What gfx card should i get
Moderator: Moderators
Re: What gfx card should i get
Maybe but I have a far more eye catching photo should that ever be a danger, heck nobodies even looked close at my new avatar
Re: What gfx card should i get
lol whatforest_devil wrote:but i should hold judgement until ive tried nvidia (which is unlikely since i refuse to pay such prices for crap hardware)
Re: What gfx card should i get
AF. Come on. COME ON.AF wrote:Caydr wrote:You can tell us apart easily, I'm less fabulous.
Seriously. Come on man. What the hell.
First, you post a picture of you holding a child. That in itself is exploitable in so many ways I'm giddy just thinking about it. But no, you also hold a sign. YOU'RE HOLDING A SIGN! That's the WORST THING TO DO IN A PICTURE, EVER.
I have to uninstall Photoshop now or I'll do horrible things to that picture IN MY SLEEP.
Re: What gfx card should i get
Don't do it Caydr... Don't do it... No... No.... Not photoshop. Do something else. Stop. Stop, stop stop stop STOP STOP STOP!!!!!!
Re: What gfx card should i get
OH GOD I HAVE PAINT TOO AND IT'S L33T IN WINDOWS 7
It's entrapment you know. Surely I couldn't be punished for shopping that.
It's entrapment you know. Surely I couldn't be punished for shopping that.
Re: What gfx card should i get
dunnu.. i kind of like that AF does not worry about such things. if you start worrying about stuff that in a sane world, you should not worry about, you are basically brain fucked.
ATI + Linux: it may work well if your card is new, for some cards.
but you know... your card will not always be new, and then you will be fucked, cause your favorite distro just came out with a new version that has lots of cool stuff, and requires a new xorg, for which sadly, no driver for your card is compatible with, except those versions that totally fuck up all of OpenGL for you and cause your screen to explode, spilling acids over your face that will render your skin glowingly red.
Only way to solve it, is buying a new card (which comes with free skin).
about the picture again...
you may abuse it, and it could be funny, but in the end he would still win, because you would just stand more sick o'head. basically, he already wins when posting such a pic, even in the sick way, except you see sickness as the goal, which is sick.
ATI + Linux: it may work well if your card is new, for some cards.
but you know... your card will not always be new, and then you will be fucked, cause your favorite distro just came out with a new version that has lots of cool stuff, and requires a new xorg, for which sadly, no driver for your card is compatible with, except those versions that totally fuck up all of OpenGL for you and cause your screen to explode, spilling acids over your face that will render your skin glowingly red.
Only way to solve it, is buying a new card (which comes with free skin).
about the picture again...
you may abuse it, and it could be funny, but in the end he would still win, because you would just stand more sick o'head. basically, he already wins when posting such a pic, even in the sick way, except you see sickness as the goal, which is sick.
Re: What gfx card should i get
Please explain to me how nvidia hardware is "crap". If you are refering to the GTX400 series (aka fermi) you are dead wrong. The only issue I can really really knock it off for is power inefficiency, but cost and heat are factors blown out of proportion by unreliable sources and ati fanboys.
The power inefficiency is undenible, even the GTX 465 draws more power at load then a 5870HD. Heat is no longer an issue assuming you have decent airflow in your case. Recent driver updates have improved underclocking at idle vastly reducing idle temperatures, and simply turning the fan up (which is not even hearable under 80% and not unbearable (like all the loud fermi videos) untill the upper 90s) to levels such as 70-80% can cool your fermi down to levels acceptable for normal cards. I am not saying they will run as cool as cypress architecture, their extra wattage needs to go somewhere.....but heat is not an issue in ay half decent case.
The other issue, price is truely the worst arguement i have seen against fermi. You can now nab a GTX470 for 300$ (normal being 330$). The 470 offers performance that comes within 10% or so of the 5870 on average, and the gap closes, or the 470 even comes out on top in certain Dx11 games, or with AA turned up high. Additionally all nvidia cards perform far better than their ati counterparts in OGL applications/games due to better drivers. Additionally you get 3d vision support, cuda and open cl support (and far better GPGPU performance), physx support, better multi gpu scaling and better overclock scaling. The cards sound like a bargain to me.....
lets not forget about the constant performance improvements coming with new driver release for them....I fail to see how they can be viewed as crap when they are very competitive with their ati counterparts. They are also more future proof seeing that fermi supports AA, OGL and dx 11 better than cypress (that is the current ati architecture name right?)
I do apologize for being unable to cite my sources atm, but i am on my cell phone away from home.
The power inefficiency is undenible, even the GTX 465 draws more power at load then a 5870HD. Heat is no longer an issue assuming you have decent airflow in your case. Recent driver updates have improved underclocking at idle vastly reducing idle temperatures, and simply turning the fan up (which is not even hearable under 80% and not unbearable (like all the loud fermi videos) untill the upper 90s) to levels such as 70-80% can cool your fermi down to levels acceptable for normal cards. I am not saying they will run as cool as cypress architecture, their extra wattage needs to go somewhere.....but heat is not an issue in ay half decent case.
The other issue, price is truely the worst arguement i have seen against fermi. You can now nab a GTX470 for 300$ (normal being 330$). The 470 offers performance that comes within 10% or so of the 5870 on average, and the gap closes, or the 470 even comes out on top in certain Dx11 games, or with AA turned up high. Additionally all nvidia cards perform far better than their ati counterparts in OGL applications/games due to better drivers. Additionally you get 3d vision support, cuda and open cl support (and far better GPGPU performance), physx support, better multi gpu scaling and better overclock scaling. The cards sound like a bargain to me.....
lets not forget about the constant performance improvements coming with new driver release for them....I fail to see how they can be viewed as crap when they are very competitive with their ati counterparts. They are also more future proof seeing that fermi supports AA, OGL and dx 11 better than cypress (that is the current ati architecture name right?)
I do apologize for being unable to cite my sources atm, but i am on my cell phone away from home.
Re: What gfx card should i get
You just jealous cause you don't own an ATI.
Re: What gfx card should i get
- Attachments
-
- Untitled-2.jpg
- (39.58 KiB) Downloaded 1 time
-
- Untitled-1.jpg
- (33.94 KiB) Downloaded 1 time
Re: What gfx card should i get
I rest my case
-
forest_devil
- Posts: 140
- Joined: 14 Aug 2009, 17:36
Re: What gfx card should i get
go onto a website selling graphics cards
open to windows and have them next to each other
set one to ati
the other to nvidia
now sort by price
and u explain to me how nvidia can charge prices nearly double ati for there hardware.
when i said crap i meant crap for the price i (would have) paid
open to windows and have them next to each other
set one to ati
the other to nvidia
now sort by price
and u explain to me how nvidia can charge prices nearly double ati for there hardware.
when i said crap i meant crap for the price i (would have) paid
Re: What gfx card should i get
so a GTX 470 is double a hd5850/70 and a GTX 480 is double a hd5970?..... Where do you live? >_>
lets not forget the GTX 460 that will be 200$ and kick the hd5830 in the pants.....or maybe you mean outdated hardware such as the 99$ 9800GTX.
For the record i own no modern high end card yet, so i am impartial and doing research. So far i have my eye set on a GTX470 though :)
lets not forget the GTX 460 that will be 200$ and kick the hd5830 in the pants.....or maybe you mean outdated hardware such as the 99$ 9800GTX.
For the record i own no modern high end card yet, so i am impartial and doing research. So far i have my eye set on a GTX470 though :)
-
forest_devil
- Posts: 140
- Joined: 14 Aug 2009, 17:36
Re: What gfx card should i get
MOST people dont buy top end cards.
wait 2 years and the price difference between those cards will probs head towards the 2:1 ratio
wait 2 years and the price difference between those cards will probs head towards the 2:1 ratio
Re: What gfx card should i get
you arent maing any sense......if you want a low end card wait untill nvidia releases theirs before comparing prices.....
Re: What gfx card should i get
I'm no ATI fanboy, and if you'll recall I was expounding on the merits of the 8800 series not so long ago. Prior to that, I owned a 7800 GS which I also liked and continues to serve another member of my family well. ATI has just really pulled it together lately.
NV is seemingly incapable of releasing a truly low-end fermi because the hardware isn't scalable within what you'd normally expect. I mean, the card will be slower and less expensive yes, but it will still run hot as hell and use way more power than an equivalent-performing 5xxx series ATI. This is what the reading I've done has told me.
And besides this, they will cost almost as much money to produce as the top-end card since what you're getting is a defective 480 part. It won't make sense for NV to flood the market with cheap parts, since doing so will merely be a way to recoup losses on attempted 480 parts (themselves being of questionable profitability), rather than a money-making proposition.
ATI on the other hand isn't taking a monolithic approach - they can sell you a 5870 for a profit, a 5970 for about the same amount of profit (which is why they have often been very hard to find), a 5850 for a profit, and 5830s are probably sold for relatively little profit since they, like a 460, are basically low-end salvaged parts. But then they have the 57xx line and everything below, which is a cash cow that they can sell millions of, manufacture easily, and turn a tidy profit on each one.
The heat and noise issues aren't exaggerated, by the way. My 5850 is overvolted and runs at higher clock speeds than a vanilla 5870. I set up a custom low-noise fan profile that idles silent (24% fan speed) at 60 degrees C, and peaks at an audible (but silent with headphones) 40% or so at about 80 to 83 degrees. Furmark will take it to about 89 @ 45%. I remind you, that's overclocked and overvolted. A stock-speed Fermi card with standard fan settings tops out at over 100 degrees (not Furmark IIRC) and still sounds like a jet taking off.
That's a 20+ degree difference and less hot exhaust air coming from my card. At stock settings, obviously things would be even more in my 5850's favor.
I don't know what kind of environment you do your PC gaming in, but unless you have an air conditioner in the same room, that's too hot to be comfortable even without taking into consideration CPU, PSU, monitor, and external component heat. I like to play a game and find myself sweating from excitement, not from the ambient temperature being 30 degrees.
I'm still hopeful for some NV management getting fired and them cleaning their act up. The next card they release that can actually compete without having major flaws, I might very well buy. But until then, I'm only being realistic and honest with you: the 4xx series is to be avoided, and the problems it has are very real, not constructs of fanboy imagination.
NV is seemingly incapable of releasing a truly low-end fermi because the hardware isn't scalable within what you'd normally expect. I mean, the card will be slower and less expensive yes, but it will still run hot as hell and use way more power than an equivalent-performing 5xxx series ATI. This is what the reading I've done has told me.
And besides this, they will cost almost as much money to produce as the top-end card since what you're getting is a defective 480 part. It won't make sense for NV to flood the market with cheap parts, since doing so will merely be a way to recoup losses on attempted 480 parts (themselves being of questionable profitability), rather than a money-making proposition.
ATI on the other hand isn't taking a monolithic approach - they can sell you a 5870 for a profit, a 5970 for about the same amount of profit (which is why they have often been very hard to find), a 5850 for a profit, and 5830s are probably sold for relatively little profit since they, like a 460, are basically low-end salvaged parts. But then they have the 57xx line and everything below, which is a cash cow that they can sell millions of, manufacture easily, and turn a tidy profit on each one.
The heat and noise issues aren't exaggerated, by the way. My 5850 is overvolted and runs at higher clock speeds than a vanilla 5870. I set up a custom low-noise fan profile that idles silent (24% fan speed) at 60 degrees C, and peaks at an audible (but silent with headphones) 40% or so at about 80 to 83 degrees. Furmark will take it to about 89 @ 45%. I remind you, that's overclocked and overvolted. A stock-speed Fermi card with standard fan settings tops out at over 100 degrees (not Furmark IIRC) and still sounds like a jet taking off.
That's a 20+ degree difference and less hot exhaust air coming from my card. At stock settings, obviously things would be even more in my 5850's favor.
I don't know what kind of environment you do your PC gaming in, but unless you have an air conditioner in the same room, that's too hot to be comfortable even without taking into consideration CPU, PSU, monitor, and external component heat. I like to play a game and find myself sweating from excitement, not from the ambient temperature being 30 degrees.
I'm still hopeful for some NV management getting fired and them cleaning their act up. The next card they release that can actually compete without having major flaws, I might very well buy. But until then, I'm only being realistic and honest with you: the 4xx series is to be avoided, and the problems it has are very real, not constructs of fanboy imagination.
Re: What gfx card should i get
By my experiences, its waste of money to buy any card over 100Ôé¼
UNLESS you have WAYYYY too much money to waste, but then you shouldnt be here asking...
So, buy a card less than 100Ôé¼ and youre fine.. recently i noticed the card i bought few years ago costs now 40Ôé¼, it did cost around 300Ôé¼ when i bought it
That shitty 300Ôé¼ card broke twice, im too tired to send it back anymore, now im using backup card that cost 20Ôé¼ and i can play spring just fine with it, and pretty much any other game too. Dont feel like getting better card any time soon...
UNLESS you have WAYYYY too much money to waste, but then you shouldnt be here asking...
So, buy a card less than 100Ôé¼ and youre fine.. recently i noticed the card i bought few years ago costs now 40Ôé¼, it did cost around 300Ôé¼ when i bought it
That shitty 300Ôé¼ card broke twice, im too tired to send it back anymore, now im using backup card that cost 20Ôé¼ and i can play spring just fine with it, and pretty much any other game too. Dont feel like getting better card any time soon...
Re: What gfx card should i get
Re: 4xx heat is no issue in a good case
You're missing the point I think. Most people (AFAIK) aren't concerned about the temperature a component runs at, as long as it isn't damaged by that heat. Fermi cards can take the heat, in fact I think I read they are manufactured to tolerate up to 120 degrees C without any bad effects.
The problem with all that heat is that it has to go somewhere. Take two cards, both run at 80 degrees. However, one has a little aluminum fin on top, the other has a series of solid copper heat sinks, complete with heatpipes and fans. One is actually generating a lot more heat, obviously. Current ATI cards generate much less heat for their respective level of performance but also move a lot less air (and more quietly), heating your room and thus your body a lot less.
You're missing the point I think. Most people (AFAIK) aren't concerned about the temperature a component runs at, as long as it isn't damaged by that heat. Fermi cards can take the heat, in fact I think I read they are manufactured to tolerate up to 120 degrees C without any bad effects.
The problem with all that heat is that it has to go somewhere. Take two cards, both run at 80 degrees. However, one has a little aluminum fin on top, the other has a series of solid copper heat sinks, complete with heatpipes and fans. One is actually generating a lot more heat, obviously. Current ATI cards generate much less heat for their respective level of performance but also move a lot less air (and more quietly), heating your room and thus your body a lot less.
Re: What gfx card should i get
erm Fermi isn't a halfyear on the market, neither ATi published that early low-end gpus of their state-of-the-art technology, it isn't even possible because you couldn't produce them in that amount. With the GTX 460 (which was presented today) NV starts to introduce mid-range fermi gpus.Caydr wrote:NV is seemingly incapable of releasing a truly low-end fermi because the hardware isn't scalable within what you'd normally expect.
1. Fermi never reaches 100degree in idle modeCaydr wrote:The heat and noise issues aren't exaggerated, by the way. My 5850 is overvolted and runs at higher clock speeds than a vanilla 5870. I set up a custom low-noise fan profile that idles silent (24% fan speed) at 60 degrees C, and peaks at an audible (but silent with headphones) 40% or so at about 80 to 83 degrees. Furmark will take it to about 89 @ 45%. I remind you, that's overclocked and overvolted. A stock-speed Fermi card with standard fan settings tops out at over 100 degrees (not Furmark IIRC) and still sounds like a jet taking off.
2. You can't test ATi's (nor compare them with NVidia ones) with Furmark at all, they auto downclock when tested with it, else they would get burned in seconds!
3. You can't compare a GTX480/295 with your 5850, those Fermi GPUs are 50% faster. You have to compare them in their classes, and then those temperatures (+ power consumptions) aren't that special anymore, a 4870x2 or 5970 reach similar ones, it's just that they aren't build for those temperatures ...
4. The noise is a problem, but it always was like that with stock designs (series7, series8, series9, ...). Also there are for some time now cards with custom coolers with much less noise.
Last edited by jK on 13 Jul 2010, 00:52, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What gfx card should i get
true, atm I would buy a GTS250 (80-120euros)TradeMark wrote:By my experiences, its waste of money to buy any card over 100Ôé¼
Re: What gfx card should i get
I guess I'll pile on.
If Linux is an important OS to you, don't think for even one second about getting an ATI video card. The open source drivers are no where near competitive with ATI's or NVIDIA's proprietary drivers. This is important for Spring use.
Secondly, NVIDIA has always supported Linux. They've done an excellent job of supporting Linux. With the exception of some motherboard/BIOS/AGP combinations (years ago), NVIDIA has always been reliable. And keep in mind, even during the AGP days, ATI didn't even have a serious competitor to NVIDIA on Linux. And as someone who has sat on a independent product evaluation board during these days for ATI, I can assure they thought Linux was crap and not worth the effort. Obviously things have changed, but the quality of their drivers still show their history. Regardless, NVIDIA has been there.
Third, if you want good 3D performance on Linux, NVIDIA is the ONLY viable solution. ATI's 3D performance is consistently slower on Linux than is NVIDIA versus their Windows implementation. In fact, from time to time NVIDIA's drivers on Linux are actually faster than their Windows counter parts. Been a while since I've seen that though. Regardless, NVIDIA does an excellent job of maintaining performance parity between Windows and Linux with their drivers. They also work hard to maintain feature parity too.
Forth, ATI's drivers are notoriously buggy as all hell. This is true on Windows and especially true on Linux. I can't tell you how many times I see lines like, "ATI_HACK_X", in various game configurations because their OpenGL implementation either is buggy or doesn't properly implement the specification. Interestingly enough, look at your ~/.springrc file. In mine I have, "AtiHacks=0". Go figure. From what I understand NVIDIA uses the same opengl implementation between Windows and Linux.
At the end of the day, if you want reliable, quality, 3D performance on Linux without headache, you have exactly one choice; NVIDIA. Period. Anyone who says otherwise either has stock in ATI, pushing an agenda, or is simply ignorant of the state of things.
That's not to say you can't have good experiences with ATI + Linux, but the odds are drastically stacked against you.
If Linux is an important OS to you, don't think for even one second about getting an ATI video card. The open source drivers are no where near competitive with ATI's or NVIDIA's proprietary drivers. This is important for Spring use.
Secondly, NVIDIA has always supported Linux. They've done an excellent job of supporting Linux. With the exception of some motherboard/BIOS/AGP combinations (years ago), NVIDIA has always been reliable. And keep in mind, even during the AGP days, ATI didn't even have a serious competitor to NVIDIA on Linux. And as someone who has sat on a independent product evaluation board during these days for ATI, I can assure they thought Linux was crap and not worth the effort. Obviously things have changed, but the quality of their drivers still show their history. Regardless, NVIDIA has been there.
Third, if you want good 3D performance on Linux, NVIDIA is the ONLY viable solution. ATI's 3D performance is consistently slower on Linux than is NVIDIA versus their Windows implementation. In fact, from time to time NVIDIA's drivers on Linux are actually faster than their Windows counter parts. Been a while since I've seen that though. Regardless, NVIDIA does an excellent job of maintaining performance parity between Windows and Linux with their drivers. They also work hard to maintain feature parity too.
Forth, ATI's drivers are notoriously buggy as all hell. This is true on Windows and especially true on Linux. I can't tell you how many times I see lines like, "ATI_HACK_X", in various game configurations because their OpenGL implementation either is buggy or doesn't properly implement the specification. Interestingly enough, look at your ~/.springrc file. In mine I have, "AtiHacks=0". Go figure. From what I understand NVIDIA uses the same opengl implementation between Windows and Linux.
At the end of the day, if you want reliable, quality, 3D performance on Linux without headache, you have exactly one choice; NVIDIA. Period. Anyone who says otherwise either has stock in ATI, pushing an agenda, or is simply ignorant of the state of things.
That's not to say you can't have good experiences with ATI + Linux, but the odds are drastically stacked against you.