The ATI HD 5 series of cards is looking pretty impressive (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-5870,2422.html)
I know that Nvidia hasn't released too much info on their new GPU architecture, but i doubt that they will let ATI keep the most powerful single GPU card title for long. So what kind of performance, and at what cost to consumers, do you expect the next generation of cards to bring?
Multi-core GPUs, wouldn't mind a quad-core video card. but good luck having windows, or anything support it for the next 25 years
GPUs are massively parallel, they have hundreds of processors...
Multi GPU cards are already out with the ATI X2 models and the Nvidia 7900 (one of the 7000 cards) the 9800GX2 and the GTX 295
(This was mainly just to put the post on my replies list) A quad-GPU card would kick ass all day... but it would probably require a connection directly to an outlet to run
Well the 300 series won't support DX11. Granted, you can look at the amount of games for 10... but something tells me 10 was pointless and that 11 should be where it's at.
I would get a 5870 if 1) I had the money and 2) an i7 and better RAM so that nothing would really bottleneck the other (I have a Q8200 and DD2 RAM, and an upgrade to i7 and new RAM would mean a new mother board too). Besides I'm fine with my 4870
I just bet it will be exactly like last release of the gtx 200 and ati 4000 cards, nvidia will be ahead performence wise, with slightly faster speeds, more ram, and maybe more cards then the gtx 295, like 6 cards, or 8! Ati still will be good, and probally will release first, but its will be cheaper. Nvidia might also switch to gddr5 ram.
This is the big one for me...
Been ATi (It might say AMD but its still red to me) since a my TNT2 Ultra turned into a 9700 OMGCARD.
Now its up in the air, the other components of my full phase upgrade are pretty obvious or already chosen (like, new case, keyboard, amount of ram, SSD etc). 5000 or 300 only benchmarks and feature lists can help now.
I get the feeling Nvidia is going with pure speed (sounds familiar) but ATi looks to win on features (also sounds familiar).
Although I really don't like having to install physx and not see the swirly leaves or whatever...
Hhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm
I predict that the new cards will be excessive in terms of power draw, heat output and price, and that only people with more money than sense will buy them until at least after Christmas.
I didn't even see that the GTX's are multi-core, I haven't bought a graphics card in a while I'm using the 9600 728mb right now.
I'd like to replace my HD's with SSD's sometime,
I'll bet the new GTX 300 is going to be $499.99 when it first hits the shelves. I paid almost that much for my GTX 280 and at the time it was the most powerful GPU on the market.
I'm not going to get into the debate on which company is better etc etc. It always starts a War between the fanboys and I don't care for that. There are times when either company is on top and they go back and forth so often it's often hard to keep track. There is something to take into account though, the two most important things in my book when making a costly purchase such as this. Let me tell you a quick story.
(Note: This story excludes the rare occasions where you get shipped a bad part. It happens to both companies)
The very first computer I ever bought was a Pentium 1, 200 MHz. It had one of the first ever GeForce cards produced. Before that I had a VooDoo card in it back when Voodoo was number one. I got that PC when I was 18 years old and it didn't die until I was 29-30. It lasted through years of living in a trailer in the woods with no AC with Florida summers reaching 100 degrees. It ran in that hot room with no ventilation surrounded by smoke and ash around cat hair and dog hair and dust and dander. I think I even dropped it once or twice. It took a beating and kept on ticking.
During the years I used that system before I passed it down to my Mom it got plenty of abuse. I saw a lot of friends build new rigs and a lot of them went with AMD procs and early ATI cards because they were relatively just as powerful but notably a good deal cheaper. They argued "You're only paying for a name brand" with Pentium and NVidia. I argues "No, you're paying for quality and shelf life". Within the first 5 years I heard back from almost every friend I had who built a new rig saying "Damnit, my video card burnt out" or "Man, my proc melted my motherboard". Meanwhile my old beat up machine was still chugging. No parts broke or wound down. The last game I played on this system was Baldurs Gate 2 and the Throne of Bhall expansion. (which according to the system specs never should have ran on that machine)
To this day I always go with Pentium Processors and NVidia GPU's. I've only built one system with a AMD proc. I know from almost 15 years experience that these companies make parts that Last. Not being a rich S.o.b. I prefer quality as I can't afford to spend 500$ on a new GPU every six months. When I build a system I build it to not need a hardware update for at least 3 to 5 years and it's only possible to do that if you buy the top of the line.
The GTX 300 series might support DX11, but Nvidia could not support it and that would kill support for it anyway (like they did with DX 10.1)
The 260 and 280 were pretty pricey when they firsdt launched, and the 260 was just ahead of the earlier generations top cards, so i think the GTX 360 will be about on par with a 285 and the GTX 380 will be about 10% faster than a 295, hopefully they will make the cards more power efficient too, GeForce cards a little too much power if you ask me.
I also have only used Intel CPUs and Nvidia cards, Intel because AMD always seems to be behind performance wise (i7 especially) and Nvidia because the same with ATI (A HD 4890 is supposed to be a 275 killer and it can just about keep up with a 260 with the benches i've seen)
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
