HD 4850 Previews

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gojirasan

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2320904,00.asp

Extremetech finally has their review with benchmarks up and as usual it is well written and interesting. Extremetech has been one of my favorite review sites for a long time now. Although I was a bit disappointed with the 4850 performance. It merely matched the stock 9800GTX. It didn't (significantly) beat it as in some other reviews.

---

In this review, it seems almost every case of AA/AF turned on the 4850 came out ahead, it was only when they were off, that the 9800gtx nudged ahead..

Nice! Near GTX260 performance for $200?! I'm in! :up:

Time to finally retire my 8800GTS 320, I was waiting for an affordable next gen card and this looks to be it. :yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macadamia

Crossfire was a mess in 2007. Undeniable. I wouldn't touch any config made with it then. In 2008 it got its act back up completely, which was the basis I made the recommendations. Why the fuss suddenly about driver profiles, AFR, etc when SLI/CF has been there, been much worse for so long and virtually nobody whined, this I'm VERY curious.

---

Because in 2007 nobody had Crossfire because of prices and because the perfomance was not there. Now every average joe can build a 3850CF system with the money of a single 9800GTX. Again, my question: have you ever tried CF or you're basing your opinion in reviews? I smell a no, so I'll tell you not to speak about something you don't know.

CF support is HORRIBLE when you play non popular games. And even in them. Go play FEAR (a very popular game with very good CF support) with Crossfire and tell me what happens when you shoot a barrel. Now put 2 or 3 barrels in scene. Do you like to play online with lots of them in single digit FPS numbers? But the final average FPS is great, so CF is great. Haha, NO.

Quote:

---

Preview : Radeon HD 4850 & GeForce 9800 GTX v2

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/3...0023593qu6.gifhttp://img46.imageshack.us/img46/8293/img0023586ny4.gif

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/1...0023585lz3.gifhttp://img209.imageshack.us/img209/7...0023584qv9.gif

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/442/img0023587eb1.gifhttp://img76.imageshack.us/img76/3408/img0023582xq5.gif

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/6...0023581ua1.gifhttp://img154.imageshack.us/img154/4...0023588hq1.gif

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/9...0023589mm0.gifhttp://img154.imageshack.us/img154/8...0023590zh7.gif

Source: hardware.fr

---

GTX 280 better n' better, GTX v2 not bad...

Another review with a bit of overclocking.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/731/1/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceevee

Or here even two of them in Xfire is only 50% of the 280GTX performance even though the cost is 61% of the 280GTX.

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/1169/70335167hd9.png

It just seems like AMD's solution is much less consistent and reliable than Nvidia's.


Sure it is cheap but it seems you get what you pay for.


If they can fix these problems so that it performs in ALL games then I will be the first to buy two 4870s, but until then no thanks.

---

Seems like a driver issue to me as the 3870X2 is way up there... ...although it has "internal" crossfire... :p:

driver issue i think and there is a hot fix out now for the 4000's

They'd better fix that, i fully plan on playing through The Witcher again when my new build is complete :yepp:

Let me get this straight.

The 4850 is as fast or sometimes a bit slower than the 9800GTX without AA, but once you turn on AA the 4850 is noticeably faster. It's beaten by the 9800GTX+ without AA, but with AA it seems to still be faster.

It's like a 9600GT kinda, but with a really good price and better overall performance.

This is just my opinion, BTW.

Hi guys.

Just wanted to let you know that we've done much more extensive testing and published an updated review.

The address is this: http://hwzone.co.il/reviews/4850_preview/

It is also the second review mentioned in the beginning of the thread ("HardwareZone").

We've done some extensive testings which include CF in 8x/8x mode(P35 board) and CF in 16x/16x PCIE 2.0 mode (X48). The results are quite remarkable!

Nice update GGuyz...

I remember only the Ultra pegging the limit of 8x anyway, and since this card 4850 sometimes matches/beats the Ultra, Im not surprised there is an increase in some items when going 16x/16x.

Though Im a little confused about how that all works personally. Crossfire still uses one pcie slot in either 8 or 16 lanes flavors for each card. Since they each use their own, why would crossfire matter? Shouldnt you see the same improvements with one card since they dont share that bandwidth?

What are the differences at 16x/8x?

Wait a minute, does this mean I need to have two 16x pci-e lanes for a HD4850 crossfire setup to perform to its fullest??? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

Nice update GGuyz...

I remember only the Ultra pegging the limit of 8x anyway, and since this card 4850 sometimes matches/beats the Ultra, Im not surprised there is an increase in some items when going 16x/16x.

Though Im a little confused about how that all works personally. Crossfire still uses one pcie slot in either 8 or 16 lanes flavors for each card. Since they each use their own, why would crossfire matter? Shouldnt you see the same improvements with one card since they dont share that bandwidth?

What are the differences at 16x/8x?

---

You are right. we saw similar differences when testing a single card in 8x/16x mode. But there's no real reason to run a single card in 8x mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.X

Wait a minute, does this mean I need to have two 16x pci-e lanes for a HD4850 crossfire setup to perform to its fullest??? :confused:

---

This was mentioned over the last few years and the main reason why there is two X16 PCI-E lanes on advanced chipsets (ie X48).

How is this surprising or even news..?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.X

Wait a minute, does this mean I need to have two 16x pci-e lanes for a HD4850 crossfire setup to perform to its fullest??? :confused:

---

I think the new P45 boards would be sufficient. Most of them only support 8x/8x mode but allow PCI-E 2.0 bandwidth. It's more or less the same as 16x/16x. Atleast in theory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGuyZ

You are right. we saw similar differences when testing a single card in 8x/16x mode. But there's no real reason to run a single card in 8x mode.

---

Of course there isnt! I was just confirming (for myself) that its not Crossfire thats the issue, its each card on its own sometimes pegging the limit of 8x. Crossfire doesnt seem to compound the issue.

I would also think that the improvements would be MUCH greater as the card performance goes up... say 9800gx2 (2) @ 8x/8x vs. 16x/16x.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGuyZ

I think the new P45 boards would be sufficient. Most of them only support 8x/8x mode but allow PCI-E 2.0 bandwidth. It's more or less the same as 16x/16x. Atleast in theory.

---

The p45 was testing against the X48 with two 4850s in crossfire.

The results were herrendous results on the P45, which might just be the variation you are seeing in reviews too. Make sure you are using 16x/16x.

Perkam

So I'm SOL with my P35 board? I haven't even had a chance to use it yet for more than 48 hours and now it needs to be replaced? @#$@#$%. Well there's only so much I can complain about the new graphics cards being too fast for my motherboard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGuyZ

Hi guys.

Just wanted to let you know that we've done much more extensive testing and published an updated review.

The address is this: http://hwzone.co.il/reviews/4850_preview/

It is also the second review mentioned in the beginning of the thread ("HardwareZone").

We've done some extensive testings which include CF in 8x/8x mode(P35 board) and CF in 16x/16x PCIE 2.0 mode (X48). The results are quite remarkable!

---

wow!! 56% improvement on fps in crysis is quite remarkable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gojirasan

So I'm SOL with my P35 board? I haven't even had a chance to use it yet for more than 48 hours and now it needs to be replaced? @#$@#$%. Well there's only so much I can complain about the new graphics cards being too fast for my motherboard.

---

In that case, see if you can return it so you can get an X38/48.

So you need an expensive x48 or similar motherboard to get the best out this series?

Thats a big dent into price vs performance.

Ok sli motherboard can be had for 65 euro, 2 8800gt can be had for 220 euro or 2 9800gtx+ for 350 euro when released

x48 will cost 160 euro mimimum, 2 HD4850 300 euro ( €185 more than 8800gt sli combo ), sli seems to have better consistency and support, while 8800gt sli is very near HD4850 crossfire performance

Not a fan boy, just pointing out

So the P45 is really no good for Crossfire with 4850's then, is that what you're saying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hurleybird

In that case, see if you can return it so you can get an X38/48.

---

No. I bought it in March. I've been working on my water cooling system for that long :). Also it's a uATX board. I'm not sure how easy it is going to be to find a x48 replacement that overclocks well , but I'm going to start looking today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by y2kbos

So you need an expensive x48 or similar motherboard to get the best out this series?

Thats a big dent into price vs performance.

Ok sli motherboard can be had for 65 euro, 2 8800gt can be had for 220 euro or 2 9800gtx+ for 350 euro when released

x48 will cost 160 euro mimimum, 2 HD4850 300 euro ( €185 more than 8800gt sli combo ), sli seems to have better consistency and support, while 8800gt sli is very near HD4850 crossfire performance

Not a fan boy, just pointing out

---

Yeah but a decent nforce board that has high end features and can overclock will cost upwards of £220 here (yeah i'm talking about 790i as it's the only decent nforce chipset bar the 750i imo).

Whats wrong with 780i? See sig for details!