Insane HD 4870X2 Crossfire-X scaling action!

[Crankybugga]

annhiliator, you really ARE an idiot. PC graphics FAR exceed that of consoles. If you think all you need is a 8800GT, you are wrong. If you think all you need is a 4870, you are wrong. If you think all new PC games are just console ports, you are wrong. PC games have waaaaaaaaaaaaay better graphics/gameplay than the majority of console games. I have had a PS3 for about a year now, and every single game I've bought (in hopes that it was good), I've sold.

Anyway, I feel dirty trying to explain anything to you. You're a tool, and you shouldn't be acknowledged.

Oh, and the fact that you loved Crysis and beat it four times is definitive proof that you're a moron. It's a horrible game, with horrible programming. The only reason no graphics card can run it properly is because it's coded poorly.

+1
Saves me writing heaps coz im jack of replying to nonsense

[perkam]

I don't see how annihilator is an idiot. He is saying 4870x2 is overkill, and thats his opinion..

Mind you I did not read the entire thread, but anyone arguing a high end card is overkill shouldn't post in any of the threads here.

This isn't SufficientSystems.com, it's XtremeSystems.com.

Looking forward to numbers with an Intel chip.

Perkam

[Unbornchild]

This isn't SufficientSystems.com,

Perkam

that's a good one!

As long as my main monitor is a Eizo T965 i play my games @ 1600x1200. Currently with my single HD 4870 i run Crysis DX10 fully maxed out at 1440x900 8xAA which as i showed earlier runs 26.8 fps avg fluidly on VistaUlt 64-bit with 8 GB RAM. If the 4870X2 will not double that performance i don't need the card for Crysis and won't need it anyway for any other current game.
But then, 4870X2 is effectively a 1 GB VRAM (per gpu), so by that in itself already there could be an improvement over my 512MB card.
Unless you have a 22" CRT like i, a 4870X2 is certainly not overkill. Everyone with a LCD 1900x1200 or larger will be very happy with the card (or 2).
[Edit: but its power consumption is way over the top! ]

[JargonGR]

Although it is certainly true that this generation of consoles have held back the evolution of game graphics in PCs, there is no doubt that every game that comes out on all platforms DOES LOOK way better on my PC. And this is not on my 30" Monitor only but on my 52" Full HD TV (second gaming PC).

I also own a Wii, a PS3 and an Xbox360 Elite and in all honesty whatever game is available on the PC and can be played with the Xbox Controller (quite many) I play it on my HTPC @ 1920x1080 (not like the console wanna be FullHD) on my 52" incher and my high-end 7.1 Speaker system.

I recently bought an 130" Screen from (Stewart Filmscreen Corporation if you know them) and it will be probably coupled by a JVC RS2 projector. At this size of screen I will be finally able to lough at how lower the graphics (textures etc) of consoles look compared to a PC. What i will give the PS3 and only that is the amazing uncompressed sound some of its games have which is indeed much better than any PC game an on good speaker set up it becomes obvious.


I am not saying that there is no fun to be had with my consoles and sometimes we have a lot of fun when friends
come over and it is so easy to play together with them. That and some exclusives that were really nice.


PS: And ofc I will be getting 4870x2 and Nehalem when it comes out. I just need to find a use for my 8800GTX SLI (hmm wife PC).

[Xello]

except i cant lay down comfortably on my bed pwning n00bs when im on a pc

Why not?

[annihilat0r]

Mind you I did not read the entire thread, but anyone arguing a high end card is overkill shouldn't post in any of the threads here.

This isn't SufficientSystems.com, it's XtremeSystems.com.

Looking forward to numbers with an Intel chip.

Perkam

I'm not saying 4870x2 is an overkill. I'm saying two of them are. And I don't care what web site this is; here too, we all talk about price/performance ratio. Even at XtremeSystems most people look for the optimal performance per dollar; and people with GTX 280 SLIs are a minority.

For such "high-end people" there is no discussing, anyway; they just go and buy the fastest thing they can buy and get insane FPS numbers. I once used to do that, too, and I understand what it's about.

What I am talking about, is the necessity of doing it for people who don't count benchmarking as a "passion".

If the reason you buy a system is "playing games at your resolution at the highest settings" (oh, please ditch 8x or 16xAA) you go and buy a 4870, or one GTX. If you would like a somewhat more comfortable platform (or you really want 8xAA, or have a 30" monitor) you go and buy a 4870x2. For all "practical" purposes there can absolutely be no need for a second 4870x2.

However, if benchmarking is your passion and you just can't get enough of Crysis Benchmark Tool or 3dmark Vantage (which I UNDERSTAND as I've been like that for pretty much always) THEN you go and get a second 4870x2.

You can't justify a second 4870x2 by its extra speed in games, which you for %95 of the time will be unable to feel (150FPS over 100FPS? Or 16xAA over 8x? Nah). Yeah, maybe in Crysis. You finished that already, and there is not going to be a Crysis 2 that is exclusive to PCs.

You can't also justify a second 4870x2 by its being "future proof" as there is no near future in which most of the good games won't be console ports.

[disruptfam]

Is it me or have i read this before??

Although it is certainly true that this generation of consoles have held back the evolution of game graphics in PCs, there is no doubt that every game that comes out on all platforms DOES LOOK way better on my PC. And this is not on my 30" Monitor only but on my 52" Full HD TV (second gaming PC).

I also own a Wii, a PS3 and an Xbox360 Elite and in all honesty whatever game is available on the PC and can be played with the Xbox Controller (quite many) I play it on my HTPC @ 1920x1080 (not like the console wanna be FullHD) on my 52" incher and my high-end 7.1 Speaker system.

I recently bought an 130" Screen from (Stewart Filmscreen Corporation if you know them) and it will be probably coupled by a JVC RS2 projector. At this size of screen I will be finally able to lough at how lower the graphics (textures etc) of consoles look compared to a PC. What i will give the PS3 and only that is the amazing uncompressed sound some of its games have which is indeed much better than any PC game an on good speaker set up it becomes obvious.


I am not saying that there is no fun to be had with my consoles and sometimes we have a lot of fun when friends
come over and it is so easy to play together with them. That and some exclusives that were really nice.


PS: And ofc I will be getting 4870x2 and Nehalem when it comes out. I just need to find a use for my 8800GTX SLI (hmm wife PC).

[Papu]

Link?

here
Css Bug List
Run Run Run !
You are running faster with the same gun at 100fps than 30 fps.

just an example , its allot more noticeable on COD4.

[Papu]

I'm not saying 4870x2 is an overkill. I'm saying two of them are. And I don't care what web site this is; here too, we all talk about price/performance ratio. Even at XtremeSystems most people look for the optimal performance per dollar; and people with GTX 280 SLIs are a minority.

For such "high-end people" there is no discussing, anyway; they just go and buy the fastest thing they can buy and get insane FPS numbers. I once used to do that, too, and I understand what it's about.

What I am talking about, is the necessity of doing it for people who don't count benchmarking as a "passion".

If the reason you buy a system is "playing games at your resolution at the highest settings" (oh, please ditch 8x or 16xAA) you go and buy a 4870, or one GTX. If you would like a somewhat more comfortable platform (or you really want 8xAA, or have a 30" monitor) you go and buy a 4870x2. For all "practical" purposes there can absolutely be no need for a second 4870x2.

However, if benchmarking is your passion and you just can't get enough of Crysis Benchmark Tool or 3dmark Vantage (which I UNDERSTAND as I've been like that for pretty much always) THEN you go and get a second 4870x2.

You can't justify a second 4870x2 by its extra speed in games, which you for %95 of the time will be unable to feel (150FPS over 100FPS? Or 16xAA over 8x? Nah). Yeah, maybe in Crysis. You finished that already, and there is not going to be a Crysis 2 that is exclusive to PCs.

You can't also justify a second 4870x2 by its being "future proof" as there is no near future in which most of the good games won't be console ports.

your not listening

Operation Flash Point 2
Alan Wake
Next Flight Sim
Stalker Clear Skys

all future games , all look very very demanding..
Ofp is said to take use of 8 cores! future proof that!

[Xello]

You can't justify a second 4870x2 by its extra speed in games, which you for %95 of the time will be unable to feel (150FPS over 100FPS? Or 16xAA over 8x? Nah).

This entire argument is based on subjective opinion, as are the counter-arguments. Some people will say you can't justify more than 1 gpu period.

Why is this dragging on

[Final8ty]

Are you serious? I think you ultimately answer your own question in more ways than one.

My honest opinion is that two of these wont be enough for me, but I just might have to make due....as usual.

Until I can run EVERY game at the highest concievable quality, without compromise (in game and external configuration) and retain totally fluid frame rates (BARE MINIMUM of 45fps) I wont be totally happy.

Also, all games are NOT for console. Such as most every decent MMO.

I'm hoping that 2x 4870X2 will be enough for my 30" but a minimum for me is 60fps.

[STaRGaZeR]

This entire argument is based on subjective opinion, as are the counter-arguments. Some people will say you can't justify more than 1 gpu period.

Why is this dragging on

Yeah a single 4870 will play everything, that's for sure. The big question is how

[perkam]

Yeah a single 4870 will play everything, that's for sure. The big question is how

The argument is that a single 4870X2 will play everything, which it will, actually.

Thing is, people will buy two 4870X2s anyway, if they can afford it, so it's a moot point.

Now back to topic !!!

Perkam

[STaRGaZeR]

The argument is that a single 4870X2 will play everything, which it will, actually.

Yes, it will play it. How? I want 24xCFAA+16xAF at 2560x1600, and I want minimum frame rates to be always 100+. And I want that in every single game.

You'll ALWAYS need more graphics muscle. Saying x card is enough is stupid. A given graphics card is NEVER enough.

[annihilat0r]

You'll ALWAYS need more graphics muscle. Saying x card is enough is stupid. A given graphics card is NEVER enough.

24xAA? You can figure the difference between 8x and 24xAA and it bothers you so much that you want 24xAA??

A "minimum 100 FPS" is also the stupidest thing I heard. Now yeah, I know FPS is a matter of preference but a minimum of 100FPS? You mean, you can't stand it when in a gunfight you drop to 90FPS? Get over it, an ideally distributed (meaning no microstuttering, and if you have microstuttering with a 4870x2, two of them won't help reduce it) minimum of 60FPS is PERFECT in a 60Hz monitor because - you guessed it; a 60Hz monitor can't display 100 frames per second.

What I am saying is: There is really not much of a difference between "24xAA and min. 100 FPS" and "8xAA and min. 60FPS".

[Leeghoofd]

He's just messing with ya Annihilator... and because you don't see the need for 2 that's your point of view, if he want max details at extreme resolutions let him buy the cards... and let him have his required minimum fps...

I know in online shooters I play with minimum detail to be sure I get 90fps all the time no matter what, some guys on LANs play with everything maxed out and require beefy hardware to do so... everybody decides for himself if he needs the hardware yes or no.... no point in trying to clarify it a zillion times what you think of it...

Let's get on with the FPS slaughtfest... a few more days and this mosnter will see the daylight

[STaRGaZeR]

24xAA? You can figure the difference between 8x and 24xAA and it bothers you so much that you want 24xAA??

A "minimum 100 FPS" is also the stupidest thing I heard. Now yeah, I know FPS is a matter of preference but a minimum of 100FPS? You mean, you can't stand it when in a gunfight you drop to 90FPS? Get over it, an ideally distributed (meaning no microstuttering, and if you have microstuttering with a 4870x2, two of them won't help reduce it) minimum of 60FPS is PERFECT in a 60Hz monitor because - you guessed it; a 60Hz monitor can't display 100 frames per second.

What I am saying is: There is really not much of a difference between "24xAA and min. 100 FPS" and "8xAA and min. 60FPS".

1) Yes, I can perfectly figure out the difference.

2) The 100FPS is a symbolic number, put it there a high number of your preference.

3) 120Hz monitors are around the corner. Oh snap! Put a 120FPS minimum.

4) I've said I want, which is different of 'I can't stand it when in a gunfight you drop to 90FPS'. Until I have what I want, I'll continue to buy more powerful cards. Too bad newer games will be more and more advanced and complex and and... you got the idea. If you're fine with your low FPS and/or low IQ in demanding areas good for you. But speak for yourself, some of us want high FPS with all the available eye candy turned on at high resolutions.

[tdream]

Hopefully they will makes games that take advantage of all this newfound power. Push more polygons, better textures, larger landscapes, without relying on AA for the pretty.

[Hu1kamania]

Hopefully they will makes games that take advantage of all this newfound power. Push more polygons, better textures, larger landscapes, without relying on AA for the pretty.

They always do. Check out coverage of the Quakecon keynote speech from John Carmack as it relates to Doom 4.

The important quote:

John Carmack introduces all-new Rage video. Other than one ridiculous explosion, it looks phenomenal. We'll add video to the 1UP Quake Con hub ASAP. "Rage will run at 60 frames per second," Carmack explains. "The next DOOM game will look like it's built on another engine, as it uses three times the horsepower." It'll operate at 30 frames per second.

[Sparky]

here
Css Bug List
Run Run Run !
You are running faster with the same gun at 100fps than 30 fps.

just an example , its allot more noticeable on COD4.

Heh I should upgrade then, this means I'm running slowly on my X1950XT

[cegras]

So annihilator, why do you even bother arguing against dual 4870X2's when the only people that will buy them are people that won't listen to you? Everyone else knows what you're talking about, it's pretty obvious. Now that you've accomplished your mission, go to the GTX280 thread and argue against SLI GTX 280 too.

[drizzt5]

And unfortunately, CF on Crysis doesn't really work....other games scale resonably well, but a 10fps gain from adding a second HD4850 for me, isn't worth it. Cervat Yerli, i'm staring at YOU.

Sorry to drag this up but... a 10 fps gain in crysis is actually pretty big compared to most scalings.

[WaterFlex]

It is the best vga ever. I`m looking forward to get it...

[Kai Robinson]

Sorry to drag this up but... a 10 fps gain in crysis is actually pretty big compared to most scalings.

I dont think so - just look at COD4 for CF scaling....then tell me that.

[Unbornchild]

Sorry to drag this up but... a 10 fps gain in crysis is actually pretty big compared to most scalings.

It is, but only when min fps go up the same. And then i want to see that's crossfire (microstutter-less, otherwise it's no win) finally noticeably working/scaling in Crysis.