Gigabyte Announced their 4770 Today...
GV-R477D5-512H-B is the model name...
Printable View
Gigabyte Announced their 4770 Today...
GV-R477D5-512H-B is the model name...
Personally, at some point I think that the 128-bit bus will become the limiting factor on these cards' potential for increased framerates through overclocking.Quote:
Originally Posted by LightSpeed
The way I think of it is this way: if we take a HD 4770 and overclock it to HD 4850 performance, we can equally take that HD 4850 and overclock it so it maintains its lead. I would always rather take a higher performing stock clocked card than overclocking a lower-priced card and hoping for stability. Especially when the difference is ~$30 at some retailers.
at 825/950 I think it will succeed HD 4850 based on results over the web
Really seems like a good and cheap card. This competition really could bring back focus to the PC game scene.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=223256Quote:
Originally Posted by v_rr
He is working on an excuse. Payed research, wrongfully etc etc :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
/me adds tinfoil
Once again thanks for the reviews recap onethreehill :up:
128 bit gddr5 == 256 bit gddr3Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
It still seem limited compared to what memory OC alone shows. 192bit with GDDR5 would have been nice I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by W1zzard
source? elaborate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...0&postcount=12Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
better question is how 6.6gbs pixel fill rate 4770 OC can out do a 4850 with 10.5 pixiel fill rate. ???
:confused:
and that's with 4xaa 16xaf.
because whatever you are testing is not fillrate limited on either cardQuote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
I'm a bit confused. HR-03 A fits both X1650 and 4670 according to TR, but in your review you say the 4770 has the same holes as X1650 but different to 4670. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
The VF-1000 also uses the same mounting holes for both X1650 and 4670.
Try check your own review as one example. % core clock OC, % mem clock OC and actual gain.Quote:
Originally Posted by W1zzard
Your own 10% core, 38% memory. Yielded ~17%.
http://i5.techpowerup.com/reviews/AT...es/perf_oc.gif
You can try again just with the memory?
dumb question, but can you crossfire 4850 and 4770 and achieve decent results?Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian
You are correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
How about finding an app that is memory BW restricted since COD4 probably isnt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Aint memory limited on the GPU? Fish?Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
What happens when you can buy a 4850 @$89 after a $20 rebate and by using the promo code "VGA851"Quote:
Originally Posted by LightSpeed
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814102824
Not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
One: Your statement about over clocking to 4850-level performance is misleading. The 4770 should be able to OC quite a bit past 4850 performance. Even if you get the most crappy 4770 in the world you could probably increase the volts, OC past 4850 levels, and still have way lower power consumption.
Two: The memory on the 4770 is under clocked by default from the rated 4GHz. Restore the memory clock to the rated spec and you've got a part that should be slightly leading, and not slightly trailing, the 4850. There's no practical reason why we shouldn't look at 4GHz memory clock as "stock".
Three: 4850's aren't really known for over clocking well, and while it will obviously vary from card to card, I think that when you overclock both, the 4770 will more often come out ahead.
So, in my view, cheaper price + better thermals + better performance (on average, assuming both are OCed).... what's not to like?
Speaking of comparing both cards over clocked, that's something I would like to see more of in reviews -- not just seeing which card is faster at stock, but who comes out when both are pushed to their limits.
*nudge, nudge*
any single slot 1gb version on the horizon?
We got ~20% overall performance boost from overclocking 13% on GPU and 37% on memory (850/1100). I'd say both GPU and memory clocks are equally important as far as scaling is concerned, this is a sign that the memory bus width is rightfully chosen. The main idea behind the 128bit+GDDR5 is to make the PCB cheaper, i'd say AMD hit the spot from the price/performance standpoint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
What i find most interesting though about this card is the fact that two HD 4770's in Crossfire marginally beat the GTX 285, wich is almost double the price of both. If it weren't for the stuttering we get in actual gameplay with multi-GPU configs it would be the best solution there is. Here's a link to our article where we tested this:
ATI Radeon HD 4770
nop!Quote:
Originally Posted by vitaminc
XFX Readying 1 GB Radeon HD 4770 Variant
http://www.techpowerup.com/92732/XFX...0_Variant.htmlQuote:
Following ASUS, XFX is another partner breaking away from the reference design mold for the Radeon HD 4770 accelerator soon after its launch. The company is ready with a variant that features 1 GB of GDDR5 memory. For now, a picture of only its box can be found from an promotional page of the company, with links leading to its 512 MB base-model, but what the one picture we have, reveals a rather lavish packaging. The "X" shaped box shows no signs of a "XXX" branding, or anything that suggests the card features factory-overclocked speeds, though the "1 GB GDDR5" is legible. The card is backed by the company's "5-star" warranty. Its pricing and availability are not known.
http://www.techpowerup.com/img/09-04-29/79a.jpg