I need advice between Nvidia and ATI card for gaming.

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1799167

Visiontek ATI 5850 $252 or $244 w/ DPA after coupon (plus tax) at Dell Home - FREE SHIPPING

My specs are as follows currently:

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz processor
BFG Tech GeForce 8800 GTX OC2 768MB video card + Nvidia 7900 GT for physx
OCZ 4GB DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel RAM

I am torn on this. Is this really that big of an upgrade over my 8800 GTX and 7900 GT I use for physx? I can run just about any game I want at a pretty good frame rate with 2x AA and Vsync on at 1920x1200. I also don't want to lose the option for physx.

I love the new Nvidia cards, but I don't think I am willing to drop $500+ on it.

 

this deal may seem too good to pass up but i'd wait until the new nvidia cards are out, i think your 8800 can keep up until then

 

The 5850 is a nice card but if you don't need to upgrade then why bother?

The 5850 will continue to get cheaper and cheaper and then there is the whole "Fermi" thing which is coming eventually from Nvidia so if you don't need to upgrade you might want to just wait it out.

 

Well the main reason I am thinking about upgrading is because Aliens vs Predator is using Direct X 11. I want to be able to max out that game.

 

Just out of curiosity, how are you running a 7900 GT for PhysX? That model doesn't support it.

 

Thread moved to:

General Hardware
http://forums.guru3d.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10

p.s.: I also changed your thread's title, hlhbk.

 

Errr I just checked and it's an 8600 GT. Sorry I forgot what I had. I know for sure the rest is correct

 

Fermi will most likely cost you an arm and a leg so I'd go with the Radeon HD 5850, but I do have to warn you, regardless of choice, your CPU will bottleneck the GPU. Time for an upgrade to at least a quad core or a stronger dual core.

deltatux

 

+1

I think that's very sound advice.

 

Not according to the article below.

http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=13454&all=1

"Conclusion

After all of this, it should be obvious why I’m still using my E6850: because there’s no need for anything faster. At reasonably high detail levels the GPU is by far the most important equation to gaming, and hence my GTX285 is the primary bottleneck in every gaming situation I use it in.

Even when underclocked to 2 GHz, my E6850 still pushes my GTX285 hard enough so that it’s a 100% bottleneck in most situations I game at. The fact that stock speed is actually 3 GHz demonstrates why I don’t bother overclocking. The last time I was CPU limited to any meaningful degree was in the Pentium 4 days.

Don’t believe the “you’re CPU limited under 4 GHz” and the “you need quad-core to game” myths. If you always configure your games to use the highest playable settings, any decent mainstream dual-core CPU is enough to push the graphics system into being the primary bottleneck, thereby erasing most practical differences the fastest quad-core setups potentially offer.

If you have any kind of limited budget, sink as much money as you can into the graphics card, and also buy the biggest monitor with the biggest resolution you can afford. Then configure all of your games to run at the highest playable settings to fully take advantage of your purchase. You’ll utilize your hardware far better this way, instead of using settings that are too low and squander GPU performance.

Of course, if you already have the best monitor and GPU setup available and you still have money left over then by all means, sink it into the fastest CPU/platform available. The same might also apply if you employ heavy multi-tasking."

 

I call BS on that for sure

Went from an Core 2 Duo E4500 @ 3Ghz to a Core 2 Duo E8400 @ 4Ghz and the increase was at least 20% faster with the same GPU.

 

hard to say, but i dont think any games needs four cores yet.

 

In you other thread I posted that you'd be better off getting a quad and either a 5850(or something like that) or the new nVidia card. So, right now a better choice is something like a Q9550/Q9505 or a Q8400, if the money is short(though a Q9505 is a better choice).

I don't see any harm in waiting for the new nvidia gpu's even, if you're not planning on buying a one. The price on HD5000 series will drop anyway and you'll get a better idea and right now, you aren't suffering from low performance, as you claim...

Bottom line: Get a quad, or get a new gpu, though quad is somewhat of a better choice

 

One of the things that made up my mind about switching back to ATI was that Nvidia disabled Physx support when an ATI GPU is detected starting with the 186 drivers. They just didn't say "it's not supported", they disabled the feature. It was a serious a-hole corporate move. I'm sorry - I'm not allowed to use your card that I paid for because your card sees another card in my system? You sad, sad over-corporate greedy company. I didn't even own an ATI card and hearing that made me sick. Imagine if Seagate hard drives disabled if they detected a Western Digital drive in your system?

I haven't owned an ATI card since 2003. I was actually impressed at how much better the drivers are now. I've been using two 5850's in crossfire for a couple of weeks and so far I haven't had any issues at all (perfect).

 

With exception to RTS games and GTAIV, really fast dual core is better than quad core.

Id say grab the 5850 and Windows 7, then in about a year or so when 32 or 28nm CPUs are out. Upgrade your mobo/cpu.

 

While I agree that prices will come down, I don't agree that a quad core is a better investment unless you know you're going to use more than 2 cores, which most games don't at this stage. I still say that the Radeon HD 5850 is a better deal if the OP is to pick one or the other.

deltatux

 

Umm the era of dual core is over. Anybody telling someone to buy dual core over a highly Overclockable quad is really giving bad advice. I would agree with a dual core if you don't game.

A lot more games and apps are starting to use quad core, and the new PII's and i7 quads perform GREAT.

This is in response to that article posted above. May as well invest in a Quad if you can.

 

Go with Nvidia like a 275 or 260 still good cards right now for a quick fix or upgrade. And you should look up the problems that people has been having with the ati drivers there pretty bad.

 

I haven't quoted a dual core unless it's an absolute budget build since 2008. Quad cores is preferred but dual cores will still perform just as fine. The number of games that can take advantage is slim (only one I can think of is GTAIV). Most games can only take advantage of 2 cores. Thus, is my rationale for saying a GPU upgrade is better than CPU upgrade.

Games are getting less CPU-centric than GPU-centric these days unlike the late-90s/early 2000s.

Yes, the era of dual cores is waning, but it isn't dead for gaming.

deltatux