Tom's Hardware: ATI Radeon HD 4770 In CrossFire: Unbeatable At $220

[Smartidiot89]

the fact of the matter is anytime a single gpu from a CF setup would have dropped below ~15fps on its own the game starts to see major stutter. Personally I'm not sure if its micro stutter or not but it is a result of pushing the card too far. (frame data too large, so and so)

this is why 4770 CF ≠ 4890 among other reasons.

As CF gets better we may see that minimum frame rate of >15 fps per gpu get lower but i dont think this will happen until GPU arch evolves and we begin to see "dual core" gpus

Will we ever see "Dual-Core" Gpus?

I made a thread about it on another forum and I became a laughstock since GPUs have been "multi-core" forever, RV770 = 800 Shader Processors.

Or am I very-very off here?

[Firestrider]

Will we ever see "Dual-Core" Gpus?

I made a thread about it on another forum and I became a laughstock since GPUs have been "multi-core" forever, RV770 = 800 Shader Processors.

Or am I very-very off here?

Two GPUs integrated on the same chip is basically what the RV670->RV770 transisiton was, from 320 to 800 stream processors.

We may see MCM GPUs which have two chips on the same package connected via PCI-E, though.

[KoHaN69]

It makes more sense to get a 4890

Fixed.

[WhiteFireDragon]

Will we ever see "Dual-Core" Gpus?

there's already been a dual core gpu. the 7950x2 from the past, but that was a failure.

[tajoh111]

Fixed.

Huh I don't get it.

[Jamesrt2004]

there's already been a dual core gpu. the 7950x2 from the past, but that was a failure.

was that 2 chips in one die though? iirc it wasnt

-checked- Its dual PCB which isn't what he was getting at,

what the person meant is like intels C2Q in that it's 2 C2D chips "stuck" together in one die..

[Manicdan]

the industry has found its sweet spot between price, yield rates, and scalability. ATI wasnt about being the fastest, but the fastest per dollar. look back at the massive 2900xt which was pretty powerful compared to a 1900 series, but consumed way to much power, and probably had crappy yield rates. while making a C2D style chip is surly possible, im thinking they dont need it in their market.

however it would be sweet for them to make a duel 4870 and compare it to a 4870x2, given it will have 2 chips and share 1GB, vs having separated chips and needing to double the memory, i think we would love to see the performance and power differences. if they found out it was 10% faster and used 10% less energy, and was even able to fit on a pcb 2-3" shorter than an X2, id think they should try it out. the only question left would be, what number would they call it? a 4970 or a 4875 or something else?

[Donnie27]

the industry has found its sweet spot between price, yield rates, and scalability. ATI wasnt about being the fastest, but the fastest per dollar. look back at the massive 2900xt which was pretty powerful compared to a 1900 series, but consumed way to much power, and probably had crappy yield rates. while making a C2D style chip is surly possible, im thinking they dont need it in their market.

however it would be sweet for them to make a duel 4870 and compare it to a 4870x2, given it will have 2 chips and share 1GB, vs having separated chips and needing to double the memory, i think we would love to see the performance and power differences. if they found out it was 10% faster and used 10% less energy, and was even able to fit on a pcb 2-3" shorter than an X2, id think they should try it out. the only question left would be, what number would they call it? a 4970 or a 4875 or something else?

But then wouldn't they be forced to use more memory and a larger bit-width? Also even something like a MCM version of the 4770 would then need a CPU cooler, right, I'm not sure, just asking here? I think they would go back to the 9xxx's for the name like V9540 or something.

[Manicdan]

the 4870: 800 stream processors, 256 bit GDDR5 and 512MB (i think i have the specs right)
chip #1 has 1600 SPs, 512 bit of 1GB (this would be the duel chip combined)
chip #2 has 2x 800 SPs, 2x 256 bit of 1GB each (this would be the X2)

technical specs look the same with the exception of the difference in ram size. but in theory id think the first one would perform better since the 2 chips would talk to each other at much better speeds and lower latency (i guess) and would probably be more versatile since it wouldnt have to worry about xfire scalability, it would just be 100% more powerful in any situation, instead of up to 90% in alot.

[Donnie27]

the 4870: 800 stream processors, 256 bit GDDR5 and 512MB (i think i have the specs right)
chip #1 has 1600 SPs, 512 bit of 1GB (this would be the duel chip combined)
chip #2 has 2x 800 SPs, 2x 256 bit of 1GB each (this would be the X2)

technical specs look the same with the exception of the difference in ram size. but in theory id think the first one would perform better since the 2 chips would talk to each other at much better speeds and lower latency (i guess) and would probably be more versatile since it wouldnt have to worry about xfire scalability, it would just be 100% more powerful in any situation, instead of up to 90% in alot.

Makes sense to me, but like the guys above, I talked about MCM and adding another 256bit memory and got flamed and laughed at.

[Manicdan]

yeah, cpus and gpus are totally different, for all we know it may not be physically possible to have C2D type gpu

[ToTTenTranz]

The higher resolution tests with filters on show how much of a short-lived "price/performance king" this CF HD4770 system is.
Lack of RAM is a problem that just gets exponentially worse with time, and several developers have said that RAM amount will play an increasingly important role in upcoming games.

The lack of memory is pushing back these GPUs a lot, Unless it's a system to use with a 720p LCD TV/projector.
2*HD4770 1GB would make sense but then again, higher-density GDDR5 is very expensive (not to mention almost unexistent). It would make the whole bang-for-the-buck theme of this GPU a bit pointless.

The current ATI line-up is quite good as it is:
- $100: get the HD4770
- $150: get the HD4870 512MB
- $220: get the HD4890 1GB




If some retailer comes out with cheap (>$120) 1GB HD4770s, then Crossfiring them would be a good idea. But remember we would be already limiting our system's upgradeability by putting two graphics cards in it right from the start.

[Donnie27]

yeah, cpus and gpus are totally different, for all we know it may not be physically possible to have C2D type gpu

But nothing wrong with dreaming!

[Donnie27]

The higher resolution tests with filters on show how much of a short-lived "price/performance king" this CF HD4770 system is.
Lack of RAM is a problem that just gets exponentially worse with time, and several developers have said that RAM amount will play an increasingly important role in upcoming games.

The lack of memory is pushing back these GPUs a lot, Unless it's a system to use with a 720p LCD TV/projector.
2*HD4770 1GB would make sense but then again, higher-density GDDR5 is very expensive (not to mention almost unexistent). It would make the whole bang-for-the-buck theme of this GPU a bit pointless.

The current ATI line-up is quite good as it is:
- $100: get the HD4770
- $150: get the HD4870 512MB
- $220: get the HD4890 1GB

If some retailer comes out with cheap (>$120) 1GB HD4770s, then Crossfiring them would be a good idea. But remember we would be already limiting our system's upgradeability by putting two graphics cards in it right from the start.

Yes but you can do much better shopping than that. The economy is still sucking very badly. Pricewatch and PriceGrabber have High-end video cards at all time lows!
4890 for $235 with a $20 MIR for a final cost of $215.
4870 512MB $175 and 1GB for $186.
4850 going for 1GB for $156 and
even a 4850 for X2 for $237.
$189 for the 260/216 GF as well.

The only reason I haven't upgraded is I can't make up my mind which on to get I don't think 4770 X 2 is that great of deal except for power savings.

Another thing I don't get. How can some folks complain about 8 X 8 for Crossfire while we know X2 versions of the cards rock. An X2 Card would have the same effective bandwidth as PCI-E 8 X 8 on many Intel chipsets, right?

[Manicdan]

i think we need a site that compares all cards with their typical OC to each other. so many choices/configurations in the 200-300$ range and a deal breaker might be quite clear if we showed price/performance ratios after their OC.

[SamHughe]

I talked about MCM and adding another 256bit memory and got flamed and laughed at.

I wouldn't take it too seriously bro. People get flamed and laughed at for many reasons here at XS. There are a lot of 13 years old 1337 haxors lurking here thinking they know everthing and the only way to show this is by ridiculing the others.

[Vinas]

Seriously man, times have changed CF works great. You kinda remind me of those old farts that refuse to use a computer "I dont need that new fangled crap, Its just a fad I tell ya"

True story. CF works really well on nearly every game now a days. Sounds like someone has e-penis envy.

[Vinas]

I love the concept behind CF/SLI, but most games that I own show very little difference between single/dual configurations.

So you're processor bottlenecked maybe?

[Vinas]

Another thing I don't get. How can some folks complain about 8 X 8 for Crossfire while we know X2 versions of the cards rock. An X2 Card would have the same effective bandwidth as PCI-E 8 X 8 on many Intel chipsets, right?

True... 8x isn't really a problem yet regardless of what some people claim.

[RVWinkle]

There are some interesting discussion and debates in this thread. I'm suprised that nobody mentioned the worst part of this article, it's on Tom's Hardware. Any shred of quality on that site was lost 10 years ago. My best advice would be to do the exact opposite of anything that's suggested on Tom's Hardware.

[Donnie27]

I wouldn't take it too seriously bro. People get flamed and laughed at for many reasons here at XS. There are a lot of 13 years old 1337 haxors lurking here thinking they know everthing and the only way to show this is by ridiculing the others.

Yeah I know, I just feel sorry for the threads their lurking in

Another thing I don't get. How can some folks complain about 8 X 8 for Crossfire while we know X2 versions of the cards rock. An X2 Card would have the same effective bandwidth as PCI-E 8 X 8 on many Intel chipsets, right?

True... 8x isn't really a problem yet regardless of what some people claim.

That's what I thought, thanks!

[deathman20]

True... 8x isn't really a problem yet regardless of what some people claim.

8x does have minor drops in performance. 5-10% at most if not mistaken at the 1920x1200 res depending on the game. Course those tests where done a while back and with 4850's. Not nearly as bad as a 8x 4x or 16x 4x setup which can have drops much much higher.

[Donnie27]

8x does have minor drops in performance. 5-10% at most if not mistaken at the 1920x1200 res depending on the game. Course those tests where done a while back and with 4850's. Not nearly as bad as a 8x 4x or 16x 4x setup which can have drops much much higher.

5 to 10%, that much, really?

[Donnie27]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...crossfire.html

Crossfire on P45 isn't the same as asking about Crossfire on X58 or etc.....

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/15...45/index5.html

That's the board I'm using. That's why I'd rather go with X2 but want something that's cooler and draws less power than 2 4850's or X2 4850!

[deathman20]

5 to 10%, that much, really?

The comparison was done on a X38 board if not mistaken. If I can find the test results I'll post the link, was sometime mid last year.