4870x2 or 295gtx

requiem1

I'm reading reviews comparing both of these cards and i know the 295 is only just out but I was looking for people's thoughts regarding which one to go for? right now I'm leaning towards the 295 cause I've never been a huge fan of ati.

Also I'm wondering about the size of the 4870x2. I currently have a 8800gts so if someone could let me know how much bigger it is that'd be great

Thanks

req

Blazer

It's about 12 inches long.
Both cards GTX295+4870X2 are similarly priced.

As for which is best the GTX295 is now the fastest card but not by much, maybe 10% which is fps terms is fcukall.

I've been very happy with the 4870X2 since I switched from SLI 8800GTXs.
Had no problem with drivers etc and even had it working perfectly in Windows 7 beta playing games as well.
It's also coming down in price to approx €420 next week. Which is still expensive as I only paid €423 for mine on launch day.
The GTX295 is a similiar card (as in 2 cards in on) and retails for approx €500.
However very limited numbers are being released due to the high costs and quality needed for them.

Below is a good review of both cards.


http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2338692,00.asp

requiem1

Mathew Reilly wrote: »

It's about 12 inches long.
Both cards GTX295+4870X2 are similarly priced.

As for which is best the GTX295 is now the fastest card but not by much, maybe 10% which is fps terms is fcukall.

I've been very happy with the 4870X2 since I switched from SLI 8800GTXs.
Had no problem with drivers etc and even had it working perfectly in Windows 7 beta playing games as well.
It's also coming down in price to approx €420 next week. Which is still expensive as I only paid €423 for mine on launch day.
The GTX295 is a similiar card (as in 2 cards in on) and retails for approx €500.
However very limited numbers are being released due to the high costs and quality needed for them.

Below is a good review of both cards.


http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2338692,00.asp

I read that review but thanks for that Mat, I was having the debate in my head for the simple reason I thought the 4870x2 would drop in price over the next while. I had no idea that the 295 was going to be limited in numbers cause my intention would have been to go quad sli when i decide to upgrade to i7 but I don't want to not have that option. do you think I should hold off to get one? aren't ati releasing a new card soon?

extra-ordinary_

295 beats the 4870x2 on power consumption, heat and noise, aswell as performance.

See: http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-295/6380.html?doc=6380

requiem1

extra-ordinary_ wrote: »

295 beats the 4870x2 on power consumption, heat and noise, aswell as performance.

See: http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-geforce-gtx-295/6380.html?doc=6380

Thanks dude, I noticed in that review that the total power draw for the system on load with the 295 was 532watts and I have a 600 watt power supply. will my power supply be able to take one of these? just given that power supplys are never as efficient as they quote

Blazer

One question?
What size monitor are you currently using.
Unless you're gaming at 1920x1200 (24"+lcd) the X2/295 is wasted.
And for Quad-Sli/Quad X-Fire anything less than 2560x1600 is a complete waste of money.
To be honest quad anything is a complete waste as by the time the next gen card comes around 2 of them will easily beat quad sli/xfire.
Your PSU should be fine. What are the rest of your specs?

requiem1

Mathew Reilly wrote: »

One question?
What size monitor are you currently using.
Unless you're gaming at 1920x1200 (24"+lcd) the X2/295 is wasted.
And for Quad-Sli/Quad X-Fire anything less than 2560x1600 is a complete waste of money.
To be honest quad anything is a complete waste as by the time the next gen card comes around 2 of them will easily beat quad sli/xfire.
Your PSU should be fine. What are the rest of your specs?

you best believe i'm gaming @ 1920x1200, its the reason for the upgrade;)
I've two raptor x's in raid, 4GB OCZ reaper @1200mhz, E6600 @ 3.4ghz, 8800gts 640MB, all on a P5B deluxe. CPU and GPU are watercooled and its in an akasa mirage. I agree quad sli is overkill but I'm debating what to do next in terms of core i7 but you're right I'll probably stick with the one. The only thing that would push me to quad sli is if the games get more detailed

jetski

The games do get more detailed. I got the 295gtx myself which the difference it makes is unbelieveable even the colours look more realistic... ive been playing bf2 for 2 years now and for some reason when i banged in the 295 it seems to display much more scenery, more vivid realistic colours....

DanGerMus

jetski wrote: »

The games do get more detailed. I got the 295gtx myself which the difference it makes is unbelieveable even the colours look more realistic... ive been playing bf2 for 2 years now and for some reason when i banged in the 295 it seems to display much more scenery, more vivid realistic colours....

What was your old card though?

Outkast_IRE

Iv had a 512mb 4870 since july and i would highly recommed it great card

jetski

DanGerMus wrote: »

What was your old card though?

The GTX280

Blazer

jetski wrote: »

The GTX280

lol

although I went from 4870 to 4870X2 as well

Frankly..going to quad is complete waste of time..
Look at the figures for quad sli/xfire and compare them again a single or dual card of the next generation.
Quad gets beat every time..poor driver/game support lets it down.

Myxomatosis

295 v 4870x2?

Why bother?

Most games now a days are developed either simultaneously for all platforms or for console first then PC later.

Whichever method, the PC version ultimately suffers. Be it in dumbing down or poor performance, totally rendering the concept of having a graphics card that is dearer than a PS3 or Xbox360 useless.

Even when you do get PC only releases, they're either crap, or not optimized at all meaning it'll probably run **** on even "top of the range" graphics cards.

I bought a 4850 6 months ago which will run any game fine, but it just sits idle in my case because there is nothing worth playing whatsoever.

Dark_lord_ire

I'd disagree with you on what's the point of having them. Games such as c&c are crap on consoles as for games that are first person shooter you really need a pc for best control and yes they do look and run better on pc. You do have a good point about games being released first on console the a version with bugs for the pc. There is a lack of good games right now for the pc and I want something that will push my 295 to the limit

jetski

Myxomatosis wrote: »

295 v 4870x2?

Why bother?

Most games now a days are developed either simultaneously for all platforms or for console first then PC later.

Whichever method, the PC version ultimately suffers. Be it in dumbing down or poor performance, totally rendering the concept of having a graphics card that is dearer than a PS3 or Xbox360 useless.

Even when you do get PC only releases, they're either crap, or not optimized at all meaning it'll probably run **** on even "top of the range" graphics cards.

I totally disagree

jetski

Dark_lord_ire wrote: »

I'd disagree with you on what's the point of having them. Games such as c&c are crap on consoles as for games that are first person shooter you really need a pc for best control and yes they do look and run better on pc. You do have a good point about games being released first on console the a version with bugs for the pc. There is a lack of good games right now for the pc and I want something that will push my 295 to the limit

I totally agree ive the GTX295 / i7 / 24" asus lcd and im dying to get my hands on a good game to teset the system out, operation flash point 2 is due out in the summer and should be really good... the new battlefield is another one to look out for

Myxomatosis

jetski wrote: »

I totally disagree

It's nice to see you put forward such a strong argument.

cherryghost

Myxomatosis wrote: »

295 v 4870x2?

Why bother?

Most games now a days are developed either simultaneously for all platforms or for console first then PC later.

Whichever method, the PC version ultimately suffers. Be it in dumbing down or poor performance, totally rendering the concept of having a graphics card that is dearer than a PS3 or Xbox360 useless.

Even when you do get PC only releases, they're either crap, or not optimized at all meaning it'll probably run **** on even "top of the range" graphics cards.

I bought a 4850 6 months ago which will run any game fine, but it just sits idle in my case because there is nothing worth playing whatsoever.

Disagreement in nearly all aspects. Just some of the PC ports arent great, but thankfully most are sorted eventually. PC only games include Empire Total war and the new Company of Heroes, as well as Battlefield Heroes, a new Need for Speed MMO as well as a host of more.

Wonda-Boy

There are a few games out already and coming out really soon that will push a 295 when maxed out. Empire: Total War for one will push it. TBH you are wasting you time getting a UBER GPU unless you have a beefy PC as it will just bottleneck the GPU and totally negate any performance you will be looking for.

The GTX295 is a better card as its cooler and less noise....lets not forget that the 4870x2 is two full GPUs strapped together whereas the GTX295 is just two gpu boards "sandwiched" not the full GPU and its running on a lower "55 NM" process.

As with all TECH you pay a price premium and TBH look at the price of the GOLDEN SAMPLE 4870x2!!! It does not matter which card you have they are both super!

BTW....the GTX285 OC is an absolute STORMER of a card....:p

I play L4D , TF2 , Fallout 3 and FEAR 2...and all MAXED out @ 1920x1200 and run absolutely perfect on the GTX295. However this is only the case with the new nVidia drivers. As the previous drivers are **** poor

extra-ordinary_

Myxomatosis wrote: »

...I bought a 4850 6 months ago which will run any game fine, but it just sits idle in my case because there is nothing worth playing whatsoever.

I feel the same way, I think I'm getting old!

TerrorFirmer

Same, I bought a 4870 1GB and ended up selling it and going back to an 8800GTS 320MB. Still runs Left 4 Dead and Call of Duty World at War at 1920x1200 high-ish settings, and the only one I really play is L4D....I actually think I'm becoming a bit bored with games :eek:

cherryghost

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Same, I bought a 4870 1GB and ended up selling it and going back to an 8800GTS 320MB. Still runs Left 4 Dead and Call of Duty World at War at 1920x1200 high-ish settings, and the only one I really play is L4D....I actually think I'm becoming a bit bored with games :eek:

I think its L4Ditis. I played it for a few days. stopped playing games for a few weeks afterwards. got back into CSS then, now i play about 20 hours a week of a mixture of css, cod4, grid and tf2

Wonda-Boy

I play online about 35 hrs a week :eek:....but its so varied. At the minute its L4D and TF2...with a hint of SF4 and pro evo!

But I also play BF2, BF2142 and Fall Out 3....and with EMPIRE:Total War out tomorrow I suppose I gonna have to flog my sprog and lock myself away...all that total war glory maxed out....hmmmmm

TerrorFirmer

Jesus lads do you not have families or girlfriends? I play about 3-4 hours a week...can't really fit anymore in unless I start putting the girlfriend in 2nd place!

cherryghost

whats wrong with 20 hours a week? thats less than 3 hours a day!

Tar.Aldarion

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Same, I bought a 4870 1GB and ended up selling it and going back to an 8800GTS 320MB. Still runs Left 4 Dead and Call of Duty World at War at 1920x1200 high-ish settings, and the only one I really play is L4D....I actually think I'm becoming a bit bored with games :eek:

Have the same cards as me you do..but 320 one sits in a box..got it from wired.

Solitaire

No... Terror got shot of the HD4870, now has a HD4890. That's what you get for threadnecromancy!! :P