PSU for GTX 480

Status
Not open for further replies.
And therein lies the problem. Meeting the persons requirements is subjective to each posters idea of how much is needed. E.g. one might say that a 4870 is all you need to play games really well, another might say a 5970 is what you need. Neither would be 'wrong' per se, but both are clearly different.

While you might say the extra performance given by a 480 will never justify the extra cost, others (like me :p) will disagree. Two 480's will give me better performance than anything else out therere except two 5970's. And the cost of those 5970s is quite substantially more than the cost of two 480's.
 
And therein lies the problem. Meeting the persons requirements is subjective to each posters idea of how much is needed. E.g. one might say that a 4870 is all you need to play games really well, another might say a 5970 is what you need. Neither would be 'wrong' per se, but both are clearly different.

While you might say the extra performance given by a 480 will never justify the extra cost, others (like me :p) will disagree. Two 480's will give me better performance than anything else out therere except two 5970's. And the cost of those 5970s is quite substantially more than the cost of two 480's.

Subjective due to ignorance. The bit with computers is everything can be quantified however you want. You can make a very good case that a 4870 simply is not fast enough with benchmarks. You can also argue the price/performance ratio of any particular card/chip.anything is insufficient to warrant buying it. All you need is the numbers, and when you are dealing with a very number oriented topic everything else is pretty pointless. Also anyone who has that kind of money really doesn't need our help. They should go ahead and spend it on the biggest parts and make us feel bad about ourselves.

Also, stop posting on a forum and go eat some dinner or watch some prime time tv. It's 3 am here, but you're far from done.
 
Despite what you say, i disagree that the level of physics nvidias PhysX provides us with can be achieved by a good CPU without being at much expense to performance. If the CPU could do all this real time fluid simulation and the rest of it, why has it never been pulled off to look and behave even half as good as PhysX does ?

I'll pretend for a minute that CPU's can do the task just as well without sacrificing much gameplay performance, that's great and all, but i can still only get it by using a PhysX card. It is essentially pointless to argue whether the CPU can or can not do the task, the fact of the matter is the only way to experience PhysX like physics is by using a nVidia card whether this is because only GPU's are powerful enough or nVidia pays all these devs to restrict the realisticness of there in game physics does not matter, the fact remains the same.

And zmatt, you are talking about only ever basing your decision off Price/Performance, if this was the same for me i too would of got a 5870. But it isn't, i like what PhysX gives me, and i like what CUDA does, and i actually prefer nvidia over ATI as i'm sure many other people do. Whether all these features are cons or not is again, totally irrelevent, i couldn't get them by getting an ATI card or by getting a better CPU.

Subjective due to ignorance. The bit with computers is everything can be quantified however you want. You can make a very good case that a 4870 simply is not fast enough with benchmarks. You can also argue the price/performance ratio of any particular card/chip.anything is insufficient to warrant buying it. All you need is the numbers, and when you are dealing with a very number oriented topic everything else is pretty pointless. Also anyone who has that kind of money really doesn't need our help. They should go ahead and spend it on the biggest parts and make us feel bad about ourselves.

Also, stop posting on a forum and go eat some dinner or watch some prime time tv. It's 3 am here, but you're far from done.

But for the quantitative data to mean anything to the end user, they must have the correct subjective views. If i define 'fast enough' for me as 5fps, or that i don't care about benchmark, the 4870 immediately becomes fast enough for every game out there, even when you look at the quantitative data. You can look at quantitative data and say "This is fastest" and on the inverse "This is slowest" but you can not say "This is fast enough for me" or "This is to slow for me" to be able to provide those two statements as answers a subjective view on the performance required must be gave.
 
I still don't see how people are arguing the gtx 480 isn't good.

It's 10% better than the 5870 at a 10% price increase so you can't say it's horrible. That's even taking phyxs and CUDA out of the equation. And no matter how hard you argue that they are useless it still comes down to nvidia has it and ATI doesn't so even if it's a "useless" feature, they still have it where the competition doesn't. I rather have a useless feature than no feature.

And if you want to go price/performance then stick with what I always say...get a 4850/gtx 260 if you're worried about that. It'll still max everything out there.
 
I still don't see how people are arguing the gtx 480 isn't good.

It's 10% better than the 5870 at a 10% price increase so you can't say it's horrible. That's even taking phyxs and CUDA out of the equation. And no matter how hard you argue that they are useless it still comes down to nvidia has it and ATI doesn't so even if it's a "useless" feature, they still have it where the competition doesn't. I rather have a useless feature than no feature.

And if you want to go price/performance then stick with what I always say...get a 4850/gtx 260 if you're worried about that. It'll still max everything out there.

This statement becomes 5x stronger when you consider that to people such as me, PhysX and CUDA do matter, alot.

Everyone can say "The GTX480 isn't the fastest". What they should not say is the GTX480 sucks, or the GTX480 is a bad car. That is like telling someone a car is bad, sure on the front of things it is easy to label a car as bad or good but if done properly the end users requirements MUST be considered before any analysis of the car is carried out and an opinion is provided.
 
I still don't see how people are arguing the gtx 480 isn't good.

And if you want to go price/performance then stick with what I always say...get a 4850/gtx 260 if you're worried about that. It'll still max everything out there.

I believe the gtx 480 is good with FPS. And what are you talking about a 4850/260 can max everything out there? Uhh they can't, so stop saying it. It's simply not true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom