ATI Radeon HD 4000 Series discussion

[mascaras]

.

regards

[zerazax]

Posted already ^^

[mascaras]

sory , i didnt read all pages , most of them = offtopic , bla bla , etc , too boring !

sory again for the repost !

regards

[zerazax]

Assassin's Creed is a bad idea IMHO, I don't want to see DX10.1 conspiracy story all over again, besides a console port is not the proper benchmark

Crysis benchmark tool seems fine to me

Meh I do caution about benchmarking a game like Crysis as the be all end all

I've heard from both sides that Crysis is well benched by the GTX280 but I've also heard the GTX280 is more optimized to crush Crysis than really anything else. But, who knows how future games will be programmed - Crysis is just one game out of numerous other games coming out with new engines that may blow it away and make it look like an anomaly

It might be the prettiest thing out there right now, but it's not necessarily indicative of how other games will fare in the near future

[Papu]

i didnt see it , if its the 4850 thats awesome , if its the 4870 not so awesome..

[Genius_pt]

So that "?" is.... hd4850 hopefully?

[mascaras]

yep , probably the HD4850


regards

[Luka_Aveiro]

Meh I do caution about benchmarking a game like Crysis as the be all end all

I've heard from both sides that Crysis is well benched by the GTX280 but I've also heard the GTX280 is more optimized to crush Crysis than really anything else. But, who knows how future games will be programmed - Crysis is just one game out of numerous other games coming out with new engines that may blow it away and make it look like an anomaly

It might be the prettiest thing out there right now, but it's not necessarily indicative of how other games will fare in the near future

Are you going Shintai's way to predict the future? Truth is the most demanding graphics game nowadays IS Crysis, you have a benchmark tool to use it, so what's the point of downsizing Crysis? Because it may not be the future?

CE2 does use lots of nowadays 3D techniques, it is shader intensive aswell, so I really do not see why it shouldn't be the reference benchmark.

[Chickenfeed]

If thats a legit 4850 bench, thats pretty decent performance. Roughly matching a 98GTX for < $200 isn't to shabby at all, good performance and with less heat and power usage to top it off.

[y2kbos]

Very good news if thats the HD4850, it does however show, just how much of a beast the GTX 280 is, if it can supposedly score over twice that amount on Crysis..

The HD4870 is what 20&#37; faster, so your deffo not going to get playable performance @ 1920 x 1200 on that card, if the HD4870x2 scales exceptionally well, it might just get near GTX 280 in Crysis..

Both companies are coming out of this very well imo, Nvidia looks to be giving you an absolute beast of a single card and Ati is giving good bang for buck ( option I will be choosing )...

[waver_01]

Very good news if thats the HD4850, it does however show, just how much of a beast the GTX 280 is, if it can supposedly score over twice that amount on Crysis..

The HD4870 is what 20&#37; faster, so your deffo not going to get playable performance @ 1920 x 1200 on that card, if the HD4870x2 scales exceptionally well, it might just get near GTX 280 in Crysis..

Both companies are coming out of this very well imo, Nvidia looks to be giving you an absolute beast of a single card and Ati is giving good bang for buck ( option I will be choosing )...

30% actually and I bet R700 will perform better than the GTX 280

1600SP...

[Xello]

CE2 does use lots of nowadays 3D techniques, it is shader intensive aswell, so I really do not see why it shouldn't be the reference benchmark.

I concur, whether Crysis is a good game or not is anyone's opinion but the quality of CE2 as a performance benchmark cannot be denied! If you don't go by that then what do you have. . . 3dmark, but then that's "not like in-game performance", so what else is there?

Is there such thing as a completely objective benchmark that is indicative of real time game performance?

I bet R700 will perform better than the GTX 280

1600SP...

Hmm, hasn't ATI always had tons more SP than Nvidia recently, going by that method of counting? Will it make them superior this time i wonder.

[Extelleron]

Very good news if thats the HD4850, it does however show, just how much of a beast the GTX 280 is, if it can supposedly score over twice that amount on Crysis..

The HD4870 is what 20&#37; faster, so your deffo not going to get playable performance @ 1920 x 1200 on that card, if the HD4870x2 scales exceptionally well, it might just get near GTX 280 in Crysis..

Both companies are coming out of this very well imo, Nvidia looks to be giving you an absolute beast of a single card and Ati is giving good bang for buck ( option I will be choosing )...

As waver said, the HD 4870 is supposed to be ~30% faster than the HD 4850 on average. I think it is likely that sometimes it will be more and sometimes it will be less; there is a 20% clock difference between the 4850 and 4870, and then the 4870 has 80% more bandwidth. In situations that require a lot of bandwidth (like Crysis @ 1920x1200) I think it is likely that the 4870 will pull ahead by more than 30%.

As for the validity of Crysis as a benchmark... IMO it is the only thing that matters right now, so yes I think it is an important benchmark. Crysis is the only thing I can't already run at maximum setting w/ AA+AF at my res of 1680x1050 with an 8800GTS 512MB. The only other thing is Call of Juarez in DX10, but it is still playable and anyway I don't think I will be replaying it. So to me, at this moment, no benchmark but Crysis is important. And I can't see that changing much later this year.... Fallout 3 will be based on the Oblivion engine, so it will likely be a breeze for modern cards. Far Cry 2 can't be more demanding than Crysis, especially since it is on consoles as well. Alan Wake is supposed to be more CPU-bound than GPU-bound, and given that we haven't heard anything for so long, it may be vaporware (sadly, was looking forward to it). Stalker: Clear Sky might be very demanding, but we'll have to wait and see.

[bigslappy]

Any one else find it kinda hilarious that due to the controversy that OBR created and all the fakes/real battles this thread has grown roughly 20 pages in the past 2 days

WELL ...We Must have our Xtreme Fun on the Xtreme Forums ! Seeing how alot of people were really taking this to the Xtreme

all this Hype is good for business !

[003]

My god w0mbat is Hector defending is graph maker to not fire him

ROFL!!!

[[XC] hipno650]

those crysis scores seem about right for the HD4850. but keep in mind that is 1920x1080 (not 1920x1200) so if you take into account the extra performance of the HD4870 and then tone the res down to 1680x1050 then crysis should be playable on VERY HIGH. and to think that the GTX 280 is rumored to do 36FPS at 1920x1200. this is going to be a very interesting couple of weeks! can't wait for more numbers form both sides!

[zerazax]

Are you going Shintai's way to predict the future? Truth is the most demanding graphics game nowadays IS Crysis, you have a benchmark tool to use it, so what's the point of downsizing Crysis? Because it may not be the future?

CE2 does use lots of nowadays 3D techniques, it is shader intensive aswell, so I really do not see why it shouldn't be the reference benchmark.

Hardly. I'm just going off what I remember with FarCry, when it was easily the most taxing game out there, and looking back, it was a whole lot of nothing that amounted out of it.

[Papu]

thats still only 15 pics of Samuel L jackson , and one of Dave Chapelle
WHERES THE LOVE!

[Luka_Aveiro]

Hardly. I'm just going off what I remember with FarCry, when it was easily the most taxing game out there, and looking back, it was a whole lot of nothing that amounted out of it.

IIRC, SM3 was firstly used on FarCry, right?

[zerazax]

Sure, but many games followed that showed it didn't require ridiculous cards to y'know, actually play. And SM3.0 was a standard, it's not like Crysis is ushering in SM4.0

[Luka_Aveiro]

Sure, but many games followed that showed it didn't require ridiculous cards to y'know, actually play. And SM3.0 was a standard, it's not like Crysis is ushering in SM4.0

TBH, I don't find any difference while playing Crysis Very High DX10 or Tweaked Very High DX9, I honestly didn't bother to know what technical improvements SM4 brought over SM3, at least I don't notice any visual difference between them...

I know what you mean with the bolded sentence and I agree with you, but if you just want a card to actually play, stick to a HD3870 or 8800GT/S, they are quite enough for gaming demandings, I think...

[DarkDisciple]

Anything more specific than "July" yet for the 4870x2? Or will it in fact still come out this month.

[SoulsCollective]

It's called coherence, your posts do not have any.

Additional coherences, you must construct them!

if this wasn't such a nice forum then there would be 20 pictures of Samuel L Jackson with captions on them in this reply.

[STaRGaZeR]

I know what you mean with the bolded sentence and I agree with you, but if you just want a card to actually play, stick to a HD3870 or 8800GT/S, they are quite enough for gaming demandings, I think...

Specially in the age of 360 ports

[cadaveca]

Anything more specific than "July" yet for the 4870x2? Or will it in fact still come out this month.

More like early august for retail availability.