• 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.

Eyefinity gets owned by NVIDIA Surround

Of course u have to take the price into account when comparing cards, a £200 extra price tag obviously puts nvidia ahead. And even spending lots on 2 gfx cards doesnt mean money is no object!

1x 5870 can happily power the latest games on triple monitors, a second card would allow extra AA and higher frames, but a lot of games dont need to be running at 60fps to feel smooth. Nvidia cards do seem to have the edge in AA but at that res ur more impressed/immersed by the overall image not just the jaggies (modern games look great even without applying AA too).

Bear in mind one further point, the price difference between the two setups is the cost of a third monitor, a lot of people have 2 monitors and with an ATI setup instead Eyefinity might fall into they're price range.

wolvers69 said:
It's like gaming looking through Tudor windows! :p
Click to expand...

infernox said:
thats the case really unless you try to modify the monitors to remove the frames.. :)
Click to expand...

Mojo said:
Am I the only one who notices the bezels while gaming? My mate has three 22" monitors and I couldn't use them, every time I tried playing Dirt 2 my eyes just complained at me =(
Click to expand...

You get used to it so quickly and the bezels really arent an issue. Literally every time this comes up people who dont have 3 or havent played on 3 monitors for very long complain they couldnt cope with the bezels, whereas anyone who has tried it and gotten used to it wont want to go back ESPECIALLY in driving games. Do u have a problem driving ur car cos of the blind spots?!

EDIT: some of the scores in those benchmarks dont make sense, e.g. I'm suprised the 5870 2GB xfire doesnt zoom ahead of the 5870 1GB xfire in Metro 2033, that game eats VRAM!! And the AVP score has to be wrong, no way it runs that low, must be a driver or profile issue.
 
Last edited:
oh god, not the power/heat/late/price argument again

1, go for 470's then, only a tiny bit more power usage
2, who cares about heat? if the thing can take it, it's fine
3, ok but for £40 more you can get dual 470's which will do it better and give you 3D
4, don't really get what your trying to say
5, why does timing matter? buy whatever is the best you can afford at the time and that's the end of it
 
I'd like to think that if I paid ~£100 more per card that I would get better performance. :p

Oh and those aren't ATIs flagship cards are they? Thought the 5970 was? ...BUT ITS 2 GPUS ZOMG.
 
Puppetmaster said:
Maybe that wasnt the best way of putting it. Il make it easier (Not exact prices, doesnt really matter for this)

5870 x2 costs £700, GTX480 x2 costs £900. £900 wins. Wait what? More money, better product / performance?

If buying 2 of each graphics card was the same price, then you could say that eyefinity gets owned by nvidia surround, but since they are different prices you cannot directly compare them. Its as simple as that. If they had tested a similiar priced ati setup it would have been fair to say they "got owned" if they actually did. Its like saying a hex core i7 owns a hex core amd, fair enough but the amd is a lot cheaper.

Even if the nvidia one scales better than ati's, it still doesnt matter without having similiar priced hardware. If ati released a product for £100 that gave you 100 fps and nvidia released one for £200 that gave 125 fps, you could argue nvidia "owned" ati with performance, but cost wise its the other way around. Some people have odd views of competition. I'd guess that review site is probably heavily nvidia biased anyway, since they are not using like for like price wise components giving the nvidia the clear edge, despite costing more money.
Click to expand...

Looking at the results GTX470 SLI could well still be faster than 5870x2 and two of those are £600? £100 cheaper than two 5870's.

I would assume though anyone crazy enough to buy three monitors for a little bit more peripheral vision when gaming wouldn't be too worried about cost. :p
 
HW91 said:
^ two 470's are £470 (huh?) and dual 5870's are £550
Click to expand...

Sorry. :o

The point still stands though that 470GTX SLI is cheaper and probably still beats (or at least matches) 5870x2 so the "but it's more expensive" argument is weak.

LeJosh said:
I'd like to think that if I paid ~£100 more per card that I would get better performance. :p

Oh and those aren't ATIs flagship cards are they? Thought the 5970 was? ...BUT ITS 2 GPUS ZOMG.
Click to expand...

Two 5870's are infact faster than 5970.
 
Last edited:
Nvidia owners, you guys are the best, you did the right thing by buying nvidia product, god loves you more than ati owners and you all just awesome :D










Shhh, ati guys, its the only way to shut them up, play along.
 
Mojo said:
Am I the only one who notices the bezels while gaming? My mate has three 22" monitors and I couldn't use them, every time I tried playing Dirt 2 my eyes just complained at me =(
Click to expand...

Yep, its horrible and costs a fortune to get unplayable frame rates. Not to mention the heat output, power usage and noise issues you get with some multi GPU manufactures :p

Seriously I just want a single uber high res monitor.
 
What a funny debate people claiming one owns the other.
To compare products between companies you would compare similar price ranges.
''This £900 setup is faster than this £700 setup'' ... not exactly surprising nor fair.

Ah well whatever floats your boat to make you feel better, I suppose you have to justify the cost somehow :D
 
Don't understand the big song and dance, one setup costs lots more than the other, I'd expect it to be faster lol, otherwise no one would buy them :) from Reading the review it seems a pair of 470's would sffice and be a tonne cheaper, that's where my cash would go if I was wanting 3 monitor support.

I understand how people could see it as performance based not cost, but f so why not trifire? That's faster still? The review makes no sense as every comparison is based upon price unless it's a "best you can buy, money no object" which it clearly isn't lol. Still, nice to see nvidia doing multiple monitor support finally, looks good, although there's no way I'd spend that much as I'm not rich enough for that amount of epeen :)
 
I think I'm safe in saying the majority of gamers just want a fast GFX card with good driver support, all this 3D suround, physx and eyefinity interests only a small minority.
 
It saddens me reading about people complaining about price and heat still :(

Isn't this an enthusiast forum?

From an enthusiast point of view nvidia 480 SLI is better. End of.
 
egnshane said:
What a funny debate people claiming one owns the other.
To compare products between companies you would compare similar price ranges.
''This £900 setup is faster than this £700 setup'' ... not exactly surprising nor fair.

Ah well whatever floats your boat to make you feel better, I suppose you have to justify the cost somehow :D
Click to expand...

People are comparing top end product against top end product - so its a valid comparison - tho I agree some comparisons of like priced setups would also be good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom