|
|
|
The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 15:48 |
Link to this message
|
Civilization V
DriverHeaven 1920x1080 resolution high detail
GT220: M16
GT430: M20
HD5570: M26
HD6850: M44
GTX460 1GB: M56
GTX480: M65
HD6870: M73
HD5870 with 8xAA applied, 1920x1080: M61
HD5870 with 4xAA applied, 5760x1080: M36
(tested card clocked at 875/4900)
Difficult to extrapolate to other GPUs due to lack of HD5 series testing, and enormous gap between 6850 and 6870
HardOCP Test 1 - min fps not available as 0 in all tests [turn changer]
HD6870: 2560x1600 2xADMS AA A31
HD5850: 2560x1600 no AA A31
GTX460 1GB: 1920x1200 4xTRMS AA A34
HD6850: 1920x1200 2xADMS AA A32
Uniform testing:
2560x1600 4xAA
HD6870: M28
HD5850: M26
GTX460 1GB: M25
HD6850: M23
HardOCP Test 2 - 2560x1600 4xAA Multi-GPU
2x GTX460 1GB: M18 (M3 once)A36
2x GTX480: M20A45
2x HD5870: M44A101
When tested, SLI encounters a desync point [something that used to occur in several games with crossfire] shortly after the start of the game, this is the cause for the low results, presumably corrected in the next driver release.
Techspot - min fps not available as techspot still have no idea you can measure minimum frame rate
Cards listed are not a requirement but a list of tested cards that pass the figure stated.
Unlike most other sites, tests are not conducted with AF.
Results are very dubious due to complete lack of variance between resolutions in fps recorded.
GTX460 tested is 1GB version.
1440x900 High 4xAA OR 1680x1050 High 4xAA - unsure which as the same graph has been used for both.
A10: 9800GT, GTX260/275/285, HD5670/4850
A20: HD5770, HD4890
A30: HD5830/5850/5870, GTS450
A40: GTX460/470/480
1920x1200 High 4xAA
A10: 9800GT, GTX260/275/285, HD4850, HD5670
A20: HD4890, HD5770/5830, GTS450
A30: HD5850/5870
A40: GTX460/470/480
1920x1200 High 4xAA No Tesselation
A10: GT240, 9800GT
A20: HD5670, GTX260/275/285
A30: HD4850, HD5770/5830/5850, GTS450
A40: HD5870, GTX460/470
A50: GTX480
1920x1200 Medium no AA
A10: GT240
A20: 9800GT, GTX260/275, HD5670
A30: GTX285, HD4850, GTS450
A40: HD5770/5830/5850/5870, HD4890
A50: GTX460/470/480
2560x1600 High 4xAA
A3: GT240
A5: 9800GT, HD5670
A10: GTX260/275/285
A15: HD4850, HD5770, GTS450
A20: HD4890, HD5830/5850/5870
A30: GTX460/470
A40: GTX480
CPU used for testing was not able to achieve M60. [3.7GHz Core i7]
M25: 2.0Ghz
M30: 2.2Ghz
M35: 2.6Ghz
M40: 3.2Ghz
M45: 3.6Ghz
M50: 3.8Ghz
M55: 4.2Ghz+ (not achieved)
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
26. October 2010 @ 16:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
nvidia bias there!
is this DX11?
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 16:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
26. October 2010 @ 16:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
tesselation then? is there a none DX11 test?
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 16:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
There is a test with tesselation disabled if you look, however I don't think there is a test with DX11 off. However, you will notice that non-DX11 cards are in the techspot review, so you can get some idea of how they will compare without DX11 support (note: not favourably!)
Something else which recent benches draw to light is AMD's 3D support, or rather, lack of.
I'm no great fan of 3D for games, but AMD's effort is very, very poor.
It can only be used in DirectX9, with one GPU, and even in DX9 titles, stability is very low, games will crash continually, and the image quality of the 3D effect is very weak compared to 3D Vision. Open platform is ethically the right decision, but with the open platform software being mind-numbingly bad, 3D needs to either (sadly) become totally proprietary to both companies with a separate driver for each, or be canned entirely.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 16:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
Bit interested in the 6850 myself. It'sa 5-10% slower than the 5850 at all times but is $100 cheaper than when I bought my 5850s. Does it simply suck less power or what? What's the main thing they changed for Barts?
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 16:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
The architecture is redesigned, the 6850 only has 960 shaders versus the 5850's 1440, but produces a very similar amount of rendering power, but with 24W less electrical power (37W for 6870 vs 5870), and thus only one 6-pin connector (still two for the 6870).
Also, if I've seen right, the HD6850 does not have a retailing reference design, so it's potentially going to be less reliable than the other HD5 and HD6 cards.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. October 2010 @ 17:13
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 17:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hmm, doesn't sound like a winner LOL!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 17:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
Have you not seen how much cheaper they are?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 17:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
The HD6950 and HD6970 TDPs seem to have appeared from nowhere, claiming 198W for the 6950 and 220W for the 6970. If true, that will represent serious performance per watt, as it will mean the 6970 will outperform the GTX480 by a country mile yet use less power than its smaller partner the GTX470.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
26. October 2010 @ 17:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
;) <--- Enthusiast
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
26. October 2010 @ 18:42 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Civilization V
Difficult to extrapolate to other GPUs due to lack of HD5 series testing, and enormous gap between 6850 and 6870
If you zoom in all the way Civ V tends to lag a bit for me when there's a bunch of stuff on screen with max settings (iirc) @ 1680x1050 but other than that it's pretty smooth. Not particularly helpful but I can grab some fps data anyone would like it.
(system info)
HD5850
i7 @ 3.8Ghz
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
27. October 2010 @ 02:05 |
Link to this message
|
So the 6850 sounds like a very reasonable card. As far as I've seen it remains consistently the same performance in relation to the 5850, which is a good thing. Not having a reference design can hurt, but I would guess a company like XFX is more than up to the task. Not only that but XFX seem to be becoming the premium ATi brand to have. Reference seems fine for my Sapphire 5850s but if the card has no reference design then Sapphire makes me a bit wary. Interested to see what becomes of it.
What I'm really miffed about is the retarded naming scheme for this series. So the 6800 series is the optimised new version(a la 9800GTX) and the 6900 series will be the new generation performers? Not the most terrible naming convention ever but I was pretty confused when the 6870 was underperforming the 5870.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. October 2010 @ 02:10
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. October 2010 @ 07:29 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah it's bad of AMD to use a rebrand like that, but since it's not in the slightest the same card, it's semi-forgivable. It means that the low-cost builds that mandate a sub $200 GPU, and a 400W PSU with one 6-pin now get HD5850 like performance.
I have to admit that for the last couple of months the HD5850 and HD5870 have been particularly overpriced, this is obviously why.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
27. October 2010 @ 15:30 |
Link to this message
|
its really not forgiveable, BUT most people that are going to buy a £150+ gfx card probably research before they buy.
and anyone with a 5850 and 5870, that arnt that knowlegable (read bought a HP etc system with one) probably wont notice even when they need to upgrade, so long as the game plays.
but still its bad, that a 6870 is not better than a 5870, as has been the case since the 3870.
(though the 3870 was a mess in its own right vs a 2900 for performance vs name haha)
man anadtechs numbers are well of everyone else. just checked their review for the 68 series.
even driverheaven (changed their name?!) comply with everyone else.
AHEM anand!
also, 4870x2s going for £130 on ebay recently, its so tempting!
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. October 2010 @ 15:33
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. October 2010 @ 15:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well what have I been telling you about Anand for ages :P
Driverheaven's tests are usually pretty solid, they just don't test very much at once.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. October 2010 @ 13:38 |
Link to this message
|
The Scaling guide to the HD6000 series
Guru3D to follow.
Legit Reviews
Aliens vs. Predator
HD6850: 1280x1024: 96.5%, 1920x1200: 97.4%
HD6870: 1280x1024: 97.0%, 1920x1200: 97.4%
Batman: Arkham Asylum
HD6850: 1280x1024: 62.1% (227fps), 1920x1200: 90.3% (177fps)
HD6870: 1280x1024: 57.0% (248fps), 1920x1200: 90.5% (200fps)
Just Cause 2
HD6850: 1280x1024: 95.7%, 1920x1200: 95.2%
HD6870: 1280x1024: 98.1%, 1920x1200: 101.5%
Metro 2033 (Since been hotfixed, Catalyst 10.10c)
HD6850: 1280x1024: 33.6%, 1920x1200: 44.1%
HD6870: 1280x1024: 30.0%, 1920x1200: 47.8%
STALKER: Call of Pripyat
HD6850: 1280x1024: 71.4% (139fps), 1920x1200: 95.6% (97fps)
HD6870: 1280x1024: 85.2% (158fps), 1920x1200: 97.4% (113fps)
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty
HD6850: 1280x1024: 43.1% (198fps), 1920x1200: 55.5% (173fps)
HD6870: 1280x1024: 30.7% (206fps), 1920x1200: 50.4% (193fps)
TechPowerup [1280x1024 / 1680x1050 / 1920x1200 / 2560x1600]
HD6850CF only
Aliens vs. Predator: 95.5/96.8/97.0/96.5
Battlefield Bad Company 2: 94.8/100.8/100.7/103.6
Battleforge: 97.4/97.0/97.8/98.4
Call of Duty 4: 76.1/82.9/87.2/90.3
Call of Juarez 2: Crossfire not supported
Crysis: 88.3/95.5/96.0/92.9
Dawn of War 2: 67.9/79.0/91.0/100.8
DiRT 2: 76.3/82.3/84.5/92.4
Far Cry 2: 91.0/100.1/100.7/100.2
HAWX: 85.3/95.4/94.9/100.6
Metro 2033: 99.0/95.4/89.7. N/A at 2560x1600 - does not run at 4xAA with 1GB VRAM
Riddick Dark Athena: 77.6/83.0/87.1/92.7
STALKER Clear Sky: 39.7/71.4/94.2/97.5
Supreme Commander 2: 13.2/19.6/25.5/45.0 - CPU limited, results largely irrelevant
Unreal Tournament 3: 18.6/53.3/66.7/90.6 - CPU limited, AvFPS >150 at all resolutions
World of Warcraft: Crossfire not supported, negative scaling
Some really impressive results, even better when I drop this in, from Hexus:
Modern Warfare 2, 30", 4xAA
2x HD6850: Min95, Ave114, 76ºC, 321W, £295
2x GTX460 1GB: Min86, Ave111, 88ºC, 431W, £285
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. October 2010 @ 08:24 |
Link to this message
|
Updated:
KitGuru - HD6850 and HD6870 vs GTX460 1GB
Aliens vs. Predator 1920x1080 DX11-TVH-1x16-AO-SCHi-MB
HD6850: Average 38.5->74.9 (94.5%), Minimum 23.2->46.4 (100.0%)
GTX460: Average 37.6->69.3 (84.3%), Minimum 22.1->42.3 (91.4%)
HD6870: Average 47.2->92.1 (95.1%), Minimum 28.4->59.2 (108.5%)
Far Cry 2 1920x1200 DX10-4x16-OO-VegHi-ShadHi-TerHi-GeoHi-PostFXHi-TexHi-ShadoHi-AmbHi-HDR-Bloom-FireVH-PhysVH-RTreeVH
HD6850: Average 62.46->117.53 (88.2%), Minimum 44.17->80.26 (81.7%)
GTX460: Average 70.21->119.63 (70.4%), Minimum 50.71->94.48 (86.3%)
HD6870: Average 71.72->129.42 (80.5%), Minimum 49.63->95.15 (91.7%)
Lost Planet 2 1920x1200 DX11-1x1-MB-ShadoHi-TexHi-RenHi-DX11Mid
HD6850: Average 34.9->64.6 (85.1%), Minimum 24.4->35.3 (44.7%)
GTX460: Average 38.7->75.8 (95.9%), Minimum 19.1->32.5 (70.2%)
HD6870: Average 40.8->80.4 (97.1%), Minimum 28.7->51.2 (78.4%)
Mafia 2 1920x1080 AA-16xAF-ShadoHi-AO-GeoHi-No APEX
HD6850: Average 41.8->71.6 (71.3%), Minimum 24.7->43.5 (76.1%)
GTX460: Average 39.2->67.6 (72.4%), Minimum 23.4->39.3 (67.9%)
HD6870: Average 49.8->82.7 (66.1%), Minimum 29.4->51.2 (74.1%)
Metro 2033 1920x1080 1920x1080 Normal
HD6850: Average 34->63 (85%), Minimum 26->53 (104%)
GTX460: Average 33->59 (79%), Minimum 26->49 (88%)
HD6870: Average 37->67 (81%), Minimum 29->55 (90%)
Resident Evil 5 1920x1200 8xAA Maximum [CPU limits suspected, HD5770CFX ~~ HD6850CFX]
HD6850: Average 85.5->108.2 (26.5%), Minimum 68.3->83.5 (22.3%)
GTX460: Average 78.3->112.3 (43.4%), Minimum 62.7->83.3 (32.9%)
HD6870: Average 97.2->124.9 (28.5%), Minimum 85.2->88.3 (3.6%)
HAWX 1920x1200 8xAA Maximum
HD6850: Average 68->121 (77.9%), Minimum 53->82 (54.7%)
GTX460: Average 65->123 (89.2%), Mimimum 48->83 (72.9%)
HD6870: Average 75->127 (69.3%), Minimum 56->94 (67.9%)
HD6850 overclocking
Default clocks: 775/4000
Stock voltage Overclock limit: 860/unknown
Raised voltage Overclock limit: 950/4532 - both cards tested
HD6870 overclocking
Default clocks: 900/4200
Raised voltage Overclock limit: 950/4560, 940/4600
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. October 2010 @ 12:23
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. October 2010 @ 13:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Efficiency of recent graphics cards (single GPUs only)
HD4850: 80% performance, 73% power - 9% gain
HD4870: 100% performance, 100% power - 0% gain
HD4890: 112% performance, 127% power - 12% less efficient
HD5750: 75% performance, 57% power - 32% gain
HD5770: 95% performance, 72% power - 32% gain
HD5830: 130% performance, 117% power - 11% gain
HD5850: 155% performance, 101% power - 54% gain
HD5870: 180% performance, 125% power - 44% gain
HD6850: 150% performance, 85% power - 77% gain
HD6870: 175% performance, 101% power - 74% gain
HD6950: 215% performance, 125% power - 72% gain
HD6970: 260% performance, 140% power - 86% gain
GTS250: 80% performance, 97% power - 17% less efficient
GTX260: 90% performance, 135% power - 33% less efficient
GTX260+a: 100% performance, 121% power - 17% less efficient
GTX260+b: 100% performance, 114% power - 12% less efficient
GTX275: 122% performance, 146% power - 16% less efficient
GTX280: 115% performance, 157% power - 27% less efficient
GTX285: 128% performance, 136% power - 6% less efficient
GTS450: 95% performance, 71% power - 34% gain
GTX460: 125% performance, 100% power - 25% gain
GTX461: 135% performance, 115% power - 17% gain
GTX465: 130% performance, 140% power - 7% less efficient
GTX470: 157% performance, 157% power - identical
GTX480: 190% performance, 197% power - 4% less efficient
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 17:01 |
Link to this message
|
As of this benchmark, all results are as recorded, not extrapolated, with the exception of the HD6950/6970, GTX580 and dual-GPU setups. Scaling assumed as 80% for Radeon HD5 series and Geforce GTX4 series, 95% for HD6 series.
Results for both 1680x1050 and 2560x1600 for Test Drive Unlimited 2 are estimates. Only 2560x1600 is estimated for Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 2.
Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 2
Game engine capped at 30fps
1024x768 M10: Radeon X1800XT/HD2900 series/3690/4650/5570, Geforce 7900GT/8600GTS/9500GT/GT220/430
1024x768 M20: Radeon HD2900 Pro/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GS/9600GSO/GT240/GTS450
1024x768 M30: Radeon HD2900XT/3870/4830/5670, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GTS250/450
1280x1024 M10: Radeon X1900XT/HD2900 series/3690/4650/5570, Geforce 7900GTX/8800GS/9600 series/GT220/430
1280x1024 M20: Radeon HD2900 Pro/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GT240/GTS450
1280x1024 M30: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5750, Geforce 8800GTS 512/9800GTX/GTS250/450
1680x1050 M10: Radeon X1950XT/HD2900 series/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GS/9600GSO/GT220/430
1680x1050 M20: Radeon HD2900XT/3870/4830/5570, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GT240/GTS450
1680x1050 M30: Radeon HD3870X2/4770/5750, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260/GTS450
1920x1080 M10: Radeon X1950XT-X/HD2900 Pro/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GS/9600GSO/GT240/430
1920x1080 M20: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5670, Geforce 8800GTS 512/9800GTX/GTS250/450
1920x1080 M30: Radeon HD3870X2/4860/5770, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260/GTS450
2560x1600 M10: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5670, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GTS250/450
2560x1600 M20: Radeon HD4890/5830/6850, Geforce GTX275/460
2560x1600 M30: Radeon HD4870X2/5870/6870, Geforce GTX295/470
Test Drive Unlimited 2 Beta - Medium detail, 8xAA
1280x1024 M10: Radeon X1950XT-X/HD2900GT/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GS/9600GSO/GT240/430
1280x1024 M20: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5670, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GTS250/450
1280x1024 M30: Radeon HD3870X2/4850/5770, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260/GTS450
1280x1024 M40: Radeon HD4890/5830/6850, Geforce GTX280/460
1280x1024 M50: Radeon HD4850X2/5850/6850, Geforce GTX295/465
1280x1024 M60: Radeon HD4870X2/5870/6870, Geforce GTX295/470
1680x1050 M10: Radeon HD2900 Pro/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GS/9600GSO/GT220/430
1680x1050 M20: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5750, Geforce 8800GTS 512/9800GTX/GTS250/450
1680x1050 M30: Radeon HD4870/5830/6850, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260-216/GTS450
1680x1050 M40: Radeon HD4850X2/5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/460
1680x1050 M50: Radeon HD4870X2/5850/6870, Geforce GTX295/470
1680x1050 M60: Radeon HD6950/2x HD4890/5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/480
1920x1080 M10: Radeon HD2900 Pro/3850/4670/5570, Geforce 8800GS/9600GSO/GT240/GTS450
1920x1080 M20: Radeon HD3870X2/4770/5750, Geforce 9800GTX+/GTS250/450
1920x1080 M30: Radeon HD4890/5830/6850, Geforce GTX275/460
1920x1080 M40: Radeon HD4870X2/5850/6850, Geforce GTX295/470
1920x1080 M50: Radeon 2xHD4890/5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/480
1920x1080 M60: Radeon 2xHD5830/6850, Geforce GTX580/2x GTX460
2560x1600 M10: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5750, Geforce 8800GTS 512/9800GTX/GTS250/450
2560x1600 M20: Radeon HD4850X2/5830/6850, Geforce GTX285/460
2560x1600 M30: Radeon HD4870X2/5870/6950/2xHD6850, Geforce GTX295/470
2560x1600 M40: Radeon HD6970/2xHD5830/6850, Geforce GTX580/2xGTX465
2560x1600 M50: 2x Radeon HD5870/6870, 2x Geforce GTX470
2560x1600 M60: 2x Radeon HD6950/3x5850, 2x Geforce GTX480
Very High Detail, 8xAA
1280x1024 M10: Radeon HD2900XT/3870/4830/5670, Geforce 8800GT/9600GT/GT240/430
1280x1024 M20: Radeon HD4850X2/5830/6850, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260/GTS450
1280x1024 M30: Radeon HD4870X2/5850/6870, Geforce GTX285/460
1280x1024 M40: Radeon HD6950(spec)/2xHD5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/470
1280x1024 M50: Radeon HD5970/HD6970(spec)/2x6850, Geforce GTX480
1280x1024 M60: 2x Radeon HD5870/6870, 2x Geforce GTX465
1680x1050 M10: Radeon HD3870X2/4830/5750, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GT240/GTS450
1680x1050 M20: Radeon HD4850X2/5830/6850, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260-216/GTS450
1680x1050 M30: Radeon HD5870/6950/2xHD4890, Geforce GTX295/460 1GB
1680x1050 M40: Radeon HD6970/2xHD5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/480
1680x1050 M50: 2x Radeon HD5870/6870, Geforce GTX580/2x GTX460
1680x1050 M60: 2x Radeon HD6950/3xHD5850, 2x Geforce GTX470
1920x1080 M10: Radeon HD3870X2/4770/5750, Geforce 8800GT/9800GT/GTS250/450
1920x1080 M20: Radeon HD4870X2/5850/6850, Geforce GTX275/460
1920x1080 M30: Radeon HD6950(spec)/2x5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/470
1920x1080 M40: 2xRadeon HD5870/6850, Geforce GTX580/2x GTX460
1920x1080 M50: 2xRadeon HD6950(spec)/3x5850, 2x Geforce GTX470
1920x1080 M60: 2xRadeon HD6970(spec)/3x5870, 2x Geforce GTX480
2560x1600 M10: Radeon HD4850X2/5830/6850, Geforce 9800GX2/GTX260/GTS450
2560x1600 M20: Radeon HD6970/2x HD5830/6850, Geforce GTX295/480
2560x1600 M30: 2x Radeon HD6950/3x HD5850, 2x Geforce GTX470
2560x1600 M40: 2x Radeon HD6970/4x HD5850, 2x Geforce GTX480
2560x1600 M50: 3x Radeon HD6970, 2x Geforce GTX580/3x GTX480
2560x1600 M60: 4x Radeon HD6970, 3x Geforce GTX480
Chalk and cheese here, the force unleashed 2 can be maxed out on a 30" monitor with a single sub £180 graphics card.
Test Drive Unlimited 2 though, you're looking at 4 of AMD's as-yet unreleased future flagship, and that's assuming that quad crossfire scaling is nearly as epic as the HD6800's dual GPU scaling. It's going to take at least 180% to pull that off.
Meanwhile a 'mere' Tri-SLI combo from nvidia would seem to work if the scaling is good, but that's still almost 900W of TDP from either side, and at least £1000 from nvidia, probably £1500 from AMD.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 31. October 2010 @ 18:13
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 17:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
The price we pay for bleeding edge technology LOL!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 18:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah but a 4-figure sum for a racing game? Unusually excessive. Especially since the first TDU didn't even look that good.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
31. October 2010 @ 18:30 |
Link to this message
|
its a racig game, why would AA even be needed, everything is blured as it is, esp 8xaa.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 18:39 |
Link to this message
|
Actually aliasing was a real problem in the original Test Drive Unlimited, far moreso than most other racers I've played. To be fair, a properly designed racing game really does still need AA applied, as not all the textures are in motion!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
31. October 2010 @ 19:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
600$ is almost too much for me :S
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
