• 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

At the higher RES's that most play at the GT is faster in nearly all games with eye candy on.

I know Crossfire Scales better than SLI but I would not run 2 GPU's in any form anyhow.

Apart from Money, there is still no reason to buy an ATI card today and thats inc the so called quiet fan comments above, as the Nvidia 8000's are all quiet.
 
Last edited:
Thats exactly what I said, go for the card you can afford, the 8800gt cant be had for £170 atm as those brands are on pre-order from what ive found and the only ones in stock are upwards of £190...so yes some people may not be able to afford the extra £40 and if thats the case the 3870's are more than capable cards if they are not willing to wait for the prices to come back down.
 
8igdave said:
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.
Click to expand...

1) Yes, in answer to your first question question (and I did). I have money for 2 GTX's, but I'm out of that game now. Trying to keep up all the time bores me now. I also gave my reasons further up in this thread.

2) You shouldn't, you should advise them based on their exact needs/requirements/wishes.

3) It doesn't. It means you want to most value for your money.

*Supposedly (just for future reference). I could have had a GT for £160 or my XT for £140 and chose the XT (as per my reasons above).
 
Randell said:
wow its amazing what bias does to understanding..
Click to expand...

I find that humourous. You are in the minority when everyone else dissagrees with you. You just happen to have everything amd in your pc and you claim everyone else is bias? Plus the ":p" in his post could mean sarcasm... or perhaps he just didn't read the bennchmarks i posted.

Just because you post 1 set of benchmarks doesn't mean they are the same, i posted some which may have even been the same games but show totaly differnt things. The average is more like 20-30% difference. Which to many people warrents the extra price. Considering the 8800Gt has a premium due to low stock when it goes down to 150 quid again no one will buy the ati cards. Plus it serposidly can be had for 170 quid. thats not far off for a 20-30%, with some games such as your oblivion benchmark showing 40%. I fail to see how the ati card is worth it if you can afford the 8800GT.
 
smids said:
1) Yes, in answer to your first question question (and I did). I have money for 2 GTX's, but I'm out of that game now. Trying to keep up all the time bores me now. I also gave my reasons further up in this thread.

2) You shouldn't, you should advise them based on their exact needs/requirements/wishes.

3) It doesn't. It means you want to most value for your money.

*Supposedly (just for future reference). I could have had a GT for £160 or my XT for £140 and chose the XT (as per my reasons above).
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity why did you choose the 3870?
 
SS-89 said:
..and the only ones in stock are upwards of £190...so yes some people may not be able to afford the extra £40 and if thats the case the 3870's are more than capable cards if they are not willing to wait for the prices to come back down.
Click to expand...

At the price I just paid, that is an extra £60, so you have to really ask yourself, do you need the extra frames at that price difference? That's all I was ever trying to point out.

£60 that's two games, 3-4 HD movies, a decent night out :P, most of a new PSU etc etc.
 
8igdave said:
I find that humourous. You are in the minority when everyone else dissagrees with you. You just happen to have everything amd in your pc and you claim everyone else is bias? Plus the ":p" in his post could mean sarcasm... or perhaps he just didn't read the bennchmarks i posted.

Just because you post 1 set of benchmarks doesn't mean they are the same, i posted some which may have even been the same games but show totaly differnt things. The average is more like 20-30% difference. Which to many people warrents the extra price. Considering the 8800Gt has a premium due to low stock when it goes down to 150 quid again no one will buy the ati cards. Plus it serposidly can be had for 170 quid. thats not far off for a 20-30%, with some games such as your oblivion benchmark showing 40%. I fail to see how the ati card is worth it if you can afford the 8800GT.
Click to expand...

You see, this is what bugs me - there are still reasons to get the ATi. I believe the HD implementation is better and can be retired to a celery later if required.

I also found a perfectly valid reason for having one now (in full knowledge of the performance of the GT). In fact, I just received my ATi today after a week of deliberating.

EDIT: My reason is on the first page of this thread.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10589485&postcount=23 If you missed it. You obviously had missed it, so I retract my comment about what bugs me, as you had not seen my example.

I will also add that I don't need to rely on crappy RAMsinks either, as the stock ATi ones are good.
 
Last edited:
luismenendez said:
Nobody mention the 3870 exhaust the hot air outside the case which is important when overclocking the whole system
Click to expand...

Any decent case will simply exhaust the hot air out of the case. it doesn't make much difference. MAny people have put new heat sinks on to run them cooler and faster and they all put the hot air into the case but with a good air flow its all pushed out quickly and doesn't really affect your cpu overclocking to badly.
 
smids said:
You see, this is what bugs me - there are still reasons to get the ATi. I believe the HD implementation is better and can be retired to a celery later if required.

I also found a perfectly valid reason for having one now (in full knowledge of the performance of the GT). In fact, I just received my ATi today after a week of deliberating.
Click to expand...

True being able to actually buy one now is quite a good bonus but i beleive there are some in stock about and ocuk has some bfg in stock i beleive?

Also considering we are doing gaming benchmarks and talking about gamign i dont think HD really comes into it. Although i gues if you love dvds too it counts, i havn't a clue which is the best at HD implementation but im curious as to why the 3870 would be any better.
 
8igdave said:
You are in the minority when everyone else dissagrees with you. You just happen to have everything amd in your pc and you claim everyone else is bias?
Click to expand...

everyone else disagrres with me that the 3870 isn't worth buying? that's funny..

enough, the GT is faster than the 3870, its also dearer.

As for bias - I had already stated I had an AMD CF board. But I don't jump into every thread telling people not to buy a GT do I? It is not what you own that shows your bias, it's what you say and how you say it.
 
luismenendez said:
Nobody mention the 3870 exhaust the hot air outside the case which is important when overclocking the whole system
Click to expand...

So does Most of the High End Nvidia inc the New GTS, the 8800GT although fast is not classed as High End.

And many peeps do not like dual Slot so they cant keep them all happy.

Also it was shown Purevideo1 (nevermind2) was better than ATI's version for HD and its far easier to do 1080p from the driver with no messing about to a HDTV (seen lots of posts on forums from ATI users asking how to do, end up using PowerStrip).
 
Last edited:
I prefer AMD CPU's and Nvidia GPU's. (just the C2D is newer than AM2 and my Crosshair fried).

AMD should never have bought ATI for both their sakes.

2x AA, some peep above claims at 8x AA it beats the GT lol.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Stick 2XAA on them benches and watch the 3870 start going down quicker than a desperate hooker.
Click to expand...

Aww i never noticed they didn't have AA, that would explain it. Doesn't tjhe 3870 still have the same weakness the 2900xt has to aa. i remember reading in a nother review actually that nvida still whipes the floor when it comes to aa being added. Cant remember where though so i cant support it, think it may have been one of the earlyer reviews.

I know he said at 8aa it beats the GT but what game is this?
 
Dave he is saying that, the comment means the ATI card will slow down rally bad with AA. (I assume your reading it backwards).

No idea what game but I get a RES like 1024x768 or less.
 
LoadsaMoney said:
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.
Click to expand...


I quote tom's as one reference for you
If you’ve recently been asking yourself if you paid too much for your GTX or Ultra card in the face of the GT’s recent release, this game will show you that your investment into more stream processors and higher memory bandwidth were very worthwhile after all.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry Loadsa, but four fps behind? In what setting? 1280*1024 with no AA and medium settings? I think in some cases it may even be slightly ahead due to the faster core in games where shaders are less important, but in the games that count at the higher res, with AA turned on etc, I would rather have a gtx. Yeah, sure it is double the amount, but your suggesting it is only 1-5% slower than a gtx, that is complete garbage, and to me it looks like you have got blinkers on.

Please re-study some benchmarks from many sources to get a grip of your comments. I think the gt is a fantastic card at a fantastic price point, but it isn't the holy grail mate. Take the rose tinted glasses off and look at the facts not the hype.

Your suggestion that the card is like a xt vs xtx. That was basically down to clock speed differences and memory type. The gtx also has higher bandwidth, more stream processors and more memory. Please tell me how you can make up that difference compared to just clocks?

as for 3870 vs gt vs gtx, once again, the gt DOES NOT perform as well as the gtx and this mind set is getting daft. The performance difference between the 3870 and GT is about the same gap -OVERALL, not in selected benchmarks and res's- as between the GT and the GTX.

Matthew
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom