HD 4890 and GTX 275 Reviews

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talonman

*snip*

I would have thought the 1GB Atomic would have done better?

---

Vantage is Nvidia ballpark and it doesn't represent actual performance.

Here is actual performance prowess of a 1Ghz 4890 from the Bit Tech review:

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/235...1920atomic.jpg

The HD 4890 1Ghz is a 1920 AA/AF monster. Even if it loses to the 285 in 2560 res it ends up on top in 1920 res.

Perkam

I thought Vantage was only in Nvidia's ballpark in PhysX.

I didn't know Jane Nash, and New Calico were too. :)

Odd he selected that program to show off the GPU then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Another review that shows that when AA and AF are turned on at high resolutions, the 4890 OC beats the 285.

Perkam

---

I don't believe AF has any noticeable impact on performance with respect to nvidia based cards... AA is another story altogether though. BTW, if you're going to keep mentioning AF as a problem for nvidia based cards, could you at least provide some proof(IE 0xAA, 8-16xAF)?

I recently bought a xfx 4890 and the biggest difference between it and my 8800gts(G92)? AA. The GTS could run all the games I played @ 1920x1200 on high with max AF, but if enabled AA(beyond 2x) always slaughtered FPS. 4890 on the other hand, same settings, but this time 4-8xAA smooth as silk. :)

The only (quasi)negative I can think of is the fan on this beast, @ 40% it sounds like the GTS's fan @ ~90%. Still, at least it keeps the card cool.

As for IQ, both camps seem very competitive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Vantage is Nvidia ballpark and it doesn't represent actual performance.

Here is actual performance prowess of a 1Ghz 4890 from the Bit Tech review:

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/235...1920atomic.jpg

The HD 4890 1Ghz is a 1920 AA/AF monster. Even if it loses to the 285 in 2560 res it ends up on top in 1920 res.

Perkam

---

So if it is OCd to 1G it can match the stock 285... :shocked:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuroimaho

So if it is OCd to 1G it can match the stock 285... :shocked:

---

Yes. I've been trying to get that point across for a little while now :p:

Perkam

I would say it depends on what program we are talking about. :)

One more Vapor-X review

JH_man

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Yes. I've been trying to get that point across for a little while now :p:

Perkam

---

What the heck perkam? In that same graph, isn't the gtx 275 faster than the 4890, even if its just a smidge. You can't compare the overclock score to the regular score of a gtx 285. We are comparing an 4890 atomic edition which is considerably more expensive than the standard 4890. I can't get my powercolor 4890 stable entirely at 950mhz. Thats with 100% fan and a scythe 3000rpm 133cfm blowing 8C air on top.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...iewed/Reviews/
The above model has the vapor x cooler and they still get it to 970 only.

1000mhz is not easy at all to get on the 4890s.

Sure the gtx 285 is not the greatest value, but the gtx 275 is just a good a value as the 4890.

Whats with the 4890 promoting Perkam?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

What the heck perkam? In that same graph, isn't the gtx 275 faster than the 4890, even if its just a smidge.

---

Stock 4890 matches the GTX275. OCed it matches the GTX285. Not that hard to see.

Gigabyte GV-N275UD-896H GeForce GTX 275 Review

Quote:

---

With its 2-ounce copper PCB and 1200MHz memory, Gigabyte's GV-N275UD-896H is one of the first GeForce GTX 275 cards on the market to deviate from NVIDA's reference design

---

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...tx_275_review/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Yes. I've been trying to get that point across for a little while now :p:

Perkam

---

I see, then look another interesting one. OCd 260 tops the 4890 Link. :p:

Quote:

---

Whats with the 4890 promoting Perkam?

---

Been wondering about that as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randomizer

Stock 4890 matches the GTX275. OCed it matches the GTX285. Not that hard to see.

---

But this is the thing, he promoting the 4890 like its the greatest thing since slice bread. The thing is although the 4890 can beat a gtx 285 when overclocked, however, its obvious that a gtx 275 can do the same. However, the gtx275 always not even mentioned in his post and thus by default, the recommendation goes to the 4890. It should also be inherently obvious although he never mentions it, that a gtx 285 OC can likely beat a OC 4890.

And atleast in Canada, a highly overclocked 4890, cost as much as an overclocked gtx 285.

This is the closest thing I can find to a 1000mhz 4890(its a 950)
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product...lor-_-14131156
And its at its cheapest price. 330.

This is a OC gtx 285 its 333(with a rebate)
http://www.directcanada.com/products...anufacture=BFG

These super overclocked 4890 lose much of their value because they so closely priced to the gtx 285.

Additionally, he keeps on posting xbitlabs links, which writes very pro AMD reviews(which can be objectively proved), and uses a AA method(which no other site uses and they are criticized for it) which penalizes NV cards more.

Perkam a good guy, but lately, he been posting a little too much hd4890 stuff, some of it being misleading.

It also has to do with price. In Norway the 285 cost 50% more then the 4890 (stock vs stock). After what I can see of the hyper-x prices etc, it dont look to me the Atomic prices will be much higher then stock, since hyper-x is basicly at sale for stock prices, so Atomic will be a bit higher.

Nvidia si simply priceing the cards out of the ballpark, or to say it another way; AMD is most likely able to make the cards cheaper due to smaller chips (less transistors) etc.

There is simply no way I would get a 285 for 50% higher price then a 4890.

JH_man

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JH_man

It also has to do with price. In Norway the 285 cost 50% more then the 4890 (stock vs stock). After what I can see of the hyper-x prices etc, it dont look to me the Atomic prices will be much higher then stock, since hyper-x is basicly at sale for stock prices, so Atomic will be a bit higher.

Nvidia si simply priceing the cards out of the ballpark, or to say it another way; AMD is most likely able to make the cards cheaper due to smaller chips (less transistors) etc.

There is simply no way I would get a 285 for 50% higher price then a 4890.

JH_man

---

+1 the performance of the two cards are very close so all that extra money dont warrant the 285 at all.:down:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randomizer

Stock 4890 matches the GTX275. OCed it matches the GTX285. Not that hard to see.

---

Yes, and OC the 285 too, and bye bye 4890... :woot:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talonman

Yes, and OC the 285 too, and bye bye 4890... :woot:

---

Here the GTX285 is ~$150 more, I'd expect it to beat the 4890 :ROTF:

with the 285 overclcoked it wont beat out the 4890 by that much and that extra cash can almost buy ya anthor 4890 cf bye bye 285

In my country, HD 4890 price is around 5-10% cheaper than GTX 275, so the value still tops nVidia's offering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

But this is the thing, he promoting the 4890 like its the greatest thing since slice bread. The thing is although the 4890 can beat a gtx 285 when overclocked, however, its obvious that a gtx 275 can do the same. However, the gtx275 always not even mentioned in his post and thus by default, the recommendation goes to the 4890. It should also be inherently obvious although he never mentions it, that a gtx 285 OC can likely beat a OC 4890.

And atleast in Canada, a highly overclocked 4890, cost as much as an overclocked gtx 285.

This is the closest thing I can find to a 1000mhz 4890(its a 950)
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product...lor-_-14131156
And its at its cheapest price. 330.

This is a OC gtx 285 its 333(with a rebate)
http://www.directcanada.com/products...anufacture=BFG

These super overclocked 4890 lose much of their value because they so closely priced to the gtx 285.

Additionally, he keeps on posting xbitlabs links, which writes very pro AMD reviews(which can be objectively proved), and uses a AA method(which no other site uses and they are criticized for it) which penalizes NV cards more.

Perkam a good guy, but lately, he been posting a little too much hd4890 stuff, some of it being misleading.

---

my volt modded 275(780/1300)24/7really games about 2-3 fps over my volt modded 4890(1000/1180) 24/7.
its just that when people see a crappy game(most all new games IMHO) that has 1 -2 fps more on ethier card they call a winner.:rolleyes:

one game the 4890 smacks aruond the 275 is fm 03.... by lots too.::yepp:
as for price,easy the 4890 might be a better price to performance winner costing 20-30 u.s.d cheaper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randomizer

Here the GTX285 is ~$150 more, I'd expect it to beat the 4890 :ROTF:

---

Yes, but we aren't talking price, we are trying to pass off the 4890, as if it can run with a 285... Gasp!!

Bad info in my book. :yepp:

I bet an OC'ed 260 would give it a run for it's money...

It will in Jane Nash, and New Calico, Crysis, and I bet lots of others too...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talonman

In that review, the Vantage FPS are low...

Jane Nash = 29.6 FPS

New Calico = 29.75 FPS


A Single 260 gets:
427jmf ------------------ i7 920@ 4.24GHz ------- C @ 786/1600/1276 ----- P15,211
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=1068524

Jane Nash = 36.65 FPS

New Calico = 35.04 FPS


I would have thought the 1GB Atomic would have done better?

---

It would have to be a program that ATI does extra well on, to keep things close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kuroimaho

I see, then look another interesting one. OCd 260 tops the 4890

---

That's a 4870 m8, not 4890 ;)

Secondly, Bit Tech, Xbit, Anandtech and many others have shown the OCed 4890 @ 1Ghz beating the GTX 285 for $$ less. Heck, when Xbit Labs did their 4890 Crossfire review, they didn't even choose the 275, they went directly to the 285 SLI and the 4890 Xfire came to within 0.6% performance of 285 SLI. I give credit where its due gentlemen, and when I see not one, not two, not three but numerous review sites showing upwards of 20% increases in performance with the 1Ghz 4890, I call it like I see it ;)

Obviously performance goes up and down with each game application, but the 4890 and the 1Ghz models have been consistently strong at 1920 with high AA and AF, with the 285 getting ahead at 2560 resolution. The GTX 275 is a good card, so is the 285, but the 4890 1Ghz is right in the middle and is the best of both worlds at the moment.

@ Talonman:

This is XtremeSystems. ALL the ATI WRs being broken right now are with the 4890s, whereas all the Nvidia WRs are still being broken by the 295.

Every wonder why ;)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

That's a 4870 m8, not 4890 ;)

when Xbit Labs did their 4890 Crossfire review, they didn't even choose the 275, they went directly to the 285 SLI and the 4890 Xfire came to within 0.6% performance of 285 SLI.
Perkam

---

Any chance they OC'ed the 4890's, and ran the 285 bone stock too, like the other 'test'? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talonman

Any chance they OC'ed the 4890's, and ran the 285 bone stock too, like the other 'test'? ;)

---

A. I don't make big posts very often, so it'd be nice if you could respond to the ENTIRE post.

B. If they thought that the 275 OC was enough to match the 4890 OC, they would have chose it, but they didn't, they went straight to the 285.

Obviously, I'm not the only one doing the 285 vs 1Ghz 4890 scenario, its an entire group of reviewers thinking the same thing m8.

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

That's a 4870 m8, not 4890 ;)

Secondly, Bit Tech, Xbit, Anandtech and many others have shown the OCed 4890 @ 1Ghz beating the GTX 285 for $$ less. Heck, when Xbit Labs did their 4890 Crossfire review, they didn't even choose the 275, they went directly to the 285 SLI and the 4890 Xfire came to within 0.6% performance of 285 SLI. I give credit where its due gentlemen, and when I see not one, not two, not three but numerous review sites showing upwards of 20% increases in performance with the 1Ghz 4890, I call it like I see it ;)

Obviously performance goes up and down with each game application, but the 4890 and the 1Ghz models have been consistently strong at 1920 with high AA and AF, with the 285 getting ahead at 2560 resolution. The GTX 275 is a good card, so is the 285, but the 4890 1Ghz is right in the middle and is the best of both worlds at the moment.

@ Talonman:

This is XtremeSystems. ALL the ATI WRs being broken right now are with the 4890s, whereas all the Nvidia WRs are still being broken by the 295.

Every wonder why ;)

Perkam

---

Sorry...

I don't know what to say as to why they went directly to the stock clocked 285 SLI's. I am guessing they think it would look better if they could show any 4890 beating a more expensive 285 in any scinareo... Not sure.

As to the 295 holding all speed records, I totally agree with you, and that is why I have one myself.

I know you aren't the one setting up OC 4890 speed tests, running against a stock 285. :)

I just say run both at stock setting, and let the chips fall where they may.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Talonman

I just say run both at stock setting, and let the chips fall where they may.

---

I'm afraid that is YOUR outlook.

The stock 4890 and the OC 4890 is a SEPARATE card, and a SEPARATE product. If you had to manually OC a 4890 and then compare with a GTX 285 then you're right, but when it comes pre-OCed then the user does not have to manually OC it and thus 1Ghz is the STOCK speed of the card. Here:

Regular 4890: STOCK SPEEDS: 850/975
4890 OC: STOCK SPEEDS: 1,000/1,100

See my point. They are two different products, and the 4890 OC is a great product when compared to the 285 ;)

Perkam