The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread

well i can see the big difference in the gpu's now this 8800 blows smoke at my 7600 it is awesome how much difference there is in the clarity and detail between the 2 cards. other than going i5 which i cant justify right now and the 6 core cpus coming along like they are i will wait for one of them a year down the road.so that means the only true upgrade for my system is a better GPU. why is there such a big difference from a 5770 and a 5870? talking $250-$350 more???? is there that much performance difference in them? and is a 5770 better than a 4850? i do like this one here.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150351
plus that about as much as i would want to spend on one when i do.
this would be about the max.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150447

and is ATI any better than Nvidia? i know thats like asking why intel is better than AMD.. i know its each and everyone opinion

in getting one of these cards, what kinda score would i be looking at?

 

Welcome to the world of graphics upgrades Your 8800GTS is at least 4 times as powerful as the 7600 it replaced, and it's now a relatively old card. Today's high-end cards like the HD5870 are 4 times as powerful as the 8800GTS itself.
The HD5770 is a midrange low-power (one PCIe connector) card. The HD5870 is the top-end new design, and is generally double the performance. ATI currently charge more than double the price because nvidia have nothing to compete in that area.
The HD5770 is marginally faster than the HD4850, but not by very much, typically 10% or less. The HD4850 is far less efficient, and is only DirectX10.1, missing the new features the HD5 series has, which is ATI's justification for the price being higher.

As for ATI vs nvidia, right now it's a little clearer cut, ATI are doing better than nvidia. The two trade blows like AMD and Intel do. However, nvidia have been in pretty dire straits lately as they have had serious production problems with their new product, which is due to be released this weekend. People aren't expecting that much from it. It'll be fast, but it'll be overpriced, and hugely inefficient, we're talking it using as much power as two of the rival GPU that can pretty much keep pace with it. Right now I'd say it's a bit like Intel with the Core 2 Quad versus AMD with the original Phenom, before the Phenom II came out, though perhaps worse than that. Who knows, things may improve for nvidia, but right now I'm remaining rather pessimistic.

 

The 5770 is essentially a die-shrunk 4870 with Dx11 tacked on. The 5870's little high-end brother is the 5850. The 5770 is in an entirely different(and lower) performance class.

On AMD vs Intel I actually like both in certain ways. Having owned and loved 3 different Core 2 based chips, you can't exactly call me biased

But I really prefer the overall structure and performance characteristics of AMDs due to my gaming roots. The Phenom II keeps consistently higher minimum framerates than my Q6600. Not an entirely fair comparison considering the age difference, but it's one of the very few reasons I could justify a full AMD build for almost no upgrade.

Due to their higher memory bandwitdth, AMDs tend to be snappier and more responsive doing OS-based tasks. Intels are more accustomed to number crunching than for responsiveness so both tend to have their shortcomings.

My most notable findings are that, except in a few games, my AMD has overkill horsepower for my cards. I actually match an i5 in a few instances. Don't get me wrong i5 is overall WAY faster, but each architecture will always have its strengths and weaknesses. Worth noting is that AMDs have almost ALWAYS had games specific code written into them(3DNow+). The very reason the Phenom I was actually okay at games... but not much else.

 

I would love to borrow an HD5830 to test. The benchmarks for it are absolutely bizarre. Some sites report it as being worse than the HD4890, an 'HD5790' if you will. Others report it midway between the HD4890 and HD5850, where I would expect it to be.

As for the Core 2 vs i5, it's worth remembering that the i5 has significantly higher memory bandwidth due to the use of DDR3, along with finally doing away with the antiquated Front Side Bus and using an AMD-like QPI instead. As to how much snappier that makes things, I'd really want to wait until I have an SSD to test. Right now, whenever I find myself waiting, the hard disk is flat out, so it seems pretty obvious where the holdback is.

 

so i should look more into the 5770 than over the 4850 just for the fact of DirectX11?

 

Not really, DX11 has some cool new features, but a 5770 on its own isn't really powerful enough to make full use of them. You may as well stick with the 4850 for a cheap upgrade.

 

first gen dxX cards are normally not great for that new dx, esp non-high end cards. I think the situation with nvidia now mirrors the whole ati siuation with the 2900GT launch. 6 month late, powerhungry, etc. But this time it should be more powerful.

 

so what would you all recommend then if not the 5770? im not gonna spend $350+ on a card either...lol

 

Well what are you going to spend? It's your choice of HD4850, HD5770, HD4870, HD4890 (if you can still find them), assuming the HD5850 is too much for you. There is also an HD5830, though we're unsure exactly how well that performs at the moment.

 

well i dont want to spend more than 200 right now. plus i need to save some for that.so if a deal comes along the way on something bigger/better it might be possible.

 

Well then it comes down to HD4850, HD4870 or HD5770. The HD4850 is less efficient than the HD5770 and slower, but cheaper by $65 ($55 after rebate). The HD4870 is marginally faster than the HD5770, but much less efficient, requiring two power connectors as well, and costs $11 more ($21 after rebate). Personally, I think it's between the HD5770 and HD4850. The HD4850 is better value, but the HD5770 is the more modern and efficient card.

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...ENE&N=2010380048 106793261 1067950041&bop=And
any thoughts on these?

edit:try now..lol

edit
ok redid it..

 

URL doesn't work

 

$200 is way more than enough for a good gaming card.

This is easily one of the fastest 5770s

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150464

Or this 4870 which might work out faster in a few cases...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814129139

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...ENE&N=2010380048 106793261 1067950041&bop=And


there we go. i dont know why the other one wouldnt work.

ive been told the XFX cards tend to run hotter than most. is this true?

kinda liking this one.
XFX HD-577A-ZNFC Radeon HD 5770 (Juniper XT)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150447

 

Link still broken.
XFX cards don't have higher temperatures than any other brand, not sure where that rumour comes from. Especially true with HD5770s because they all use the same cooler!

 

what the hell??? does the single link work??? they both are working for me.

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150462
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814103086
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150447
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814129150
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102858

right now my card is at 54c im not useing it though. what are the temps of the bigger cards like those?

 

Typically the HD5770s idle in the 40s or so, and under full load will run up to about the 80s for the standard coolers, maybe a bit lower for the noisier open coolers, such as your 1st and 4th link. ATI GPU temperatures, however, are fine up to well over 100ºC so there's no issue really.

 

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight
[Game engine restricted to 30fps, so M30 figures shown for Good and above]
[Anti-Aliasing not included]
Minimal: Radeon X1800 series/HD2900 series/HD3650/HD4550/HD5450 or above, Geforce 7800 series/8600 series/9500GT/GT220 or above
Reduced: Radeon HD2900 series/HD3690/HD4650/HD5570 or above, Geforce 8800 series/9600 series/GT220 or above
Moderate: Radeon HD4700 series/HD5700 series or above, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GTS250 or above
Good M30: Radeon HD4750/HD4850/HD5750 or above, Geforce 8800GTS G92/9800GTX/GTS250 or above
Optimal M30: Radeon HD4860/HD5770 or above, Geforce GTX260 or above
Extreme M30: Radeon HD4870X2/HD5830 or above, Geforce GTX295/GTX470 (est) or above



First GTX480 benchmark has appeared, it's not looking good. Five games were tested, alongside Unigine. The performance of the GTX480 is obviously superior in Unigine for now, but in the games tested (DiRT 2, Bad Company 2, Crysis Warhead, Far Cry 2 and HAWX), the GTX480 only shows any lead (greater than 4-5%) in Far Cry 2, DiRT 2 and HAWX - HAWX being a game that was bugged for the HD5870 in earlier catalysts which has been fixed in the latest driver and DiRT 2 being bugged for the GTX480 tripping into DirectX9 and showing false figures. This really only leaves the GTX480 with an advantage in Far Cry 2, hardly the most important title so far. The HD5870 and GTX480 are neck and neck in Crysis Warhead until 2560x1600 (bear in mind this is Enthusiast with AA enabled) at which point you wouldn't be using an HD5870, but an HD5970, which slaps the GTX480 around in all of these tests regardless.

Power of the GTX480 is about identical to that of the HD4870X2 but with better idles (higher than that of the HD5970), 475W PC draw at load, 150 at idle. Load temperature of the GPU on the stock cooler is a toasty 93ºC, and with a 250W+ GPU to cool, that isn't going to be a quiet 93 Celsius either.
The GTX480 is a dismal failure if it costs any more than £350. I'm almost certain it will.


EDIT: The GTX480 is £450. All together now... "Oh...Dear."