Printable View
Its the latest eplage called fanboyism, spreading even to the far reaches of the XS. What ever you do please do not try and have a constructive argument with the ones that are already infected or your common sense and logic will suffer a painful death.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Once you become one of them people will always :stick:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
what reality?
there are currently no users out there that own both, and can make an independent statement.
So i have to go after the data that is available. The available show that the powerconsumption is between 20-50W more then a 280gtx if you look around the web.
Can someone with HD4870 test the performance in Age of Conan? Also report what settings (resolution, AA, bloom etc) and zone (wild, ot), ati driver and hardware setup.
I'd relly appriciate it, and you can give yourself a hug ;p
While I can't go into every one of the details, I trust my own results since we are using the proper equipment and tests to properly determine power consumption of the full system (Line conditioner, UPM power meter, etc.). In addition, since I personally spent weeks determining the 3D application which would put the most constant load on the GPU, I can am confident in any numbers we produce.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Many tests you see are highly influenced by the CPU power consumption fluctuating up and down. The trick to properly determining power consumption is to first see which application will properly load the GPU while letting the CPU sit as idle as possible. Then make sure that the program can put an almost constant load on the GPU and its memory with minimal load times in order to get an even testing field.
Finally, the test MUST be run for AT LEAT 45 minutes in order to determine a peak power consumption number. This is due to the fact that many power meters have a sampling rate of about 250ms to 750ms which means that peaks in the power draw may not be logged. That is why you need to have a very long test under constant load; so the power meter can pick up the peaks in consumption even if it misses it the first, second, third and so on time.
I also have to say that it is extremely important to use a line conditioner for power consumption tests. As many of us know, input voltage can fluctuate quite a bit from a household power outlet. This voltage fluctuation can have a pretty large impact on efficiency numbers of power supplies which in turn would influence the numbers generated by any GPU power consumption test.
That is my story, that is how I tested and I am sticking behind my 70W difference statement 100%. :up:
HardOCP tested AoC with the 4870Quote:
Originally Posted by n3m3sis
Just curious, but which application did you find that best tests power consumption Sky?Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
When I tested the power consumption of my RV670, I used Prime95 Small FFT to find the load of CPU only. Afterwards I let it run on a single thread, then use the free core to run ATITool Artifact tool, which seems to put the highest temperatures on my video card. Its single threaded, maxes out the cpu and maxes out the gpu.
Then I subtract the difference between (Prime95(singlethread)+ATITool) and Prime95(dualthread) to get just the power consumption of just my gpu. I'm using a killwatt plugged into a Belkin PureAV Line Conditioner. Care to comment if this sounds like an accurate way to test just GPU consumption? I use SmallFFTs because system memory does not get loaded much
hornet you need to stop blindly questioning everything anyone says, SYMTL is a reviewer who is very trusted and clearly has a thorough methodology, his results from both the 280 and the 4870 show the 280 being 70w higher then you just need to accept itQuote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
i am not doubting your results, just the variety of results found on the web. If every result would be 50-70W higher then i say ok, but we have results raging from 20-70W. This is kinda hard to swallow.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Maybe your result is the absolut worse case, dependig on what load you used. Since this 2 architekture are quite different, different situations will give different results. E.g. I dare to say that a scene based on heavily texture usage, will produce more heat/power draw on a 280gtx then on a 4870 (80TMUs vs 40TMUs).
blind following = brainless = not my styleQuote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
even if hes trusted i have my doubts, as i have with everything. As long as there is such a hugh discrepancy i belive nothing, till i get the chance to test it myself, or far more data if available.
Agreed SKYMTL, i just can't understand people that insist HD 4870 has similar power consumption under load compared to GTX 280, i believe both ATi and nVidia don't pull TDP value for each respective product out of their CEO rear. HD 4870 TDP is 156w while GTX 280 TDP is 236w for God sake, and those are official numbers i believe. :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
i couldn't wait for the 4870x2 or even the 48701gb
i went out and bought two 4870's !
Should be more than enough to keep me going for awhile @ 1920 x 1200 yeah?
People need to realise, what TDP is...Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
TDP is a value that is aimed at OEMs to give them a guide value what the cooling solution should be able to disipate under certain conditions. This conditions vary depending on the manufacturer specifications. For intel and amd you can check this specifications, for ati and NV not.
Its quite possible that NV was more conservative with there TDP this time then ATI. Just look at Intel vs Amd TDP, and how they have turned.
Also noone doubts that the 280gtx needs more then a 4870, but the question is how much more.
Well, the issue is that we have no way to accurately judge full system load BEFORE the PSU. When we use a Kill A Watt or any other power meter the problem is that you also have to take the efficiency factor of the PSU into consideration. This can be a HUGE factor. Here are a few examples:Quote:
Originally Posted by Miwo
If you are drawing 700W from the wall with a PSU which has 85% efficiency at a certain load, that means that the system is actaully drawing 595W from the PSU.
On the other hand....
If you are drawing 700W from the wall with a PSU which has 80% efficiency at a certain load, that means the system is drawing 560W from the PSU.
So that change of a mere 5% in efficiency resulted in a 35W difference in actual system power consumption. See what I am saying? It is next to impossible to determine how much power is being drawn by JUST the GPU. Even a clamp meter won't work due due to it not being able to judge the draw from the PCI-E slot.
For my GPU tests I use the following running on a loop for 1-2 hours:
3DMark06 Batch Size Test @ highest triangle count
2X AA
16X AF
Highest resolution (2650 x 1600 in my case)
If you have a smaller monitor, increase AA as needed as long as FPS stay above 25.
This ensures minimal CPU overhead while stressing both GPU core and memory. It also scales well with SLI or CF which ATITool DOES NOT do.
And you care to read WHAT I POSTED? You replied to my statement that 2x GTX 280s in SLI draws close to 100W more than 2x HD4870s in CF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
'Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129
When 2x GTX 280s in SLI draws close to 100W more than 2x HD4870s under load, it's called "close."
Originally Posted by Hornet331
that is something what i find quite missleading by many review, wehn you check different review the difference between the 280gtx and the 4870 range from 20W to 50W.
Quite contrary, isn't it?
Eh, care to read my post?
Has anyone seen a comparison of a single 4870 to 2x 3870 CF on X38-X48 board? Would like to see one.
Just take the results for a 3870X2, they're not that dissimilar, and should give you a reasonable idea of how they stack up against each other.
Sometimes it seems like nearly all threads on this board (save the xmods section) are lost by page 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Can anyone speak to retail sightings of this board? I've checked two best buys and a Microcenter in MN and have had no luck....
Actually, worst case would be the test I run PLUS something like Orthos Burn (CPU + Ram) test running in the background. My test is an almost exclusively 3D worst case test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Then again, testing worst case scenarios is the best thing to do IMO. Every program out there has a different power consumption envelope so knowing the worst case means you know if the PSU you are using is enough. If we didn't publish worst case figures you may have someone whose PSU would be fine in one application and then load up something like WiC only to have their system crash due to the increased GPU load in that game nailing their PSU in the gonads.
I actually sighted one at a store here in Montreal today. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Truckchase!
I just want one 4870. Should be great for me at 1680x1050. Here is to hope that prices will fall closer to the 250 range.
4870x2 2x1GB for me. Waiting sucks though...
Thanks :) glad you liked it, we know minimum FPS are as important as average if not more.Quote:
Originally Posted by roadie
Yes TDP from AMD is somehow misleading if you check HD 4870 at idle or load, consumes more thatn GTX 260 which has a higher rated TDP.
Thank you for the detailed explanation SKY. That is the issue with reviews, people compare and reference them but seem to always forget that each review often use different hardware/drivers and even when all is equal, testing procedures can greatly differ. Your way of testing load seems to be a consistent and fairly accurate way all things considered. My personal thoughts on other some other reviewers load tests, showing smalls spreads on the 4870/280, is they simply did a short load test ( some mention running 1 of the 3D06 tests such as Canyon ) which like you said isn't enough to get a proper reading even when using a good test application.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
I still personally think that the TDP on the GT200 cards is somewhat conservative currently based on most results I've seen, eg most games won't fully leverage the architecture resulting in lower power usage, where the R770s get a better workout. Regardless the 4870 will still use less power, theres no 2 ways about it.
E8500@ 500x8
Biostar TPower I45
Team Xtreem PC2-6400 3-3-3-8 4x1gb@ 1200mhz Cl5
Sapphire HD4870 Crossfired
BFG Ageia Physx
WD Raptor X
Windows Vista Ultimate 64bit
Dont see any bottleneck here..
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/l...ntitled-11.jpg
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/l.../Untitled2.jpg
3dmark06 default
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/l...Untitled-8.jpg
3dmark06 1920x1200
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/l...Untitled-9.jpg
3dmark06 1920x1200 8AA 16AF
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/l...ntitled-10.jpg
wow great scores with AA and AF which is what counts. Everyone plays games with Filters applied.
not everyone, personally i cant stand playing games at anything less then 50fpsQuote:
Originally Posted by vengance_01
You have to find something equilibrate: you may have 50FPS, but the IQ is crap. Jaggies everywhere is sometimes worse than low FPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawne32
I'm pretty sure people can make their own determination as to what they like.
+1 :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
What is MSRP? :S
Manufacturer's Suggested Retail PriceQuote:
Originally Posted by Isaac MM
Its subjective really, choppiness makes games less enjoyable to me than some jaggies.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
But if the game is already running significantly over 60fps and sustaining it for the most part, i'll take 2x AA on a 21.6 Screen @ 1680x1050 instead of none.
I barely see a difference going to 4x AA and wouldn't take the hit from going higher.
For me its a function of pixel density, for 20" (1680x1050) screens 2xAA is plenty, 22" (1680x1050) screen 2-4x AA is good enough, 24" (1920x1200) screens and their pixel density makes 2x about all i want and finally 30" screens more or less don't need any (I haven't used a 30" screen but its sharper per square inch so ...).
levish i dont understand, you go larger in screen with the same pixel quantity, so the pixels are larger and more obvious, unless you move the screen farther away and its all the same
i have a 26" at 1920x1200 and a classic 2900xt and only play at max res. i generally get 40-60 (vsync enabled) and for most games dont feel the need for any AA. if for some reason i cant quite handle that res, its probably my cpu that limits me so i reduce a few things that arnt that important to me, like shadows, until it is playable. i was able to play crysis at med/high at 1920x1200 and get about 15-40fps
Is there any detailed review out there comparing GTX 280 in SLI and HD 4870 in CF? The review made my TweakTownhad no details at all, no AA/AF comparison and while the GTXs were overclocked the Radeons were at stock.
i come from a long line of jaggies, im used to it :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
i focus on dodging bullets more than counting jaggies. come on, a real gaming enthusiast doesn't nit-pick about eye candy.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Your bullets and weapons hit just as hard, regardless of IQ :up: Its all subjective.
On the topic of 4870CF scores, seeing only E5800 gives me high hopes for the 4870X2. There are rumors that these cards are doing 7000 currently... and that was probably not even on a highly clocked system like the one posted above. If those numbers are true then the X2 scales extremely well, at least in Vantage.
I like my headshots pretty :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by biohead
http://www.scan.co.uk/Index.aspx?NT=1-0-94-549-0
So far it looks like only 512MB cards are available except for the 1GB ASUS 4850.
4870 starts at £190, 4850 stars at £130.
The more 133tist stores are charging significantly more (as usual): http://www.overclockers.co.uk/produc...d=56&subid=939
We have them for £113 (4850) & £185 (4870) http://www.cyberpowersystem.co.uk/sy...crossfire_pro/ as part of a system build.
Pixmania have them in stock and cheap
HD4850 £111
http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/1304...12-mb-gdd.html
HD4870 £185
http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/1344...12-mo-gdd.html
So I have never bought ATI before; Who generally makes a more reliable card and stands behind their warranty?
Nvidia = EVGA, BFG, and a few othersQuote:
Originally Posted by DefStar
ATI = Sapphire, HIS, Diamond... etc
The only real standout on either side is EVGA, due to a good warranty, and their stepup program. I wish a company on the ATI side would offer something similar.
I have had great experience with HIS in the past but I hear visiontek has a lifetime warranty for its cards. Generally sapphire is the budget group of cards but I have friends who have found them reliable and overclockableQuote:
Originally Posted by DefStar
ha;
4xAA, even at 19x12 in my opinion...and at 19x12 on 20.something" viewable crt, dot pitch is quite 'dense'.
4xAA is optimal and minimum for me.
4xAA is suitable for 1280x1024 also...(@20.something")
im very jaggie sensitive :D
8xAA doesnt seem to do anything to my eyes, not even at 1280x1024 (which should make jags more noticeable vs higher res)
and 2xAA is better than none. :)
i hate jaggies, but i suppose jaggies have rights too:p:
where's my 4870X2 ?
actually 19x12 with 2xAA is pretty good with my screen:)...and the only way to match this quality wood be with an l220x i reckon
this aussie e-tailer has a 4870 1gb listed,no price though but dated for JULY 8TH!
http://www.austin.net.au/ProductList...G/Default.aspx
To actually focus on dodging bullets first you have to see who is shooting them. If he's too far, you won't see a $hit without AA. Anyway jaggies destroy my eyes. 2xAA absolute minimum at all resolutions, but I can't live without 4xAA at 1280x1024.Quote:
Originally Posted by biohead
So do you think 2xAA or 4xAA is enough for 1920x1200? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
2xAA minimum, 4xAA optimal (if the card can handle it and the game is not a slideshow of course :p:)
Thanks, good to hear that, hopefully HD4870 CF will solve the problem. :D;)Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Damn what a dillema, the price of these 4870's is so good, i don't know if i get a pair of those or a GTX 280, monster performance with lots of trouble or nice performance with no troubles? that's the question.
I dug a little deeper and they do have a price - $379.50AU!!! which is only about $30-$40 more than the 512mb version....here I was thinking about getting a pair of the 512mb versions tomorrow, now I might wait for this....Quote:
Originally Posted by disruptfam
they also have listed the 4870x2 for August no price though
http://www.austin.net.au/ProductList...G/Default.aspx
2x1gig 4870cf (or 4850's cf) vs 1g 4870X2 :hrhr:
nice find!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangals
i'ma wait for the 1gb version,then.
what would win>??Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
well; according to my reading of all you prognosticators 2x 4870 1gig cf will win :lol:
in 3d mark benches anyway,
but i think 4870X2 will be the most cost effective multigpu option, particularly for those without a proper crossfire mobo :D
and 2x 4850 1gig cards in cf could be good too.
i seem to run out of vram in M2TW, with sporadic subsequent fps drops, and cpu is not maxed out at any point :fact:
although 4870x2 may prompt me to upgrade my cpu, as ive noticed cpu use can go as high as 90%(rarely however), on one of the 2 cores anyway.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvi...-ati,5764.html
also, physx seems to be in ati's hand (as per another thread)
so HIS & Sapphire are the reliable brands? been sooo long since i owned an ATI card (probably the last one was still AGP). how about GeCube?Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
hmm i am waiting for R700 .. maybe it wont just be 4870 CF ... maybe theres more (better way of making the 2 chips working together perhaps?) ... then ill make my decision
My gosh, Techreport is my favorite one so far. Everything about their review is so awesome, and makes all others almost "redundant"!
Yeah I noticed TechReport has really stepped it up recently. Their review had architecture coverage as well as real in-game tests along with synthetic benchmarks and image quality along with AA and AF tests. Very impressed
QFT, i find it quite funny that people don't care about them or vsync. Why spend all that money on hardware? Why bash consoles all the time if you have a tearing and/or jaggies on your PC? :shrug: I just discovered that if a game doesn't have the option to enable Vsync the CCC won't let you do it in Vista :down: That and the issues with the X-Fi, i think i'm going back to XP.Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
QFTQuote:
Originally Posted by biohead
If I'm playing single player, then eye candy is lovely. You can push all the settings as high as you want and enjoy the look of the game. In multiplayer, most competitive players, will have configs to reduce everything as much as possible. Not just for the FPS but also to see clearer.
AA is certainly off.
Guru3D: AMD Radeon HD 4870
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon...-review--asus/
Overclockersclub: PowerColor HD 4870 Review
http://www.overclockersclub.com/revi...rcolor_hd4870/
Wow!, their HD4780 and GX280 use more or less the same blue color, very handy...:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
I can't seem to find Guru3D's methodology. I see Mass Effect and GRID tested but I don't see HOW they were tested (runthrough? Timedemo? Which level? Etc.). Can someone provide me with a link? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
SKYMTL did you try overclocking the hd4870? you're the only reviewer so far i think, to have proper cooling on this card (btw when checked which coolers fit, did u happen to check the temp difference compared to the arctic cooling?)/
Did I hear overclocking :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kuden
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=192411
The issue is not the core nor the memory. It is Catalyst.Quote:
Originally Posted by kuden
I got to the max Catalyst allows RIGHT HERE
790 / 4400
I am waiting to hear back from ATI right now since they are supposed to send me an updated Catalyst driver to unlock speeds to 1000Mhz / 5400Mhz.
As for temp difference between the Thermalright and the AC...I have no idea.
Nice review..Quote:
Originally Posted by onethreehill
HD4870 = GTX280..
Nvidia muss more price cut..:down:
Nah I'd say the 4870x2 will win, if it indeed is designed to act as an mcm, then it won't need xfire support in games and thus the x2 will win over all, not to mention there shouldn't be any micro-stuttering, so even if the x2 gets less fps it still would hold more valueQuote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
My god. If 4870 X2 hits the market, I just might be on board. AMD did pretty good this round.
Pretty good? The 4870 nearly matches the gtx 280, I'd say they did short of amazing, not to mention their yields are better and the r7xx can do ray tracing, so pretty good would actually be a major understatement, especially considering they were behind in the race by a considerable margin (especially with aa enabled)
GTX 280 can do ray tracing also.
Haha. Yeah, I guess I'm the king of understatement.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
To possibly speculate though, are the rumors still going around about the 4870X2 using shared memory, instead of using two separate frame buffers?
If that is true, could we not possibly be looking at the end of some of the software/driver/micro-stuttering issues brought on in dual card setups?
Due to the 4870x2 having a bridge chip that provies 160 GB/s of bandwidth, it is entirely possible, which likely means r700 will act as an mcm if that is the case (now I did not say will be an mcm, act as an mcm, probably too much concentrated heat if it was an mcm). But there's no guarantees yet, but due to the huge delay between the 4870 and 4870x2, likely something big is changed in the r700 from the r680
Link? I've heard nothing about that, and as you can tell I spend A LOT of time in the news forumQuote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
ATI 9700 with 5 years can do ray-tracing....
AliG - 160GB/sec? Sorry but you've been on the funny sauce again. It's a 48 lane PCIe 2.0 Bridge chip from either PLX or IDT (more than likely PLX). Thats 16 lanes for each GPU, and 16 lanes for the bus connection, which means at most, 32GB/sec bandwidth between GPU's.
dont forget "magic" crossfire x sideport. :yepp: :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
Anyone hear about 4870's refusing to post? My new card bit the dust this morning during a reboot after working fine for the last 24 hours. There's another guy over in the general hardware forum who has the same problem on 2 different 4870's.
hey guys, UPS says my 4870's are out for delivery so i will be doing my own mini review of crossfire scaling and such and ill post it up sometime tommorrow night :) testbed will be the system in my sig
hmm maybe needs further investigation.Quote:
Originally Posted by halo112358
Did you oc your card already?
Also can you see any physical damage?
that's what the ATI representative said, don't shoot the messenger. I'll dig up the link. Only thing I don't get is why does ati need a fancy bridge chip when the 9800gx2 clearly did fine without one, all it does is add power consumption.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
And you said I'm on the funny sauce again, when was the first time?:rolleyes:
No physical damage, nothing different than when I plugged the card in in the first place. Of course I OC'd it, duh. No voltage bumps, nothing out of the ordinary except routine catalyst overdrive changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1319753
2x4870 real life comparison against GTX 280 from an owner. Nicely written IMO.
X2 cards aren't regular corssfire, GX2 aren't crossfire, crossfire works in a different way SLI does. Does this help out? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
By OC you mean thru BIOS update with modded frequencies or thru ati catalyst?Quote:
Originally Posted by halo112358
What I can't believe is the power consumption of the 4870, especially in CF. It's just nuts.
I'm serious, I believe the only reason why they have the bridge chip is to increase the bandwidth between the two gpus for a faster interconnection as they've claimed no micro-stuttering with both the 3870x2 and 4870x2. Of course later on they admitted the micro-stuttering on the 3870x2 was horrible because the bridge chip didn't provide enough bandwidth (8 GB/s) and the extra latency made it worse than regular xfire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
That was interesting info for me:Quote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
Anyone to confirm this from personal experience?Quote:
The GTX 200 series power saving features do NOT work on an Intel platform. That’s right. I thought I was the odd one out when I saw countless other websites posting about the down-clocks and down-voltages, whereby the GPU settles at 300Mhz Memory to 100Mhz etc when no 3D app is running. What some of them failed to state was that they only achieved this on an Nvidia platform; while ALL the reviews out there failed to warn consumers that this does NOT work on an Intel platform at all. The writeups out there further confuse you by stating the downclocks are achieved in drivers, while only the full hybrid power features, i.e., shutting down the GPU and offloads 2D to the onboard IGP require an Nvidia platform. They just don’t know what they are talking about.
This was confirmed after a 30 minute phone conversation with an XFX engineer, the manufacturer of my GTX 280.
What this translates to is that all the idle power consumption graphs you saw on reviews over the GTX 200 series do NOT apply to an Intel platform. Again, out of the 15 odd reviews out there, not one, I repeat, NOT A SINGLE ONE, bothered to state this clearly. Whats the user footprint in the real world with an Nvidia platform? 0.1% of the PC population?
The GPU temp does drop back to the 50s while idling in Windows, but the clocks do not scale back, which leads me to believe there is no real power savings.
Well, I know my GTX 280 downclocks fine on an X38 and P35 chipset. The power consumption figures I have seen follow the trend of it working when at idle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
If you mean clocking down when not in 3D,that works just fine for me on an Intel chipset.
Guess it works.Quote:
Edit:
There's been more than 1 response saying the downclock works. I stand corrected and it must have been due solely to my copy of the XFX card. The engineer I spoke to may not be in a very experienced position with the GTX 280 to identify whether its the card or the series at fault.
That guy sounds like an AMD/ATI infomercial though! It almost sounds too good to be true, but I'm rooting for the underdog here... hope it is true
what an opportunity... he can discredit intel and nv in one blow, and forgot to mention that atis own powersaving is not working right now. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by m0da
Actually, it is in some cases and will soon be working with ALL cards. Only some of the first batch of cards had it disabled which should be fixed in a future driver release. Other cards had it working (most notably the MSI cards) without a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
"Sorry for the wall of text, I hope you found the above a little more useful than a bunch of graphs from some teenage “me-too” review sites."Quote:
Originally Posted by AriciU
What bad have hardware sites ever done to this guy?? :down:
I stopped reading when he was attacking reviewers credibility and then proceeded to use his "trusty right foot" for temperature testing. :)
That, along with many other flaws/contradictions.
What flaws/contradictions did you observe?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonucci
Sorry, Im not going through that again. I would have to re-read, taking notes :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
would 850w psu be enough for 4870 1b cf?
Name brand, yes..... assuming the load of the rest of your system is "average".Quote:
Originally Posted by disruptfam