ATI Radeon HD 4000 Series discussion

[FischOderAal]

http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/60220...-amd--ati.html

ty

[Unbornchild]

Patients, we will see in a couple of weeks.

Patients

[Mungri]

Erm, wow, epic thread on hexus right here about the 3850's I got, I just couldnt believe this:

http://forums.hexus.net/current-barg...s-72-45-a.html

o.O wow wow wow wow omg wow. I want to stay away from Nvidiots, please keep them away from me.

[generics_user]

AMD confirmed the name of RV770 and R700: Radeon HD 4800 family. It will have RV770PRO Radeon HD 4850, RV770XT Radeon HD 4870 and R700 Radeon HD 4870 X2. AMD will ship out RV770 GPU to AIB at the end of this month and the graphics card will launch in next month.

Radeon HD 4850 will be released on June 18th, 229$.

Radeon HD 4870 will be released on June 25th, for the GDDR5 supply problem, it will come into the market in July, at 349$.

Radeon HD 4870 X2 possible in September and the price will be 529-549$.

The clock of Radeon HD 4870 will be no more than 800MHz but there is no problem to overclock it to more than 1GHz

photochopped

the subscores should give around 16000 3dmarks not 19000

[mascaras]

Computex 2008 Radeon HD 4850, HD 4870 perform better than 8800GT and 9800GTX performance comparison
In mid June, AMD will launch another new series of graphics cards. These new series HD 4800 series will have more muscle to challenge the NVIDIA GeForce cards.

It is said that the HD 4850 is 20% faster than the 8800GT and HD 4870 is 20% faster than the 9800GTX.

As we all know, GeForce 9800GTX is only 10% faster than the 8800GT. We are able to get a clearer picture of the performance of these 4 cards as shown in the diagram below.

In 3DMARK06, Radeon HD 4870 will be 32% faster than 8800GT, 22% faster than 9800GTX and 12% faster than 4850.

AS for 4850, it will be 20% faster than 8800GT and 10% faster than the 9800GTX.





http://my.ocworkbench.com/bbs/showth...1&goto=newpost

regards

[Mungri]

<---- Killed by impatience.

I'll just upgrade and sell again perhaps. I might be able to get more then what I paid for these 3850's second hand, or even just the same amount back.

Oh well, more stuffs to play with XD

[y2kbos]

Will they just run Crysis, its all people want to see..

[Eastcoasthandle]

Will they just run Crysis, its all people want to see..

With games like Alan Wake, Far Cry 2, etc coming Crysis won't be looked at as the game that set the standard but, it will be viewed as the 1st game that tried. Compounded by many not liking it IMO makes it old hat. Also, it's not an engine found in up coming titles. Unless something was announced and I missed it, if so please link me. With Far Cry 2 (using a Dunia engine) doing the exact same graphical enhancements (even more IMO) it may be replaced if found to be more efficient.

[adamsleath]

's crysis bye bye.

yumyum 4870
and a new nvidia offering.

so the 4850 to have 20&#37; more performance than 8800gt, can we expect that it will be 20% more price.
9800gtx ($343 cheapest) costs 70% more than 8800gt ($198 cheapest) in aus.

[bowman]

With games like Alan Wake, Far Cry 2, etc coming Crysis won't be looked at as the game that set the standard but, it will be viewed as the 1st game that tried. Compounded by many not liking it IMO makes it old hat. Also, it's not an engine found in up coming titles. Unless something was announced and I missed it, if so please link me. With Far Cry 2 (using a Dunia engine) doing the exact same graphical enhancements (even more IMO) it may be replaced if found to be more efficient.

Don't forget Stalker Clear Sky. It'll have more DX10 features as well.

If my 8800GTX can't run that.. Maybe I'll have to spring for a couple of these ATIs.

[perkam]

That is not FPS, its performance increase over 8800Gt as the base card.

Idiots at OCW could've just as easily told us what the actual 3dMark 06 would be.

For example, if that chart is to be believed, if the 8800GT scores 11.5k with an Intel Quad, then:

The 9800GTX would score 12.7k
The 4850 would score 13.8k
The 4870 would score 15.2k

That may be a tad unrealistic. (for a $225 card to beat the 9800GTX. I mean, even if the 4870 loses to the GT200, if the 4850 can wrestle out the 9800 that would still be a crowing achievement, which ATi isn't known for).

Perkam

[STaRGaZeR]

Come on, no more 3DMark crap to test new cards...

[grimREEFER]

hmm, im assuming they left out the vantage results because they were unfavorable lol?

[Eastcoasthandle]

hmm, im assuming they left out the vantage results because they were unfavorable lol?

What is that based from?

[Macadamia]

If the 800SP rumour is true, even in a bad case of shader usage this would be essentially stomp over the G80.

Well, the 480/800 debate continues...


Even if the 4800s have 480SPs, I don't think 3DMark will really show the real improvement. Vantage *should*, considering the poor thing's so jacked up by fillrate on ATI cards it's not funny. Real games with AA and AF- definitely, perhaps the 4870 even beating the G92s in AA due to bandwidth concerns (when the sample rates were the same, aka 8x AA, 3870 = or > 8800GT)

[AliG]

once again guys, for the n millionth time, its been discussed constantly and decided its the af that kills the radeon 2k and 3k cards, not the aa, 320 shaders is more than enough, where as 16 TMUs flat out equaled fail


The extra bandwidth wouldn't do squat for them if they put gddr5 on even the 3870x2, its the architecture changes and extra shaders that will make use of the bandwidth and will have the biggest impact

[Macadamia]

Actually, it does. Even without AF, at 4x AA the Radeons don't look that good. At 8x they're back to even.

2x can be done on one pass in both cards, 4x needs 2 for the Radeons and 1 for the G80s, 8 is 2 for both. Which is quite funny as the Radeons don't scale.


AF is another matter, but the ratio of these 2 are overblown on 2 seperate extremes when in fact, it's not.

[ZL1Killa]

can't wait till june/july. I'm going to invest in a 3870X2 right now... I need to get my PC built before XP is killed and don't have time to twiddle my thumbs really.

Can't wait to see what these new cards will debut at price wise and performance wise. The top dog cards have always been $420-$5xx from what I have seen so it will be interesting to see the prices

[clayton]

I wanna try Dual 4870X2 <3

[Calmatory]

What is it with people thinking that 3DMark is some GPU test nowadays? 3DMark06 WAS a GPU test when there was no C2D and people used single core A64's with 6800's and X800's. Now go think why Vantage is more GPU dependet than 3DMark99MAX or 2001.

Using YEARS old 3DMark to show GPU performance is just like showing how SuperPI time improves once you voldmod your GPU and cool it with LN2. :|

and oh boy, RV770 is NOT to compete with GT200. Thats definite NO GO. R700 is going to compete. NOT RV770. Thanks.

/boring rant

[adamsleath]

RV770 is NOT to compete with GT200

simply because it wont, and RV770 should find a nice price niche between 8800gts and gt200 :/ thus leaving current 3xxx cards much as they are price wise. i suppose.

maybe nvidia brings out a crippled variant of gt200 (gt280/260 whatever it is) to compete directly in same price segment as rv770 variants.
anything can happen with prices. cant even speculate without real numbers.

[AliG]

thing is, I don't think nvidia will release anything below a 9900gts or gtx 260, whatever you want to call it, using the gt200 die because it will simply be too expensive to make, most likely they'll with g92b for performance, and gt200 for high end, nothing in between

[zerazax]

simply because it wont, and RV770 should find a nice price niche between 8800gts and gt200 :/ thus leaving current 3xxx cards much as they are price wise. i suppose.

It was always this way though. People act shocked despite the fact that RV770 was meant for the value section, while R700 is for performance, which directly targets GT200

[AliG]

well by the gfx market, the rv770 is actually performance while the rv740 will be mainstream (honestly I'm very interested in seeing how that turns out, I'm surprised no one really seems to care, as far as I remember nobody did a decent review on the 2900gt and the 4670 will have something like 24 TMUs compared to the r600's 16) and r700 high end

[tajoh111]

I am hoping the performance of the 4850 is better than the 9800gtx because its a new generation(3800 and g92 were not) and should eclipse the old generation by some decent margin. Also because a gts basically offers the performance of a 9800 gtx and cost 200 dollars with a lifetime warranty(voltmodders need not apply), cheaper than the 4850 with its current price.

I want ATI to create a one chip, highend. A two chip, single die card is not the most sustainable, nor elegent way to create a highend because its just crossfire or sli on a single card. This to me is not true singlecard performance.

Half the fun of seeing records broken is because its not on cloned hardware.(although there only 2 or three different systems of it being made on). When I see a 9800gtx getting beat by a 3870 x2, I don't seeing a legitamate beating. If this were sports, it would be a two on one person advantage. Its also not a true reflection of gaming performance because the game still has to support sli or crossfire for the performance to be seen.

ATI is making the 3d competition, a competition of clones and this is going to kill alot of the excitement of watching people break records. The 4870 only going to be beating old records set by old g92 and other 4870s. Wheres the excitement in that.

Remember people this is xtremesystems not give me value like the latest budget website like slickdeals or fatwallet.