• 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.

The GTX 260 is faster than 4870

same as gurusan never had any drivers probs with either ati or nvidia .not had 1 crash in any game with my 4850 and tried a lot of games with it.i game more than 90% of people and the ati 4850 has been as stable as any other card ive owned.think some people have had bad experiences of the past with either brand and just rubbish it forever after that.

the 4870 is faster its been proven lots of times .great effort for trying though lol.now lets have some benchies from the games we actually play like cod4 :D
 
Will be interesting to see how they stack up against each other when Warhead is released.. Whether it's down to 'poor' coding of Crysis or that type of game engine in general. I don't think it's entirely fair to say 'well crysis favours nvidia cards so that doesn't count', because if we suddenly get a load of games like Crysis, we might see the 260 in a more favourable light?
 
Cupra said:
i have a 4850 and tbh its rubbish worthy of the bin they were never ready for release they crash in games there slow the drivers are crap.
Im now back on a single 9800gx2 and loving it and im so glad i didnt wait for the 4870 to come in stock cos there more money for the same crap
Click to expand...

Suprised at your comments. :(

Seems a bit of a silly thing to say.
 
My 4850 has crashed once in game, I had it overclocked, without modifying fan speeds, and playing CoD4.

I've since put it back at standard clocks, and it runs perfectly, no crashes.

I've suffered the dual screen issue once, in the month I've had this machine built.

I couldn't have bought a better card for the money than my 4850, and stand by that :)
 
MikeHiow said:
My 4850 has crashed once in game, I had it overclocked, without modifying fan speeds, and playing CoD4.

I've since put it back at standard clocks, and it runs perfectly, no crashes.

I've suffered the dual screen issue once, in the month I've had this machine built.

I couldn't have bought a better card for the money than my 4850, and stand by that :)
Click to expand...


^agreed, best card I have owned so far. Not to mention it's lightning quick and at my resolution and probably up to 1920x1200 most likely not too far off a GTX 280 when overclocked to 880/1150...going to pencil mod the mem a bit tonight to push it up to a nice even 1200mhz as well. :)
 
Last edited:
The only crash I have had on my xfire 4850 setup was in furbench. Which is a real shame because between that and 3dMark, it's all I play on my PC.

sadpanda.jpg
 
MikeHiow said:
My 4850 has crashed once in game, I had it overclocked, without modifying fan speeds, and playing CoD4.

I've since put it back at standard clocks, and it runs perfectly, no crashes.

I've suffered the dual screen issue once, in the month I've had this machine built.

I couldn't have bought a better card for the money than my 4850, and stand by that :)
Click to expand...

No need to run it overclocked, I only run it overclocked for Crymark07 and benchmarks.

layte said:
The only crash I have had on my xfire 4850 setup was in furbench. Which is a real shame because between that and 3dMark, it's all I play on my PC.

sadpanda.jpg
Click to expand...

Crash at stock speeds? could be VRM you never know!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
There will be problems with all hardware! Just because you have a specific problem, doesn't mean other people will too. :D

The GTX260 wins the FPS battle in some games, the 4870 does so in others. It's all about personal preference and both cards are able to compete with each other. Either card is viable given they are roughly the same price now. Neither are significantly better in performance given scaling and minimum framerates. Just because a 4870 has more FPS in COD4 doesn't mean jack if both cards hit 60+ minimum FPS.

The GTX260 seems to have more raw power and better minimum FPS and the 4870 is better with shader intensive AA due to better tech. ATi has a smaller PCB, while nVidia has better temps, power draw and more VRAM. Nvidia also has PhysX now and ATi has... well, it has DX10.1, lol... whatever floats ya boat really.

You may buy ATi because you feel they did the industry some justice with nV's prices, or you may purchase nVidia because you don't give a rats about pricing strategy and like what companies such as BFG, EVGA and XFX have to offer (warranty, step-up, RMA, etc). Whatever.

Personal preference; i'll be getting a GTX260 next week as it's the same price as the 4870 in Hong Kong. Doesn't mean the 4870 isn't worthy of my money, it's just I prefer the GTX260.

Just buy a card and play the damn games! :)
 
Last edited:
4870 does AA better, in a high end card that's the winning factor for me when its so close performance wise, though the performance gap is well in the 4870's favor when you apply AA.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
4870 does AA better, in a high end card that's the winning factor for me when its so close performance wise, though the performance gap is well in the 4870's favor when you apply AA.
Click to expand...
That's cool, so are you basing your results on online reviews?

The reason I ask is I can see a mixed bag of reviews with AA. Like in general I see AA better with ATi, but the difference is usually only with avg/max FPS. Even then, the difference is <10FPS (5-10%) and those numbers with avg/max FPS aren't going to show much difference on your monitor. Again, what matters is minimum FPS as that's what makes your games laggy.

So really, the performance is negligible if you take that into account.

Then you have a few sites like Firing Squad showing the GTX260 actually beating the 4870 even in COD4 with AA. Shock, horror!

Without having both cards and testing myself, I couldn't say for sure, but I honestly can't see the 4870's performance gap being well into ATi's favour given the performance being only 5-10% better at max/avg FPS only, and in some games, only.

It would make jack all difference with my gaming experience.
 
Last edited:
Nothing wrong with minimum frame rates on the 4870.

All I know is if I got a GTX260 It would proberbly be a downgrade in my rig unless every game starts using PhysX.
 
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the 4870's min FPS, just saying the majority of reviews people are basing their opinions on are using max/avg FPS and those numbers are about as conclusive as synthetic benchmarks.

He said the performance gap was well in ATi's favour, i'm saying it's negligible. When taking in account max/avg FPS which mean jack all, ATI and nV are clearly neck and neck with minimum FPS.
 
Last edited:
It's a well known fact the 260 does a tad better in crysis, 3dmk06, etc.

I'd be more interested in seeing some more game compared, like cod4, tf2, grid, etc.

Glad you're happy with your new card though... even if you have downgraded. :p
 
It was kind of self inflicted though, since he posted an innacurate title based on flawed information

It should have been "gtx 260 works better on my system as i couldnt get the 4870 to work" rather than a blanket statement
 
MR. B
Thanks for a very interesting read. I for one look forward to seeing your benchmarks of other games for a more real world test (i agree with others that 3dmark and crysis are not the best to bench with).
As it stands at present I m still undecided what Gcard to buy (280 or 4870x2) the price for the ATI is a little high compared with the now hugely reduced Nvidia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom