So why can't this card do AA in Bioshock?
Printable View
So why can't this card do AA in Bioshock?
It can, but you have to force it in CCC. Only DX9 though.
Ok, I'm impressed...
source
impress by what?? hheh .. hopefully the 4850 :)
if this is how 4850 performs, 4870 might just be as fast if not faster than GTX 260 ... cant wait for R700
Impressed by a card that trades punches with a 9800gtx...a card that will be $199 very shortly with the supposed release of the 9800gtx+ for $230 that should beat it out consistently... What am I missing here? (seriously)Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry
4850 for sale
I also found it on ebay for the same price. Is it already supposed to be available? I only did a google shopping search.
WHat are you missing here?How about this:Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...s_GTX_w_AA.png
You better hope that 9800GTX on steroids have some mind blowing GPU/mem. clocks and some funky magic driver improvements ,since it will need them to overcome 42% deficit in performance (on average) in 16x12 8AA 16AF modes,when compared to Radeon 4850 ,which btw will cost 169$ in 2 weeks time(just wait for it and see it yourself).Not to mention power consumption of the 9800GTX+ which will be higher.
Is the computing power of these cards going to be used for something outside games, you know, stuff like distributed computing, 3D rendering?
THe card is impressive because for 110W, you have a card that consistently beats the 9800GTX in most games especially with AA and AF turned on, that scales much better than the 9800GTX (its more on par with the 8800Ultra), and can even match the GTX260 at some settings in some games. And two of them matches a GTX280 at 2/3 the price. Thats why people are impressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
The 9800GTX is longer, requires 2 x 6pin cables, and requires a nForce chipset for SLI, which a lot of people refuse to do.
The 4870 if it performs 25% faster might even start trading blows with the GTX280 at higher settings and will certainly trounce the 9800GTX+ easily.
Yes. Although ATI doesn't have as much into their own coding as Nvidia does with CUDA so far, they've shown that the 4870 has incredible rendering power (with the render demo they had) and programs like folding@home, once optimized for the 4800's (clients work but aren't using the 800SP's fully yet) will certainly benefit from the huge flop count.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pisu87
HD4850 beats crap out of 9800GTX at high res gaming, and 98GTX costs a lot more. Even in many games it does beat HD3870x2. nVidia released their high end cards, but in midrange segment ATI is the king. Even i believe HD4850 will be on par with 260GTX. For much less money. HD29 series was well not bad performing, but it had flaws. HD38 series reworked power consumption flaws, but still at aa/af gaming still there was some problems. But HD48 series definitely will make hard times for nVidia. Glad to see AMD/ATI is learning. And this time they did their job.
Guys can you please stop reposting images from reviews here. People can check the results on their own
Find me an 8800 Ultra for $199 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
jas, you saw the official reviews and said Shoot !! Dang !!" as did the rest of us. Please learn to accept the feeling :p:
And attempts to say the it is slower than the 8800GT fall flat when it ends up faster than the 8800GTX and the 8800 Ultra, unless you believe an 8800GT is faster than an 8800 Ultra.
Nvidia will have its day with the $229 (not $199) 9800GTX+. Wait for it ;)
Perkam
Funny, I didnt mention an Ultra...:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
As I see more and more reviews coming out my level of acceptance for what this card is, I have to admit, is dropping. Especially considering the 9800GTX is dropping to $199 with the 9800GTX+ coming it at $230.
**please note I put in bold the EXACT card I am talking about so one cannot misconstrue my post**
EDIT TO YOUR NINJA EDIT: When did I mention the 8800gt? Am I in bizarro world now??? :lol:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/724-...n-hd-4850.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
^^ Consistently my arse!!! ^^
It seems (finally) that ATI has improved the loss from AA..thats good news as they were get :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: slapped around in that area.
Regarding power and such...PERSONALLY (this is me only) I dont care about performance per watt, or the fact that a midrange card only uses 110W. I only care about performance and performance /dollar. Which WHEN/IF the 9800gtx comes down to $199, this will be a tough decision to make for some. And to pay an extra $20 for *supposed* better performance is not a bad thing TO ME.
Heres another one to add to the list:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-at...d--powercolor/
The 4850 beats an 8800 Ultra :) An Ultra is NOT $199 :) That, therefore, is impressive :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
Wouldn't you agree? :)
Perkam
I'm not really interested in either card but with that chart showing a 3870 as out-scoring a 9800GTX (when it's common knowledge that an 8800GT will trade blows with a 3870, mostly out-pacing it) i wouldn't put much stock in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I think we should really stick to comparing cards to the 9800GTX though, AFAIK the 88 Ultra has been EOL for a while (not sure about the GTX), and it had its high price tag for good reasons :rolleyes:
If only beating an ultra wasnt an obvious anomoly, or if it did it consistently, I would agree. But since it doesnt in the reviews I have read, I wont agree. Did you look at the link I provided? (PS- I cant see your ONE picture at work, that site is blocked by our spam filter)Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
And again, Im not sure what the Ultra has to do with anything here. Stop it already! :D
You are trying to compare a "turbocharged and NOS Civic to a Lambo" How about trying to compare the same cards I am (and frankly that it competes with) instead of trying to prove a point that nobody is trying to make. ;)
When a mouse kills a giant, people take notice.Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
Come on jas, you can do it. You can admit the 4850 scores are impressive, come on now :p:
Here, I'll quote Tech Report for you:
My point was, people are impressed, even the people who tested these cards with all of Nvidia's offerings. Admitting the achievements of the both companies is what differentiates fanboys from fans :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TechReport
Perkam
fact is that the 4850 beats the 8 and 9 series (not GX2) at high res gaming, and there isn't even a 4870 or 4870X2 out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
accept it, the crown is shifting over and over again and this time amd is going to have the crown for a longer time than with the 3870X2, right now it doesn'T have it but for the price you can easily build sli rigs which equal or beat the gtx 260 at a lower price :shrug:
So it loses in a few games here and there (seems to be the Rainbow Six ones) to the 9800GTX but trounces it with higher AA and res settings, and can even match up to the GTX260?
It's pretty clear that the card is ~9800GTX levels at lower settings but really separates itself with AA and AF and higher reses. Hence the 8800Ultra comparison, since the 8800Ultra and 9800GTX are relatively the same speed until you start cranking up res, AA, and AF then the Ultra shows why its still the better card.
And you might not care about performance/watt, that's great. I don't really either. But it sure as hell shows that the RV770 is much more efficient than the GTX280 which gives us lackluster performance for its gigantic GPU die size and power draw. Put two RV770s together and you match a GTX280 for 2/3 the price and less power draw. That's what I'm amazed at - the fact they fit 300 million more transistors, 2.5x ALU, 2.5x TMU's in 30ish% more die space. Now if only they'd do that at a 350mm^2 die size
A first look at the Radeon HD 4850@ TechReport's review :
http://techreport.com/articles.x/14967/1
My Conclusions :
HD 4850 > 9800GTX,8800GTX& Ultra .
HD 4870 ~ or > than GTX 260 and close to GTX 280 performance numbers .
Any 4850 Crossfire reviews yet? I kinda curious if it can beat the 9800GX2 or not.
I think I have done quite well in playing both sides to the middle personally. You continuous allusions to the fact that I am a fanboy are really bordering on trolling now. Please stop. I will be more than happy to offer my post history as proof to the contrary, as I have offered in the past. I suggest you dont cherry pick posts and look at the big picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Im not going to beat a dead horse anymore...my statements are in my posts. If you choose to ignore or dismiss them, thats simply not my problem. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
You should read some more reviews...I only mentioned 9800gtx guys! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Yes, no doubt its great they can jam all that crap in there, get solid performance, and only have 110W power draw...Yippee! Again, performance /dollar is my concern. And yes, it does a good job at that as well, especially now since there is nothing in that segment to compete (until the price drops on the 9800gtx and 9800gtx+ comes out). Then we have what we all wanted...COMPETITITON! :)
Ok I can see this will turn into another pissing contest for no reason..(as soon as someone, ANYONE mentions the other brand in brand X's thread). So, my apologies. :cool:
EDIT:Excellent point. I do my best not to speak in such absolutes. Especially when people base it off of ONE review, or ONE screenshot (that I cant see). Also consider I posted up a review that backs up my points, and Kai Robinson's link does so as well. My thoughts have been a compilation of several reviews I saw posted on this site. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
Not taking any sides here but no wonder some people get a little passionate now and then, comments like "accept it, the crown is shifting over and over again" and "HD 4870 ~ or > than GTX 260 and close to GTX 280 performance numbers" is just going to get people worked up, it's one card, it's only been out a few days and people are already calling winners. All the 4870 'conclusions' will have the same effect, as far as i know there's actually nothing remotely concrete been seen of it so far :shrug:
Or maybe this is what people are trying to do :rofl:
QFT!Quote:
Originally Posted by v_rr
Plus many of us don't like nVidia boards and are forced to use Cross Fire by default. All 3 of my Computers have Radeons and the next one more than likely will as well. If their drivers sucked, that wouldn't be the case.
Well now that we know how well the 4850 performs, we can assume the 4870 will perform 20% better [1 review backs this up]. So do we still think the 4870x2 is still on target performance wise? There hasn't been a lot of info on this card and companies normally release their top tier products first if given the option to do so...
looking at the numbers the HD4850 is faster than the 9800gtx in most games but still not in crysis:(. however i would agree with people that say it is a better buy than the 9800gtx and it should be a tiny bit faster then the 9800gtx+ save the games it is lower in (the 9800gtx+ will have a noticeable lead in crysis).
however what is the most impressive about this card is how well it can handle higher resolutions and how little of a hit it takes with AA enabled. however once more games take advantage of the shadder power available the card will come crashing down as far as AA performance goes. it performs well now due to it's multitude of shadders that are not being used by the game to render textures so it can use them for AA. once you use those up then AA performance will take the same hit the 2900's and 3800's saw. but in today's games it is impressive.
for the price this card will be extremely attractive and will be the best card in the price range. however this is not a GTX 260 competitor, some people seem to think that this card is that fast. it's not. and i doubt the 4870 will beat the GTX 260 as well.
and yes Crossfire is fast in select games but please let us stop hearing about how much better it is than the GTX 280. you can not compare dual GPU results with that of single gpu.
however impressive card!
It kicks very much ass, and it's on sale in some places in the USA for $189.
Dropping 9800GTX to $200 won't make it for NVidia. They need to drop it to at most $170.
And for the GTX+, a 50MHz bump in clocks won't give the card the push needed to compete with 4850 at high resolutions with high AA and AF; at those conditions the card is very bandwidth-limited anyway, and I see no increase in memory clocks.
Techreport seems to rave about the card
wow. directX 10.1 ownage!Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
What is DX 10.1? :shrug: :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
I agree with what you have said and I'm still wondering why people don't apply that way of thinking when comparing the GTX280 to the 9800GX2.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
Not again please, but I lol'd at those results remembering BZ's screenshots with 38 FPS :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
They usedQuote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
Why? Someone said the drivers that comes with the card on the CD is Cat 8.7.. :shrug:Quote:
ATi Catalyst 8.6 (Radeon HD 4850)
Dunno if it's true though
CD is Cat 8.5 i believe. 8.6 was just released yesterday
How come no ATI can do AA in Bioshock ? whats so different about it when compaired to other unreal engine games ?
Looking at the results from other games, AA on an ATI would slaugher everything else if it worked.
ATI can do AA in all UE3 games since X1k series.
My thought was based upon:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuen4y
8.6 is being used yes, but 8.7 supposedly might come out in the next few weeks to include full support of the HD48xx cards. Seems like cat 8.6 runs them fine though. The CD drivers were 8.5 from what user reviews have been saying.
Nope . Catalyst 8.6 is, but early build :) .Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Early adopters here stated the CD is catlyst 8.5.
Catalyst 8.6 just came out according to the ATI website!
I forgot who said it but Cat 8.7 is supposed to be the one to fully engage PowerPlay on the 4800's hence at idle they're only dropping 125MHz core clock when they should be going lower IIRC.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3338
anandtech just put theirs up
shader utilized rendering of direct X 10.1?....Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
newegg has them for sale now, all $199
Considering thats launch price wouldn't be surprised to see it down the 179.99 in a few weeks.
What I was getting at is there are currently no DX10.1 games out if AC is patched of course, which that article makes no mention of. Which makes the post I quoted (you)...well, confusing at minimum, but false for all intents and purposes until someone can find out if the AC game benched in that review is patched or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
If it isnt patched, I would say that review is garbage and intentionally or not, shows a bias in that game as we all know DX10.1 runs quicker than DX10, and that site SHOULD know that, or at least make a mention of it (if I missed it I apologize).
NOT AC PLOT AGAIN :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
(i'm not mad @ you nor even anyone, I just don't want newer posts to talk about this, ok? beating dead horses is not fun, unless they are alive)
WTF are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro
I just mentioned the facts. No conspiracy (Im not Jakko :rolleyes: :rofl:). We all saw it ran faster in DX10.1. If thats how they benched, its flawed. Dont try to extrapolate more out of it please. ;)
EDIT: I dont want to rehash either, but their testing methodology is now coming into question b/c it isnt clear on what they used. You are making into something it never was.
Don't say Jakko's name, I don't want him to post anything about it again, I sure remember your statements and mines about that BS, let just stop it ok?Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
I would like to know if AC was patched or not, since I don't know it, I'll wait for a newer review that uses patch/unpatched etc etc etc...
When are the HD4870s due to launch anyways? Is it June 25? The way things are looking... I wouldn't be surprised if they end up putting the GTX 260s to shame.
First week of July.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightning_Rider
Perkam
what is the clock difference between the 4850/4870??
I don't think that is clear to anyone now alive.Quote:
what is the clock difference between the 4850/4870??
I like the anandtech review. Very well written.
Its translated so its hard to say. I just assumed 10.1 because of the way 10.1 renders, it can utilize the shader architecture in the ATI card more effectively and thus putting it only 3 frames behind a 280gtx with 16aa/4af on at 1280...which seems no small feat, even at 1650 rez it keeps within a few frames, and leaves the 9800gtx behind. This seems like a prelude for things to come, as 10.1 and 11 directX will be adopted by new games.Quote:
Originally Posted by jas420221
20% on the core clock(750 vs 625Mhz) and double on the aggregate bandwidth,thanks to GDDR5(works @900Mhz).
625 vs 750Quote:
Originally Posted by GAR
http://www.extremetech.com/image_pop...ID=1017,00.asp :up:
Yeah, I just want some clarity. If it ISNT 10.1 then wow on the couple fps it adds to the results already!Quote:
Originally Posted by villa1n
And as far as 10.1 and especially DX11 you will be waiting quite a while before even a few games release with it. Expect 09 AT LEAST for 10.1 games to BEGIN to saturate the market, and DX11....why are we talking about that again? Thats like a 2010 release (with windows 7?) and games picking up on that surely isnt until 2011.
they seem a bit more cautious about the NDA than other sources who actually listed the TMUs and other specifications of the architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
And he needed a 12kW PSU for just 2 4850's? That's a little ridiculous. Excessive PSU hype much?
Yeah, that's a little odd. They claim issues on their 1000W, and then post total system load of 335 watts. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
There's a lot of information over at Extreme Tech regarding the new architecture. Apparently it isn't just a RV670 with more shaders, it's been redesigned a bit.
OMG! Who makes a 12kW PSU? Talk about overkill.Quote:
And he needed a 12kW PSU
more like alotQuote:
Originally Posted by ryboto
1.2 :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by gojirasan
I think that should be 1.2kWQuote:
Originally Posted by gojirasan
I triple-taked just to make sure Anand was claiming PSU problems with his 1Kw EliteXStream running GTX280 SLI.
I wasn't wrong.
As always, Anandtech gives the deepest and the best comments to the benchmark scores.
You're joking right? Anand is not bad at all, but it's FAR from being the best in something.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
A local distributor in Singapore said is arriving next week :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Lightning_Rider
http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/sh....php?t=2001178
Something is more than odd with Anandtech in their testing at times. They appear to have used the same PS for the Nvidia reviews as well and had shut down problems. Maybe the power supply is bad guys, use a different one?Quote:
Originally Posted by MotF Bane
But then again this is the same site that somehow blew up several 780G motherboards, and tried to rig an Opteron server to do game testing, then complained how poorly it performed. :shakes: Actually didn't they end up killing that server, as in totally dead?
I still don't understand why people compare two GPUs to one GPU and act like this is somehow an equal comparison.
Why don't you compare two GPUs to two GPUs?? Of course AMD will look better when you compare two to one. :rolleyes:
Does AMD have a solution to beat two 280GTX in SLI that I can buy any time soon?
Will two 4870 in crossfire beat two 280GTX in SLI? I seriously doubt it.
I agree Anandtech's testing has been horrible recently. There Nehalem preview was terrible and this 4850 review is terrible.Quote:
Originally Posted by eleeter
How can you say two 4850 in Xfire has the ultimate performance crown when you do not even consider two 280GTX in SLI??? :confused:
Why not compare two GPUs to two GPUs??
Not to mention that they show clearly that crossfire doesn't even work in half of the games!
Performance/watt/price is what matters, not the actual configuration of the hardware.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
Do you really need the output of a gtx 280? The 4870 will come fairly close to the 280, and for $300 less.
They would probably blow up the lab trying such a thing knowing them. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
Although GTX280x2 is going to pull some serious power from the wall, as will a 4870x2 times 2 in fact most likely even more.
People will pay to have the best of the best and since it will presumeably be the best of the best post 4870 launch, they can charge it and damn well should since they can. Its up to the consumer to purchase what he prefers. Biggest e-peen and several more FPS, or average e-peen and less FPS?
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleeter
Well two 4850s in crossfire draw more power at load than a single 280gtx.
I agree two for $400 US seems like a great deal but the review also shows that Xfire only works (at all!!) in about 50% of games, so I do not see why it is so great.
They should not say something has the greatest performance when they do not make fair comparison.
Clearly 3 GTX280 is the performance crown. Whether the cost is worth the performance gain is a totally different issue.
I have to admit, I dont get that performance /watt argument...unless you are some 5th level Vegan tree hugger. :ROTF: :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by eleeter
ya performance per watt for me is garbage. i care about:
1-single GPU performance
2-price
3-dual GPU performance
4-features (CUDA etc.)
5-heat output INTO the case
6-and finally power consumption
now the HD4850 looks like it meets 2,3 and 6 very well and 1 pretty well. still waiting on that hardwarecanucks review.
I doubt that...Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
I have seen one source claim that.
Because 2 HD4850s cost way less than just 1 280GTX. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
But Xfire doesn't work in 40-50% of games. :stick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightning_Rider
http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/9858/40795142xw0.png
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/1169/70335167hd9.png
http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/3875/66083850rz6.png
Xfire seems like its still a total crapshoot to me, just like it was when I got so annoyed with it back with 2x1950xtx.
Its great if you only like 1 or 2 games and are lucky enough that it will actually work on those games. Also Anand doesn't even show GTX280 in SLI.
^
There is a reason why almost all the articles are PREVIEWS. Duh
GTX280 is 238 watts max, 4850 is 110 watts max times 2 = 220 so they are very close, according to their specs.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
Considering the price, a single 4850 is within spitting distance of the 280! Day-um that is amazing to me. We are talking over 3 times the cost. Fix the crossfire bug and it will probably be the highest performer in Bioshock.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
The 4850 is available to buy everywhere just like the 280GTX, so this excuse is not valid.
Here are like 8 of them to buy now: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...scription=4850
He's right. And all of those games are very popular ones and in consecuence very well optimized. ATI driver team has put time into them. If you play non popular games, CF just don't work or it does with graphic problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
or they come with a healthy does of microstuddering.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
it is good to see AMD really making an effort to fix CF though. gosh i remember when the X850XT's ran in crossfire. what a joke those were.
Or here even two of them in Xfire is only 50% of the 280GTX performance even though the cost is 61% of the 280GTX.Quote:
Originally Posted by eleeter
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.
Hello Mister, does 3870 X2/CF scale?Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
http://www.techreport.com/r.x/radeon.../etqw-2560.gif
http://www.techreport.com/r.x/radeon...-1920-high.gif
You consistently ignore that the drivers are 1st release and not gone through 3 like the GTXes, and keep on threadcrapping.
2560 sometimes needs >512MB, we know that already. Geez.
Continue making fun of yourself then. :rofl: :rofl::rofl:
Macadamia have you ever used CF? Or you base your opinion in reviews?
They have improved a lot since the X850 days. A LOT. But it's still not enough. Nothing like single card.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
Sapphire Radeon HD 4850 In Crossfire
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/147...ire/index.html
The only people who look bad here is rude mouthbreathing fanboys like you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
I have consistently said I will buy whatever platform gives the best performance. I have owned more ATI and NVIDIA cards than you probably have had in your entire life.
I have actually used Crossfire setups before for day to day computing. (have you? How many crossfire setups have you owned??)
Unless it has changed dramatically since my last 2 x1950xtxs, then crossfire has artifacting, glitches and zero performance increase on some less common games. I owned several games that I had to disable one video card because Xfire was WORSE than a single x1950xtx.
If this has changed and Xfire is now universally compatible then great sign me up, but so far I only see more evidence that it still has problems.
From what I understand about SLI/crossfire, being universally compatible is impossible. They have to manually go in and make a profile for each game don't they? I doubt they will waste their time on any obscure titles.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
Wow asus is already offering a $30 MIR on newegg bringing the price down to $169.99 now THAT'S a sweet deal for this card. Hopefully these manufacturers will begin to offer this rebate in Canada soon. (I know many people have problems with rebates, but sometimes you just have to take a few minutes out of your day to hassle the processor with e-mails and phone calls for that rejected UPC)
Now, I'm looking into building a new PC for my girlfriend soon. Yes the HD4850 is SWEET, but she wants a top of the line rig. Me personally, I'm going to try my luck at selling my 8800GT and buying an HD4850, but for her I'll have to look in the $300-$400 segment. ATM the 9800GX2 still takes the $400 segment just tipping at $399.99 Two 4850s come close, and sometimes beat it, but from what I could gather it seems that the 9800GX2 still comes out on top MOST of the time. I don't have until august. And the projected price for the 4870s ($329) doubled becomes $650. That is a LOT of money. Unless the price drops soon, I think I'm going to have to grudgingly support Nvidia. I hate Nvidia with their fake 9 series, and their monopolistic behaviour. I'm sure ATI would do it if they were in the same place, but they're not. They also had a really bad run the last couple gens and they seem to have an A+ product right now, so I would love to support the company :up:
But, as it stands, sadly, but truly it seems the 9800GX2 still wins for $399. And it wouldn't be worth it to buy two 4850s for $349 if and when the price drops, because we wouldn't mind spending that extra $50 for the better performance. Is there any way I can support AMD and still be happy with my performance? :confused:
The nature of multigpu is some engines just aren't coded properly to take advantage of it. This is why some games show no gains or worse performance. Sure, if they tweak drivers and make profiles it can help but some games just will not benefit period.
Personally I'd say if SLI/Crossfire works very well in a game(s) you play alot then all the power to you. If you want consistent and predictable performance across the board stick with one gpu. It's that simple.
Anyone see any folding at home numbers, PPD on the new cards? I didn't see any in my travels today.
I specced 2 3870X2s to 16*10 widescreen users, and they were happy with it. I've played with a 9800GX2, I'm happy with it. I don't own either since I don't even game anymore, but jumping from one excuse to the other doesn't give you extra credence.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceevee
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.
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.