I've offered someone three quarters of what I paid for my second 4870X2 (£200 from £277), the new alternatives are worth much more, but this is in line with what others on ebay are charging. £77 isn't too much to lose for 7 months use I suppose... :S
Selling since I will find it much more difficult to sell when the 5870s become really prominent, and I can live with a single X2 over christmas, but will NEED to sell them in order to afford a 5970.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/gra...ormance_1q08/2Originally Posted by sammorris
Seems the HD3870 is faster than the 9600GT in Crysis!!It seems the newer drivers did help performance after all!!
The 8800GS/9600GSO does seem to suffer a bit in this game though. The HD3850 512MB seems quite a bit quicker too.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 22-11-2009 at 02:30 PM.
God forbid I should get back to the OP...
But what about the person who wants DX11 AND PhysX? At the moment nVidia is preventing that from happening. An nVidia rep has already stated that they dropped the ball on this one.
As for DX11 as a feature, it will become the defacto standard. Sure games right now run on DX9 still, but for how long will that persist? Win7 is likely to be a success, so everyone will have DX11, so games will require a DX11 sub system. This will be quicker than the DX10 ramp out, as Vista was such an abomination.
To be honest, the whole ATI vs nVidia thing has been moot in Crysis for ages. SLI vs Crossfire scaling used to still be in nVidia's favour, but even that's quite close now. With the improvements in Quad Crossfire scaling, Crysis is actually, as of the HD5970, pretty much crossed off the list. We'll be waiting for the next generation before we can enable 4xAA with smooth frame rates at 2560x1600, but apart from that, the game is beaten, and quicker than I predicted.
Now onto the more tricky titles like Cryostasis, STALKER Clear Sky and GTA4...
ajones: It will happen eventually, when nVidia get the Fermi retail products to market, but I really do think they're focusing on Tesla-oriented products too much right now, they've pretty much abandoned the gaming sector for now, whether they intended to or not.
....and Crysis 2!!Now onto the more tricky titles like Cryostasis, STALKER Clear Sky and GTA4...
I hope that CryEngine 3 is as scalable as Crytek is saying it is.
I'm trying not to think about that... :S
I've still not played through much of Crysis Warhead, I'm waiting to get an i5 so I can play it on Enthusiast without CPU lag...
The 9600GT was a budget card launched to compete with the HD3850. The only reason the HD3870 (ATi's flagship part at the time) ended up in competition with it is ATi had to lower the price of their whole line up to compete, because their fastest GPU only offered the performance of NVIDIA's budget card.http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/gra...ormance_1q08/2
Seems the HD3870 is faster than the 9600GT in Crysis!!
The 8800GS/9600GSO does seem to suffer a bit in this game though. The HD3850 512MB seems quite a bit quicker too.
The HD3870 in the UK was substantially cheaper than the 8800GT(at least 20% for the GDDR4 version in the UK even at launch and the card was around 20% slower in a game like Crysis without AA). People who could not afford(or even get hold of) an 8800GT 512MB got an HD3870 since it was the second fastest card in the sub £150 market at the time. The 8800GTS 512MB was over £150 and the 8800GT 256MB was not great either for the price unless you played games at lower resolutions and settings.
The HD3850 512MB tended to be cheaper than either an HD3870 or 8800GT 256MB and Nvidia had to have the 8800GS/9600GSO based on the 8800GT to compete with it in a similar price range in the first place. The 8800GS/9600GSO had less memory(768MB GDDR3 versions were very hard to get hold off) then it should have since it was faster in many situations than a 9600GT and was more expensive to make too. The G92 has something like over 200 millon transistors more than the G94 too. In many ways the overclocked versions of the 9600GT also provided competition with the 8800GT in less shader heavy games. It was an excellent graphics card for the price. It is the HD3850 512MB which brought the 9600GT to the market. Most HD3850 512MB cards could be overclocked to levels approaching that of an HD3870 512MB GDDR3 so it probably sold in much larger quantities than the HD3870 did. The GDDR4 version of the HD3870 was rare and most of the HD3870 cards were much cheaper GDDR3 versions which made it an overclocked HD3850 512MB basically.
Nvidia did not have any real competition in the high end market until the HD4000 series. The HD3870X2 could perform well in some games but the massive performance hit with AA did not help at all. OTH,IIRC the 9800GX2 had potential for great performance but does not seem to have been well supported.
If anything it just shows how important mid-range and lower high end cards under £150 are important for a graphics card company. This is why I am interested to see what Nvidia can came up with in the next few months.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 22-11-2009 at 06:10 PM.
Yeah the HD3870 was noticeably inferior to the 8800GT, but substantially cheaper. Mine was around £120, when I'm pretty sure 8800GTs (of the 512MB version that mattered) were around £150.
If I remember rightly the HD3850 512MB was a latecomer to the party and didn't see that much attention.
Neither the 9800GX2 or HD3870X2 impressed me that much, and as someone who used crossfire back then and crossfire now, the differences are substantial. CF was an absolute pain in the backside then, it's only a minor pain in the backside now
The minor pain might be endured for the monster framerates the 5970 churns out......Yeah the HD3870 was noticeably inferior to the 8800GT, but substantially cheaper. Mine was around £120, when I'm pretty sure 8800GTs (of the 512MB version that mattered) were around £150.
If I remember rightly the HD3850 512MB was a latecomer to the party and didn't see that much attention.
Neither the 9800GX2 or HD3870X2 impressed me that much, and as someone who used crossfire back then and crossfire now, the differences are substantial. CF was an absolute pain in the backside then, it's only a minor pain in the backside now
I liked my 9800GX2s fine, one of my buddies still uses the one NVIDIA gave me on "long term loan". If you're not trying to run 25X16 with AA it's still a very capable card. He loves it.
Assuming you've got SLI scaling. Something as powerful as an HD5850/HD5870 GPU really doesn't matter if you've not got CF scaling unless you use 2560x1600 as pretty much anything will run at 1920x1200 on one of them. With the 9800GX2 though, you get GTX280-like performance in SLI enabled games, but only 8800GT performance without, which can be a bit of a ballbreaker. Of course for the HD3870X2 it was even worse (and back then, arguably CF's scaling and reliability was far behind SLI, I like to think it's pretty even now, though nvidia usually still do a slightly better job of getting brand new titles to scale quickly after release)
I don't get what your point is. The whole point of an expensive graphics card is better looking graphics. If I wanted to turn the details down I would have bought a cheaper card in the first place. The 8800GTS runs out of memory long before it runs out of GPU power and RAM bandwidth. They would have been better with an 8800 GT like 512MB RAM. I know that isn;t possible due to the 320 bit bus but that doesn't change what I said.
I solved this problem by getting a Radeon 4870 1GB
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote