260gtx vs. 4870!!!

which card is a better buy

Nvidia

ATI

Nvidia one comes with a free game but is $15 more yet ATI is said to perform better.

it comes down to these two cards for me.

HELP ME DECIDE!

Wow , your system is like a clone of mine hehe.

Anyway , I went with the Black Edition. XFX is a great company and their double life warranty is a big plus. If I ever want to selll the card like on ebay , ect... that person can get the lifetime warranty so the card keeps value.

It performs very well for me and Benches have been about the same from when I was looking.

Read this. Page 3 starts to really get at its comparison's but I suggest you read the whole thing.

Good Luck.

i was reading another article and it said opposite. but i will be running crysis at 1360x768 on a 32" monitor. so would Nvidia still be better?

EDIT: i am getting arctic cooler 7 so it will almost be identical. so in that case, what do you play crysis on? what fps do you get? and what OS do you have?

From experience I cannot say. I really only researched upto 24 inch.

Anyway , the 4870 has wasted VRAM. It has its VRAM listed as 1Gig BUT only 256 bit. So you're really only getting 512mb VRAM.

The GTX260 has 896mb of VRAM with 448 bit. So it will be using all of the 896 VRAM which helps on higher resolutions.

I'm not telling you which way to go , I really try not to do that unless I have used both products. Just wanted to point that out to you.

The 4870 uses 1gb of gddr5 which is 256bit x4, meaning it can actually use the whole of it's memory. Either way i theink they are fairly even, and i think the core 216 tops it in a number of benches. Not 100% thoughlundy86_4

The 4870 uses 1gb of gddr5 which is 256bit x4, meaning it can actually use the whole of it's memory. Either way i theink they are fairly even, and i think the core 216 tops it in a number of benches. Not 100% thoughlundy86_4

Ah true. I overlooked that when looking at the card. Most of the time , they the card makers use 1GB as a marketing stunt with DDR3 256 bit.

Good pick , you'll like it. Just remember to register it with XFX so you get the double life warranty.

Enjoy!

If your British don't get an XFX card. They're warrenty is shot, they don't offer double lifetime and if your card snuffs it a year down the line they'll give you like 20% of the price you paid. You also can't install custom coolers on them in the UK. Worst customer support I've ever had and seen in numerous places.

Go with a BFG/eVGA.

I'd also go for the GTX260 /w 216 steam processors. Nvid released a driver update about a week or so ago and boosted it by about 10 FPS. I've only seen one benchmark so far with the new drivers so in my mind, old benchmarks are, well, old. Look up the POV GTx 216 review on hexus.

when do you think the prices will drop?

i have this GFX card. it was recommended for screens +30" which i have a 32" monitor.

nvidia FTW..... It has way less driving crashes than ATI does asides it performs better than the HD4870 and it runs coolergamerloks

[QUOTE="gamerloks"]nvidia FTW..... It has way less driving crashes than ATI does asides it performs better than the HD4870 and it runs coolerwklzip

The 260 216 with stock cooler idles at about 45C and runs at about 60-65 where the ati is in the 80-90s. As far as the fail rate, Nvidia had a particular chip line that was defective due to solder joints coming free in some situations and they had a press release about it. The new chips don't have the defect.The nvidia also has very mature drivers in comparison to the ATI, and the prices are very close so at this point, the more logical choice is Nvidia unless you have a problem with them for personal reasons, in which case the ATI is still a good choice for an alternate, but the company has still not completely overtaken Nvidia as far as raw power/quality is concerned.

To correct the earlier post : 260 216 GTX > 4870 512 > 4870 1GB > 260 GTX

The 1GB 4870 is slightly slower than the 512 due to the memory chips being being of higer latancy. Its not much but the difference is there. its well published.

The 4870 uses 1gb of gddr5 which is 256bit x4, meaning it can actually use the whole of it's memory. Either way i theink they are fairly even, and i think the core 216 tops it in a number of benches. Not 100% thoughlundy86_4

What does that even mean? Are you talking about the bus speed?

Why would you pay more for a GTX260 than I did two weeks ago for a brand new Evga GTX280 SC? Why would you pay more for that 65nm GTX260 than you would for a 55nm GTX260? This is like the fourth thread where you have asked this. The two cards are about even. Based on my experience, not some review which never mentions any driver problems or issues at all, the GTX260 has better drivers but not by much and runs much cooler and the fan is much less annoying. You may not have the heat and noise issues with the cooler on that card though.

[QUOTE="wklzip"][QUOTE="gamerloks"]nvidia FTW..... It has way less driving crashes than ATI does asides it performs better than the HD4870 and it runs coolerstele29

The 260 216 with stock cooler idles at about 45C and runs at about 60-65 where the ati is in the 80-90s. As far as the fail rate, Nvidia had a particular chip line that was defective due to solder joints coming free in some situations and they had a press release about it. The new chips don't have the defect.The nvidia also has very mature drivers in comparison to the ATI, and the prices are very close so at this point, the more logical choice is Nvidia unless you have a problem with them for personal reasons, in which case the ATI is still a good choice for an alternate, but the company has still not completely overtaken Nvidia as far as raw power/quality is concerned.

To correct the earlier post : 260 216 GTX > 4870 512 > 4870 1GB > 260 GTX

The 1GB 4870 is slightly slower than the 512 due to the memory chips being being of higer latancy. Its not much but the difference is there. its well published.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/11/28/gigabyte-gv-r485mc-1gh-radeon-hd-4850-1gb/5
here happy ?that i solved this FireStarter ?! cause of people like stele29 who as no knowledge in hardware that thing go wrong here.or so
when i see a post that on fire i just come up and i found ur solution guy bit-tech shown on 1920x1200 + all AA-AF 4870 1gb +20fps 4870 512meg in fallout 3
+1FPS (before 8.12) which incraese fps by +15% = now probabely 33fps.
if you ever want to state a cheaper card again that is bad at last get a real proof with the REAL ATI DRIVER not some psedu website who would run 4870 1GB On a Outdated OMEGA DRIVER or 8.5 IT REALLY important to update DRIVER FREQUANLTY ON VIDEO CARD IF UR A CASUAL GAMERS

here stats used in the review

• Gigabyte Radeon HD 4850 1GB (GV-R485MC-1GH) - operating at 640/1,920MHz using Catalyst 8.10 hotfix 8-551-1-71310
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB - operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.10 hotfix 8-551-1-71310
• Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 4850 X2 2GB - operating at 625/1,986MHz using Catalyst 8.11 beta
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB - operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.10 hotfix 8-551-1-71310
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB - operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.10 hotfix 8-551-1-71310
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB - operating at 625/1,986MHz using Catalyst 8.10 hotfix 8-551-1-71310

witha pc right now as such as E8600 4.3Ghz it would ralbey go to +10fps. And with better ram also and a better hard drive would just increase load time the psu is okay and it as vista home pack 64 : Serivce pack 1 and intel inf 8.30. WHLQ


Here anotehr review with 8.12 Instead of 8.10
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/12/19/sapphire-ati-radeon-hd-4870x2-atomic-review/4

• Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB Atomic - operating at 800/4,000MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• Dual AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB in CrossFire – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
  
  that show that driver matter

also it a much better machine tough

Intel Core i7 940 processor (operating at 3,709MHz – 22x168.6MHz); MSI Eclipse SLI motherboard (Intel X58 Express with three PCI-Express 2.0 x16 slots); 3x 2GB Corsair TR3X6G1333C9 memory modules (operating in dual channel at DDR3 1,349.4MHz 9-9-9-24-1T); Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 250GB SATA hard drive; Enermax Galaxy DXX 1000W PSU; Windows Vista Home Premium x86-64 (with Service Pack 1); Intel inf 9.1.0.1007 WHQL.

[QUOTE="wklzip"][QUOTE="gamerloks"]nvidia FTW..... It has way less driving crashes than ATI does asides it performs better than the HD4870 and it runs coolerstele29

The 260 216 with stock cooler idles at about 45C and runs at about 60-65 where the ati is in the 80-90s. As far as the fail rate, Nvidia had a particular chip line that was defective due to solder joints coming free in some situations and they had a press release about it. The new chips don't have the defect.The nvidia also has very mature drivers in comparison to the ATI, and the prices are very close so at this point, the more logical choice is Nvidia unless you have a problem with them for personal reasons, in which case the ATI is still a good choice for an alternate, but the company has still not completely overtaken Nvidia as far as raw power/quality is concerned.

To correct the earlier post : 260 216 GTX > 4870 512 > 4870 1GB > 260 GTX

The 1GB 4870 is slightly slower than the 512 due to the memory chips being being of higer latancy. Its not much but the difference is there. its well published.

1. Again i say, that HD4870 has the same cooling solution as the Toxic HD4870 and its not overclocked, so it should run slightly cooler than the Toxic version. And its cooler than the GTX216 core 216, and the 216 he listed is OCed so as expected should be a bit warmer.

source

2. Yes, but they kept denying the faulty chips for a long time, and now that they just fixed the problem they are finally admiting it.

3. Nvidia has better mature drivers? Maybe on some games, but probably you havent heard of the problems related to their motherboards and SLI which some users had been having nightmares.

4. On what resolution are you saying the HD4870 512 is faster than the 1gb version?

You would be happy with either. They are pretty close in the benchmarks. I just got a BFG GEFORCE GTX 260 OC MAXCORE 896MB yesterday and it was the cheapest card I could find between the 4870's and the 260's. It is an overclocked 216 version but I got the lowest one. I didn't want the OCE or OCX because not only do they cost a little more but run a little hotter and use a little more power.

Tried out COD4, Test Drive and now FarCry 2 on it which came with the card. All run great on it. Still have to test it out on some other games but I am more than happy with it. :D

[QUOTE="stele29"]

[QUOTE="wklzip"] 1. That HD4870 has a better cooling solution than the GTX260 he listed. 2. Nvidia gpu's lately have been known for having somewhat high failure rates.wklzip

The 260 216 with stock cooler idles at about 45C and runs at about 60-65 where the ati is in the 80-90s. As far as the fail rate, Nvidia had a particular chip line that was defective due to solder joints coming free in some situations and they had a press release about it. The new chips don't have the defect.The nvidia also has very mature drivers in comparison to the ATI, and the prices are very close so at this point, the more logical choice is Nvidia unless you have a problem with them for personal reasons, in which case the ATI is still a good choice for an alternate, but the company has still not completely overtaken Nvidia as far as raw power/quality is concerned.

To correct the earlier post : 260 216 GTX > 4870 512 > 4870 1GB > 260 GTX

The 1GB 4870 is slightly slower than the 512 due to the memory chips being being of higer latancy. Its not much but the difference is there. its well published.

1. Again i say, that HD4870 has the same cooling solution as the Toxic HD4870 and its not overclocked, so it should run slightly cooler than the Toxic version. And its cooler than the GTX216 core 216, and the 216 he listed is OCed so as expected should be a bit warmer.

source

2. Yes, but they kept denying the faulty chips for a long time, and now that they just fixed the problem they are finally admiting it.

3. Nvidia has better mature drivers? Maybe on some games, but probably you havent heard of the problems related to their motherboards and SLI which some users had been having nightmares.

4. On what resolution are you saying the HD4870 512 is faster than the 1gb version?

key word there being SOME, SOME ATI users have been having the same nightmares about their setup, i've had sli running in my rig and i havent had one problem with it, my friend has had sli running in his rig for a few months and has had no problems with it, i know two more ppl who have been running sli rigs for a while now with no problems the reason i went with nvidia and my 2 GTX 260's, is for one big reason, not the only one, physics support, ATI doesnt have it, i think that makes a big difference in a lot of games, like crysis, the only thing ATI has that nvidia doesnt is directx 10.1, but i have yet to seee a game that even acknowledges 10.1, and i think the price on the GTX 260's is a very good deal, and thats what i would reccomend

GTX 260 216 > 4870 1GB >GTX 260 >4870 512 IMO

and about those temps, idk where they're getting that, maybe at 30% fan speed, but mine dont get that hot and i run them in SLI, at like 65-70% fan speed

Just read this review.

Blatently shows that with the new drivers the C216 is better than the HD4870.

They are the same. One does better in one game, and the other does better in another game.

• Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB Atomic - operating at 800/4,000MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• Dual AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB in CrossFire – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• AMD ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB – operating at 750/3,600MHz using Catalyst 8.12 WHQL
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 280 1GB – operating at 602/1,296/2,200MHz using Forceware 180.84 beta
• Dual Nvidia GeForce GTX 280 1GB in SLI – operating at 602/1,296/2,200MHz using Forceware 180.84 beta
• Nvidia GeForce GTX 260+ 896MB – operating at 576/1,242/1,998MHz using Forceware 180.84 beta
• Dual Nvidia GeForce GTX 260+ 896MB in SLI – operating at 576/1,242/1,998MHz using Forceware 180.84 beta
  
  most of beta work as good as the original when it compare (ATI DRIVER & nivida Driver) product it just polishing of potential bug the release mostly
  if you get bug then you note them in bug repport or post on forum if you have bug you ad since beta driver ;) it helpfull for them hehe

Looking at from a simpler point of view right now, the 4870 is cheaper than the 280 and as far as I know the 4870 just wins in testing.

Now if anyone wants to loan me the money ... ;-)

[QUOTE="stele29"]

[QUOTE="wklzip"] 1. That HD4870 has a better cooling solution than the GTX260 he listed. 2. Nvidia gpu's lately have been known for having somewhat high failure rates.wklzip

The 260 216 with stock cooler idles at about 45C and runs at about 60-65 where the ati is in the 80-90s. As far as the fail rate, Nvidia had a particular chip line that was defective due to solder joints coming free in some situations and they had a press release about it. The new chips don't have the defect.The nvidia also has very mature drivers in comparison to the ATI, and the prices are very close so at this point, the more logical choice is Nvidia unless you have a problem with them for personal reasons, in which case the ATI is still a good choice for an alternate, but the company has still not completely overtaken Nvidia as far as raw power/quality is concerned.

To correct the earlier post : 260 216 GTX > 4870 512 > 4870 1GB > 260 GTX

The 1GB 4870 is slightly slower than the 512 due to the memory chips being being of higer latancy. Its not much but the difference is there. its well published.

1. Again i say, that HD4870 has the same cooling solution as the Toxic HD4870 and its not overclocked, so it should run slightly cooler than the Toxic version. And its cooler than the GTX216 core 216, and the 216 he listed is OCed so as expected should be a bit warmer.

source

2. Yes, but they kept denying the faulty chips for a long time, and now that they just fixed the problem they are finally admiting it.

3. Nvidia has better mature drivers? Maybe on some games, but probably you havent heard of the problems related to their motherboards and SLI which some users had been having nightmares.

4. On what resolution are you saying the HD4870 512 is faster than the 1gb version?

Um, have you heard of all of the problems with crossfire? Have you heard all of the complaints about ATI's driver releaces for the past few months? Im not bashing ATI, but as someone who has used both 2 4870 512s and a GTX260 on the most recent drivers, on the same hardware Im telling you Nvidia has the more mature drivers, in most circumstances. The 4870 is a solid card though, rock solid. It could just use some better drivers or at least the ability to create profiles for games in CCC. The 4870 requires alot more tweeking.

Just read this review.

Blatently shows that with the new drivers the C216 is better than the HD4870.

death1505921

Yeah, vs 8.11. Great review, why wouldnt they use a more recent ATI driver? No, bias there. That is why YOU CAN'T TRUST REVIEWS.I hate seeing these benchmarks that never mention driver bugs that may come up. I love how all of these review sites never have any driver issues with any game. Its bs. Benchmarks are only half of the equation. It is a great idea to read what people are saying at a respectable hardware forum and no not Toms Hardware.

nvidia FTW..... It has way less driving crashes than ATI does asides it performs better than the HD4870 and it runs coolergamerloks

Well from what I've heard (I'm no expert though) The GTX 260 216 core> 4870 1gb> 4870 512mb> Gtx 260.mattpunkgd

It really depends on the game.

[QUOTE="wklzip"][QUOTE="gamerloks"]nvidia FTW..... It has way less driving crashes than ATI does asides it performs better than the HD4870 and it runs coolerstele29

The 260 216 with stock cooler idles at about 45C and runs at about 60-65 where the ati is in the 80-90s. As far as the fail rate, Nvidia had a particular chip line that was defective due to solder joints coming free in some situations and they had a press release about it. The new chips don't have the defect.The nvidia also has very mature drivers in comparison to the ATI, and the prices are very close so at this point, the more logical choice is Nvidia unless you have a problem with them for personal reasons, in which case the ATI is still a good choice for an alternate, but the company has still not completely overtaken Nvidia as far as raw power/quality is concerned.

To correct the earlier post : 260 216 GTX > 4870 512 > 4870 1GB > 260 GTX

The 1GB 4870 is slightly slower than the 512 due to the memory chips being being of higer latancy. Its not much but the difference is there. its well published.

WHAT??? WOW!

Just read this review.

Blatently shows that with the new drivers the C216 is better than the HD4870.

death1505921

Then also use the New ATI drivers...