[Advice Please] New Video Card

Realizing the loyalties that each group possess, I wish to nonetheless
solicit which is the better choice. Mostly Steam games like Half Life 2
and anything from id Software will be the gaming element of the uses the
selection will perform.

First is:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130433

Description for those leery to click a link:

EVGA 896-P3-1257-AR GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Superclocked Edition 896MB
448-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card -
Retail

Other is:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102830

Described as:

SAPPHIRE 100269SR Radeon HD 4890 1GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16
HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail

I did read reviews but wish to solicit comments from these two
communities to add that input to my decision.

Thanks in advance.

Mike

I did read reviews but wish to solicit comments from these two
communities to add that input to my decision.

Thanks in advance.

Mike

An HD4890 card is more comparable to a GTX 275 card. It outperforms a Core
216 GTX 260 on virtually all games and benches. I own an eVGA SSC Core 216
GTX 260.....it's a really good mid range card. But on Left4Dead at 1920x1200
the 4890 beats it by almost 20fps. That's a large amount. I don't game on a
monitor that large. I'm using a 1280x1024 LCD. So the GTX 260 unit is plenty
good for me. If I had even a 1600x1050 or above, I'd have gone for the
GTX275. I've never cared for the Catalyst drivers and their CCC
incarnations. That's the only reason I've been sticking with nVidia.

"mike" wrote in message
...
Realizing the loyalties that each group possess, I wish to nonetheless
solicit which is the better choice. Mostly Steam games like Half Life 2
and anything from id Software will be the gaming element of the uses the
selection will perform.

First is:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130433

Description for those leery to click a link:

EVGA 896-P3-1257-AR GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Superclocked Edition 896MB
448-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card -
Retail

[snip]
Thanks in advance.

Mike
..
The Nividia card is usable here if you're interested in helping medical
research:

http://www.gpugrid.net/

There are plans to allow ATI cards for the same purpose, but I'd guess not
for another year.

Robert Miles

Augustus wrote:
I did read reviews but wish to solicit comments from these two
communities to add that input to my decision.

Thanks in advance.

Mike

An HD4890 card is more comparable to a GTX 275 card. It outperforms a Core
216 GTX 260 on virtually all games and benches. I own an eVGA SSC Core 216
GTX 260.....it's a really good mid range card. But on Left4Dead at 1920x1200
the 4890 beats it by almost 20fps. That's a large amount. I don't game on a
monitor that large. I'm using a 1280x1024 LCD. So the GTX 260 unit is plenty
good for me. If I had even a 1600x1050 or above, I'd have gone for the
GTX275. I've never cared for the Catalyst drivers and their CCC
incarnations. That's the only reason I've been sticking with nVidia.


I note that for a fair comparison, your assertion that a more reasonable
apples-to-apples look points to the 4890 versus the 275. It looks like
the 275 will be the likely choice.

Thanks once again,

Mike

Augustus wrote:
I did read reviews but wish to solicit comments from these two
communities to add that input to my decision.

Thanks in advance.

Mike

An HD4890 card is more comparable to a GTX 275 card. It outperforms a Core
216 GTX 260 on virtually all games and benches. I own an eVGA SSC Core 216
GTX 260.....it's a really good mid range card. But on Left4Dead at 1920x1200
the 4890 beats it by almost 20fps. That's a large amount. I don't game on a
monitor that large. I'm using a 1280x1024 LCD. So the GTX 260 unit is plenty
good for me. If I had even a 1600x1050 or above, I'd have gone for the
GTX275. I've never cared for the Catalyst drivers and their CCC
incarnations. That's the only reason I've been sticking with nVidia.


Would you buy this card?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127429

Mike

Would you buy this card?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127429

Mike

Yes, I would. Good price and it's a factory OC job.

Augustus wrote:
Would you buy this card?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127429

Mike

Yes, I would. Good price and it's a factory OC job.

Last question.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130492

A little more memory.

512 versus 448 memory bus.

Slower clock (602 versus 666).

$5 less after rebate.

Better choice?

Mike

"mike" wrote in message
m...
Augustus wrote:
Would you buy this card?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127429

Mike

Yes, I would. Good price and it's a factory OC job.

Last question.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130492

A little more memory.

512 versus 448 memory bus.

Slower clock (602 versus 666).

$5 less after rebate.

Better choice?

Mike

It's a tossup.....the GTX 280 will have the 65nm fab core with 32 ROP's and
512bit bus, while the GTX 275 has the newer and cooler running 55nm fab core
with 28 ROP's and 448bit bus. The GTX 280 has more bandwidth and processing
power (wider bus and 4 more ROP's) but runs hotter and consumes more power.
They bench very closely. I would likely take the GTX 280 and set the clocks
somewhere within the standard eVGA 280 SC levels (621/2268) or the eVGA 280
SSC levels (650/2326). The GTX 280 is a better card, but not a huge amount,
and it's a hotter and more power hungry one, but again, not by much.