GTX295 beaten by 2xHD4890 CFx - -BIG TIME

[amitash]

^the fact that a single gtx275 is faster than an hd4890 + the fact that SLI scales much better than crossfire + lower power consumption of nvidia = no chance for 4890 cfx

 

[comp@ddict]

the fact that SLI scales much better than crossfire

it's not fact, that's clear "fart"
-----------------------------------------
Posted again:
-----------------------------------------

the fact that SLI scales much better than crossfire

it's not fact, that's clear "fart"

 

[amitash]

it's not fact, that's clear "fart"

Lol, do you even know what your talking about?...search before u post as always.

*www.guru3d.com/article/core-i7-multigpu-sli-crossfire-game-performance-review/6

compare the performances there and again, dont make claims that you cant support.

 

[tkin]

I agree, but here's something that concerns me.

Both SLI and CF suck, most new games have issues that need patches and Driver Updates to be dealt with, for now the most elusive card is the GTX 275, no CF/SLI Hassle to deal with and offers good performance

BTW-ALL tested games are years old, how about some new game reviews, also sometimes CF and SLI beats 2x cards, like HD4870 CF beat HD4870x2 in many games, so I like a review of GTX 275 SLI with HD4890 CF.

 

[comp@ddict]

compare the performances there and again, dont make claims that you cant support.

How does that change anything? the fact that an HD4870X2 performs 106% higher than HD4870 is good enough, I don't see GTX295 coming near that feat, although it's the fastest GPU.

And we can't go on comparing HD4870 to GTX260, reason:-
GTX 260 - 216 SHADERS
HD 4870 - 160 Shaders (x5 = 800 Stream Processors in ATi Language)

And true, both CFx and SLi suck.

 

[amitash]

BTW-ALL tested games are years old, how about some new game reviews, also sometimes CF and SLI beats 2x cards, like HD4870 CF beat HD4870x2 in many games, so I like a review of GTX 275 SLI with HD4890 CF.

We are all waiting for the ellusive gtx275 sli review

How does that change anything? the fact that an HD4870X2 performs 106% higher than HD4870 is good enough, I don't see GTX295 coming near that feat, although it's the fastest GPU.
And we can't go on comparing HD4870 to GTX260, reason:-
GTX 260 - 216 SHADERS
HD 4870 - 160 Shaders (x5 = 800 Stream Processors in ATi Language)

The GTX260 was released to compete with the 4870 only....I dont see any other card you can compare with...gtx280 is way more powerfull but gtx260 and 4870 have VERY similar performances....And at the time of release, the 4870 was easily beating the gtx260, but with new rivers that is not the case....If you look around, you will find that a single gtx260 and 4870 are VERY similar in terms of performance....since 2x gtx260 beats 2x4870, then its clear that SLI scales better.

GTX 260 - 216 SHADERS
HD 4870 - 160 Shaders (x5 = 800 Stream Processors in ATi Language)

This is a very noobish statement to make...ATi and NVIDIA have vast differences in archaetecture, Its like saying you cant compare say, a Q8200 to phenom 2 920 because phenom 2 uses different arch.... The point is: gt260 was meant for competetion with hd4870 and it WINS in both single and dual gpu configs...If not gtx260 there is nothing to compare 4870 too.

Oh and BTW, hd4890x2 is very unlikely to come out because of the near 400W power consumption:

source: *www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13228&Itemid=34

We have investigated if any of ATI’s partners will actually make an HD 4890 X2 card powered with two RV790 chips and most of them are negating that they plan do make such a card.


With a moderate clock, this card should be possible, it would draw a lot of power as HD4890 has maximal board power of 190W but still a dual card could be possible.

ATI said that it doesn’t plan to bring such a card, but we were told before that partners could do it, but partners said that the performance of dual X2 4980 card would not be enough to beat GTX 295 and therefore doesn’t make much sense to make it.

At this point we are not aware that someone will make an HD 4890 X2 card, but if the partner decides to go this direction, ATI can provide materials and some support to make such a project alive.

 

[comp@ddict]

This is a very noobish statement to make...ATi and NVIDIA have vast differences in archaetecture

exactly, that's y i mentioned it.

What you see as 800 SPs is (160 x 5D)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But yes, due to different archietecture, they somehow come up with near similar performance

EDIT:- Yes I agree, GTX260 pawns HD4870 and HD4890 too, but HD4890 OC handles it.

BTW, let's end this endless argument

 

[skeletor]

^ lol, we all love to kiss and make up. Don't we?

 

[comp@ddict]

yes

 

[skeletor]

^ yup, i knw.

 

[amitash]

GTX275 SLI results are here: *www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1554&pageID=6783

But the site has listed very few games and settings are different from the 4890x2 results on tech power up....The only games i found comparable to these two reviews is far cry 2, and world in conflict...where gtx275 sli beats 4890x2 quite easily...

Heres another review of 4890 crossfire with nearly the same setup:*www.tweaktown.com/articles/2704/ati_radeon_hd_4890_in_crossfire/index2.html

Here, if you compare the 2 reviews, gtx275x2 scores higher than 4890x2 in vantage, world in conflict, and in crysis warhead (which tech power up mysteriously didnt include) the gtx295 itself beats the 4890x2, gtx295 even wins in farcry 2 in that review, it is beaten by 4890x2 in stalker, and in left 4 dead: 4890x2 beats in one review and gtx295 in the other so its equal there.

Result: 4890x2 barely manages to beat gtx295 and is not even close to gtx275 as i have always said...

 

[comp@ddict]

^^^Yes, I agree. Well, now HD4890 has a chance only on price, at least till stock GTX 275's come for 17.8k.

Otherwise, nVidia rulez. BTW, nVidia's GTX350 aka GT300 will have 512 SHADERS

 

[tkin]

^^^Yes, I agree. Well, now HD4890 has a chance only on price, at least till stock GTX 275's come for 17.8k.

Otherwise, nVidia rulez. BTW, nVidia's GTX350 aka GT300 will have 512 SHADERS

Palit GTX 275 Sonic @ 17.3k(itwares).

512 Shaders, hell yeah, that card's gonna kick a$$, that's equivalent to 5*512=2564 shaders for ATI.

Seems ATI needs to come up with new plans and not just stick to revisions

(9800GTX+:GTS250=HD4870:HD4890).

 

[amitash]

17.3k...WOW thats cool....AMD need to do something fast or nvidia will walk all over them

 

[tkin]

^^ F**king spammer. Bot perhaps?

 

[comp@ddict]

I had already REPORTED it about a few minutes ago

 

[tkin]

^^Again!!!
WTH is happening here??
GET THE F**K OUT.

Why why why on this thread? Go to chit chat, bother others, no one cares.

 

[comp@ddict]

I've reported 20 threads or so today as spam/ad

 

[topgear]

Here goes the much awaited GTX 275 SLI Review

BFG GTX 275 OC Edition SLI Review

*www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1554


BTW, I've noticed a strange thing :

For example in Far Cry 2 @ 1920*1200 ( High DX10 )

HD4890 X2 ( CF Mode ) 91.2
*www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/HD_4890_CrossFire/9.html

HD4890 X2 ( CF Mode ) 111.58
*www.tweaktown.com/articles/2704/ati_radeon_hd_4890_in_crossfire/index7.html

GTX 295 81.1
*www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/HD_4890_CrossFire/9.html

ASUS GTX 295 111.41
*www.tweaktown.com/articles/2704/ati_radeon_hd_4890_in_crossfire/index7.html

ASUS GTX 295 89
*www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1554&pageID=6785

BTW, techpowerup used a core i7 920 @ 3.8 with 2x 1GB DDR3 Ram
tweakdown used a core i7 965 @ 3.8 GHz with 3x 2GB of DDR3 ram
bjorn3d used a core i7 965 @ 3.74 Ghz with 6 GB memkit

Now look those rigs & scores. The rig with core i7 965 @ 3.8 Ghz just outperformed all those other results. So I think gfx cards benchmarks not only depends on the gfx card itself but also heavily depends on what kind of cpu & ram is used & their speed also.

 

[dOm1naTOr]

errr..
maybe drivers are diff, or driver setings might be diff