ATI Aiming For R300 Deja-Vu: Officially Launches 4800 Campaign

[Eson]

You can only count the r6xx SP to 64 when you are using 64-bit double-precision floating-points. Since there are no 64-bit ALUs, the r6xx have to emulate it and does so by using the whole 5 ALU cell. Then you get 1/5 of the performance and about 100GFLOPS. Thats why you have to seperate SP FLOPS and DP FLOPS.

[GoldenTiger]

http://base.google.com/base/s2?autho...%26view%3DList

Froogle shows an HD4850 for $233 USD...
ASUS EAH4850 HTDI 512M ATI RADEON HD 4850 512MB DDR3 PCIE2.0 DVI HDTV HDCP HDMI

[Seraphiel]

You can only count the r6xx SP to 64 when you are using 64-bit double-precision floating-points. Since there are no 64-bit ALUs, the r6xx have to emulate it and does so by using the whole 5 ALU cell. Then you get 1/5 of the performance and about 100GFLOPS. Thats why you have to seperate SP FLOPS and DP FLOPS.

Aren't G80 / G92 also 64-bit SP FP? At least, in terms of NVIDIA's solutions (G80 / G92), that is limited to single precision, effectively, right?

[zerazax]

How does Supreme Commander and Call of Juarez work for you at that resolution, with HQ settings (in game maxed + 4 * MSAA / 16 * AF)...

Not that I really disagree with your point. Aside from those 3 games, I have wonder why I would want to upgrade my two XFX 8800 Ultra XXX 685M.

Still, I want more... and the new offerings from NVIDIA and ATI + Intel's Nehalem, is the closest alternative for more than a year to what I have now.

Yeah COJ was another game though 1920x1200 I play it just fine.

AA isn't that important at that res though I've never had problems with AF.

I suppose that's why the GTX280 is supposedly getting a price drop... both from competition with ATI but also Nvidia is probably getting the feeling that there just isn't enough software out there to validate super expensive hardware. Unlike a few generations ago where only SLI setups of the best card out there could run the most taxing games, nowadays its really only Crysis that's impossible to play without SLI setups at the highest res.

[zanzabar]

How does Supreme Commander and Call of Juarez work for you at that resolution, with HQ settings (in game maxed + 4 * MSAA / 16 * AF)...

Not that I really disagree with your point. Aside from those 3 games, I have wonder why I would want to upgrade my two XFX 8800 Ultra XXX 685M.

Still, I want more... and the new offerings from NVIDIA and ATI + Intel's Nehalem, is the closest alternative for more than a year to what I have now.

i like COJ and no AA with maxed in dx10 runs fine on my comp with 1 3870 a and 4ghz 3870 with 2048x1536, but im not sure on the fps

for reference since its the only game sponsored by ATI and NV


also isnt the NDA over on monday for the new ati lineup and the NV 280

[Seraphiel]

Zerazax & Zanzabar

CoJ DX10 totally tanks on my system, with 2560 * 1600, maxed settings and 4 * AA / 16 * AF. It runs much worse than Crysis at comparatively IQ

Haven't tried Vista Ultimate x64 for many months, but I doubt nVIDIA has improved much with drivers for my 2 * G80 A3.

I hate nVIDIA for destroying support for one of my favorite games: UFO Afterlight... Everything worked perfectly before 163.75, but any driver since makes horrible texture errors

I am still uncertain about what to upgrade, if at all, as aside for those 3 games, I really don't have the need for it. Everything works more than "acceptable", regardless of real fps

[zanzabar]

why do u use AA at those resolutions its not a vary good idea maybee 2x since it dose it in the same frame buffer or 4x or 8x in dx10.1 since thats also in the same frame buffer so there is no performance drop, but over 2x in dx9 or 10.0 is a wast IMO, and i dont see a slow down with AF if i dont have AA on with my 3870 (in some stuff on the source engine i get more fps with more AF)

[Seraphiel]

why do u use AA at those resolutions its not a vary good idea maybee 2x since it dose it in the same frame buffer or 4x or 8x in dx10.1 since thats also in the same frame buffer so there is no performance drop, but over 2x in dx9 or 10.0 is a wast IMO, and i dont see a slow down with AF if i dont have AA on with my 3870 (in some stuff on the source engine i get more fps with more AF)

I use it, because my eyes are sensitive to MSAA * 4, even at those resolution. Beyond that level of sample AA, I can't see the difference, but 0 * MSAA, 2 * MSAA and 4 * MSAA, is very obvious to be and I can typically always name exactly what is used, as nVIDIA implements all of those.

DX9 in CoJ vs DX10 is so much more different, in terms of quality, regardless of AA / AF settings. Even though I believe all effects could be done in DX9C, perhaps with equal effective IQ and performance.

Is CoJ Valve Source based? If so, I didn't know that at all, but that puzzles me more, as anything Valve based (even FFCM7 and FFCM8) gives me way better performance.

EDIT: Sorry for OT

[Gogeta]

That said, if money works out, the 4870 may be the card I finally upgrade to. I've been holding on to my X1950XT for a long time now, and there are a few things that are starting to show its age.

I'm feeling the same way about my 7950GX2. I've been waiting for a GPU launch like this for quite some time.

[Nomadsoul]

WOW new products, release date ??

[zanzabar]

Is CoJ Valve Source based? If so, I didn't know that at all, but that puzzles me more, as anything Valve based (even FFCM7 and FFCM8) gives me way better performance.

no COJ is on a vary moded chrome engien (3d)/open dynamic (physics) with some crytech people implementing dx10, and it was basically a stripped down scimitar beta (its used in assassins creed, the new POP and the upcoming shaun whites snowboarding)


on topic----

how would the increase TMU affect the performance would that change the usable flops or strengthen the steam capabilities, wouldent that mean more than the new shaders


back off topic ------
i like the QA/debate much better than the usual flaming, this thread should be an example

WOW new products, release date ??

some time next week for the 280gtx and 4850

[cegras]

It's sort of funny to read this thread. I mean, here you have three people arguing over semantics of marketing, but no one responds to zanzabar. Are his posts really that bad, or are they just too technical for you to respond to? It seems like he's the only one getting the point here.

Well, my post will probably be ignored anyways, since I've fallen into zanzabar's invisibility field by talking about him.

[SoulsCollective]

It's sort of funny to read this thread. I mean, here you have three people arguing over semantics of marketing, but no one responds to zanzabar. Are his posts really that bad, or are they just too technical for you to respond to? It seems like he's the only one getting the point here.

Well, my post will probably be ignored anyways, since I've fallen into zanzabar's invisibility field by talking about him.

Speak up man, we can't hear.

[zanzabar]

Well, my post will probably be ignored anyways, since I've fallen into zanzabar's invisibility field by talking about him.

lol, im betting that im on ignore from some people


but, my posts are at the end of the page and get lost, or people just hate me

[grimREEFER]

So correct me if I am wrong. This card is roughly equal to nV last generation the 9800GTX?

Hmm.

9800gtx is roughly equivalent to the 8800gtx of the previous generation lol.

[Seraphiel]

lol, im betting that im on ignore from some people

but, my posts are at the end of the page and get lost, or people just hate me

That may be, but then they are the fools

9800gtx is roughly equivalent to the 8800gtx of the previous generation lol.

Perhaps, it is within a very limited scenario. I can tell from various benchmarks, using 2560 * 1600, maxed settings, and 4 * AA / 16 * AF, that isn't the case in this particular example.

8800 GTX and Ultra are still presently the best performance single GPU cards overall... Upgrading from one of those to a 9800 GTX, will leave one with no significant positive benefits, or even worse performance - at least at the settings I pointed out. Even a single 9800 GX2 vs single 8800 GTX / Ultra, there are tests where the 9800 GX2 falls short.

[Dainas]

Even a single 9800 GX2 vs single 8800 GTX / Ultra, there are tests where the 9800 GX2 falls short.

Hence why ATI will not be out of the rut that confines it shoestring second fiddle till they have a GPU thats worth a 512bit pcb. GDDR5 is a stunt, we all know from history how fast new DDR on a narrow bus plays out (FX 5800 Ultra anyone? ok major extravagation but had to be said). Theres still allot of room for 256bit, but it effectively admits you are not releasing a Crysis crusher, not atleast without a shader miracle and certainly not above 1280x1024. But there are games a plenty that will run smooth, just hope this thing can atleast overcome the source engine dynamic shadow fps bomb that the HD3000s had.

[mrcape]

I thought q6600 with medium oc and 8800gt (now like $160) was getting like 17k in 3dm06 six months ago. I hold out hope for the dual card but this is kind of a dud.

[[XC] hipno650]

if that's what a mildly overclocked 4850 can do with a 4GHZ quad in XP then i am.... unimpressed. but i need not worry as it's only 3dmark!!!!

[003]

I thought q6600 with medium oc and 8800gt (now like $160) was getting like 17k in 3dm06 six months ago. I hold out hope for the dual card but this is kind of a dud.

Exactly... those figures are slightly inflated, but they are similar. This is very unimpressive and I knew I wasn't crazy for thinking so.

[s1nykuL]

That can probably be attributed to Quad Core vs your Dual Core, and 4ghz vs 3.2ghz.

The 3DMark score looks nice, but then one has to remember its done on a quad core running at 4ghz (which while on these forums may be similar to the norm, under normal circumstances is more than an average overclock).

I would have hoped that the 3Dmark score would be higher. The CPU score is over twice my CPU score but the 3Dmark score is only around 25% higher. Accepting I have an approximate 10% overclock on my GPU. I would have hoped for an 06 score that was at least 50% greater than my score for a next gen card driven by such a CPU. As 06 is now commonly believed to be CPU bound, this to me is a disappointing score. But as I mentioned 3DMark is not where is counts. I will reserve judgment until I see some genuine in game benchmarks submitted by an entity I know and trust.

[awdrifter]

If those scores are real, the 4850 doesn't look too impressive.

[cegras]

Driver optimizations, you all forgot about those! : O

[Eson]

Aren't G80 / G92 also 64-bit SP FP? At least, in terms of NVIDIA's solutions (G80 / G92), that is limited to single precision, effectively, right?

Nvidia cant do DP at this moments but some Nvidia employee claims that double precision will be available on all next generation products (GT2xx?).
http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=33079

[perkam]

This is not the full performance of the 4850. Because the real competitors to the series is the 9900GTX and GTS(maybe) coming in July, there is still some performance yet to be unlocked to battle those.

Perkam