1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Graphics GTX275 SLi Vs 4890 Crossfire?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by SpeedLegion, 8 Aug 2009.

  1. SpeedLegion

    SpeedLegion Minimodder

    Joined:
    23 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    485
    Likes Received:
    21
    guys guys stop the violence :p
    I'm buying the stuff today its all good!
    I'm glad i started some "healthy discussion" it seems, but lets not make things petty?
    Cheers for all the help and links again!
     
  2. AstralWanderer

    AstralWanderer What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    749
    Likes Received:
    34
    One point not raised is that of SLI/Crossfire configurability. If no profile exists (which will apply to just-released games as well as non-mainstream ones) then you can still set an SLI mode with Nvidia drivers (though that doesn't guarantee any benefit - some games can run worse with SLI enabled).

    With ATI, this option didn't exist (does that still apply?) unless using third party tools like ATI CrossFire Xtension.
     
  3. trig

    trig god's little mistake

    Joined:
    10 Aug 2006
    Posts:
    2,848
    Likes Received:
    43
    got you 2 pretty fired up dont i? but hey, i can admit when i am wrong about something, and here it is. you did not say 4890's beat the 285's, which i knew, but got off on another tangent and addressed it incorrectly. but you were still wrong in that they do not tie the 285's either...

    in addition, you "slander" me for not providing links to the 275's performance to the 4890's. but...what? oh wait, neither do you 2...in fact, the only post's you provide again prove that the statement "4890's tie 285's" is wrong. margin of error? lmao...

    275's vs 4890's reviews are hard to find. i post with the knowledge that 275's are better (or at least were based on the drivers used) because i too was looking to possibly upgrade my card (275 or 4890 or 4770) and had to piece reviews together to form that conclusion...going through that again doesn't appeal to me to win a pissing contest. of course, the time spent arguing i probably could have. he made his decision, he'll be happy with it i am sure. it's not like it lost by any real margin, and in several games as i recall (grid, stalker, h.a.wk. - i think) they were a decent winner. but in the majority the 275's won...

    edit:
    i also tend to try to get the last word in, so sorry for prolonging this. i will quit posting...
     
  4. Slizza

    Slizza beautiful to demons

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,738
    Likes Received:
    120
    I think this would be a great article for bit to run, HD4890 xf Vs gtx 275 sli.
    Seems both are great choises for people wanting to buy a multi gpu setup right now so it makes sense.
     
  5. SNiiPE_DoGG

    SNiiPE_DoGG Engineering The Extreme

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    533
    Likes Received:
    39

    boy you really dont like to read my posts do you? do you even know the definition of slander? because I certainly never "slandered" you, that would be me lying about something pertaining to you personally :duh:

    lets :read: shall we? I will make it very simple

    (note the quotes of the links to reviews I previously posted)
    you will note that a stock 4890 trails a gtx 285 by ~10% in a single card to single card comparison, where as the overclocked 4890 to the overclocked 285 closes that gap to ~3-5%

    next:
    this chart shows a STOCK 285 in SLI is only 3% ahead of a STOCK 4890 in CF

    now lets make a bit of a leap (I know it is hard for you to fathom simple math and logic)

    if a single 4890 at stock is 10% behind a single 285 at stock, and CF 4890 is only 3% behind 285 SLI. Yet when the 4890 and the 285 are both overclocked (single card) the performance gap is only 3-5%. Then we can conclude that overclocked CF 4890's are faster than overclocked CF 285's

    now unless you are trying to contend that 275's are faster than 285's... I dont see how you can possibly find a hole in that logic.
     
  6. hotnikkelz

    hotnikkelz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    28 May 2009
    Posts:
    258
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think there's more to it than that, but i can see your logic. The gaps is just too small for SLI 275s to fit between the 2 i think.

    However, iirc single 275 > single 4890 in MANY benchmarks that i've seen, especially for games. I think logically speaking on that vein, SLI 275 should > 4890 XF.

    I tihnk it all boils down to the efficiency of the cards in their respective configs, but it's not quite 'fair' to use the 285 so strictly as an indication of how the 275 will perform.
     
  7. Moyo2k

    Moyo2k AMD Fanboy

    Joined:
    11 May 2009
    Posts:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    52
    Dunno why this keeps coming up,

    For gaming AMD + ATI > Bang for buck than Intel + NVIDIA
    For anything else, intel and nvidia walk all over AMD/ATI, then walk back over for added effect... for bang for buck 2 HD4890 isnt comparable to 2 GTX275...

    I'm a gamer so I know where my favourites are
    Red Corner Cheesecake!
     
  8. JaredC01

    JaredC01 Hardware Nut

    Joined:
    24 Nov 2002
    Posts:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    62
    For single card performance, the 275 is pretty sexy. It beats the 4890 in over half of the tests, though it's also a tad more expensive. For folding it's also a no-brainer.

    When moving up to two cards, a lot of the performance depends on how well the cards scale to multiples. SLI scales pretty well, though with the 4890 cards, they scale better than the current nVidia cards, so while one 275 may beat out one 4890, once you move up to two cards, the performance gain with the second 4890 is higher than the performance gain with the second 275. In fact the difference is large enough to push the two 4890 setup into a higher class with the 285 card. Check the chart posted by SNiiPE_DoGG to see the comparison...

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/video/gtx285sli-hd4890cf/1920_relative.png

    Have a quick read of this review as well... 1GHz 4890 single card vs OC'd 285 single card. Pretty close on numbers, especially at the higher resolutions.

    http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...-4890-Atomic-Battle-of-the-OC-giants/Reviews/

    Based on that, and how well the 4890 scales when compared to the 285, Crossfire 1GHz 4890's SHOULD beat SLI OC'd 285's.
     
  9. SpeedLegion

    SpeedLegion Minimodder

    Joined:
    23 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    485
    Likes Received:
    21
    just ordered my two 4890s :) yummy lol
     
  10. JaredC01

    JaredC01 Hardware Nut

    Joined:
    24 Nov 2002
    Posts:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    62
    Which brand did you end up going with?
     
  11. SpeedLegion

    SpeedLegion Minimodder

    Joined:
    23 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    485
    Likes Received:
    21
  12. Moyo2k

    Moyo2k AMD Fanboy

    Joined:
    11 May 2009
    Posts:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    52
    Good on you, NVIDIA has lot their way, if they think brand names are gonna validify a premium then pretty soon the green corner is gonna be empty - i mean the GTX295 vs HD4870, unless your a maniac its pretty lopsided

    XFX is ridiculously cheap so er... yer go for it, haven't seen enough bad things to put me off their brand
     
  13. SpeedLegion

    SpeedLegion Minimodder

    Joined:
    23 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    485
    Likes Received:
    21
    So far so good! Very happy with the cards! Working fine... almost :p
    Still waiting to get a Crossfire Bridge which they didn't come with >.<

    However once that arrives :D everything will be perfect :p
     
  14. Slizza

    Slizza beautiful to demons

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,738
    Likes Received:
    120
    Things like this swing it the Nvidia way for me..
    Those Physx effect in game realy do make the difference as they can't be enabled with ATI :(



     
  15. CrapBag

    CrapBag Multimodder

    Joined:
    17 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    7,753
    Likes Received:
    412
    Those vids really show the difference Physx is making in games yet people will still say its pointless.

    Games are supposed to evolve to become more realistic and physx does just that, its the reason I went Nvidia again over ATI in my recent build.

    Nice example Slizza
     
  16. SNiiPE_DoGG

    SNiiPE_DoGG Engineering The Extreme

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    533
    Likes Received:
    39
    ZOMG cloth hanging from rafters! Trash on the ground! damn, now that definitely makes ATI inferior :lol:

    all of those details can be done on the CPU easily, its just that nvidia pays devs to make it run on the GPU and sap GPU performance in the graphics area
     
  17. CrapBag

    CrapBag Multimodder

    Joined:
    17 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    7,753
    Likes Received:
    412
    Can't say I have noticed any performance hit by enabling Physx on either of my Nvidia cards.

    I didn't say ATi were inferior but I'd rather have Physx than not, each to their own. It does add to the realism.
     
  18. Slizza

    Slizza beautiful to demons

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,738
    Likes Received:
    120
    *hands tissue over*
    The effects are not limited to what was shown in the vids that was just a couple examples and it continues throughout the whole of both those games.

    I don't know too much about the topic but as far as i have read on this, cpu use as per havok is much more limited than what can be done with gpu physx.

    If it makes games better (and it does) it swings it for me.
    Not that ATI have bad cards it's just a shame they have no physx and sadly it's a deal breaker.
     
  19. Elton

    Elton Officially a Whisky Nerd

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    8,577
    Likes Received:
    192
    Moyo, Intel + ATI = win...dunno what you're goin on about.
     
  20. SNiiPE_DoGG

    SNiiPE_DoGG Engineering The Extreme

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    533
    Likes Received:
    39
    ALL physx effects can easily be run on a CPU so phyx is just a marketing ploy - PhysX does take away frames when used - but currently you CPU is BARELY used when gaming.

    there is so much cpu power available to run physics calculations, but you can sit there and foolishly think physx is some revolutionary amazing tool.
     

Share This Page