Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

HD 4870 vs GTX 260: My Experience

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Well on a sidenote the WINE devs are partially to blame for fglrx's WINE problems, as they not only initially developed WINEs 3d features for Nvidia hardware, but also used Nvidia specific OpenGL extensions.

    Comment


    • #17
      Yeah, fglrx is giving me less stress/headache than nvidia these days, although it was pretty frustrating when I couldn't use wine for months last year. I'm also using the OSS driver on a different partition and that's been faultless since I upgraded the kernel to 2.6.29 (with RT patches - that's the reason for the second partition).

      If I could get some current-generation hardware video decoding out of either driver I'd have no reason to even consider nvidia any more

      Comment


      • #18
        Sorry to interrupt the discussion. I was wondering what PSU wattage you need (generally speaking) for these cards. In particular, the Nvidia GeForce 260 GTX cards. I read on a 'gpu' site, the wattage used is around 200w so if you had a few 120mm fans, 4 or 5 hard drives (1 with the OS), the rest are for data (so are usually idle or not being stressed), a laser printer, an Intel Quad Core Q6600 CPU @ 95w and an aftermarket fan, what PSU would you need? I tried a 'PSU calculator generator' and the calculation was 380w. But, some people are saying you need at least 500 watts so use 600 or higher. My current PSU is the Corsair HX520w (the one with yellow writing and it's modular). Is that sufficient or would I need an upgrade?

        I guess the ATI cards of the higher end 4800 series has a comparable power draw. So, it could apply to either card.

        I am thinking of building a 2nd, cheaper system, so I could just use this PSU but maybe I wouldn't have to?

        Thanks for any reply. I am sure this question has been asked a thousand times but with newer graphics cards drawing more power.... Also, I am sure it depends on what you're doing and what is being stressed.
        Last edited by Panix; 07-08-2009, 10:37 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          The main thing to keep in mind is that graphics cards draw the bulk of their power from the +12 line, so the amount of total +12 current is more important than the total # of watts at all voltages. You may need a 500W rated supply to get the 380W you need at specific voltages.

          Most cards include a recommendation for +12 capacity in a reasonably fully loaded system (ie not a RAID-ed server but not an empty box either).

          Comment


          • #20
            I found this:

            HX520W with a maximum +12V output of 480W (i.e. 40A total output)
            So, I should be good using this same PSU for a basic setup (no SLI or anything) with either of these cards?

            Comment


            • #21
              Yep, I think that should be OK. Just make sure the +12 is only split across a couple of rails, ie if it has 5 +12V outputs each capable of 8A then that wouldn't work so well.

              Comment


              • #22
                For my experience of my HD4870 with fglrx 9.3, I can say that :
                fglrx is a nightmare with Wine apps. To solve that particular topic, I bought a new hard drive (30 €) on which I'll put windows. It'll be reserved for running games from editors that don't even know the meanning of "linux". They probably think that linux is a sort of penguin threatened of extinction and therefore should be taken care by WWF (not the catchers but the ecologists ). Far cry 2 will be the first example.

                fglrx gives tearing in videos, unless you select acceleration with opengl. This way, you don't get tearing.

                fglrx makes run smooth ut2004, but, after all, it a 2004 game. It also makes runs smooth Quake Wars, which is more demanding game by the way. I mean that on a 1920*1200 resolution, not 1024*768. It's real demanding gaming conditions !

                fglrx is annoying because I'm stucked @ 9.3 version : Gentoo stable is blocking fglrx 9.6 if xorg-server > 1.5.2-r7 is not installed. All those upcoming versions are marked as unstable (amd64). I also believe that 9.6 can't run with newer 2.6.29 and 2.6.30 kernels, but I'm not sure.
                Anyway, the fglrx upgrades are not as fast as ATI is issuing the monthly releases but the fault is also half in the guys who are mainting the distro.

                I really like more power management in fglrx control panel, but perhaps is there other ways to achieve that. Nvidia wasn't much more advanced on that particular topic (for old 2004 nvidia 6800 GT).

                All in all, I'm rather happy with fglrx and ATI HD4870, but the goal is one day to run fully on open-source drivers. This day will come sooner or later but meanwhile, I really fglrx could be more optimized for linux (even if there is a huge work done by AMD for stabilizing and optimizing it).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Sorry you were the victim twice of ATi.

                  I stopped buying ATi cards when they stopped making solutions for gamers the first time in 1996 or so. They actually had a press release that year that said something to the effect that they didn't need to make video cards for gamers anymore, they were quite pleased to have the market share advantage for business class onboard video solutions.

                  I've used Nvidia exclusively ever since.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Jaguar07 View Post
                    Sorry you were the victim twice of ATi.

                    I stopped buying ATi cards when they stopped making solutions for gamers the first time in 1996 or so. They actually had a press release that year that said something to the effect that they didn't need to make video cards for gamers anymore, they were quite pleased to have the market share advantage for business class onboard video solutions.

                    I've used Nvidia exclusively ever since.

                    Never heard that one. I think what you mean is their decision to not compete directly with nvidia in the high end market and instead focus on more affordable single solutions. That actually played out to their advantage since their cards ended up being so cheap compared to nvidia's that it was possible for people to pair up two cards and match the performance of nvidia's high end without going broke.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Melcar View Post
                      Never heard that one. I think what you mean is their decision to not compete directly with nvidia in the high end market and instead focus on more affordable single solutions. That actually played out to their advantage since their cards ended up being so cheap compared to nvidia's that it was possible for people to pair up two cards and match the performance of nvidia's high end without going broke.
                      I'm referring to the time approximately between 1996 and May of 2000 when ATi concentrated on consumer video devices. May of 2000 is when ATi came back to the game with the first Radeon release. When 3DFX was acquired by Nvidia, it left a huge vacuum regarding a quality gaming video card that performed. It actually was a vacuum filled by Nvidia. It worked to Nvidia's advantage much more than ATi. ATi had been in the video card manufacturing business long before Nvidia borrowed CGI systems design and started to make video cards of their own. ATi was around in the early days. When ATi was acquired by AMD, that ended the lesson. ATi is now just another label owned by someone else just like 3DFX.
                      Last edited by Jaguar07; 07-23-2009, 02:55 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Using a MSI 4870 here, phenom 9850. have tried both 32bit version of debian and ubuntu. I used to get tearing, but that seem to no longer be much of an issue. HL2/CS:S work fine, hvaent played WoW but I could not get Warcraft 3 to play. CoD4 *works*, with major graphical issues. I also use two monitors, a 22inch widescreen and a 19inch widescreen. To note, for windows, do not try and use CCC to setup two monitors, set it up through windows display manager. Xinerama and BigDesktop both worked flawlessly after I disbaled RandR12 support.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          gts 250 - isn't that a renamed 9600?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by energyman View Post
                            gts 250 - isn't that a renamed 9600?
                            Nope, it's a 9800 GTX+.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                              Nope, it's a 9800 GTX+.
                              you mean, renamend 8800GTS...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by energyman View Post
                                you mean, renamend 8800GTS...
                                basically, there are slight differences, the 9800GTX+ has higher clock speed then the 8800, and uses a 55nm die. the GTS 250 has a larger framebuffer then the 9800GTX+

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X