ATI Aiming For R300 Deja-Vu: Officially Launches 4800 Campaign

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

06-12-2008, 03:06 PM
Papu

Quote:

Originally Posted by gojirasan

While I think the AMD engineering department is far behind that of Nvidia, it seems that their marketing department is ahead. I really like that poster or whatever it is. It's beautiful. Everything about it just clicks for me. They shouldn't say "priced for gamers" though. It's obvious that gamers are their entire market. Who else would even buy a GPU? Does any consumer market segment spend more money on their PCs than gamers? We are the big spenders. So when they say "priced for gamers" I am thinking an MSRP of $800+ like the last card that was "priced for gamers", the 8800 Ultra.

i believe the term nvidia uses is enthusiast :D;)
06-12-2008, 03:11 PM
003

Those 3dmark results suck badly. With my 2900pro overclocked to 874/1000, and a Q9450 at 3.6GHz, I score 14.5k in 3dmark06. Are you trying to tell me that a 4850 with a 4ghz yorkfield is only scoring ~500 points higher than I am? Because that really, really sucks.

ROFL, and the 4850 was supposed to be as fast/a little faster than a 9800GTX?
06-12-2008, 03:14 PM
perkam

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

Those 3dmark results suck badly. With my 2900pro overclocked to 874/1000, and a Q9450 at 3.6GHz, I score 14.5k in 3dmark06. Are you trying to tell me that a 4850 with a 4ghz yorkfield is only scoring ~500 points higher than I am? Because that really, really sucks.

ROFL, and the 4850 was supposed to be as fast/a little faster than a 9800GTX?

I'm going to wait for you to check the first post again before correcting your post. (Here's a hint: the 4850 is at stock)

Perkam
06-12-2008, 03:15 PM
zanzabar

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

Those 3dmark results suck badly. With my 2900pro overclocked to 874/1000, and a Q9450 at 3.6GHz, I score 14.5k in 3dmark06. Are you trying to tell me that a 4850 with a 4ghz yorkfield is only scoring ~500 points higher than I am? Because that really, really sucks.

ROFL, and the 4850 was supposed to be as fast/a little faster than a 9800GTX?

its at 670mhz the 4870 is supposed to be 1ghz +
06-12-2008, 03:16 PM
perkam

Quote:

Originally Posted by zanzabar

its at 670mhz the 4870 is supposed to be 1ghz +

The 4870 will be between 750-800Mhz. The architecture can't do 1ghz on air.

Perkam
06-12-2008, 03:20 PM
Dainas

R300, haha... that kinda would mean you'd have the gpu performance crown...regardless of price period. From all hints it seems that Nvidia the one pulling a R300, two generations in a row with the 8800GTX and now GTX 280. What ati is pulling is more like a Ti4200, high end performance on a budget.
06-12-2008, 03:23 PM
perkam

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dainas

R300, haha... that kinda would mean you'd have the gpu performance crown...regardless of price period. From all hints it seems that Nvidia the one pulling a R300, two generations in a row with the 8800GTX and now GTX 280. What ati is pulling is more like a Ti4200, high end performance on a budget.

I wouldn't mind if they did, Ti4200 was Nvidia's "Comeback" card. Either way its good news for ATI ;)

Perkam
06-12-2008, 03:23 PM
Papu

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dainas

R300, haha... that kinda would mean you'd have the gpu performance crown...regardless of price period. From all hints it seems that Nvidia the one pulling a R300, two generations in a row with the 8800GTX and now GTX 280. What ati is pulling is more like a Ti4200, high end performance on a budget.

but why pay so much more money for an extra couple of frames , bang for buck people will go for price/performance.
oh yes the 8800gts was up against the x1900's for nearly a year :rofl:
06-12-2008, 03:25 PM
Dainas

Quote:

Originally Posted by perkam

I wouldn't mind if they did, Ti4200 was Nvidia's "Comeback" card. Either way its good news for ATI ;)

Perkam

Same here, but back in that era it was the "R300" (9700pro) in my main rig, and will be again.. Although as you can see from my sig I appreciate the Ti4200s too.
06-12-2008, 03:28 PM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helmore

And for reference, NVIDIA's GTX280 will have 933 GigaFLOPs.
ATI's 4850 will have 1000 GigaFLOPs and the 4870 will have 1200 GigaFLOPs.

GFlops amount doesnt really matter much. Else the 8800GTX should have lost bigtime.
06-12-2008, 03:34 PM
zanzabar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

GFlops amount doesnt really matter much. Else the 8800GTX should have lost bigtime.

it matters but when u neuter a card then compare the folps the r6x0 scores were it dose in game against the g80, and the 280 will have 240 streams so that should help ati out
06-12-2008, 03:37 PM
003

Quote:

Originally Posted by perkam

I'm going to wait for you to check the first post again before correcting your post. (Here's a hint: the 4850 is at stock)

Perkam

My overclock shouldn't matter. You seem to be forgetting, the 4850 is supposed to have 800 SPs, more than double that of the 2900, AND it has double the TMUs, as well as general improvements to the architecture. Pair that with the fact that it's got a 4ghz yorkfield behind it ... 15k is not impressive at all.

Now unless it will see massive gains from memory overclocking due to being memory bandwidth limited, then I really do not see this being such an amazing card.
06-12-2008, 03:41 PM
LordEC911

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

My overclock shouldn't matter. You seem to be forgetting, the 4850 is supposed to have 800 SPs, more than double that of the 2900, AND it has double the TMUs, as well as general improvements to the architecture. Pair that with the fact that it's got a 4ghz yorkfield behind it ... 15k is not impressive at all.

Maybe you are missing something...
Might want to go back and look to see what the GTX280 is scoring...
06-12-2008, 03:45 PM
adamsleath

http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/...20&showadres=1
ATI Radeon HD4850 512mb DDR3 PCI-E x16
PREORDER: $258.50 aud
auspcmarket link seems to be broken...
06-12-2008, 03:47 PM
Seraphiel

I am not impressed by this FUD, if I understand the situation correctly. The R300 was more than just being cheap, for its relative performance. It was about destroying the current alternative from nVIDIA by miles, and also even being competitive with nVIDIA's next generation.

R7xx current competitor (at release) will be the GTX 2xx series, and not G80 / G92. Simplified... there is not chance in hell, that ATI can pull a R300 this time around, but nVIDIA may do exactly that, just like with G80. G80 A2 (GTX) and A3 (Ultra) can still give any card a run for its money, when resolution and settings are taken to (playable) extremes.

That said, damn, I hope I am wrong.. because ATI leading the GPU segment in terms of raw effective performance - I'll be the first to welcome that (I chose R9700 Pro over the GF TI 4600 ... and never looked back, it was even very competitive with NV3x series released many months after).
06-12-2008, 03:48 PM
003

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordEC911

Maybe you are missing something...
Might want to go back and look to see what the GTX280 is scoring...

I guess I am missing something. Would you mind sharing with me what a GTX280 scored in 3DMark06 with a yorkfield at 4.0GHz? Because I am having trouble finding that information.
06-12-2008, 03:49 PM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by zanzabar

it matters but when u neuter a card then compare the folps the r6x0 scores were it dose in game against the g80, and the 280 will have 240 streams so that should help ati out

1. 1 flop is not equal to 1 flop. Flops are perhaps the most hard/useless way of measure since there is no defined standard. A cell can both be 200Gflop and 17gflop etc.
2. ATI dont have a 1Tflop chip. They have a theoretical 1 tflop chip. effective it will be alot less.

Also 280GTX got 240 SPs, 4870 got 160 before you apply marketing.
06-12-2008, 03:54 PM
dinos22

not bad not bad

even though 8800GT is still a great card regardless of what is coming out from either camp

i just don't see these making any difference in my machine hehehehe

ATI is doing a great job here keeping nvidia in touch as they are going to make them think twice about what pricing the'll charge :up: ...good for us i must say :D
06-12-2008, 03:54 PM
Kingcarcas

It's so beautiful *tear*, they better have plenty of cards at launch. :up:
06-12-2008, 03:54 PM
SNiiPE_DoGG

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

I guess I am missing something. Would you mind sharing with me what a GTX280 scored in 3DMark06 with a yorkfield at 4.0GHz? Because I am having trouble finding that information.

would you mind sharing your 3d mark scores?? your overclock does matter because this card isnt overclocked at all! maybe you should go use you 2900pro to play crysis at high res, oh wait nvm...
06-12-2008, 03:56 PM
msgclb

It looks like a PowerColor HD 4850 with a 3DMark score of 15,194. The test system consists of a X9650 @ 4000MHz, 2048MB RAM and Windows XP. From what I can find this 1000 GigaFLOPs card has the GPU clocks @ 625MHz and the memory @ 1000MHz. If I'm reading this correctly isn't this test done at 670MHz/1100MHz?
06-12-2008, 03:59 PM
Extelleron

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

1. 1 flop is not equal to 1 flop. Flops are perhaps the most hard/useless way of measure since there is no defined standard. A cell can both be 200Gflop and 17gflop etc.
2. ATI dont have a 1Tflop chip. They have a theoretical 1 tflop chip. effective it will be alot less.

Also 280GTX got 240 SPs, 4870 got 160 before you apply marketing.

HD 4870 does not have 160SPs. It has 800, just like R600 has 320. They are just different than nVidia's; for one they are clocked much lower.

If HD 3870 has 64SPs, then why do those 64SPs @ 775MHz outperform the 9600GT's 64SPs @ 1.625GHz by a huge margin?

Anyway, people are worrying way too much about 3D Mark 06. 3D Mark 06 is useless, haven't we learned that from G80 vs R600? IMO nobody should be benching cards on '06 anymore; it is 99% CPU dependent on just my 8800GTS 512MB, much less a RV770 / GT200 card.

Vantage is what matters, and of course games matter much more as well. In Vantage Extreme, HD 4850 scores ~2600 IIRC, meanwhile GTX 260 scores 3750~, so the GTX 260 is maybe 45% faster than the 4850. And that is at over twice the price. HD 4850 CF outperforms GTX 280 by ~100 points or so in Extreme as well. Given that HD 4870 should be ~30% faster than the 4850 that would put the GTX 260 only ~10% ahead of it in Vantage. Even GTX 280 would only be ~45-50% faster than it. That means that HD 4870 X2 will blow the 280 away.
06-12-2008, 04:00 PM
zanzabar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

Also 280GTX got 240 SPs, 4870 got 160 before you apply marketing.

whats that supposed to mean, and an SP is not an SP it could be a stream processor like ati has that acts like a cell and is fully programmable or it could be a shader processor and be hard coded into a bios and not allow full functionality when compared to a stream

and were do u get 160, if it has 480 were its speculated and this bench would forecast it to, thats 1/3rd and that makes no since, or 800 thats 1/5th that also makes no since

and on benching vantage is a BS bench its not using full dx10 its using the dx10 base so its really anti ati
06-12-2008, 04:02 PM
Seraphiel

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shintai

Also 280GTX got 240 SPs, 4870 got 160 before you apply marketing.

Does the 4870 really have that many? I thought, they had a 1:5 ratio, in term of their FUD about SP count? R600 had 320 SP / 5 = 64 SP vs G80 GTX/Ultra that had 256 SP / 2 = 128 SP :confused:

I thought, the 4850 / 4870 only really had 96, increased from 64, but still with more execution units per SP than nVIDIA ... 1:5 vs 1:2.

In terms of execution units ... GTX 280 and 4870 is the same: 480(1:2) vs 480(1:5). Meaning 240 SP for nvidia and 96 for ATI, and there is the clock difference.

I thought, ATI's 320 SP for R600 was FUD and not the same as nVIDIA's 128 SP, which has two execution units (and counted as ATI does, that would be 256 SP).

Please someone explain.
06-12-2008, 04:03 PM
003

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG

would you mind sharing your 3d mark scores?? your overclock does matter because this card isnt overclocked at all! maybe you should go use you 2900pro to play crysis at high res, oh wait nvm...

Yeah, with a Q9450 at 3.6GHz and my 2900Pro at 874/1000, I score 14.5K in 3DMark06. The 2900Pro has 320SPs and 16TMUs.

The 4850 is paired with a QX6850 at 4.0GHz, and the 4850 has clock speeds of 670/1100, and it has 800 SPs and 32 TMUs. It's score is not impressive.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page