Lets cut to it..

ArCElM · *Last edited by ArCElM; 05-05-2012 at 13:03.*

EDIT: SORRY SCRATCH THIS THANKS I have a 680.

Thanks for all the help.

Spets · 05-04-2012, 07:27 | posts: 1,429

Realistically, a good one:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/21

A better one when proper performance drivers are out for it.

ArCElM · *Last edited by ArCElM; 05-04-2012 at 07:42.*

Thanks for the reply..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spets

A better one when proper performance drivers are out for it.

Really? is this a myth or is this for real? I am pretty sure drivers are strong on launch, they always have been in the past and HAVE to be, because of the reviews.. I am not sure I buy into this mate but please if I am wrong I will only be pleased.

It is very hard to find reviews that show good OLDER cards performing at there best, along side new gen cards, and ofc these are what really tell a better story.. and what most people don't want us to see, I just want to know what I am REALLY getting for £500 which I could better spend elsewhere.. lol

EpicLoss · 05-04-2012, 08:02 | posts: 824 | Location: Midlands/UK

even my old zotac gtx275 was better than the sapphire 4870x2 i had

difference should be quite substantial imo

anyway what resolution do you game at ? anything below 1920x1080 would not be worth the upgrade

Spets · 05-04-2012, 08:04 | posts: 1,429

Drivers have always improved performance wise over time but let's get back to what you really came for.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/vga-charts-spring-2011/6
You have the similar performance of a 5850, with a score of 16757, the 680 in vantage scored 29860.
Modern Warefare 2, the 5850 scores 101 frames at 1920x1200, the 680 has 206 fps.
Far Cry 2, 4870x2 has 49, similar with the 5850 at 50, the 680 has 126 fps.
Bad Company 2, 5850 gets an avg of 43, 680 has 97.

Gives you a general idea of the performance gain.

ArCElM · *Last edited by ArCElM; 05-04-2012 at 08:46.*

Actually the 4870x2 is more along the lines of a HD5870, but still thanks for the help and advice.

And I game at 1080p

XBEAST · *Last edited by XBEAST; 05-04-2012 at 08:44.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArCElM

Actually the 5870x2 is more along the lines of a HD5870, but still thanks for the help and advice.

And I game at 1080p

Typo: you meant 4870x2.

And, yeah, you're right. HD 4870 X2 is similar to HD 5870, BUT it all depends on CF support in games. If a game has very good CF support, 4870X2 will perform similarly to 5870. Otherwise, it will perform worse.

Anyway, GTX 680 would be a MASSIVE boost. According to TPU, GTX 680 is 75-85% faster than HD 5870 @ 1920x1200.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/P...Stream/28.html

As for drivers, they tend improve over a long period of time. At least GTX 480 had some nice improvements over a year. Since GTX 680 is also new architecture, drivers should also bring some improvements.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...0,2875-12.html

ArCElM · 05-04-2012, 08:46 | posts: 1,434 | Location: The Octagon

yeah my bad, and thanks allot.

PR-0927 · 05-04-2012, 08:50 | posts: 1,666 | Location: Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A.

A 10. No doubt. Believe me, I came from a Radeon HD 5870, which I got as a replacement for my defective Radeon HD 4870 X2.

If anyone has experience on this exact matter, it's me.

The Radeon HD 4870 X2 is roughly equal to the Radeon HD 5870. The GTX 680 achieves around 2 times the performance of a Radeon HD 5870 in almost every game, at least at 1920x1200 (the resolution I game at).

I'm currently playing Batman: Arkham City at 1920x1200 with every single thing maxed, even PhysX, plus 32xCSAA, FXAA, and 8xSSAA from the nVidia Control Panel. Pair that with adaptive v-sync, and it's just beautiful.

In-game benchmark gives me an average FPS of 41 with all this. My Radeon HD 5870 would have died trying to do all this.

For Battlefield 3, I have everything maxed again, plus the same 32xCSAA, FXAA, and 8xSSAA from the nVidia Control Panel. Adaptive v-sync as well. Running a solid 57-60 FPS on average. It'd be higher if I turned off the adaptive v-sync.

This card is revolutionary compared to the Radeon HD 5870.

You'll love it.

- PR-0927

automaticman · 05-04-2012, 20:45 | posts: 663 | Location: Orange County, CA

Here's how the 680 compares to a 5870:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/511?vs=555

tuco · 05-05-2012, 11:46 | posts: 3,036 | Location: SoL 3

but wont the op's cpu hold a 680 down?

RoadKillNL · 05-05-2012, 12:30 | posts: 2,544 | Location: The Netherlands

Quote:

Originally Posted by tuco

but wont the op's cpu hold a 680 down?

Not at all. It's OCed to 3.8 Ghz.

maddy2012 · 05-05-2012, 12:30 | posts: 474 | Location: england

It's not holding mine back, runs everything butter smooth.

The Goose · 05-05-2012, 12:49 | posts: 1,274 | Location: shropshire,UK

i have 2 4890s in cf and i play mostly arma2 @1080p with most settings on ultra giving me 30-45 fps, i dont need to upgrade atm but im going too,

personally if your fps are ok i`d hold off till the prices drop but if you have the money and your itching to upgade just do it ,a 680 can only be better,the alternative is to get a better cpu but you`d gain more from the 680

ArCElM · 05-05-2012, 13:05 | posts: 1,434 | Location: The Octagon

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Goose

personally if your fps are ok i`d hold off

My FPS is not OK, anything below 60FPS and I cant stand it..

And I will buy a £500 GPU and drop details or whatever it takes to get that.

35-40 FPS and I would not play, no ifs buts or maybes, it's just me, I can't help it.

RoadKillNL · 05-05-2012, 14:46 | posts: 2,544 | Location: The Netherlands

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArCElM

My FPS is not OK, anything below 60FPS and I cant stand it..

And I will buy a £500 GPU and drop details or whatever it takes to get that.

35-40 FPS and I would not play, no ifs buts or maybes, it's just me, I can't help it.

Well below 60 isn't acceptable for me either, so you're not a stranger there