ATi Radeon HD 4870 X2 Cat 9.x + GTX 295 review
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/h...itt_einleitung
ATi Catalyst 9.x Beta
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/h...alyst_9x_beta/
Translation
http://translate.google.com/translat...ng&sl=de&tl=en
http://translate.google.com/translat...2F&sl=de&tl=en
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/1457/61199577rj7.jpg
http://i43.tinypic.com/i768uw.jpg
http://i40.tinypic.com/2u74yud.jpg
WHOA. Nice Crysis improvements.
ATI's new year present, probably stops a lot of people from switching. And for $400, a better Crysis experience?
Wow the new drivers handle crysis really well with aa...and everyone was saying only nvidia could have drivers increase performance :)
Hope that carries down through the other cards aswell though.
This new card seem's to be a nice opponent however.
Wow people complained about the 4870x2 getting hot this thing is right along with it...
Interesting results so far. Also, those beta Cat drivers (9.X) do show some improvements from 8.12.
I kinda expected more from the GTX295, glad i already have my 4870X2 since 3 Months and looks like "she"´s performing better and better with new driver releases :)
Sick Crysis improvements
Looks like I'll be keepin my 4870X2 for a bit longer
I think we will see our cards steadily improve compared to Nvidia this quarter. Right now its looking like my 4870x2 will see service till Q1 '10 ;)
Nice review....
At the overall perfomance look at the superiority at res beyond 1680x1050 with aa of the 4870x2!
Yeah, I noticed that. Those betas are really doing a good job.Quote:
Originally Posted by leoy
Lol, before anyone else says it, Sideport?
I won't changing the X2 any time soon.
I would assume that if they enabled sideport it should be mentioned in Cat 9.1 release notes. However, IMO it looks like they are optimizing their drivers. But in all hard to say until they tell us.Quote:
Originally Posted by fornowagain
I was kidding, though they do look like a nice AA performance increase. You never know though, wouldn't put past them.
Now where can I get those beta's...
http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/8299/12454145sp5.jpg
Very nice driver improvements....now where can i get these mythical drivers? :D
that's what I'd like to know! I can not find them on the internets! :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
Driver versions
* Nvidia GeForce 181.20 (GTX 295) Nvidia GeForce 181.20 (GTX 295)
* Nvidia GeForce 180.48 Nvidia GeForce 180.48
* ATi Catalyst 9.x 8.561.3 Beta (4870 X2) ATi Catalyst 9.x 8.561.3 Beta (4870 X2)
* ATi Catalyst 8.11 ATi Catalyst 8:11
Aww... I wanted to see the difference on the 4870 too, and why not use the 8:12 ?
Because they made the benches w/ 8.11 already.
http://forums.extremeoverclocking.co....php?p=3313248
There you go - single 4870 results.
Im hoping 9.x drivers get better.
Great review!
Looks like the 9.x help quite a bit!
wonder how the gtx295 is at 1920x1200 bet crysis stil only just playable lol 30ish fps what a joke for £400 card lol
And with that, hundreds of Nvidbots cried out in agony.
Looks like the months and months of waiting was truly worth it.
Those Cat 9xx driver improvements seem almost unreal.. Up to a 46% boost in performance in some cases!
Nvidia isn't idle either. I'm sure they'll respond with some performance boosts of their own.
what was that I said about 9.1...... I can't remember....:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Carfax
(;) props to ATi for making me a truthful man :rofl:)
I recall you saying 9.1 would bring nice improvements. And I remember certain people absolutely RAGING at the mere possibility of the 4870X2 not being made absolutely worthless.Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
:up: my friend. You called it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
I saved it, and planned to use it in my signature in case your predictive abilities failed you :DQuote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
Seems like out there on ATI still have hidden aces on their sleeves... :)
Although i would like a comparison between them and 8.12...
C'mon, people - start benching. The 8.12 hotfix w/ SMP optimizations is available at AMD's site, already!
That 8.12 hotfix has been available since December. The Version number hasn't changed.
Looks like Nvidia is a bit ahead on lower settings, while AMD dominates the high res/aa/aniso where the GTX 295 runs out of memory. Out of the two I would pick the 4870X2, mainly because it seems more future proof (more memory, DX10.1, possibility of enabling side port, further away from theoretical performance so possibly more performance to be extracted with new drivers.)
And it's cheaper.
BTW, that ComputerBase.de loads super fast for me, I can't remember a faster site than that (I'm not kidding) and only Gmail may come close.
http://support.ati.com/ics/support/d...estionID=40671Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
8.12 hotfix with multithreading.
Is that the same driver that Computerbase.de used?
Probably not... I would imagine the one they used is an early beta of 9.1 which would not be the same as the 8.12 hotfix.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird
However the same problems using Vista64, 3000/4000 Series with 8GB+ RAM = STOP 43 code is still present.
I downloaded that driver and surprise surprise the executable was identical in size, down to the last byte, as the one i downloaded on christmas eve.
Install it and check driver version, it is an updated driver.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Robinson
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...Capture-21.jpg
EDIT: They only added some minor changes to it, so I wouldnt think that the package size would differ that much. I cant get it to install so I cant really say for definite.
Checked in Device Manager - its the same driver revision as mine, too.
Does not really matter, it is still a messed up install when you use more than 4GB of RAM anyways. Wish they would really fix that.
I am curious those. The crysis leap was pretty big(freakish actually).
Did they do an image comparison test, because that seems like a rather large leap for just a single driver revision. And its not like NV the only one who has done some shady stuff.
It strange to see how much it scales better than simply double the numbers of the 4870 1gb. It really doesn't have the memory advantage. And yet at some of the lower resolutions its score 44% percent better that simply just double the numbers of the 4870 1gb. Is that even possible? We all know in reality side port just a really fast communication between the chips so we basically hit the max potential of crossfire which is 100 percent scaling. How is it they are getting 44 percent more performance than that even?
I post it 2 days ago in Guru3D HIS 4870 review!
http://www.behardware.com/news/10055...-9-1-quad.html
Is it that hard for nvidia to beat down 4870 X2? poor nvidia
Try again...Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/7963/24833262ut7.jpg
73402 is 8.561.3-081217a and 73652 is 8.561.8-081216a.
so are you saying 73402 is this new 9.1 beta?
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Undercover is faster too, not 50-70% but that's probably because of my CPU.
ah ok good :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
Did yours install fine?Quote:
Originally Posted by fornowagain
Its the same number, I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
Yep, straight over 8.12Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX
I cant even get 8.12 to install I keep getting code 43 crap....Quote:
Originally Posted by fornowagain
vista64 + 8GB + 4870X2 = no go
Theoretical Benchmarks- Enough SaidQuote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
Anyone surprised thats just come out a NV boys mouth? :p: What about all those tests that were.. you know.. NOT synthetic benchmarks lol.
Again jasonelmore trolling an ATI thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonelmore
So your saying they only theoretically played those games and recorded those frame rates?Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonelmore
Incredible, the advances we've made in virtual reality simulation, simply incredible.
the fact that they didnt show 1900x1200 resolutions is a disgrace, thats where the gtx 295 really shines.
The review is so biased its ridiculous, im prolly still gonna buy a 4870x2 but that reviewer is a nub.
:confused: if the 4870x2 beats the 295 @ 1680x1050 then why would the 295 get any better at 1920x1200?Quote:
Originally Posted by Raadster
That's where Nvidia cards shine is at high res, and where their brute power really shows itself. Lesser cards struggle at those resoltuions. It's even more pronouced with true SLI. Not bad for 2x260 tweaked cores.
I can't wait to see what 2x285's do with the better design, and better cores and cooling.
Looks like nVidia has opened another can, and I like it. I like it alot.
Psssst, check the subject line again. I think you missed something...the part where it says "[Computer Base]ATi Radeon HD 4870 X2 Cat 9.x + GTX 295 review".Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
I don't think ATI makes a GTX295.
did you find it yet? (hint: its a sense that's not sight, sound, taste, touch, or smell)Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
he was referring to the snyde comment in the other thread that you definitely read.... lol
4870Х2 is a king yet...
That's actually a quite funny thing to say. They test 2560x1600 and they test 1680x1050. If the GTX295 falls behind the 4870X2 in both 1680x1050 and 2560x1600 it's quite possible it will beat it in 1920x1200 aswell. So excluding this resolution is not that big deal. Or is it maybe because the GTX295 becomes memory starved at 2560x1600 that you want the 1920x1200 (so it would look better)?Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
As far as I'm concerned the GTX295 performs well and as expected. It's better than 4870X2 in many benchmarks but is still beaten in some. At the same time it consumes a bit less energy. It's a great buy if you're into nVidia and also great for people that favour ATI/AMD since they dropped the prices on the 4870X2. But the can of whoppass you're referring to isn't that big, about 25ccs (and thats ccm's, not cci's).
Though they're not winning overall, ATI got some very respectable gains out of Crossfire with this 9.1 driver for Far Cry 2 and Crysis.
Like I said, better than 4870X2 in many benchmarks (often by small margin) and beaten in some (often by small margin).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sr7
Added another link for a separate 9.x Review from the same source but including single HD4870
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX
ChaosMinionX... why don't you remove 4GB from your system... install the drivers... them put the 4GB back on the system...?
:shrug:
It errors right after 8GB is readded to the system.Quote:
Originally Posted by aka_ronin
Wouldn't a card that shined at higher res and had so much brute power win more at 2560x1600? Do you just want the nvidia card to win so bad you just make this stuff up? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
It's really too bad Nvidia didn't get any miracles at 55nm. I was really hoping that G200b would be incredible. Looks like I might not even step up at all.
Unless the 295 really impresses with driver updates. But I don't see that happening, like the 9800GX2 before it, drivers will simply improve for a month or two
and then level out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T_Flight
the 4870x2 has been out for almost 5 months.... Nvidia's can of air is more like it. I want the GT300
Yeah, GTX 295 card has an aura of "welcome to yesterday" product, nothing major whatsoever. G200b cards are basically meh line up, they only exist for nVidia's bottomline improvement, OTOH, GT212 in late Q2, now we're talking. Can't wait for the next 8800 GT to unveil itself, that should be the real can of whoopa$$ stuff.
Wow, I hope those results are legit! :D
I agree with hardwarecanucks sentiments, that they should not test a beta driver that is not available to the public in real review. Especially in the competing products first review. This driver was meant to entirely take the sales out of the gtx 295 momentum which is pretty dirty because this is a publically not available driver(and thus not testable by the actual public).
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...review-19.html
HWC got this driver but did not use it in their review because they only test with publically available drivers for good reasons. Heck, the site in this topic is the only one that did this and I can't imagine NV paying off 30+ sites off.
Some reasons that I could think of personally is optimizations that degrade image quality in actual gameplay settings or increased instability.
This type of performance gains really needs an image quality test because the gains over a single 4870 1gb is significantly over 100% in some cases. Heck these type of gains with a driver of require their own review(like big bang) because they not only require a review of the performance gains but a review of the image quality and how those gains were obtained.
Remember Radeon 8500? It's Nvidia that started the practice of ruining the product launches with super-drivers. They got what they had coming to 'em.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
The driver is available to the public (42, the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything!) : http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...6&postcount=42
ChaosminionX - I have 8.12's and 8gb right now, no problem? Maybe try setting a fixed memory address so your system only "sees" 7.9gb or something?
What 8.12 version?Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
The premise that the driver that ATi sent to the GTX 295 reviewers isn't legit because of its beta status, simply doesn't hold a candle to me. nVidia did and always user Beta drivers accompanying official, WHQL drivers in their product reviews/previews, so why does it make unfair to ATi in using the best available driver to show their products in a better light ? Fact that the driver isn't widely available, that's simply because of different approach in Beta driver testing, in which ATi decided that the beta drivers would only be better debugged and tested by chosen people who knows what they're doing. If ATi has the audacity to offer the performance driver, do you think they will backtrack later on and not releasing a WHQL driver based on that Beta, while the expectation is already mounting because of the great results in the preview ? That would be suicidal in my book.
You're so funny :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
What's the goal of 295GTX december "paper launch"? To spoil 4870X2 Christmas sales! Which drivers this preview used? 180.87 and 180.88 beta . Were this drivers available? I don't think so but what i know is that this card was not available!
Between testing a non avaiblable card or a non avaiblable drivers which is the worse.
http://74.125.43.100/translate_c?hl=...7RwclkMsbkLK7g
End of story.Quote:
Nvidia unveiled its new high-end in mid-December. Une préannonce destinée à gêner AMD pour les ventes de Noël, ce qui est de bonne guerre. A preannounce to impede AMD for sales of Christmas, which is fair game. Nvidia en a cependant profité pour organiser des previews contrôlées de sa GeForce GTX 295 en offrant une exclusivité à une poignée de publications, en échange de quoi celles-ci acceptaient de tester la carte de la manière dont le service marketing de Nvidia l’avait décidé, c’est-à-dire en se concentrant autour de 5 jeux choisis par Nvidia, plus un jeu libre. Nvidia has however taken the opportunity to organize its previews controlled GeForce GTX 295 offering an exclusive to a handful of publications, in exchange for which they agreed to test the map of how the marketing department had decided Nvidia , ie focusing around 5 games chosen by Nvidia, plus a free game.
Pour rappel, Nvidia avait déjà essayé d’organiser des tests limités autour de ces 5 jeux entre la Radeon HD 4870 1 Go et la GeForce GTX 260+, sans grand succès. Remember, Nvidia had already tried to organize around limited testing of these 5 games between the Radeon HD 4870 1GB and GeForce GTX 260 +, with little success. Avec la promesse d’une exclusivité de nombreux confrères ont cette fois été plus compréhensifs, certains ayant ceci dit l’honnêteté de préciser les conditions du test en indiquant que l’information restait intéressante en attendant un test complet alors que d’autres, sans peur du ridicule, ont été jusqu’à expliquer avoir « choisi » ces jeux parce qu’ils sont les plus représentatifs du moment. With the promise of exclusivity many colleagues have now been more understanding, though some have the honesty to specify the conditions of the test, indicating that the information was interesting until a comprehensive test while others without fear of ridicule, were explained to have "chosen" these games because they are more representative of the moment.
Fair play is a joke in this industry :rolleyes:
He's talking about the 9.X Drivers being released to the public. The link above is to some 8.5 beta catsQuote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonelmore
Quote:
73402 is 8.561.3-081217a
Quote:
so are you saying 73402 is this new 9.1 beta?
???Quote:
Yes.
@AbelJemka, yeah, i catch your drift, beetween touting an unreleased product vs using beta driver in review, everything is a fair game in this industry, no need to cry foul when stuffs like that happen from BOTH side of IHVs.
long live ati
Hearing good results with beta, and the delay can mean a good thing. Means AMD really wants to get this right and taking longer than the usual release Cat 9.1 on the 10th day and hope it wasn't just the holiday vacation.
The driver is not available anywhere on the AMD site from what I can see and in that respect is not available to the public. Granted, someone with access to the AMD FTP seems to have gone and posted it on various file sharing sites but that is by no means "public".Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
As for the other comments regarding the beta nature of the drivers used it is as simple as this: the GTX 295 needed beta drivers for the preview or it wouldn't work. Simple as that.
On the other hand I had so many issues with the HD 4870 X2 drivers sent to us before the GTX 295 launch that I basically gave up trying to use them. They weren't even close to final and including them in a review would have been pointless at best. Calling them a "9.1" beta is like calling a Yugo a Ferrari. They are 8.12 drivers with a few bits and numerous bugs tacked on and nothing more.
so 48~70% gains in crysis is just a "bit"?Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Coupled with artifacts and crashes at 2560 x 1600 2xAA on Vista x64? I would say yes. Not to mention driver recovery when playing NFS: Undercover at 1920 x 1200 with any kind of AA turned on. IMO, any performance increases that come with stability issues are worth less than a steaming pile of crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
well they are beta drivers by fixing somethings they may have made other things worse :)
How much should these 9.1 Drivers help out Crossfire 4850's? Should it still be a large increase like the rest of the higher end ATI cards, since they are all based on the same GPU.