• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

3870XT 512 v 8800GT 512

Scougar said:
For goodness sake, stop saying the GT 'IS' on par with the GTX. It isn't. It has a good performance next to the GTX, but it can't match the GTX where it counts.

Matthew
Click to expand...

Idd, its close but when the GTX is clocked its still behind...
 
Scougar said:
For goodness sake, stop saying the GT 'IS' on par with the GTX. It isn't. It has a good performance next to the GTX, but it can't match the GTX where it counts.

Matthew
Click to expand...

I said it was GTX performance, which it is, as last i knew a couple of frames or so slower means absolute bugger all. :)

Oh look my GT is about 4x frames slower than the GTX here in this game, oh look only 6x in this one, and in this one its only 2x, jesus its getting obliterated :eek:, its nowhere ******* near GTX performance, wish id lashed out £300 on that now instead of £160 on this heap of ***** of a GT. :mad:



Look at when the x1950 XTX came out, everyone was saying to buy the much x1900 XTX's for the same performance, even though the x1950 XTX was a couple or so frames faster.

fact is the GT is around the GTX performance, all reviews show this, the 3870 is around 2900 XT performance, same in some, couple of frames faster in some, all reviews show this, Gibbo even said the 3870 was around 2900 XT performance, now last time i saw, the 2900 XT was getting trounced of the GTX, so what miracles have the driver team pulled off then, if now your saying the 2900 XT is GTX performance, as it clearly must be now if its around GT performance, as the GT is GTX performance, so that would make the 3870 GTX performance to, but it clearly isn't from the reviews ive seen, its nowhere near the GTX.
 
Last edited:
I chose the 3870.

However, I have reasons for my choice. I am fed up buying the top end cards i.e. GTX etc so I'm sticking to mid range. The fact that my 3870 cost me £140 all in and it was available swung it for me. I'd be looking at close to £170 upwards for a GT and also, I water cool. I am not spending money on a new waterblock when my old one here will cool the core and the heatsinks for the 3870 RAM are independently fitted to the main fn meaning cooling it with water is about as easy as swapping out my cards. The GT would require a new waterblock (as mine is an old Maze4 so I'd probably buy a new one). That would add about £50 to the £170 or so now, so I'm happy.

I know for a fact the GT is faster, but I just couldn't be bothered. So, if anyone is wondering why I chose my XT (not that I expect anyone to be), there's my reason.

However, the XT is about 20% slower than the GT and only about 15% cheaper (this is basically what most reviews say). Still, I don't have a big monitor yet so for me it's meaningless and beats the crap out of the 6600GT I've been using for the last 8 months since my X1800XT 512MB died.
 
smids said:
I chose the 3870.

However, I have reasons for my choice..
Click to expand...

every purchase decision has to made on its own merits. There are some people on this board who overplay how much faster the GT is over the 3870 and don't admit at a price (£140 being about right IMO) it is a good and equally valid choice as a GT. I will probably get one because I have a CF board and only a 480W psu for example.
 
I love my 3870 because it's totally silent - I'm an absolute noise nut - I detest anything that makes more than a faint whisper.

Ok so maybe it's not the fastest mid-range card on the market, but it handles most stuff I chuck at it with ease - COD4 + Bioshock at 1680x1050 at max detail, for example.
 
LoadsaMoney said:
fact is the GT is around the GTX performance, all reviews show this, the 3870 is around 2900 XT performance, same in some, couple of frames faster in some, all reviews show this, Gibbo even said the 3870 was around 2900 XT performance, now last time i saw, the 2900 XT was getting trounced of the GTX, so what miracles have the driver team pulled off then, if now your saying the 2900 XT is GTX performance, as it clearly must be now if its around GT performance, as the GT is GTX performance, so that would make the 3870 GTX performance to, but it clearly isn't from the reviews ive seen, its nowhere near the GTX.
Click to expand...

Well you dont say, I wonder is that the reason its around £120 cheaper than the cheapest gtx and £40-50 cheaper than a gt? :rolleyes:

For its price/performance ratio its a very good card...as is the gt.
 
Err, the 3870 retails at around £160, you can pick the 8800GT up for £170 in some places, so £10 difference at most, GT is the card to get at that price range.
 
I have not seen any gt's in stock at that price but if they are then yes definitely at that price the gt is the card to go for unless your on a budget in which case the 3870 is still a good card.
 
Yeah, some retailers are not hiking the prices up on the GT and all credit to them for it, one place has stock going at £166, my card has gone up a tenner since launch as well.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Err, the 3870 retails at around £160, you can pick the 8800GT up for £170 in some places, so £10 difference at most, GT is the card to get at that price range.
Click to expand...

err no. The lowest price on here for a 3870 is £152, the lowest price for a GT is about £182, so thats £30.

But here isn't the lowest price for either, I just ordered a 3870, in stock for under £130, £135 with shipping, against say a best price for a GT of £160, still £30 difference

Two things GT fans on here keep doing, overstating the GT performance advantage and understating the 'available' price difference, amazing.
 
Last edited:
Randell said:
every purchase decision has to made on its own merits. There are some people on this board who overplay how much faster the GT is over the 3870 and don't admit at a price (£140 being about right IMO) it is a good and equally valid choice as a GT. I will probably get one because I have a CF board and only a 480W psu for example.
Click to expand...

This point of view that people are just not amiting that the 3870 is almost as good as a GT is untrue. Where are the facts showing its almost as fast? One benchmark on one game? Perhaps 2 games? How about every other game showing the GT to have a decent lead over it?

Have you thought that perhaps you just have a lower price/performance threshold then some? I see the GT as a £170 quid GTX which was only recently £300. I see the 3870 as a slightly faster 2900xt which is pritty much what it is.

I think it is more likely that you simply dont want a GT therefore are trying to convince your self there is no difference and trying to claim we are all wrong.
 
8igdave said:
This point of view that people are just not amiting that the 3870 is almost as good as a GT is untrue. Where are the facts showing its almost as fast? One benchmark on one game? Perhaps 2 games? How about every other game showing the GT to have a decent lead over it?

Have you thought that perhaps you just have a lower price/performance threshold then some? I see the GT as a £170 quid GTX which was only recently £300. I see the 3870 as a slightly faster 2900xt which is pritty much what it is.

I think it is more likely that you simply dont want a GT therefore are trying to convince your self there is no difference and trying to claim we are all wrong.
Click to expand...

what a surprise you jumped in :) I've seen you claim a GT has between a 25% and 40% perf advantage, and I know you've been shown this before

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=6

I game at 1680x1050, the 3870 is fast enough for that resolution, is 15% slower on aveage than a GT (and Anandtech isn't he only one that has come up with that figure) and is about 15%-20% cheaper than GT so price per fps is the same. I have a CF board, so yes it is in my vested interest to have a good price/perf ratio ATI product, why is it in yours to keep saying the GT is a cheap GTX, and underplaying the 3870 performance?
By your reckoning I have a card that is 75% of a near GTX experience for around 40% of the cost still seems a good deal to me.

If an in stock 3850 512mb was around £100-£110 I might well have gone that route. If I gamed at 1920x1080 I probably would have gone GT route.

All of the 3850, 3870 and GT far surpass my 1950pro so I choose what was right for my wallet.
 
Last edited:
Randell said:
what a surprise you jumped in :) I've seen you claim a GT has between a 25% and 40% perf advantage, and I know you've been shown this before

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=6

I game at 1680x1050, the 3870 is fast enough for that resolution, is 15% slower on aveage than a GT (and Anandtech isn't he only one that has come up with that figure) and is about 15%-20% cheaper than GT so price per fps is the same. I have a CF board, so yes it is in my vested interest to have a good price/perf ratio ATI product, why is it in yours to keep saying the GT is a cheap GTX, and underpalying the 3870 performance?
By your reckoning I have a card that is 75% of a near GTX experience for around 40% of the cost.

If an in stock 3850 512mb was around £100-£110 I might well have gone that route.

All of the 3850, 3870 and GT far surpass my 1950pro so I choose what was right for my wallet.
Click to expand...

Sounds more like you cant afford a GT therefore think all of us are just putting the 3870 down because we can. Perhaps its because we would rather the extra framse the GT gives?

MMM 1 review with figures showing a 40% difference in oblivion as well.

How about some other benchmarks?

(the xxx version is a factory overclocked 8800GT and is what the 8800GT would do if it was overclocked pritty much, but you can ignore that if it makes you feel any better about how good the 3870 is)

COD4:

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/3870-XXX/COD4.php

GOW (Is capped at 63 hence why the GTs are at 63 but the 3870 doesn't even make it to that and its likely the 8800GT would go faster then 63)

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/3870-XXX/gow.php

World in conflict:

As far as im consered the difference between 33 and 45 is the difference between makign a game playerble or not:

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/3870-XXX/wic.php


Crysis:

Thats about 40% difference i beleive:

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/3870-XXX/crysis.php

Lost planet:

Almost 30% difference

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/3870-XXX/lostplanet.php


Might as well add in overclocked xxx GT vs overclocked 3870 is roughly 25-30% difference in crysis:

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/3870-XXX/faster.php
 
This is the reason I stay out of the graphics forum.

Let's make this categorically clear - the GT is a fair bit faster than the XT (about 20% I'd say on average [across resolutions]). However, both cards are bloody good value and are both bloody fast...

I am very happy with my purchase at the price I paid and many others who buy the ATi will be too. I certainly knew what I'd be giving up in terms of performance but chose for good reasons.

I don't think anyone doubts the fact that the GT is faster tbh, and it is not greatly slower than the GT. 20% of 30 fps on some of these modern games is like 6fps. Quite frankly, a lot of cards struggle with the newer games at max/high details - I don't consider 30fps to be playable on something like cod4 or ut anyway).
 
Last edited:
8igdave said:
Sounds more like you cant afford a GT
Click to expand...

I can easily afford a GT, I just don't need to IMO. I can pull out benches if I want showing the 3870 beating the GT at 8xAA if I wanted, and winning overall in SLI v Crossfire, if I could be bothered. I don't want to get into a p*ssing war war with anyone, which is why I didn't name names earlier, but hey you fight the good fight if you want.
 
Most if not all on here agree that the 8800gt is on average around 20% faster and if you can get it at £170 (which is nigh on impossible atm but possibly after xmas) it is definitely the card to go for over the 3870 which can be had for £150 (should also fall in price). However, they are both good cards in terms of price/performance. Its quite astounding how some people are blinded by their own bias towards a brand, IMO go for what you can afford and gives you what you need regardless of the manufacturer.

Just so you know I think the 8800gt is a Stonking card (in terms of bang for buck) if you can get it for £170, not so much at £200.
 
Last edited:
SS-89 said:
Most if not all on here agree that the 8800gt is on average around 20% faster and if you can get it at £170 (which is nigh on impossible atm but possibly after xmas) it is definitely the card to go for over the 3870 which can be had for £150 (should also fall in price). However, they are both good cards in terms of price/performance. Its quite astounding how some people are blinded by their own bias towards a brand, IMO go for what you can afford and gives you what you need regardless of the manufacturer.
Click to expand...

Simply put, if you had the money for a 8800 GT would you buy a 3870? I doubt it. Why should we all tell people to get the 3870 when they can afford a 8800GT. Why should that make us biased or anti ati because we rather buy the better product? Serposidly they can be had in the 170s but i dont know where.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom