Protip: There are tiers of each generation, obviously the lowest tier of the newest will be worse than the highest tier of last year...mtb0minime wrote:
Forgive my tech noobishness, but aren't you supposed to make graphics cards faster and better as time goes on?
>Implying 6870 should not be better than 5870FloppY_ wrote:
Protip: There are tiers of each generation, obviously the lowest tier of the newest will be worse than the highest tier of last year...mtb0minime wrote:
Forgive my tech noobishness, but aren't you supposed to make graphics cards faster and better as time goes on?
GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
... HD 6870 looking to be slower than HD 5870 ...
Last edited by mtb0minime (2010-10-13 11:59:50)
Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2010-10-13 23:51:01)
thisGC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
There is absolutely no good reason to fuck the naming like this. Only possible reason is to confuse people.
HD 6870 being slower than HD 5870... what the fuck are they thinking.
Case in point, the dual GPU card is in fact HD 5970Finray wrote:
5870 was a single GPU mekingtons
5890 was the dual GPU.
so which card will be the new 5870? the one that would be faster then the 5870 but still close to the top of the lineGC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
There is absolutely no good reason to fuck the naming like this. Only possible reason is to confuse people.
HD 6870 being slower than HD 5870... what the fuck are they thinking.
HD 6970 (codename Cayman XT)GR34 wrote:
so which card will be the new 5870? the one that would be faster then the 5870 but still close to the top of the lineGC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
There is absolutely no good reason to fuck the naming like this. Only possible reason is to confuse people.
HD 6870 being slower than HD 5870... what the fuck are they thinking.
Any word on price?GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
HD 6970 (codename Cayman XT)GR34 wrote:
so which card will be the new 5870? the one that would be faster then the 5870 but still close to the top of the lineGC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
There is absolutely no good reason to fuck the naming like this. Only possible reason is to confuse people.
HD 6870 being slower than HD 5870... what the fuck are they thinking.
Yeah guess soCapnNismo wrote:
If you have to ask...
What I meant was, back when the 4870 was new, wasn't it's main competitor the older 8800GTX or the more recent GTX280, which were both much more expensive and offered the same performance?GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Nvidia announced price drops on GTX 460 and 470, resulting in AMD lowering the launch price of HD6xxx. Hard to say any accurate numbers.
Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-10-21 04:05:44)
You remember wrong, GTX 280 has never been on par with HD 4870 in terms of performance, it is faster.FloppY_ wrote:
What I meant was, back when the 4870 was new, wasn't it's main competitor the older 8800GTX or the more recent GTX280, which were both much more expensive and offered the same performance?GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Nvidia announced price drops on GTX 460 and 470, resulting in AMD lowering the launch price of HD6xxx. Hard to say any accurate numbers.
I remember it beeing a no-brainer
Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2010-10-21 04:19:32)
Well in that case I meant the GTX260GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
You remember wrong, GTX 280 has never been on par with HD 4870 in terms of performance, it is faster.FloppY_ wrote:
What I meant was, back when the 4870 was new, wasn't it's main competitor the older 8800GTX or the more recent GTX280, which were both much more expensive and offered the same performance?GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Nvidia announced price drops on GTX 460 and 470, resulting in AMD lowering the launch price of HD6xxx. Hard to say any accurate numbers.
I remember it beeing a no-brainer
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Diamond/HD_48 … erfrel.gif
And at that time 8800gtx sure wasn't more expensive than the HD 4870. Plus you forgot the GTX 260, which was ~ to HD 4870 in every perspective.
Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-10-21 04:24:14)
But was bit faster too. therefore ~equal to 4870.FloppY_ wrote:
Well in that case I meant the GTX260
Which costed more at the time
Depended on the game. At the time, in nearly all games I was interested in, the 4870 was the better...GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
But was bit faster too. therefore ~equal to 4870.FloppY_ wrote:
Well in that case I meant the GTX260
Which costed more at the time
Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-10-21 04:33:10)
