ATI Radeon HD 4000 Series discussion

[ghost101]

I want to clear up some review sites showing awful results for the hd4850.

Lets take cod4 as an example.

The following all show the 4850 outperform the 9800gtx

computerbase.de - http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/h...call_of_duty_4

guru3d - http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-at...-powercolor/11

techpowerup - http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/P...HD_4850/6.html

Then these benchmarks show awful performance

pcgh - http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,64...k-Test/&page=5

pcper - http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid...e=expert&pid=3 <--- using heavily oced nvidia cards

The PCGH review clealrly has something wrong with their test system and should be ignored. There are systematic differences throughout their benchmarks. Bioshock being the other game with terrible performance.

[Hornet331]

I want to clear up some review sites showing awful results for the hd4850.

Lets take cod4 as an example.

The following all show the 4850 outperform the 9800gtx

computerbase.de - http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/h...call_of_duty_4

guru3d - http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-at...-powercolor/11

techpowerup - http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/P...HD_4850/6.html

Then these benchmarks show awful performance

pcgh - http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,64...k-Test/&page=5

pcper - http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid...e=expert&pid=3 <--- using heavily oced nvidia cards

The PCGH review clealrly has something wrong with their test system and should be ignored. There are systematic differences throughout their benchmarks. Bioshock being the other game with terrible performance.

lulz, why does it sound like fanboy talk... review is not like it was expected, so ignore it?

maybe you would consider that they use other bench settings (custom time demo etc.) befor saying they are rubish....

[ghost101]

lulz, why does it sound like fanboy talk... review is not like it was expected, so ignore it?

maybe you would consider that they use other bench settings (custom time demo etc.) befor saying they are rubish....

The PCGH review is the only inconsistent review out there. Yes, they could be the only review with the correct figures, but im gonna take the most likely possibility, there was a problem in their test setup. When you get the 4850 barely outperforming the hd 3870 and even falling behin in the higher res cod4 benchmark, it should tell you something. Am i a fanboy? I dont really care but I think the 9800gtx+ will do better than the hd4850 as the reviews show us, at normal resolutions of 1280*1024 and 1680*1050, the 9800gtx at the moment is pretty much neck and neck.

Yes there custom time demo might be different, but why should the relative positions be so significantly different? It would only affect absolute figures. Look at the pcgh graphs, the 4850 is absolutely awful in some of the games.

The PCGH article didn't use OC'd cards. But i'm still confused as to how the 4850 straight up beat the GTX280 while using the Qarls Texture Pack at 1920 x 1200. I thought cards with < 700MB choke with that pack, but the 4850 is eating a 1 GB card at 8xAA no less.

The HD3870x2 also does abnormally well as well. Maybe somethign to do with ATI drivers being better optimised in that particular scenario.