ATi 4xxx Series Review

[chizow]

Originally posted by: ddarko
What a joke your posts are. You don't even have the grace to acknowledge an impressive turnout without bitter insults masquerading as backhanded compliments.

I know the truth hurts guy. I'd be much more impressed if this launched with G92. Sorry I just don't see how this part is so exciting compared to 7-8 month old parts selling for $130-160 offering nearly the same performance.

"I'd ask if anyone were able to simulate 4870 clock speeds and performance but it doesn't seem as if anyone can overlock [sic] these...due to heat." Oh please. You're not interested in the 4870 performance; you're trying to slag the heat characteristics of the 4850 card.

Actually I am interested, because as of now those thermal characteristics put the possibility of an 4870 at 750MHz in doubt. Sorry but when people are concerned about 80-100C *IDLE* at 625-660MHz that is reason for concern. Maybe that whole GDDR5 excuse is the red herring you've been looking for and all those benefits of lower TDP of the 55nm process were a bit overstated?

"looks like ATI finally caught up...after two refreshes"? Oh please. Only a partisan like you would try to denigrate the impressive performance of a company's new card by insulting its older cards. And really, since you're so concerned about past performance, why not answer why Nvidia sat on its ass for two generations and ended up producing a whopper-sized card that costs more and delivers less than its own last-gen products, let alone its competitor? Nvidia in graphics is turning into the AMD in processors: arrogant, lazy and underachieving.

Huh? NV has produced 3 generations of product (G80, G92, GT200) now without answer from ATI. RV770 is their first competitive product in almost 2 years but its still competing more against last-gen than current products. Its their 3rd refresh of essentially the same part and as I said originally, it would've actually been impressive if it had launched against G92 and not GT200.

 

[ChaosDivine]

Originally posted by: error8
Yeah, or 4850 GTR double turbo. :laugh:

You sir, are epic fail. How could you forget the mandatory Type R sticker on the HSF

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Yes, i think the mid range now will soon be transitioning to the G92b chips ala 55nm G92. These chips are roughly similar in size to the HD4800 series, but has less transistors making it pretty damn competitive in terms of production cost (nVIDIA has a slight edge here). Seeing as the HD4850 is roughly 9800GTX performance give or take couple of % i think its too premature to declare a winner. (With 8800GTs selling dirt cheap and 9800GTX priced at $199)

Well the 4850 has something that the GTX doesn't: directX 10.1. It really doesn't matter now, but if they are on the same performance level, people could be more attracted by the extra "feature" and buy the ATI card. It's also shorter and has a single slot cooler, another two advantages to buy it.
It's gonna be a big and bloody fight between these two.

i would think that physX on CUDA would be a more attractive feature.

 

[allies]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
Well, AMD's sub $200 part is in general as fast to a bit faster then the 9800GTX, which looks to be in the $270 range. That's spectacular. In some cases the 4850 even touches and rarely even surpasses the $400ish GTX260 in performance. I don't see what's not to be excited about if you are a gamer.

The 9800GTX was dropped to $199 today and was selling for $240-250 before that. I expected a price drop but not so much, so soon. Like I said its a fine part for $200 but realistically, there's G92 parts that have been selling for $130-150 (GT and GTS) for weeks now that offer similar performance for much less.

Assuming the 4870 is going to be 20%+ faster then the 4850 then it'll probably compete pretty well against the GTX260 and even in some cases with the GTX280 for a LOT less money. If you like to game with AA the difference seems even more pronounced. I think AMD is doing a quite a bit better then 'just lost somewhere in the middle (again)" this round. Also, when you get into crossfire, I think they're competitive on the high end as well, not just the mid-range as you say. So far it looks like 2 4850's > the GTX280, I'd say that makes them pretty competitive in the high end.

How isn't it just lost somewhere in the middle again? This is what happens when you don't shoot for being the best and once again ATI manages to be just mediocre. The reality of it is, these parts aren't anything special compared to G92 or even G80. Sure they improve with AA, and that's certainly a benefit but NV is going to have cheaper options that are a bit slower and more expensive options that are faster no matter how you slice it, leaving them squarely in the middle.

Probably because it's faster than last gen parts while being cheaper than their prices.

Also, from looking at the reviews, there are many instances where the 4850 outpaces the 3870X2. This means that the 4870 will likely by twice as fast as 3870. In one "refresh" we gain 200% the speed... whereas nVidia only pulled ~150-175%

Looking forward to seeing the 4870X2 trump the GTX 280 for a lower price.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: chizow
The 9800GTX was dropped to $199 today and was selling for $240-250 before that. I expected a price drop but not so much, so soon. Like I said its a fine part for $200 but realistically, there's G92 parts that have been selling for $130-150 (GT and GTS) for weeks now that offer similar performance for much less.

Not to mention the new 9800GTX+ which could be a 55nm part, combined with a newer faster driver set.

The next few weeks should be interesting.

I will wait for official benchmarks, but so far getting an ATI card or a NVIDIA card has become much easier on the consumer.

 

[Hauk]

Today's Mental Health Note

Healthy discussions are perfectly normal and are a tradition of sorts; but it's wise to keep in mind that we as consumers are all winners, regardless of what color we favor.

Whether you choose ATI or nVidia, the price to performance ratio has never been better. At all price points!

Let ATI and nV battle it out. Enjoy the spoils of war without getting your hands dirty. In other words, don't get too wound up over this stuff...

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: ddarko

Originally posted by: chizow
Not bad for the price, looks like ATI finally caught up to G80/G92 after two refreshes. This part would've been a win when G92 launched instead of RV670 but as it is it just makes ATI competitive again in the mid-range.

I think its safe to say now that RV770 isn't going to be 2x as fast as RV670, although it does see nice gains with AA. I'd ask if anyone were able to simulate 4870 clock speeds and performance but it doesn't seem as if anyone can overlock these more than 50MHz even with CCC's limitations due to heat. Still with 4850@$200 and 4870 @$300 it doesn't exactly stand out against G92 at $200 and GTX 260 at $400, they're just lost somewhere in the middle (again).

What a joke your posts are. You don't even have the grace to acknowledge an impressive turnout without bitter insults masquerading as backhanded compliments. "I'd ask if anyone were able to simulate 4870 clock speeds and performance but it doesn't seem as if anyone can overlock [sic] these...due to heat." Oh please. You're not interested in the 4870 performance; you're trying to slag the heat characteristics of the 4850 card. "looks like ATI finally caught up...after two refreshes"? Oh please. Only a partisan like you would try to denigrate the impressive performance of a company's new card by insulting its older cards. And really, since you're so concerned about past performance, why not answer why Nvidia sat on its ass for two generations and ended up producing a whopper-sized card that costs more and delivers less than its own last-gen products, let alone its competitor? Nvidia in graphics is turning into the AMD in processors: arrogant, lazy and underachieving.

Some people are finally figuring out.

 

[AzN]

4850 is very impressive and very efficient. If you read pcper article you know with less tmu it has faster throughput than 8800gt.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Wow, way to poop on ATI's parade. :laugh:

I think this will make the 4870 a tough sell, let alone the 4850 which already had competition at $70 cheaper.

Combine that with the rumored new drivers and it seems we have a spoiler a comin'.

A $200 4850 destroys the 9800GTX when using higher res and high AA, especially 8xAA. 9800GTX+ is a just another nvidia marketing stunt to stop people buying the 4850. 9800GTX should be priced at $150 to make it competitive.

http://www.computerbase.de/art..._radeon_hd_4850_rv770/

Computerbase sorted out DX 10 - Benchmark

Assassin's Creed 1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 61
HD4850 : 56
9800GTX : 45

Bioshock 1600x1200 1xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 82
HD4850 : 54
9800GTX : 53

Call of Juarez 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 24
HD4850 : 17
9800GTX : 6

Company of heroes 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 66
HD4850 : 42
9800GTX : 35

Crysis 1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 18
HD4850 : 11
9800GTX : 9

Lost planet 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 45
HD4850 : 29
9800GTX : 24

World in Conflict 1600x1200 4xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 69.1
HD4850 : 56.2
9800GTX : 41.1



Computerbase DX 9 - Benchmark

Call of duty 4 4xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 62
HD4850 : 48
9800GTX : 46

Clive Barker's Jericho 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 26
HD4850 : 28
9800GTX : 7

FEAR 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 93
HD4850 : 60
9800GTX : 49

Gothic 3 1600x1200 1xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 76.3
HD4850 : 34.4
9800GTX : 46.7

Rainbow Six Vegas - 1600x1200
GT 280 : 65
HD4850 : 62
9800GTX : 49

Stalker 1600x1200 1xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 49
HD4850 : 35
9800GTX : 35

Unreal Tournament 3 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 72
HD4850 : 63
9800GTX : 34


Will Nvidia want to make its GT 260 obsolete ? I think alot of nvidia connected member got a new tag line to go with. "MAKE the 4850 look as like it just barley able to beat 9800GTX by spamming the forum of 4850 being weak". Sound like republican strategy against the democrats.

Do we have our fox version Nvidia viral manipulation team in anandtech. I still can't believe they forced the AC devs to take out DX10.1 function so ATI would loose in the benchmark.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: ddarko
What a joke your posts are. You don't even have the grace to acknowledge an impressive turnout without bitter insults masquerading as backhanded compliments.

I know the truth hurts guy. I'd be much more impressed if this launched with G92. Sorry I just don't see how this part is so exciting compared to 7-8 month old parts selling for $130-160 offering nearly the same performance.

"I'd ask if anyone were able to simulate 4870 clock speeds and performance but it doesn't seem as if anyone can overlock [sic] these...due to heat." Oh please. You're not interested in the 4870 performance; you're trying to slag the heat characteristics of the 4850 card.

Actually I am interested, because as of now those thermal characteristics put the possibility of an 4870 at 750MHz in doubt. Sorry but when people are concerned about 80-100C *IDLE* at 625-660MHz that is reason for concern. Maybe that whole GDDR5 excuse is the red herring you've been looking for and all those benefits of lower TDP of the 55nm process were a bit overstated?

"looks like ATI finally caught up...after two refreshes"? Oh please. Only a partisan like you would try to denigrate the impressive performance of a company's new card by insulting its older cards. And really, since you're so concerned about past performance, why not answer why Nvidia sat on its ass for two generations and ended up producing a whopper-sized card that costs more and delivers less than its own last-gen products, let alone its competitor? Nvidia in graphics is turning into the AMD in processors: arrogant, lazy and underachieving.

Huh? NV has produced 3 generations of product (G80, G92, GT200) now without answer from ATI. RV770 is their first competitive product in almost 2 years but its still competing more against last-gen than current products. Its their 3rd refresh of essentially the same part and as I said originally, it would've actually been impressive if it had launched against G92 and not GT200.

That is not true. You seem to competely forget about running 2 4850's. What you are saying is only true for a single 4850. What else was there for AMD to compete with from Nvidia? All Nvidia had been doing was respinning the G92 as numerous different cards. What else should AMD be competing against from Nvidia? The GT200? Fine, run some 4850's in Crossfire. You get more performance for less money on the highend. What to go higher? Run more then two 4850's or 4870's (when they launch in a week) against multiple GT200 cards. How are they stuck in the middle?

 

[Kuzi]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Oh boy, where is Ocguy31 now? :laugh:

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
all 4870's are gddr5. the difference is that some are 512mb and some 1gb memory.

What's this then Sapphire HD4870 512MB GDDR3

I think ATI may have to release some HD4870 with GDDR3, because of low availability of GDDR5 at this time, plus GDDR3 cards should be cheaper. Not everyone will need the higher bandwidth of GDDR5.

Mr.FUD says there will be GDDR5 shortages till next month

 

[imported_Scoop]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Actually its pretty even with HD4850 power consumptions according to Pcper. And apparently the 9800GTX+ uses 55nm G92 cores, i.e that explains how its clocked so damn high.

I'm having a hard time believing that cards with one and two pcie-connectors consume the same amount of power.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986


Will Nvidia want to make its GT 260 obsolete ? I think alot of nvidia connected member got a new tag line to go with. "MAKE the 4850 look as like it just barley able to beat 9800GTX by spamming the forum of 4850 being weak". Sound like republican strategy against the democrats.

Do we have our fox version Nvidia viral manipulation team in anandtech.

A.) It says link not found
B.) Some early benchmarks were pegging the 4850 at 8800GT speeds, even a slide from AMD showed the 8800GT as it's competitor (so goto C)
C.) I will wait for official bencharks, as these "previews" are usually very flawed
D.) Are you the fox version ATI viral manipulation team? (try not to make it or take it personally).
E.) The 9800GTX is probably one of the best cards you can buy right now. (I checked newegg and did not see any 4850s + you can get a 8800GT for a lot less than a 4850 which you can't buy anyways.
F.) These are just video cards and not our children so you don't need to get so upset.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: Scoop

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Actually its pretty even with HD4850 power consumptions according to Pcper. And apparently the 9800GTX+ uses 55nm G92 cores, i.e that explains how its clocked so damn high.

I'm having a hard time believing that cards with one and two pcie-connectors consume the same amount of power.

lol . You know when people start to say stuff without providing numbers , linking their source, it means they are in bsing.

 

[tuteja1986]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: tuteja1986


Will Nvidia want to make its GT 260 obsolete ? I think alot of nvidia connected member got a new tag line to go with. "MAKE the 4850 look as like it just barley able to beat 9800GTX by spamming the forum of 4850 being weak". Sound like republican strategy against the democrats.

Do we have our fox version Nvidia viral manipulation team in anandtech.

A.) It says link not found
B.) Some early benchmarks were pegging the 4850 at 8800GT speeds, even a slide from AMD showed the 8800GT as it's competitor (so goto C)
C.) I will wait for official bencharks, as these "previews" are usually very flawed
D.) Are you the fox version ATI viral manipulation team? (try not to make it or take it personally).
E.) The 9800GTX is probably one of the best cards you can buy right now. (I checked newegg and did not see any 4850s + you can get a 8800GT for a lot less than a 4850 which you can't buy anyways.
F.) These are just video cards and not our children so you don't need to get so upset.

A ) Linked fixed
B ) early benchmark is now your talking point, boy you are sinking low.
C) official benchmark ? benchmark done by lazy site that don't do detail analysis or site that use rules that suite them like hardocp. Computerbase do much more better review then the site you probably link. Last time you were linking driver heaven.
D) NO , I am actually still going to get a GT 280 when its comes down to $500 and i have said that in many threads. I am not a blind ignorant fanboy.
E) No , a 4850 for $200 that can be bought now is the best buy and they are on sale globally. That is why ATI pushed up the launch as they couldn't stopped retailer from selling it. http://fxvideocards.com/Sapphi...deon-4850-p-16386.html .
F)Now your trying to play emotional card , your friends are the one upset that they are using cheap marketing tactics.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Wow, way to poop on ATI's parade. :laugh:

You're "wowed" by the fact that NV is releasing a factory OC'd 9800gtx (which still costs more than a 4850), giving it a confusing name, and spreading rumors with no actual product to show? :laugh:

I think this will make the 4870 a tough sell, let alone the 4850 which already had competition at $70 cheaper.

That's just an illusion from those green tinted glasses... In reality, the 9800gtx needs an OC just to match a 4850, and the 4870 will stomp all over it regardless

Combine that with the rumored new drivers and it seems we have a spoiler a comin'.

The rumor IS the spoiler... I don't believe in miracle drivers, especially the kind that works magic for a 2 year old architecture without IQ cheats and hacks.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Wow, way to poop on ATI's parade. :laugh:

I think this will make the 4870 a tough sell, let alone the 4850 which already had competition at $70 cheaper.

Combine that with the rumored new drivers and it seems we have a spoiler a comin'.

A $200 4850 destroys the 9800GTX when using higher res and high AA, especially 8xAA. 9800GTX+ is a just another nvidia marketing stunt to stop people buying the 4850. 9800GTX should be priced at $150 to make it competitive.

http://www.computerbase.de/art..._radeon_hd_4850_rv770/

Computerbase sorted out DX 10 - Benchmark

Assassin's Creed 1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 61
HD4850 : 56
9800GTX : 45

Bioshock 1600x1200 1xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 82
HD4850 : 54
9800GTX : 53

Call of Juarez 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 24
HD4850 : 17
9800GTX : 6

Company of heroes 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 66
HD4850 : 42
9800GTX : 35

Crysis 1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF
GT 280 : 18
HD4850 : 11
9800GTX : 9

Lost planet 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 45
HD4850 : 29
9800GTX : 24

World in Conflict 1600x1200 4xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 69.1
HD4850 : 56.2
9800GTX : 41.1



Computerbase DX 9 - Benchmark

Call of duty 4 4xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 62
HD4850 : 48
9800GTX : 46

Clive Barker's Jericho 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 26
HD4850 : 28
9800GTX : 7

FEAR 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 93
HD4850 : 60
9800GTX : 49

Gothic 3 1600x1200 1xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 76.3
HD4850 : 34.4
9800GTX : 46.7

Rainbow Six Vegas - 1600x1200
GT 280 : 65
HD4850 : 62
9800GTX : 49

Stalker 1600x1200 1xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 49
HD4850 : 35
9800GTX : 35

Unreal Tournament 3 1600x1200 8xAA/16xAF:
GT 280 : 72
HD4850 : 63
9800GTX : 34


Will Nvidia want to make its GT 260 obsolete ? I think alot of nvidia connected member got a new tag line to go with. "MAKE the 4850 look as like it just barley able to beat 9800GTX by spamming the forum of 4850 being weak". Sound like republican strategy against the democrats.

Do we have our fox version Nvidia viral manipulation team in anandtech. I still can't believe they forced the AC devs to take out DX10.1 function so ATI would loose in the benchmark.

This is sweetness. Something everyone can use (more eye candy). Those 8xAA punishes 9800gtx. 4850 seems so efficient and elegant like a porsche. 9800gtx behaves like a mustang that can do fast 0-60mph but can't take a turn at high speeds.

 

[taltamir]

I wonder why not use some GDDR4... supposedly the chip supports 3, 4, and 5. so any one of them could be used...

 

[MarcVenice]

Hd4850 for 160 euro's in Holland. You pay 220 euro's for a 9800gtx. Meaning the 9800gtx has to drop 60 euro's to compete, that's a HUGE price drop. 8800gt's cost 115 euro's. Competition is fierce, but if the HD4850 really proves to be equal to a 9800gtx, then it's the better buy for sure.

Can't wait for the HD4870. This is good for the consumer, I could see Nvidia dropping prices, even when they play dead even, or even LOSE money on videocards, just to stop ATI from gaining marketshare? Btw I'd still buy a HD4850 over a 9800gtx, my PSU only has 2 6 pin pci-e connectors, but it has a pretty weak 12v rail, like 33a or so, so the less juice the videocard eats, the better ...

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Wow, way to poop on ATI's parade. :laugh:

You're "wowed" by the fact that NV is releasing a factory OC'd 9800gtx (which still costs more than a 4850), giving it a confusing name, and spreading rumors with no actual product to show? :laugh:

I think this will make the 4870 a tough sell, let alone the 4850 which already had competition at $70 cheaper.

That's just an illusion from those green tinted glasses... In reality, the 9800gtx needs an OC just to match a 4850, and the 4870 will stomp all over it regardless

Combine that with the rumored new drivers and it seems we have a spoiler a comin'.

The rumor IS the spoiler... I don't believe in miracle drivers, especially the kind that works magic for a 2 year old architecture without IQ cheats and hacks.

Not to mention Nvidia has shown over the last year or so that they're so capable or writing magic drivers.

What does the 9800GTX run at now, 675MHz? I don't see how a 60MHz bump is going to make up the difference.

 

[taltamir]

Sound like republican strategy against the democrats.

Again with this... how many times do I have to point those out? really do you even conceive that about 50% of all Americans are republican? how in the world does it seem logical to back up your argument with an insult to 50% of the population?
This is also inappropriate.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Yes, i think the mid range now will soon be transitioning to the G92b chips ala 55nm G92. These chips are roughly similar in size to the HD4800 series, but has less transistors making it pretty damn competitive in terms of production cost (nVIDIA has a slight edge here). Seeing as the HD4850 is roughly 9800GTX performance give or take couple of % i think its too premature to declare a winner. (With 8800GTs selling dirt cheap and 9800GTX priced at $199)

Well the 4850 has something that the GTX doesn't: directX 10.1. It really doesn't matter now, but if they are on the same performance level, people could be more attracted by the extra "feature" and buy the ATI card. It's also shorter and has a single slot cooler, another two advantages to buy it.
It's gonna be a big and bloody fight between these two.

i would think that physX on CUDA would be a more attractive feature.

Who knows!? Right now both of these aren't implemented. The future will show which is more important.

 

[Kuzi]

Because it sux, it's GDDR3 with minor tweaks.

 

[Wreckage]

NDA has lifted? Full review at Guru3d.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...-force-3d--powercolor/

Due to AMD unexpectedly lifting the NDA five days sooner than planned, we have not been able to go as in-depth in this review as we typically do. We returned with cards one day after AMDs press event, which was merely yesterday.

 

[HurleyBird]

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/...enchmark-Test/&page=10

Very impressive, this card scales very well. Beats the 280 at 2560X1600 8AA 16AF in need for speed despite losing at lower settings!