First review: Sapphire HD 3850 512MB fanless version

Click and see our HUGE pic

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...0_512mb_04.jpg

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...0_512mb_06.jpg

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...0_512mb_18.jpg

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...0_512mb_03.jpg

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...0_512mb_12.jpg

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...0_512mb_20.jpg


HD 3850 512M vs HD 3850 256M

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...b_512vs256.png

HD 3870 512M VS HD 3850 512M

http://www.expreview.com/img/review/...3870vs3850.png

Final thoughts

Both cards are using 512MB memory and 256bit memory interface, but HD 3870 have a better performance. That’s because HD 3870 used GDDR4 and have a higher frequency so the 15% gap is reasonable.

What our focusing is that the HD 3850 256MB vs HD 3850 512MB. The Zero HD 3850 256MB and Sapphire HD 3850 512MB have the same frequency so the only difference is their memory. Except they are equal in Half-life2 timedemo, in other items 512MB HD 3850 have a better performance compare to HD 3850 256M.

But please notice though in high resolution the 512MB version have advantage, but the FPS is too low to play (not even 30FPS ). So the extra 256MB’s advantage is almost nothing in common use.

If you are going to buy this product, do not trust the fanless design 100%. Because if you did not build a nice chassis with a good air flue, then in the load mode the heat could be a danger.

Sapphire said this card will hit the market in Dec 15. The price is just a few bucks more than a reference card, so if you cares about the noise level and you have a good air flue then this card is a good choice.

Original Post at Expreview.com(more pics there:))

just overclock the 512mb 3850 and its a 3870, but with a nicer passive cooler.
i think the blue his one is better though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grimREEFER

just overclock the 512mb 3850 and its a 3870, but with a nicer passive cooler.
i think the blue his one is better though

---

the memory is still different(GDDR3 and GDDR4). so there still be some performance loss

AFAIK the reason why GDDR4 is advantageous is because it requires less voltage and in the end allows for a higher mem speed. Also just like with typical system RAM the latencies are higher too, therefore requiring a higher clockspeed to even make GDDR4 worth it, the main reason why NVIDIA doesn't use GDDR4 and has stuck with GDDR3. ATi used it as a complete marking tool for its introduction on the X1950XT/X to say it was the first card with GDDR4 memory, and now they've of course stuck with it for their 2900XT and 3870s.

In the end my point is that when and if GDDR3 and 4 are clocked the same they would probably perform the same, if not even in the favor of GDDR3(of course the problem is GDDR3 is harder to clock as high). Unless there are some other major changes in GDDR4 that i'm not aware. I don't know the specifics on the changes between GDDR4 and 3, but i do remember their being some other changes between DDR2 and DDR3 besides the lower voltage and higher clockspeed that should give DDR3 more performance.