Same cooler mounting dimensions as HD3850?
If so, HR-03GT and Accerlero S1s will fit fine
Printable View
Same cooler mounting dimensions as HD3850?
If so, HR-03GT and Accerlero S1s will fit fine
most likely the same dealer as the card from the last page, Gigabyte
wasn't there a 4870 pic last week?
this one?
http://media.bestofmicro.com/9/9/105...al/07RV770.jpg
http://media.bestofmicro.com/9/A/105...al/08RV770.jpg
" In 3DMark06 reached the HD 4850, according to "Fudzilla" a score of 11,760, while the Nvidia card compared to 10,800 3DMarks came - two values that only by a factor of 1088 separately. At this point not tested 9800 GTX would probably come around 12,500 points.
Similarly, results in the colleagues of "ITOCP" emerged that the HD 4850 P5847 points in 3DMark Vantage has achieved. At the same system, a 9800 GTX P5816 points obtained. So far so good: It is interesting, however, that the X-mode, in 1920x1200 instead of 1280x1024 and there is also the default 4-times anti-aliasing and 16 times anisotropische filtering active, the score against a 9800 GTX with points instead X2609 X2104 points, 24 percent higher."
translated with google, source; http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl...%3Fnews%3D2124
Those are some pretty amazing scores for 1920 x 1200 4xAA and16xAF. It shows that it has high shader performance and that AF is fixed (granted, 9800GTX gets hurt starting at those resolutions and settings).
Either way, sub $200 for a card with 8800Ultra performance would be amazing
So how do you guys think the 4870 will do in comparison with the 280 GTX?
If when OC'd it beats the 260gtx i'm sold. i'm more into price:performance ratio's
So how do you guys think the VW Golf will do in comparison with the Mercedes S-Class?
GTX 280 has the be at least 2x faster.
True, true, but we'll pay at least 2x more...Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
I want to know about the physics part,is it actually better,how does it work, like will a x2 be crossfire physics?:up:
If you meant Physx, then the answer is no. Nvidia did a smart thing by swallowing Ageia to get their hands on the Physx and make it available only to Nvidia users.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Hound
Only way for you to have Physx capabilities is to grab one of the old PCI Physx cards. And again, that is if you meant PHYSX not PHYSICS.
We are at the point were the fastest card isn't really important as in days past. Having the fastest of the fastest is becoming more and more a novelty not a necessity IMO. Because of this, people are looking for more from their video cards then just 100 gimillion frames per second in crysis. What is becoming more important as video cards perform better is:
-Price
-Power Consumption
-Image Quality
-Feature Set
-Better Performance
-Heat Output
-Reliability
-Overclock Ability
Now this not saying that better performance isn't welcomed, it is. But the urgency of it isn't as important IMO.
As for the VW vs Mercedes S-Class, with gas at over $4+ a gallon the value for such a car has decreased at a increasing rate. Yes, it performance is better then most other cars. Yes, it's more comfortable and popular. However, in this economy vehicles like that are taking a back seat. The same that applies to a S-Class applies to anything else.
imo, what I think the performance should be is enough that you can play at your max resolution with some detail. Honestly my 6600gt can play quite a few fairly new games on my 24" widescreen, even the 8800gts g92 generally is enough to give you at least 30 fps for my needs. Honestly, 300 fps looks and feels no different than 61 (as the eye can't detect the difference above 60 anyways), so what matters most to me is minimum framerate (which has shown to be a problem for 3870x2 and even occasionally the 9800gx2). If either the 4870 or 9900gtx (not gtx 280) can do that for me, then I have no need for anything better
Actually, if the green team is to be believed they are in the process of making the physx API an open one, so that even AMD can implement it in their cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Telo
Can't find the quotes right now, but this definitely came from the horse's mouth.
No harm to ya but so not true! I'd be surprised if there isn't some old thread on this forum about it, but the human eye does not work in a way that facilitates the statement "can't detect above [number] fps".Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
Yep, I saw what they were going to do when they bought Ageia so I quickly snagged a used PhysX card on e-bay for cheap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Telo
Wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
http://amo.net/NT/02-21-01FPS.html
That is not true :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
If you're in a dark room and have 200fps (199 black 1 blank) passing on the wall, you will notice the blank one :p:
Although in games, more than 60fps is indeed a waste.
Good article, pretty accurate. It goes into motion blur which is very important :) An example i like to use is that if you played a game at avg 500fps for a few days, then suddenly played it at 250fps, you would very much notice the difference. Obviously this has to be taken in context, we don't play modern games at that high an avg fps so it's arguably not important, but the point is there is a difference and the whole "anything above 60fps / 100fps cannot be perceived" is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
Perhaps I was wrong (as you said there are tons of people and threads that talk about what I said)
It also must be taken into consideration that only the very best CRT monitor (impossible to find these days) will only be able to display ~240 FPS, limited by the refresh rate. Although technically a higher FPS than the refresh rate can be shown, there will be very noticeable tearing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
:lol2: Totally. It's all theoretical atm...Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
240hz CRT? Man I'd love to have one of those.
Faster LCDs are coming as well. 120Hz are out and samsung has a 240Hz prototype as well.
I know, I can't wait for them to come out. It's funny to see all the naive people bashing them claiming it is a pointless upgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hu1kamania
Those are hdtv's. I don't think you can get an actual 120fps in computer games with those, can you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hu1kamania
If your hardware can manage it, you can do 120fps with those hdtv's. An LCD hdtv is basically a big LCD monitor anyways. I like to think about how nice vsync would look at 120fps vs. 60 fps.Quote:
Originally Posted by natty