4870 1gb versus 280

philstanbridge · 28 Dec 2008 at 15:43

I really like my 4870 but it's a little noisy under load and I do not like the ATI drivers. Would there be much point in a 280 upgrade at this point in time? How noisy are they with the stock heatsinks?

alex24 · 28 Dec 2008 at 15:49

The 280 certainly performs and costs more, but if you got a good price for your radeon it might be a worthwhile upgrade. Depends how much you're willing to sacrifice for noise (it is quieter) and a bit more performance.

philstanbridge · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:02

Thanks - some people have said the 260 is quite a lot quieter than the 4870 but that would be a bit of a sidestep for me. I was concerned that the 280 would be on par and maybe noisier than what I've already got. Are there any 3rd party coolers for the 280 yet?

LoadsaMoney · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:05

280's are quiet from what ive read, but they are going EOL in 12 days time as the 285 is getting released (overclocked 280 on a 55nm process), so you may be best waiting till then.

loltim · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:07

Get a new cooler for the 4870?

philstanbridge · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:23

Tim said:
Get a new cooler for the 4870?

Yes that's a good option too - but I'm not a fan of the ATI drivers. I find them unstable at the best of times otherwise I'd stick with it.

Alexrose1uk · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:25

Thats a bit odd, 8.12 drivers have been rock solid for most people with single cards unless they've got issues elsewhere, Im even using the HDMI Realtek chip and I haven't had many issues with the latest realtek drivers (more issues there than with ATI IMO).

Drivers wise have you considered trying the modified drivers, with something like ATT if you don't like CCC?

Fair enough though as every system is different!
280 is a lil quieter and hotter, and a bit faster dependant on game. How much for the games you plays should really be what makes the choice, as it is also more expensive, and the 4870 is arguably more forward compatible with DX 11 etc (already has hardware tesselation for example), however I think it would also depend on what you can get for your 4870. PS, might be worth trying manual fan control, I find approx 33% brings temps down considerably without being excessively noisy.

Overslop · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:51

Be aware that if you apply 8xAA then the GTX 280 actually peforms worse than the 4870 (even the 512MB version) in many games (especially newer ones).

If you don't apply that much AA then the GTX 280 will on average perform better.

Overslop · 28 Dec 2008 at 16:53

philstanbridge said:
Yes that's a good option too - but I'm not a fan of the ATI drivers. I find them unstable at the best of times otherwise I'd stick with it.

Trust me, nVdia's are no better. I've had many cards from both camps and neither company have problem-free drivers.

From the current gen I've personally had more trouble with nVidia, but it's largely luck of the draw.

All that said, the nVidia CP is much better than the ATi CCC imo.

mmj_uk · 28 Dec 2008 at 17:01

LoadsaMoney said:
280's are quiet from what ive read, but they are going EOL in 12 days time as the 285 is getting released (overclocked 280 on a 55nm process), so you may be best waiting till then.

Agreed.

If low noise is a priority 55nm version should run cooler and be even quieter under heavy load, won't be long to wait for it now.

mmj_uk · 28 Dec 2008 at 17:07

Overslop said:
Be aware that if you apply 8xAA then the GTX 280 actually peforms worse than the 4870 (even the 512MB version) in many games (especially newer ones).

Nobody uses 8x AA except perhaps 4870x2 users with extra frames to burn, it hardly looks any better than 4x AA.

philstanbridge · 28 Dec 2008 at 18:16

I tend to use 8-16X AF rather than AA as I prefer the look. But noise and stability are the primary reasons for me considering a change. I'll wait and see what the new year brings, but I may just invest in a decent third party cooler for this.

Alexrose1uk · 28 Dec 2008 at 19:12

Definately run a few stress tests and fiddle with the manual fan control then

If you're having instabilities that is, the fan control may aid your noise issues also

PS, you may need to enable overdrive for manual fan control (I just set it to the same as my standard clocks, so no overclocking, just manual fan)

Leutrim.23 · 28 Dec 2008 at 20:44

Overslop said:
Be aware that if you apply 8xAA then the GTX 280 actually peforms worse than the 4870 (even the 512MB version) in many games (especially newer ones).

If you don't apply that much AA then the GTX 280 will on average perform better.

Tbh AA makes minimal difference to gaming from what I can tell. Unless you're going to do x24, its not worth the loss of fps.

gurusan · 28 Dec 2008 at 20:45

Leutrim.23 said:
Tbh AA makes minimal difference to gaming from what I can tell. Unless you're going to do x24, its not worth the loss of fps.

fail

Final8y · 28 Dec 2008 at 20:50

Leutrim.23 said:
Tbh AA makes minimal difference to gaming from what I can tell. Unless you're going to do x24, its not worth the loss of fps.

FAIL 2.

Peter450 · 28 Dec 2008 at 21:02

Well IMO, it can make a differance, but depending on the game type it can be either quite noticable or not very noticable at all, one thing i have noticed though is even in games were AA does have an effect, using more than x4 AA does not seem to give any noticable improvements, i tried several games at x8 AA and only noticed a reduction in frame rates, the edges were not more smoothed out, and the visuals seemed idenetical, at least to my eyes to 4xAA so i only use x4 now when using AA

Overslop · 28 Dec 2008 at 21:16

mmj_uk said:
Nobody uses 8x AA except perhaps 4870x2 users with extra frames to burn, it hardly looks any better than 4x AA.

Totally incorrect statement.

I can notice a big difference between 4xAA and 8xAA. The bigger the screen you have, the more you appreciate AA and I have a 40". With more and more people using HDTVs as monitors, higher AA levels only become more important.

elpedro · 28 Dec 2008 at 21:53

Overslop said:
Totally incorrect statement.

I can notice a big difference between 4xAA and 8xAA. The bigger the screen you have, the more you appreciate AA and I have a 40". With more and more people using HDTVs as monitors, higher AA levels only become more important.

But when scaling 1080p upto 40", doesn't it start blurring the edges anyway. Obviously no where near as crisp as a monitor.

And really, to compare 4xAA to 8xAA you need to zoom in on paint at like 300%... Having said that, with games I have "FPS to burn", I always stick on 16x

Overslop · 28 Dec 2008 at 22:01

elpedro said:
But when scaling 1080p upto 40", doesn't it start blurring the edges anyway. Obviously no where near as crisp as a monitor.

And really, to compare 4xAA to 8xAA you need to zoom in on paint at like 300%... Having said that, with games I have "FPS to burn", I always stick on 16x

There's no blurring due to being a big screen.

Crispness is better than most monitors because I have a high quality HDTV. In comparison with my old Dell 2407WFP, this one produces a better picture despite being much bigger.

And no, you don't need to zoom in at all. The difference between 4xAA and 8xAA on my screen is really very obvious. I can even notice differences all the way up to 24xAA but my eyesight is excellent.