Comparing cards not only on FPS but on merits! need help with choice

[zanat0s]

Hi all,

I have the following PC:

i965 @ 3.8Ghz
V10 aircooling
12 GB Dominator GT @ 1866 Mhz
SSD agility EX 60 GB
EVGA classified VI X58
Bluray Dvd rom
Asus Xonar 1.3 HDMI
3 X Monitors DEll 3008 WFP

Until now i was running the PC with 2 X Gtx 295(MSI) with no problems. One of the cards is now malfucitning and my store will swap them because they are under warranty. i have now the following choice upgrade to GTX 480 SLI or ATI 5970 Xfire.

What is most important for me? I want to have PhysX and a good gaming experience. I am an nvidia fan but definetely Ati consumes less Watt and outputs more frames. My big problem is whether I can have PhysX with ATI cards(by suing nvidia cards or AGEIA).

i want to know what you believe. What cards should i get and why? I wouldn't have upgraded if i didn't have the issue with GTX 295 but a decision needs to be made.

PROS of ATI 5970
faster than the competition
more economical

CONS of ATI 5970
no PhysX
not good at Antialising as Nvidia(does it matter though?)
variances in perfomance

Pros of GTX 480
PhysX
better scaling at games through SLI

Cons of GTX 480
hight Temp
not as fast 5970

can you share your view with me?

[newtekie1]

Get the HD5970s and forget about PhysX, there is literally one good game that uses it, Batman, and once you beat Batman it is pointless to even worry about PhysX. And there aren't any good games on the horizon that plan to use PhysX either.

[zanat0s]

well i like PhysX and i would like to have more information. I want this to be a discussion on merits and facts..

i can have one card extra to be the PhysX accelerator. I am really confused about the choice i can make and i hope people can help me make an informed decision.

[Kreij]

Welcome to TPU, Zan

Take a moment to put you system specs in using the UserCP. That way you will not have to type them all the time and people will be able to better help you with problems in the future.

You are going to get opinions from both sides of the fence (ATI/Nvidia), so don't get bogged down in the rhetoric.

I don't care about physX, so I would get the 5970, but that's just me.

[$immond$]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Get the HD5970s and forget about PhysX, there is literally one good game that uses it, Batman, and once you beat Batman it is pointless to even worry about PhysX. And there aren't any good games on the horizon that plan to use PhysX either.

I find PhysX more useful than Eyefinity, I am sure there will be ^more^ games developed in the future that will utilize PhysX.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by $immond$

I find PhysX more useful than Eyefinity, I am sure there will be games developed in the future that will utilize PhysX.

I'd like to know in what did you find it more useful? Because, aside from Batman, in the few other games that hardware PhysX is used, I really found it added next to nothing to the game.

And with DX11 adding its own physics engine, there likely won't be a whole lot more games that will use PhysX. Because nVidia could never get PhysX running on ATi hardware, it kind of killed any potential that PhysX had.

As it is, there are a whole total of 15 current and upcoming games that use hardware PhysX, according to nVidia's site, most of which are not exactly block-busters.

[MT Alex]

Originally Posted by $immond$

I find PhysX more useful than Eyefinity, I am sure there will be games developed in the future that will utilize PhysX.

Eyefinity would be useful to him since he has 3 monitors.

It seems to me that PhysX is more important for benchmarks, since very few real world apps take advantage of it.

[$immond$]

Id rather game use this instead of having to see separations of the screens.
Gaming at 2880×900 rofl...

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by MT Alex

Eyefinity would be useful to him since he has 3 monitors.

It seems to me that PhysX is more important for benchmarks, since very few real world apps take advantage of it.

It would seem to me that eyefinity isn't really a concern either, he wasn't gaming on all three monitors with the GTX295s, so I doubt he is going to with the new cards, though at least with the HD5970's it is possible. Though I also agree, that eyefinity is pretty gimmicky and useless, less so than PhysX as this point, but still pretty useless.

[Black Panther]

Originally Posted by zanat0s

i have now the following choice upgrade to GTX 480 SLI or ATI 5970 Xfire.

A single 5970 beats a single GTX480.
So choose 5970 CF over GTX480 SLI.

@ $immond$, I nearly hate you for posting that!
The main reason I never went for eyefinity is that I find having the picture separated by the bezels to be ridiculous.
But that thing.... omg *drools* and the price is downright prohibitive Totally out of budget

[erocker]

Originally Posted by zanat0s

PROS of ATI 5970
faster than the competition
more economical

CONS of ATI 5970
no PhysX
not good at Antialising as Nvidia(does it matter though?)
variances in perfomance

Pros of GTX 480
PhysX
better scaling at games through SLI

Cons of GTX 480
hight Temp
not as fast 5970

can you share your view with me?

Well I disagree with your Anti aliasing statement. ATi does AA better but that is just opinion.

I wouldn't say a 5970 is economical.

Here is a list of PhysX games: http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_physxgames_home.html - I wouldn't use PhysX as a determining factor.

The only solution for you in my mind is the 5970. Three monitors and no other card will do it better.

If PhysX ends up really being a concern for you 5970 + something like a 9800GT would work. It can be done easily and it works well, I've done it. You can get the means to do it at nghq.com

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by erocker

Well I disagree with your Anti aliasing statement. ATi does AA better but that is just opinion.

I would actually agree with him, if we were back in the HD2900/HD3800 days. However, now I think they are about even, I still might even give the slight edge to nVidia(I think they do transparent AA a lot better), but really during gameplay they are both extremely good so it doesn't matter.

[$immond$]

Originally Posted by Black Panther

A single 5970 beats a single GTX480.
So choose 5970 CF over GTX480 SLI.

@ $immond$, I nearly hate you for posting that!
The main reason I never went for eyefinity is that I find having the picture separated by the bezels to be ridiculous.
But that thing.... omg *drools* and the price is downright prohibitive Totally out of budget

Well perhaps a 32" to 40" LCD widescreen would be a viable option to those ugly screen separation from 3 monitors. When I get my 5850 I am going to see if I can game on my 42" LCD.

[Fourstaff]

My vote goes to 5970, but 5870CF might be a viable option

[crazyeyesreaper]

why wouldnt you game on your 42" its the same res as most monitors so it dosent make a difference

if he wants 5970 crossfire id say hes better off with a 5970 + 5870 for trifire trifire scales way better then quad and if you overclock the 5970 to 5870 clocks your golden and can save a few bills and trifire 5970+5850 will use less power then 480 sli and be faster so its win win and considering price there the same 5970 and since 5850 / 5970 clocks are close u can overclock them both easily if there reference models.

as far as eyefinity it goes 3x1 is awesome 3x2 sucks

physx is garbage you realize that if physx ran on more then 2 cores say 4 cores and 8 threads of that i7 no nvidia gpu would be able to do physx faster so at the end of the day you may want physx for 1-2 games but sadly if you weren't screwed by proprietary standards your i7 would do physx better then the gpu. for 1 solid reason

for nvidia Physx + rendering + tessellation is done on the shaders so tell me once u turn that all on and start pushing a game how long will that high frame rate last? when if it ran off the cpu and used your other hardware effectively you wouldnt see a drop.

eitherway take your pick both choices in gpus will slaughter all games but metro 2033 with all settings maxed

[$immond$]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

why wouldnt you game on your 42" its the same res as most monitors so it dosent make a difference

Because my 2900 Pro doesn't have enough balls?, I meant.... Its super duper!

Gaming on 3 monitors is a waste and is unsightly, if its used for working with apps and managing VM's it may have a purpose.

[crazyeyesreaper]

lol if your card handles your games at 1920x1200 on a monitor it will easily handle that 42" tv if it cant well then it just wont handle it that simple as size is irrelevent only res matters

[$immond$]

Its being upgraded to a 5850 soon so I will be more confident in playing the latest games on a much larger screen.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by $immond$

Gaming on 3 monitors is a waste and is unsightly to me, if its used for working with apps and managing VM's it may have a purpose.

FTFY

If the image on the center screen doesn't change, and you are adding the extra view of the two side monitors, how is that a negative?

And it is obvious you have no actual idea what you are talking about, as using three monitors to work with apps and manage VMs has nothing to do with eyefinity. People have been doing that seemlessly for years without eyefinity. The great thing about eyefinity is it makes all 3 monitors appear as one large monitor to the game/full screen app, which hasn't been easily possible before.

[$immond$]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

FTFY

If the image on the center screen doesn't change, and you are adding the extra view of the two side monitors, how is that a negative?

And it is obvious you have no actual idea what you are talking about, as using three monitors to work with apps and manage VMs has nothing to do with eyefinity. People have been doing that seemlessly for years without eyefinity. The great thing about eyefinity is it makes all 3 monitors appear as one large monitor to the game/full screen app, which hasn't been easily possible before.

I suppose if you don't have depth perception its great but I can notice those ugly monitor separations sitting 2 feet away. I hardly call that enjoyable and immersive gaming.




this even looks allot more "immersive" than 3 monitors.

[Crazykenny]

No brainer, go for the HD5970 Crossfire set-up. The GTX480, for me, feel like a rushed card. Dont get me wrong, but I expected better from Nvidia.

Perhaps wait for a redone GTX485? Less wattage and heat.

[bobzilla2009]

Originally Posted by Crazykenny

No brainer, go for the HD5970 Crossfire set-up. The GTX480, for me, feel like a rushed card. Dont get me wrong, but I expected better from Nvidia.

Perhaps wait for a redone GTX485? Less wattage and heat.

if a 7 month late card is rushed, i would hate to see how long an unrushed nvidia card would take to make.

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by bobzilla2009

if a 7 month late card is rushed, i would hate to see how long an unrushed nvidia card would take to make.

Its rushed, not 7 months late. Nvidia just took their time early on with all kinds of fancy features, and then when ATI released the 5 series, they were in deep trouble, hence the rush.

[bobzilla2009]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

Its rushed, not 7 months late. Nvidia just took their time early on with all kinds of fancy features, and then when ATI released the 5 series, they were in deep trouble, hence the rush.

aye, maybe they thought the hd5 series was going to be naff. Surely they learned from the hd4 series that AMD will bust their balls if ther don't pull their thumb out of their ass.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by $immond$

I suppose if you don't have depth perception its great but I can notice those ugly monitor separations sitting 2 feet away. I hardly call that enjoyable and immersive gaming.

http://www.fahad.com/pics/elumens_visionstation.jpg


this even looks allot more "immersive" than 3 monitors.

Depth Perception:


It is nice that you, can see the separations, but others can ignore them.

You have yet to answer the question I've asking in this thread and the other. In what exactly do you find PhysX useful?