Yup, I've noticed...and one is on the way.:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
Printable View
Yup, I've noticed...and one is on the way.:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
no all people spend 50 dollars in ONE waterblock...DYS waterblocks are really cheaper and safe...i have 4 waterblocks all home made and i donīt spend 50 dollars in all system 4 years ago..Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
people were asking about buying one, not making one. no point going off topic to try and prove me wrong. your talking to someone who takes old cpu heatsinks and mods them to fit video cards. i spent 0$ since i had it laying around.Quote:
Originally Posted by FEROCIDAD
Agreed, I have a block on a 4850 and it is clocked sky high at 900 when I want to speed it up during games. I think most watercooling people have the hardware that keeps universal for changes if you need/want them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
unfortunatelly it seems that you cannot even increase/decrease memory frequency even a bit! pc crashes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
i am looking forward to new driver and i hope it can fix this issue.
works fine for meQuote:
Originally Posted by acos
How high can you go with the memoryclock?Quote:
Originally Posted by W1zzard
don't remember, check my reviewQuote:
Originally Posted by Clint
4770x2? That would be an interesting card. It wouldn't really fit into the market that well... below a 4850x2, less power consumption, lower cost. But I think the 4890 is were that card would fit in.
from what im seeing a 4890 costs more than a 4850x2, atleast on newegg. and with future faster 4890s coming out, they will probably cost more. so getting multiple cheaper cards has really seemed to be the best power/cost ratio for the 4000 series.
Clint: Did you get your XFX? there are no heatpipes, right? That's what I've heard anyway.
Yes, got it...and already sent back. As for heatpipes, two empty holes... The cooler performed lousy without them, no surprise there.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
:eek: Cheeky bastards!!!!! :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint
Depends on your set-up. I know I'd rather take a 4890 over 4770 Crossfire at my resolution. And you can find deals on the 4890 if you look hard enough (was one for $175 at ewiz). I agree though, at 1680x1050 and below, it'd be tough to beat the price/performance of 4770 in crossfire (maybe with a kick ass sale on 4850's, but I'd rather have the lower power cost of the 4770 :D).Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Holy crap! That stinks, but thanks for reporting. So the original GPU-heatsink only cards are still the best retail heatsinks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint
not sure if you should be mad at the cooler for sucking, or at the gpu which on 40nm with gddr5 sucking up way too much power. when youd think it would be close to half what its 4830 brother puts out. that the only reason i didnt buy one. since i leave my pc on 24/7, id figure a 4770 would be an on par upgrade to my 2900xt, but savings on my electric bill would be massive enough to pay for the upgrade after just 3-4 months. but since it power consumption is NO WHERE near what anyone expected, ill pass and wait for a 5850 like i planned too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint
60w is a lot of power?Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
LOL, i bet HD 2900 XT idle power consumption is around 50% bigger than HD 4770 full load power consumption, that beast is one leaky bast*rd chip -clocked like a champ though.
I read a lot of Radeon 4770 reviews and all praise the card for having a really low power consumption
(around 80W by itself), and now here you are saying that the power consumption is not really all than
low?
I just ordered Gigabyte 4770 for 106€ and now I wonder if I should just add another 20€ and get the
Sapphire 4850 Vapor-X with 512MB?
Coming from the Radeon 3850 which would be better for a 19" panel (res. 1280x1024).
The 4770 uses 60-70 W under load.
In worst case it uses like 25-30 W idle, the 2900 was a "tad" hotter.. :rofl:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=11
Its certainly not using 25-30W idle. Its more like 50-60W idle and 70-80W load.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.ph...=18202&page=11
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3553&p=9
http://techreport.com/articles.x/16820/11
Main reason is the lack of clocking down the GDDR5 :(
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...es/pwridle.gif
why not just get 1gb 4870
prices have fallen sharply
I wish I had waited a bit before I bought mine earlier this year..the prices are so low it's ridiculous. The only cool thing about this card is 40nm and ability to clock quite a bit higher and still run cool. But for all out performance 4870 or 4890 for just a bit more is a better idea.
Nice, you link to other sites, and post something from the firing squad?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
anand,
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/4...3456/18958.png
Using ~20W less than the 4830, which is around ~80W-90 and using ~42W less than a 4850.
Hexus is a flash thing, but total system power consumption is only 11W higher than a system with an HD4670 under full load, considering the 4670 is a 50-60W card, that puts the 4770 at 60-70W.
and from the techreport article you linked,
http://techreport.com/r.x/radeon-hd-4770/power-load.gif
HD4770 using 20W less than a 9800GT under load, and almost 40W less than a 4850(~110W load draw), implying ~70W card draw.
So you just confirm what I wrote with 70-80W. Not sure about your point.... :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
at the high end, it's using 70W, but a number of sites are showing 60W. 60-70W, not 70-80W. Also, your idle numbers are double what reviewers are showing. Underclocking the RAM in 2D should fix all the idle power issues. Xbit labs measured power to the card only, their measurements are in DC i assume,Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
http://xbitlabs.com/images/video/rad...4770_power.png
There is sofar only 1 site that shows those low idle modes. All the rest dont. If a HD4770 uses 25-30W idle then alot of cards should be about 10W or below 0W....Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
Also there aint any 2D mode with Vista/Windows7.