clear.

Grow up. That's your response when you realise you're wrong? I've seen you post complete BS time and again and can't handle being proved wrong. Your posts aren't helping.

Oh rly? :heink:
right now I'm running a q9550/775 processor, 8gig DDR2 800, a 6950 2gig card at 1920x1200. Now, UNTIL FarCry3 came along I could play ANY game maxed out at that res. Right now I am getting some sputtering, why, not because the video card isn't holding it's own but because I finally met the threshold of the performance of the processor.

put that same video card in a machine that runs a E3-1230v2, 8gigs of DDR3 1333 and that same video card and I have no problems with FarCry3.

The 660 cards are better performers than the 6950. Now who doesn't know what they are talking about?

1942? What was that about? :heink: :lol:

1. I don't care what you have.

2. Nobody is talking about 6950s except you.

3. I never said the GTX660 was inferior to a 6950, 4870X2 or anything else. I said a GTX670 will give a more noticeable boost.

4. I really don't care how smooth Far Cry is for you.

Cris Pochettino

May 13, 2013
Hi all,

i have the same question: need to replace a (TOO MUCH) hot and subsequently crashing 4870x2, CPU is 9550 4core, 4 gb ram...

nowadays, what you consider a good choice, standing the fact that i have only a 17" LCD, so no big resoltion after all?

thanks in advance, and sorry for my EN :)