• 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.

Nvidia Alternative for 4850

This review should enlighten you more, clearly shows the 4850 generally a bit ahead of the 9800GTX+, so Id suspect the rest of your system to be holding you back, whether its CPU or RAM or it was initially a power problem (the way I read it you changed to a 650 after?)
The review actually shows if you get another one and cross fire them, it'll even out perform the new 285's up to and including 1920*1200, above this they rapidly decline but upto this resolution you shouldnt be having any problems
 
Reviews only show you the maximum framerate, they hardly ever show you the lowest or the average.

It's like GTA IV on a 4870x2 compared to a GTX 280/285. In the benchmarks and reviews the 4870x2 scores higher framerates and looks the better card for GTA IV. But when you read the forums you see 4870x2 owners past and present compaining their cards drop down to much lower minimum framerates, while those same users who swapped to GTX 260/280 cards all say the average framerate of their card is much higher than the 4870's they used to own.

Swings and roundabouts. Personally I'd say a consistant average playable framerate is far more important.
 
Reviews only show you the maximum framerate, they hardly ever show you the lowest or the average.

It's like GTA IV on a 4870x2 compared to a GTX 280/285. In the benchmarks and reviews the 4870x2 scores higher framerates and looks the better card for GTA IV. But when you read the forums you see 4870x2 owners past and present compaining their cards drop down to much lower minimum framerates, while those same users who swapped to GTX 260/280 cards all say the average framerate of their card is much higher than the 4870's they used to own.

Swings and roundabouts. Personally I'd say a consistant average playable framerate is far more important.

thats why i got shut of my 4850,because the low framerate dips.
 
Well if you actually bothered to read it you'd see that it shows the averaged framerates over multiple test runs as well. N.B. Techreport is one of best review sites Ive found, most reliable and least biased
Using GTAIV (the worst coded game presently available) as an example is just stupid in itself
 
the ati card is slightly quicker but not by that much to shout about.in all honestly the cooling would probably be better on the nvidia card.i have a 4850 great card but they get bloody warm :D.
 
The ATI vs Nvidia argument is Moot here frankly as the game I play most has some issues with ATI and its drivers, hence my original question of what the equivilant nvidia card is. Its got nothing to do with my system or anything else!!
 
I did read it, it said this

Reviews only show you the maximum framerate, they hardly ever show you the lowest or the average.

If you read the review linked you'd see they ran multiple test of each game, and then compared both the average and minimum frame rates, they did not compare the maximum!

And to OP sry I understand what you're saying but Im fed up of people bashing one company or another without foundation
 
thats why i got shut of my 4850,because the low framerate dips.

How's that for foundation?
That's literally the comment above your reply!

I'm not bashing anyone, I don't buy ATI cards normally so it makes no difference to me, it's just something you see regularly when they are compared.
 
9800 GT = 4830
9800 GTX+ = 4850
260+ = 4870 1g

Perfect, exactly what I wanted thanks :)


The new ATI drivers have helped matters a little, but the problems still remain with my tearing issues etc so it looks like I'll go ahead and make the change when I have some spare £'s. Also gives me the benifit of CUDA for some seti loving too i guess ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom