The Fastest 3D Cards Go Head-To-Head

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]benpot[/nom]I expected more from toms hardware:Why wasn't the catalyst 8.8 used ?Crossfire was improved in this version and all HD 4800 series performance was boostedWhy wasn't the HD 4870 X2 tested ?This is a single card, although it's expensive[/citation]

seriously ur like a broken record, they put alot of work into these and boo hoo if the don't have a x2 in it, u can fidn results for it elsewhere. For what it is these are very valuable when i help my friends pick cards they get to see a wide range of high performace cards next to each other.
 
Excellent article; my PC is of pretty average performance and I'm not hardcore enough to spend lots of money on Quad Core processors and all the hardware to support it. For me, the article proves that you need an immense system to run the very best GPUs while the performance gap between the mid-range and bottom has shrunk massively.

However; I do sympathise with some of the comments posted by other readers. The 4870 x2 should have been present and it would be interesting to see what the Crossfires and SLIs can do when they have faster CPU support.

For me it may be academic, but let’s see a super high-end test.
 
If the article is a month old, it should be tucked away in the archives instead. It should not be inserted on the home page all flashed up in the top headlines. This would have easily avoided all of the negative feedback. tsk tsk
 
Good article!
Even if I agree on the CPU-limitation and drivers, but this can easily be fixed with a short test.
I like the fact that you use an summed up fps, however if we say that the limit is 60fps, then the range is very important, is the games playable = are there any drops below 60 fps? So an min, mean and median value of the fps should be added.
So my suggestion is that you do a minor test on an C2D-H2O OC to the max (a loud machine, or 9*Noctua NF-P12-1300 120mm fans on this http://www.vcore.dk/shop/ac-airplex-evo-1395p.html ) and test the best cards with new drivers.

Keep up the good work Tino!
 
Why is the motherboard platform x38? isn't everyone buying p45 now?
This is starting to drive me crazy as I have seen some large differences in Crysis on different web sites, most of it is between windows XP and Vista.
But I have also noticed that some of the sites using the P45 motherboards are posting much better results on a GTX 280 on Crysis then a X2 4870
But with so many sites using the old x38 motherboards its really hard to work out whats going on.
 
I agree that these results are nvidia fanboy hogwash. A 9600gt sli setup faster than a 4850CF setup? Bwahaha, and I've got a nice bridge to sell you in NYC. My single 4850 absolutely CRUSHES my old 8800gts640 in every game and my crossfire 4850 destroys any game I throw at it, even crysis on high/very high settings at 1920x1200 is a solid 30fps+. Guys, if you want people to take you seriously again then please for the love of GOD, start using some control methodology with your testing.
 
I'm sure that x38 was used because in CF it is capable of doing PCIE 2.0 dual X16 whereas the crappy P45 chipset is not. At least they got that one right so as not to handicap CF any worse than they already did.
 
I retract my original post for i didn't realize the age of the article. We all make mistakes. I'm sorry.
The CPU choice is quite ridiculous as is the 8.6 drivers... RABLE RABLE RABLE!!!
 
Why does the Geforce 8800 GTS (512mb) consistently outperform the Geforce 8800 GTS (640mb)? This seems counterintuitive.
 
[citation][nom]Smed[/nom]Why does the Geforce 8800 GTS (512mb) consistently outperform the Geforce 8800 GTS (640mb)? This seems counterintuitive.[/citation]
Because the GTS 512MB is a superior card, how is that counterintuitive?
 
[citation][nom]Smed[/nom]Why does the Geforce 8800 GTS (512mb) consistently outperform the Geforce 8800 GTS (640mb)? This seems counterintuitive.[/citation]

The 8800GTS 512 uses a newer, much improved chipset. Hence it gets better scores. Unfortunately Nvidia when following their established namming scheme, had no choice but to call it a GTS, even though it's a different card.
 
> Since the graphics card does more work,
> the pressure on the CPU is relieved slightly

Whoops! I don't know how much you flightsim, but lemme tell you, anyone who's a true fan of the MS-FS franchise knows that Flight Simulator puts the strain on the CPU, not the GPU. The day someone develops a sim that is built around the graphics instead of the math, that day we'll experience AS REAL AS IT GETS.
 
I think this article was fantastic but I agree about the 4870x2 not being in the review. I really like the fact that the article lets me know that because I have the 260 gtx in sli I should upgrade my processor to a quad 3.0 at least I currently have a dual 3.0. I would really like to give my unbiased truth about nvidia vs ati having tried these three cards recently 8800gts 512mb 260 gtx 4870. All cards in single card mode although my old 8800gts is a beast of a card. I'm usung a 24" monitor at 1900x1200 res. The gtx 260 is the best of the three I just want to warn one thing about the ati card. THE ATI CARD IS FAR INFERIOR TO NVIDIA LET ME EXPLAIN:

Forget about the benchmarks with the frame rates for a second when I put the 4870 in with the latest drivers that were available late august all games that I plyed on my system Crysis, call duty 4, bioshock, mass effect, oblivion, dirt, grid, gears of war etc the ATI cards did NOT have the same polish and graphical looks. The ati card sapphire 4870 clearly showed morepop up loads in the background and the grass and overall look in games didnt have the colour and sharpness like the nvidia even the 8800gts 512mb is superior to the 4870. So I decided to go with the 260 gtx in sli i am very happy but I think my processor is bottlenecking me a bit. I know people may disagree but try both cards you'll see what I mean the ATI card definatley does not have the same polish the pixels are fuzzier. I know thers a better technical term but hey peace all.
 
Dear TM
Would it be possible for you to update your article?
There has been raised questions about the use of old drivers and their impact on the test scores.
And with FSX it shows - as I know- it really challenges the graphic cards industry. You cant just by a card it seem you need guidance.
Could you elaborate more about the fact that older cards like GeForce 8800 GTS outperforms all ATI cards?

I have tried for a year to optimize my pc to fsx. And I couldn't find any real use relevant information in the end. Today I have ATI HD 2900 XT and Intel Q9450 and it's not enough.
Yours

Jens Michlas
DK
 
Why don't they test ATI cards with an ATI Chipset such as 780G and above. Reason why i say this is that i have two computers which both have HD3870 inside. One is an X38 chipset and the other is 780G chipset. I get much more performance out of the AMD chipset.

1. GA-MA78GM-S2H(miniATX AMD780G) AMD6000X2 4GB Cosair 800Mhz CL4 RAM HD3870 (ASUS) Both in XP32bit and Vista64Bit
Vs
2. ASUS P5-E SLI (FullATX Intel X38) Intel E8400 4GB Kingston Hyper X 1066Mhz RAM HD3870 (ASUS) Both in XP32bit and Vista64Bit

And considering the way the stream processors are designed are quite different between ATI and Nvidia it would definitely make a difference.

Make sure your try to pair ATI graphics with AMD Chips and Nvidia with Intel. From my experience the difference is about 10% to 15% (noticable when playing games difference of about 8 to 15FPS on the same settings) and considering the AMD setup was half the price i would think that it may be even bigger in the top end machines.

I also agree that the drivers for ATI cards make alot of difference with performance.
 
I just installed the latest driver for my GTX 260 to fix a problem with Cyberlink's Power Director 9. It did fix the problem but now my Microsoft Flight Simulator X does not display correctly. It is no longer edge-to-edge. It displays in the middle of the monitor very narrow with two inches of black screen on either side. Changing my monitor resolution does on change the size of the display area. Thank you for any help.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom