Hey, title is pretty self explanatory. Will this be a decent upgrade? My current resolution on my 19" monitor is 1440 x 900, which is extremely small, I know. My current rig is in my sig, and I'm looking at budget gaming for playable BF3 and MW3. I wont have enough money to really future proof or anything for a while, so I'm looking to spend like a hundred bucks on the 4870's and seeing how that works. A single 4870 seems to run Crysis playably, so perhaps crossfire 4870's could handle low/medium BF3? I have played BF3 Beta quite a bit on the 8800gts and it plays relatively fine but only on lowest settings and it lags and slows down considerably when aiming down the sights and ESPECIALLY while scoping. Surprisingly, my sniping effectiveness is relatively unaffected despite this problem. Still, I want to play without these problems, and BF3 looks beautiful even on low settings, so what do you guys think? Good option for a temporary band-aid?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Looking to Upgrade From 8800GTS 640 to Xfire 4870 512's
- Thread starter irishtea
- Start date
Silent Knight
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 1,254
If you can get a couple of HD4870 for like $150-200 then you can consider buying a single HD6850 or even HD6870,and replace that PSU as well.
I just upgraded from 2 1gb 4870's in crossfire. The BF3 beta was playable on high settings with frame rates in open areas in the mid 40's with my system and in door areas in the low to mid 50's. I upgraded to a 6970 and can now run everything with ultra settings in the low 50's outside and mid 60's inside. I use 1920x1200 and system specs are in my signature. The biggest different I notice is minimum fps. With 4870s it would sometimes dip below 30 outside, with the 6970 in doesn't dip below 40. Crysis also noticed a major increase in minimum fps take a look at the before and after below.
BEFORE:
9/26/2011 9:56:23 PM - Vista 64
Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1900x1200, AA=16xQ, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=3, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
================================================== ============
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 61.55s, Average FPS: 32.49
Min FPS: 19.97 at frame 147, Max FPS: 41.02 at frame 876
Average Tri/Sec: -11062066, Tri/Frame: -340437
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.69
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 54.97s, Average FPS: 36.39
Min FPS: 19.97 at frame 147, Max FPS: 42.51 at frame 883
Average Tri/Sec: -11911157, Tri/Frame: -327354
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.80
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 54.84s, Average FPS: 36.47
Min FPS: 19.97 at frame 147, Max FPS: 42.51 at frame 883
Average Tri/Sec: -11924569, Tri/Frame: -326944
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.80
TimeDemo Play Ended, (3 Runs Performed)
================================================== ============
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
9/26/2011 9:56:23 PM - Vista 64
Run #1- DX10 1900x1200 AA=16xQ, 32 bit test, Quality: VeryHigh ~~ Overall Average FPS: 36.43
AFTER:
10/6/2011 2:58:33 PM - Vista 64
Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1900x1200, AA=16xQ, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=3, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
============================================================ ==
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 51.93s, Average FPS: 38.51
Min FPS: 30.66 at frame 156, Max FPS: 45.81 at frame 980
Average Tri/Sec: -14701829, Tri/Frame: -381750
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.40
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 48.84s, Average FPS: 40.95
Min FPS: 30.66 at frame 156, Max FPS: 46.63 at frame 876
Average Tri/Sec: -15059727, Tri/Frame: -367770
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.49
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 48.80s, Average FPS: 40.98
Min FPS: 30.66 at frame 156, Max FPS: 46.88 at frame 998
Average Tri/Sec: -15060262, Tri/Frame: -367496
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.49
TimeDemo Play Ended, (3 Runs Performed)
============================================================ ==
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
10/6/2011 2:58:33 PM - Vista 64
Run #1- DX10 1900x1200 AA=16xQ, 32 bit test, Quality: VeryHigh ~~ Overall Average FPS: 40.965
BEFORE:
9/26/2011 9:56:23 PM - Vista 64
Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1900x1200, AA=16xQ, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=3, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
================================================== ============
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 61.55s, Average FPS: 32.49
Min FPS: 19.97 at frame 147, Max FPS: 41.02 at frame 876
Average Tri/Sec: -11062066, Tri/Frame: -340437
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.69
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 54.97s, Average FPS: 36.39
Min FPS: 19.97 at frame 147, Max FPS: 42.51 at frame 883
Average Tri/Sec: -11911157, Tri/Frame: -327354
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.80
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 54.84s, Average FPS: 36.47
Min FPS: 19.97 at frame 147, Max FPS: 42.51 at frame 883
Average Tri/Sec: -11924569, Tri/Frame: -326944
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.80
TimeDemo Play Ended, (3 Runs Performed)
================================================== ============
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
9/26/2011 9:56:23 PM - Vista 64
Run #1- DX10 1900x1200 AA=16xQ, 32 bit test, Quality: VeryHigh ~~ Overall Average FPS: 36.43
AFTER:
10/6/2011 2:58:33 PM - Vista 64
Beginning Run #1 on Map-island, Demo-benchmark_gpu
DX10 1900x1200, AA=16xQ, Vsync=Disabled, 32 bit test, FullScreen
Demo Loops=3, Time Of Day= 9
Global Game Quality: VeryHigh
============================================================ ==
TimeDemo Play Started , (Total Frames: 2000, Recorded Time: 111.86s)
!TimeDemo Run 0 Finished.
Play Time: 51.93s, Average FPS: 38.51
Min FPS: 30.66 at frame 156, Max FPS: 45.81 at frame 980
Average Tri/Sec: -14701829, Tri/Frame: -381750
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.40
!TimeDemo Run 1 Finished.
Play Time: 48.84s, Average FPS: 40.95
Min FPS: 30.66 at frame 156, Max FPS: 46.63 at frame 876
Average Tri/Sec: -15059727, Tri/Frame: -367770
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.49
!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
Play Time: 48.80s, Average FPS: 40.98
Min FPS: 30.66 at frame 156, Max FPS: 46.88 at frame 998
Average Tri/Sec: -15060262, Tri/Frame: -367496
Recorded/Played Tris ratio: -2.49
TimeDemo Play Ended, (3 Runs Performed)
============================================================ ==
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
10/6/2011 2:58:33 PM - Vista 64
Run #1- DX10 1900x1200 AA=16xQ, 32 bit test, Quality: VeryHigh ~~ Overall Average FPS: 40.965
samuelmorris
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2010
- Messages
- 5,506
I'm calculating approximately unified scores for modern games currently, they won't consider other circumstances like major architectural changes in performance or video memory issues, but taken with some common sense, they'll give a rough idea of performance.
There are currently 103 games in the test. With an 8800GTS 640 at 1440x900 (score of 64) - you will only be able to attain 60fps average in 5 of the 103 games. There will be several more around the 40-50fps mark which may be fine, but suffice to say, that's not really adequate for modern games at high detail.
A pair of HD4870s at 1440x900 scores 288, which is enough to get an average of 60fps in more than 85 of the games, and a minimum of 60fps in 73 of the games, which is an excellent result. However, as said, the 512MB video memory per card means this will not be representative of a real world result, and you may encounter issues in some recent titles. Due to the low resolution, this won't be too many, perhaps 4 or 5 titles at most.
There are currently 103 games in the test. With an 8800GTS 640 at 1440x900 (score of 64) - you will only be able to attain 60fps average in 5 of the 103 games. There will be several more around the 40-50fps mark which may be fine, but suffice to say, that's not really adequate for modern games at high detail.
A pair of HD4870s at 1440x900 scores 288, which is enough to get an average of 60fps in more than 85 of the games, and a minimum of 60fps in 73 of the games, which is an excellent result. However, as said, the 512MB video memory per card means this will not be representative of a real world result, and you may encounter issues in some recent titles. Due to the low resolution, this won't be too many, perhaps 4 or 5 titles at most.
Alright, well I'm working on picking up a 650watt+ PSU to handle these older cards in Xfire and give me a little more headroom. I won't be sinking money on a 1000watt or anything of that nature until I have the money for top grade AMD 7XXX cards and Nvidia 6XX, depending on how they come out price to performance wise. If anyone happens to have a 650watt or better laying around that they wouldn't mind parting with for a fair price let me know. I prefer modular cable design btw. (Don't we all?)
On the subject of GPU's, again. I think the 4870's should do pretty well on BF3, and I don't plan on maxing out the textures or anything because detail doesn't make so much difference to me as performance. I usually end up tweaking textures and such down a notch anyway just because I have noticed in the past that refreshes often look noticeably faster and cleaner even on higher end cards when they aren't trying to render extremely high resolution textures all the time. I managed to net two Diamond 4870's with 512mb each for 100 dollars shipped, so the price is fantastic. I mean, that's relatively dirt cheap for decently performing cards. So to make a long story short, it seems like as long as I'm not too worried about texture load, I should be happy with this 100 dollar investment, plus a cheap-ish PSU to cover my power requirements until I have the money for the much anticipated 7XXX line etcetera. I also need a stronger PSU not just for the GPU's, but because when I OC my processor, the power draw increases by an incredible margin. At 4.0ghz, the 920 can't pull enough power from the PSU, and is a clear sign I need more headroom. Thanks for your comments guys, I really appreciate it!
On the subject of GPU's, again. I think the 4870's should do pretty well on BF3, and I don't plan on maxing out the textures or anything because detail doesn't make so much difference to me as performance. I usually end up tweaking textures and such down a notch anyway just because I have noticed in the past that refreshes often look noticeably faster and cleaner even on higher end cards when they aren't trying to render extremely high resolution textures all the time. I managed to net two Diamond 4870's with 512mb each for 100 dollars shipped, so the price is fantastic. I mean, that's relatively dirt cheap for decently performing cards. So to make a long story short, it seems like as long as I'm not too worried about texture load, I should be happy with this 100 dollar investment, plus a cheap-ish PSU to cover my power requirements until I have the money for the much anticipated 7XXX line etcetera. I also need a stronger PSU not just for the GPU's, but because when I OC my processor, the power draw increases by an incredible margin. At 4.0ghz, the 920 can't pull enough power from the PSU, and is a clear sign I need more headroom. Thanks for your comments guys, I really appreciate it!