GTX480 SLI or GTX470 SLI?

[H2O]

I'm looking to upgrade my ageing HD4870 512MB with either a GTX480 or GTX470, with a second card to be added later after I upgrade my cooling system and PSU. However, I can't decide if the extra $150 for a GTX480 is worth it. The better stock cooling does not matter, as the cards will be under water as soon as I get them. I will probably be a big DX11 user. I also have two 1680x1050 monitors, one of which I game on with high AA/AF, although I will probably upgrade to a 27" or 30" once some 120Hz LCDs come out that I can use with 3D vision. Power and heat are not factors in my decision; I am looking for the best card at the right price.

I am also considering HD5850/HD5870 CF, but I just want to narrow it down to a single Nvidia card to compare against the ATi cards.

[lkiller123]

You can spend the money on another GTX470 rather than only 2 GTX480s.

[Chickenfeed]

If you have only a 1680x1050 display right now, I'd say a 470. SLI 470s should do more than fine on 3 of those ( if you go the 3x1 surround way ) or a single 30". This would provide you with great performance currently and once / if you decide to migrate to a bigger display setup, a 2nd 470 would be the ticket. On water I'm willing to bet the 470s will beat CF 5870s all things equal ( based on all the reviews they scale much better with clock increases than the HD5xxx series ) My suggestion for your loop would be to get a 2nd 240 rad for the cpu / board loop ( assuming the board is on water ) and having the gpus on your current feser.

[LiquidFiction]

My vote gos to GTX 470 SLI. Less Expensive than GTX 480 But the Power Difference will also Be a significant amount as well.

[YukonTrooper]

Obviously everyone's "what is best for me" situation is different, but I've really warmed up (no pun intended) to the GTX 470. Yes, it has high power draw and thermal characteristics, but the performance is there and it often beats out the HD 5870 where it counts for me and many other gamers (minimum frames @ 1920X1200 w/ AA + AF). What I really like, though, is the fact that the driver support for the 400 series is in the infancy stage, so we're going to see some solid performance gains as time marches on, and perhaps, if we're lucky, lower power draw and thermals as well. For me, it's a solid buy, and if I was going SLI I'd definitely choose the 470's over the 480's, but only because I think the the GTX 470 is a solid buy, and that's just the way my mind operates, I suppose.

[zanzabar]

considering that an overclocked 5850 will beat an overclocked 480 why even look at NV unless u are folding, atleast until NV refreshes and drops power consumption the 4xx is not a good consumer card for the price or wattage

[H2O]

Thanks for the advice everyone! I was thinking that the GTX480 really wasn't worth the extra cash, especially since that $300 could buy a new cooling system or a new PSU. I just wanted to make sure that there was nothing major that I was missing.

considering that an overclocked 5850 will beat an overclocked 480 why even look at NV unless u are folding, atleast until NV refreshes and drops power consumption the 4xx is not a good consumer card for the price or wattage

For a couple reasons. One, the NV cards scale better in SLI than the HD5850s in CF, so two overclocked 470s will probably perform better. Two, there is so much untapped power in the arch. If we see some serious driver and game optimizations, these cards will really shine. Three, it will probably age better than HD5850s, since this is basically a new arch whereas the RV870 arch that HD58xx cards use is more or less based off of RV770. Finally, a GTX470 is currently around the price of a HD5850 ($349 vs. $329) and I wanted to try NV this time after the terrible driver issues I had with ATi.

Yes, it is a gamble, because if there aren’t large performance gains with new drivers, I could be stuck with two power hungry, underperforming cards. However, it would not be too bad; I would just sell them off in a year and move on to the next arch.

[YukonTrooper]

considering that an overclocked 5850 will beat an overclocked 480 why even look at NV unless u are folding, atleast until NV refreshes and drops power consumption the 4xx is not a good consumer card for the price or wattage

An overclocked HD 5850 beats an overclocked GTX 480? Huh? In very few situations, perhaps, but definitely not in general.

[zanzabar]

An overclocked HD 5850 beats an overclocked GTX 480? Huh? In very few situations, perhaps, but definitely not in general.

the 5870 was trading blows with the 480 and while when ocing the 480 is rather linear but it only goes 14-20%, the 5850 is only 2-5% slower than the 5870 clock for clock and in BC2 (the only game using dx11 shading) the 480 gets its ass kicked by overclocked 1ghz 58xx.

until there is a refresh or tsmc gets its act together i wouldent even look at the NV cards, 1 gpu over 200W in a game is ridiculous

[zalbard]

GTX480 imo, just because it has more VRAM.

[YukonTrooper]

the 5870 was trading blows with the 480 and while when ocing the 480 is rather linear but it only goes 14-20%, the 5850 is only 2-5% slower than the 5870 clock for clock and in BC2 (the only game using dx11 shading) the 480 gets its ass kicked by overclocked 1ghz 58xx.

until there is a refresh or tsmc gets its act together i wouldent even look at the NV cards, 1 gpu over 200W in a game is ridiculous

Likewise, even the GTX 470 bests the HD 5870 in certain situations. For example, @ 1920X1200 w/ AA + AF, the GTX 470 has incredible minimum frame rates, often catching up and beating the HD 5870 in that regard. I just think your statements are way too general and don't take into account the whole picture. Also, 400 series drivers are in their infancy, while the 5000 series drivers likely don't have nearly as much legroom for performance gains.

This chart seems to contradict what you've said about the 480 getting its ass kicked by an overclocked 58xx (I assume you mean 5850 as well). Granted, this is only one resolution and IQ setup, but it just goes to show that making blanket statements simply isn't an accurate way to go about things. Also, why compare an overclocked card to a stock card anyways? That's always been odd to me.

[H2O]

GTX480 imo, just because it has more VRAM.

Would ~300MB of VRAM really make that much of a difference? I would like to get two GTX480s, but $300 extra is a lot of money, and at the moment I can't justify it.

[skeyo]

You need ram if you are playing in hi resolution. With two 470 you are good to go, because you can search for reviews where two 260's had almost same result like two 280 or 285.

[H2O]

You need ram if you are playing in hi resolution. With two 470 you are good to go, because you can search for reviews where two 260's had almost same result like two 280 or 285.

What about at 2560x1600? And would the 448 vs 480 CUDA cores make a big difference?

Sorry for all the questions, I just don't want to wish I chose the other card one month after I buy them.

[zanzabar]

Likewise, even the GTX 470 bests the HD 5870 in certain situations. For example, @ 1920X1200 w/ AA + AF, the GTX 470 has incredible minimum frame rates, often catching up and beating the HD 5870 in that regard. I just think your statements are way too general and don't take into account the whole picture. Also, 400 series drivers are in their infancy, while the 5000 series drivers likely don't have nearly as much legroom for performance gains.

This chart seems to contradict what you've said about the 480 getting its ass kicked by an overclocked 58xx (I assume you mean 5850 as well). Granted, this is only one resolution and IQ setup, but it just goes to show that making blanket statements simply isn't an accurate way to go about things. Also, why compare an overclocked card to a stock card anyways? That's always been odd to me.

http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im.../GTX480-39.jpg

both cards have linear overclocks, the 480 seam to get about 14% the 5850 get a good 25%. and BC2 is dependant on were u are as to what card is better the places were multi player would occure (aka like the chase scene) and not a single player graphics showoff (aka the river boat ride with waterfalls)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2977/n...h-the-wait-/14

What about at 2560x1600? And would the 448 vs 480 CUDA cores make a big difference?

Sorry for all the questions, I just don't want to wish I chose the other card one month after I buy them.

if u have to go NV i would get the 470 for sli as the heat load unless u have liquid would suck, but if u are going liquid then the 480 especially since there is no voltage control (or none yet)