260 or 4870...Don't tell me it's true

M

MirageMobile

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
489
Will ATi beat the 260 with its 4870 in performance and be $100 cheaper? Don't tell me its true; I don't want to have to wait till July 8
 
Darkatom said:
July 8th ? I was thinking that we'd be hearing some news next week lol.
Click to expand...
We will see reviews and numbers on June 25th. It sounds like the 4870 may be available in limited quantities next week, but a recent ATI slide showed July 8th as the date for wide availability.
 
Well rumour has it that GTX 260 will drop in price to compete better ...
I hope that the GDDR5 does'nt cause any more delays for 4870.

I will be upgrading my X1950 pro, GTX 260 is still to loud and pricey for me.
 
GTX 260 already dropped down in price, originally it was 449 now it is 399. Street prices should be even lower.
At the moment it seems the 4850 will be faster than 9800 GTX. I guess 4870 will be around GTX 260, sometimes faster, sometimes slower.

You have to wait another seven days at least. There are some "reviews" of 4850s on webforums, but it is hard to compare.
 
Shane Baxtor said:
The thing is though, I’ve tested the HD 4850, and what’s interesting is that the card is going to be a mid-range solution. But in Crossfire? - Wow! - With the amount of people who have CF boards as well, thanks to the Intel CPU and chipset being the products of choice, this is going to be a great solution.
Click to expand...

NDA alarm WEEEOOOOOWWWWEEEEOOOOOO arrest that man!

edit:
Its clear this guy doesn't know too much about what hes saying though:
Shane Baxtor said:
NVIDIA released the G92 core to slow down ATI. Honestly though, could ATI slow down any more? In the process all they did was completely screw with the release of the GTX 280. A few things should have happened with this card.
Click to expand...

Nvidia released the G92 to... (you guessed it) make money. There are two paths you can go to make money: Serious profits, earnings from sales, or market share, earnings from investments. The G92 did both and it did both really really well. The Geforce 8800 series didn't become the most popular card on the steam servay until after the introduction of the G92 as the 8800GT and 8800GTS 512mb. Since then its skyrocketed up there with a lead over its nearest compeditor, the 7600, by 65,000 people. To my knowladge, this is the first time an enthusiast grade GPU (keeping in mind that by that point we were way overdue for a new one) has reached the top of the charts.

From a strictly logical standpoint, the GTX 280 was nowhere near a failure. It is the top dog. It will be faster than ATIs next best, at least until the HD4870X2. It performs, ... well reasonably well, better than the previous top dog which is enough for Nvidia marketing to say "Fastest GPU in the world". ITs expensive, but like a ferrari, all that does is make the average Joe want it that much more. Maybe if you save up your pennies you can get a GTX 260 Joe, maybe. In the mean time, lets continue to sell our massive high yield, massive high market penetration, and massive high profit card for $100 to $300 (yeah, the G92 covers basically 80% of Nvidia's lineup).

If you think ATI's got the trump card with their HD4870X2, I think your still wrong. I think when push comes to shove a single GT200, big and loud as it might be, is still cheaper than two RV770's, which means the GTX can undercut the HD4870X2.

The issue for Nvidia is ATI's lineup vs Nvidia's top dog marketing. Joe "Gamer" Average (90% of all Nvidia pc consumers) buys a [insert generic OEM here] gaming computer for ~$800-$1200 which means dell uses a card which at retail would cost somewhere between $170 and $220? That puts the HD4850 right in its sights. If Nvidia can get it in the minds of consumers that their GPUs are better there is no way the consumer is going to select the HD4850 box dispite it being a far superior GPU than the 8800GT they just ticked off. The train of thought will be something like the 8800GT is from Nvidia ---> Nvidia is the better company (due to the GTX280 and 8800GTX word of mouth, though they won't know about these two GPUs expliciatlly).


anyways, I think ATI is more or less where they want to be, at least they are until Nvidias G92b and GT200b.
 
Niceone said:
Please give link to some review site that isn't pro-Nvidia?
Click to expand...

Why don't you give a link to a site that does in depth testing in actual gameplay, so you can see the crappy dropped frames you get from SLI. Oh wait, some one already did.
 
The GTX 280 is faster than a GX2, it all comes down to three things:
- The application
- Resolution and Quality settings
- AA and AF settings

When it comes to resolutions of at least 1680x1050 and 16x AF and AA setting higher than 4x, the GX2 starts to slow down while the GTX 280 goes on. This is also game dependend. Not every game scales good with SLI and after all, the GX2 is nothing but two SLI boards with just one PCI-E connector.

There have been some hints about 4870 should be around the same performance as GTX 260. Which definatly isn't bad. The GTX 260 is a great card for the price.
 
Steelwormpilot said:
The GTX 260 is a great card for the price.
Click to expand...

Until the 4850 in Crossfire comes.

(But it seems that sites like [H] will just test in XHD, proclaim a win for the 260 and most possibly ignore the antialiasing mode that is 8X.)
 
I very much doubt the [H] is bias towards one company or another. I think they even said the ATI 3000 series were good cards, just not on the level of the Geforce 8 series.

I dunno if the GTX 280 deserved a golden [H] but it is the fastest single card out there right now.

I very much like the way they do their reviews, having the graphical options all laid out. I just wish they would include 1600x1200 or 1680x1050 resolution into their reviews more often. ^^
 
MrWizard6600 said:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTUxOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

the pictures in the artical and the words in the artical tell two subtelly different stories. You should read it.
Click to expand...

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTUxOCw0LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

So your point is? 9800gtx sli still beats the 280 and in smoothness wise...just take a look at the graph, drops in the 9800gtx fps reflect drops in the 280 at same points in time except even during drop 9800fps is higher. Right now a gtx sli rig would also be cheaper if you look around for deals so for a price conscious enthusiast 280 is no killer.
 
Lost! said:
Until the 4850 in Crossfire comes.

(But it seems that sites like [H] will just test in XHD, proclaim a win for the 260 and most possibly ignore the antialiasing mode that is 8X.)
Click to expand...

Not everyone has CF compatible mainboards or want to buy one. If you look at it this way, you can also buy two 8800 GTS or two 9800 GTX and you are faster AND cheaper than GTX 280. But then again this is only for SLI mainboards...

Also not everyone wants MGPU solutions, I won't do any SLI/CF any time soon again. I prefer a powerful single card.
 
Steelwormpilot said:
Not everyone has CF compatible mainboards or want to buy one. If you look at it this way, you can also buy two 8800 GTS or two 9800 GTX and you are faster AND cheaper than GTX 280. But then again this is only for SLI mainboards...

Also not everyone wants MGPU solutions, I won't do any SLI/CF any time soon again. I prefer a powerful single card.
Click to expand...


That's where the 4870 should come into play... If any of the hearsay is true it should beat out the 260 easily and be cheaper.
 
Steelwormpilot said:
Not everyone has CF compatible mainboards or want to buy one. If you look at it this way, you can also buy two 8800 GTS or two 9800 GTX and you are faster AND cheaper than GTX 280. But then again this is only for SLI mainboards...

Also not everyone wants MGPU solutions, I won't do any SLI/CF any time soon again. I prefer a powerful single card.
Click to expand...

you can prefer, whatever it is you prefer, that certainly doesn't make it faster :p
 
can't wait to see details on Crossfire with two 4870 1GB models.

That's where I have my sight set. I just hope it isn't December before they are available.:D
 
If 4870 is faster then 3870x2 I'm all over it. 260 is still too much money. For $400 I'd rather buy an entire PS3 then one component of my PC.
 
popowrx said:
I very much doubt the [H] is bias towards one company or another. I think they even said the ATI 3000 series were good cards, just not on the level of the Geforce 8 series.

I dunno if the GTX 280 deserved a golden [H] but it is the fastest single card out there right now.

I very much like the way they do their reviews, having the graphical options all laid out. I just wish they would include 1600x1200 or 1680x1050 resolution into their reviews more often. ^^
Click to expand...

There is no bias, except the one of people saying there is one in sites such as [H].
At the time of R600, many people resented [H] i.e. ATI fans, because they called it a flop, just like many people probably resented [H], when they trashed the GeForce FX line i.e. NVIDIA fans. Fanboys are irrational and even if a certain product is good, if it doesn't match their "color", it sucks.
 
I'm actually excited to try out ATI this round. I've always been an nVidia fan for their relatively quiter highend card HSF's and recent good performance... But if I can get a 4870 for cheaper than a 260, then I will have it.

Well, that's not entirely true... Whichever waterblock comes out first, the 4870 or the 260, is the card I will buy...
 
Arcygenical said:
I'm actually excited to try out ATI this round. I've always been an nVidia fan for their relatively quiter highend card HSF's and recent good performance... But if I can get a 4870 for cheaper than a 260, then I will have it.

Well, that's not entirely true... Whichever waterblock comes out first, the 4870 or the 260, is the card I will buy...
Click to expand...

I built a Crossfire deal last month, X48 and two 3870 cards,kicking myself now that all this new stuff is out; but that's another topic.....

I've been an nvidia guy since VooDoo cards, but these 3870s are really surprisingly good.
I am very impressed with the image quality I've seen in Half life and STALKER......since they are old games I can't brag about frame rates.....but there seems to be something "different" about the image quality that I really like......if the 4870 is as advertised then I'm in for two. I just can't see spending nearly 700 dollars for one card.

Plus I really like this new X48 board. Absolutely no issues and overclocks very nicely. Took my Q6600 to 3.3 with out breaking a sweat on AirCooling.
 
DaNotoriousDOM said:
If 4870 is faster then 3870x2 I'm all over it. 260 is still too much money. For $400 I'd rather buy an entire PS3 then one component of my PC.
Click to expand...
Exactly. That's why ATI's mid range strategy is much smarter than nVidia's "All the power in the world, for a price" mentality. The people with the means and will to spend above $400 on a single video card are few and far between, especially when you take into account all the gamers who are in it just for playable FPS on decent settings. [H] is a little bit of an oddity, where people build systems that seem to need huge resolutions to be justified. Most people don't have monitors above 22 inches, let alone at the crown of 30 inches where so many of the so called "battles" for the top are set.
 
Silus said:
There is no bias, except the one of people saying there is one in sites such as [H].
At the time of R600, many people resented [H] i.e. ATI fans, because they called it a flop, just like many people probably resented [H], when they trashed the GeForce FX line i.e. NVIDIA fans. Fanboys are irrational and even if a certain product is good, if it doesn't match their "color", it sucks.
Click to expand...

Is flag waving and blunt bias seperate or the same thing? Guess it's matter of taste and such can only be judged by individual basis.

Anyways I raised my eye brows when I read a comment made by [H] editor just couple days before GTX 280 that could be easily counted as hyping an unreleased product. Not very good way to show your neutrality in matters such as these IMHO.
 
sam0t said:
Is flag waving and blunt bias seperate or the same thing? Guess it's matter of taste and such can only be judged by individual basis.

Anyways I raised my eye brows when I read a comment made by [H] editor just couple days before GTX 280 that could be easily counted as hyping an unreleased product. Not very good way to show your neutrality in matters such as these IMHO.
Click to expand...

[H] supports Quinicunx AA while condemning Custom Filter tent AA.

Yes, no bias! :D
 
If ATI, competitively prices the 4870x2 (around $449) I might actually buy it. Now if a Single 4870 beats a GTX260 and costs somewhere around $300 than I will just buy the 4870. If ATI plays the price war right, they might just beat Nvidia this round.
 
[H] has always had sound method and sound advice for the consumer. Thats why I stick around this place. I do think the way they portray games sometimes can have a negative effect on my purchasing decisions though. They like their FPS a lot slower than I would, but thats their opinion and they are entitled to it. I am the kind of person who can't stand one hitch or even the slightest sign of choppiness. I usually run settings that put my min FPS near their max FPS.

If they have targeted a specific audience I am certainly not in it.:p I find it hard to believe than most of the people who read this site have $3000+ invested in hardware, but they would know more about that then me. I just get the feeling that they are overrunning their audience with what is essentially meaningless information. I'd like to know what hardware I can buy that will run the games with 60FPS minimum. According to them, nothing can. Most of the time I am left to deduce on my own how a game will run when I get it home. You just can't return the games these days either. No one will take them back. Basically, if I buy a new game I'm going out on a limb that I can achieve the performance I desire.

Some time ago I was afraid to buy F.E.A.R. because of everyone getting crap FPS and saying that the game was a monster. I eventually did buy it and I didn't really see what all the fuss was about. No way is a minimum FPS in the teens what I am looking for. I still haven't sprung for Crysis. I just don't think I can get the speed I need to make a shooter enjoyable.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
If you think ATI's got the trump card with their HD4870X2, I think your still wrong. I think when push comes to shove a single GT200, big and loud as it might be, is still cheaper than two RV770's, which means the GTX can undercut the HD4870X2.
Click to expand...
Well, the GTX 260 is the same price as two RV770Pro cards and the GTX 280 is equal or higher than two RV770XT cards at the (rumored) MSRP. All along, the early reports have said ATI has plenty of room to drop prices on these cards. They were originally aimed at lower price points, but they raised the price when the performance exceeded expectations.

Anyway, the market will be a very different place in August. Most of the premium-price-paying, early adopters will have already picked up their GT200 or 4800 cards and we will probably see some nice price drops as the two companies jockey for market share. So, I seriously doubt the R700 will be priced at the level that two RV770XT cards will cost at launch. RV770XT and GT200 launch prices will have dropped lower by August. I would guess that the R700 will be priced lower than two single RV770XT cards and in line with it's performance relative to the other cards on the market in August.

Nvidia does undercut them now, by having the fastest single-card two months before ATI, but the RV700 should be the single-slot performance leader when it is released. I have the feeling it will be priced very competitively to win over as many converts as possible from the crowd who must have the latest and greatest.
 
RikkAndrsn said:
Exactly. That's why ATI's mid range strategy is much smarter than nVidia's "All the power in the world, for a price" mentality. The people with the means and will to spend above $400 on a single video card are few and far between, especially when you take into account all the gamers who are in it just for playable FPS on decent settings. [H] is a little bit of an oddity, where people build systems that seem to need huge resolutions to be justified. Most people don't have monitors above 22 inches, let alone at the crown of 30 inches where so many of the so called "battles" for the top are set.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but why would you want to spend that kind of money on a card when you're not going to be running higher resolutions? If you're running 1024 or 1280 rez, the only reason you'd be reading the 260/280 (and probably the 4870) reviews is to see who's fastest. You wouldn't be using the reviews to figure out which card you're going to be buying. You'll be more interested in the budget or mid-range. Sure the review on [H] could have done more resolutions, but they decided to focus on the intended market for these new cards, the power gamer with a decent amount of disposable income. I'd rather read a very well thought out and executed review that focuses on the important information than one that just puts up a huge amount of benchmark numbers in a scatter shot type sploogefest.

And since Nov, the definition of midrange & budget have been drastically changed from previous times. ATI has been relegated to that section or the most part recently, but Nvidia has done a very good job with their price reductions to stay in there too. As it stands right now, it's a great time to be a budget or midrange gamer. Lots of choices and awesome bangs for the buck!

I've been in the Nvidia camp for my last few video cards, but I'll go with ATI if they have something that can provide a better bang for the buck. I have fond memories of my old 9800pro :) That being said, the 4870 will have to be quite impressive to make me think about upgrading from my 8800GTS 512. Maybe once it's released it'll force Nvidia to drop the price on the 260.
 
BallerX said:
[H] has always had sound method and sound advice for the consumer. Thats why I stick around this place. I do think the way they portray games sometimes can have a negative effect on my purchasing decisions though. They like their FPS a lot slower than I would, but thats their opinion and they are entitled to it. I am the kind of person who can't stand one hitch or even the slightest sign of choppiness. I usually run settings that put my min FPS near their max FPS.

If they have targeted a specific audience I am certainly not in it.:p I find it hard to believe than most of the people who read this site have $3000+ invested in hardware, but they would know more about that then me. I just get the feeling that they are overrunning their audience with what is essentially meaningless information. I'd like to know what hardware I can buy that will run the games with 60FPS minimum. According to them, nothing can. Most of the time I am left to deduce on my own how a game will run when I get it home. You just can't return the games these days either. No one will take them back. Basically, if I buy a new game I'm going out on a limb that I can achieve the performance I desire.

Some time ago I was afraid to buy F.E.A.R. because of everyone getting crap FPS and saying that the game was a monster. I eventually did buy it and I didn't really see what all the fuss was about. No way is a minimum FPS in the teens what I am looking for. I still haven't sprung for Crysis. I just don't think I can get the speed I need to make a shooter enjoyable.
Click to expand...

I'm with you,I like the way they test with real world situations and not canned benchmarks, but I wish they throw in some lower resolution tests. I mean most people game at 1680x1050 or lower, so most people will not get any info out of these super hi-res tests and I don't care if they get FPS that are double what they find playable it will benefit more people this way IMO.
 
sam0t said:
Is flag waving and blunt bias seperate or the same thing? Guess it's matter of taste and such can only be judged by individual basis.

Anyways I raised my eye brows when I read a comment made by [H] editor just couple days before GTX 280 that could be easily counted as hyping an unreleased product. Not very good way to show your neutrality in matters such as these IMHO.
Click to expand...

No, they are the same thing, though flag waving is the light aspect of blunt bias, which is obviously the worst and you can usually spot lots of those, when they join the forum specifically to bash some product that is about to be released, among other situations of course.

I've been called a NVIDIA fanboy numerous times and it comes with the territory. People are quick to call someone a fanboy when that person says something they think "hurts" their "color/flag" for some reason. even if that's what countless reviews/evaluations say too. Actually, my latest favorite, was the still in denial fans (even after 1+ years), that think R600 does very well with AA. Obviously just pointing this out makes me a NVIDIA fanboy again, but I don't really care anymore.

Also, who in [H] said anything that you thought was hyping an unreleased product ? Was it really hype or was just your perception of it ?
 
APOLLO said:
You might want to read this article to help you decide: http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1467/how_nvidia_stuffed_the_gtx_280/index.html
Click to expand...


You know I would, but this guy pretty much goes out of his way in the article to torpedo Nvidia. You can tell he basically is fabricating a lot of what he says.

Such as saying the 280's are $750 bucks apiece.

An obvious attempt to make the situation seem worse than it really is.

I believe this was the same schmuck that ran his benchmarks at a low resolution in order for the 280 to look worse. If I remember right he ran that at like 1024 x 768 or some crummy resolution that would show no difference.
 
hasoos said:
You know I would, but this guy pretty much goes out of his way in the article to torpedo Nvidia. You can tell he basically is fabricating a lot of what he says.

Such as saying the 280's are $750 bucks apiece.

An obvious attempt to make the situation seem worse than it really is.

I believe this was the same schmuck that ran his benchmarks at a low resolution in order for the 280 to look worse. If I remember right he ran that at like 1024 x 768 or some crummy resolution that would show no difference.
Click to expand...

Umm I think he is in Australia and that is the actual price of gtx280 in AUS dollars.
 
hasoos said:
You know I would, but this guy pretty much goes out of his way in the article to torpedo Nvidia. You can tell he basically is fabricating a lot of what he says.

Such as saying the 280's are $750 bucks apiece.

An obvious attempt to make the situation seem worse than it really is.

I believe this was the same schmuck that ran his benchmarks at a low resolution in order for the 280 to look worse. If I remember right he ran that at like 1024 x 768 or some crummy resolution that would show no difference.
Click to expand...
As the poster above mentioned, that's in Aussie currency. As for the article's handling of NVidia, you may be correct, I don't frequent that site at all. However, it's not the only place I have noticed some rumors lately indicating amazing performance for the price of the new Ati cards. We will find out soon enough. I would wait before purchasing if for any other reason than the prices dropping.
 
hasoos said:
You know I would, but this guy pretty much goes out of his way in the article to torpedo Nvidia. You can tell he basically is fabricating a lot of what he says.

Such as saying the 280's are $750 bucks apiece.

An obvious attempt to make the situation seem worse than it really is.

I believe this was the same schmuck that ran his benchmarks at a low resolution in order for the 280 to look worse. If I remember right he ran that at like 1024 x 768 or some crummy resolution that would show no difference.
Click to expand...

The prices he listed were in AUD...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top