HD 4850 Previews

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philip_J_Fry

impress by what?? hheh .. hopefully the 4850 :)

---

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)

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

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)

---

WHat are you missing here?How about this:
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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

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)

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pisu87

Is the computing power of these cards going to be used for something outside games, you know, stuff like distributed computing, 3D rendering?

---

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

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)

---

Find me an 8800 Ultra for $199 :)

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Find me an 8800 Ultra for $199 :)

jas, you saw the official reviews and said ":banana::banana::banana::banana: !! Dang !!" as did the rest of us. Please learn to accept the feeling :p:

Perkam

---

Funny, I didnt mention an Ultra...:shrug:

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zerazax

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.

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.

---

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/724-...n-hd-4850.html

^^ 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/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

Funny, I didnt mention an Ultra...:shrug:

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.html

^^ 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.

---

The 4850 beats an 8800 Ultra :) An Ultra is NOT $199 :) That, therefore, is impressive :)

Wouldn't you agree? :)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

WHat are you missing here?How about this:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...s_GTX_w_AA.png

---

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.

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

The 4850 beats an 8800 Ultra :) An Ultra is NOT $199 :) That, therefore, is impressive :)

Wouldn't you agree? :)

Perkam

---

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)

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. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

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)

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.

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TechReport

What remains now is for us poor slobs in the press to get the products tested and to publish our findings as soon as we reasonably can. One wonders whether all of this fuss is worth it, especially on Nvidia's part. It really may not matter. The Radeon HD 4850 kicks more ass than a pair of donkeys in an MMA cage match.

---

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 :)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jas420221

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)

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. ;)

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

When a mouse kills a giant, people take notice.

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 :)

Perkam

---

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 generics_user

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.

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:

---

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. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zerazax

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

---

You should read some more reviews...I only mentioned 9800gtx guys! :up:

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:

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,

Or maybe this is what people are trying to do :rofl:

---

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. ;)

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v_rr

Yeah and you forgot the other 10 bugs that it creat with the new beta.
ATI also have some hot-fix through the year but that´s only it.

Problems with drivers are everywhere with everyone, and ATI and Nvidia drivers are both good. The Nvidia = Best and ATI = Bad drivers is ridiculous and everyone knows that.

I´am one advanced user and I never in my life installed drivers weekly. That´s insane. I remember Nvidia launched 2 drivers in one day to fix the other beta.
99% of users stick with monthly WHQL upgrade driver.
Drivers is a no go excuse to stay away from one HD 4850. It could be if we where talking about crossfire, but those problems are equal in SLI/Crossfire.

---

QFT!

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.