[Autopsy] ATI Radeon HD 4870 Update: Review

[shiznit93]

I'd much rather they used a 512 mega bit bus to either that 512MB or 1GB of RAM. It will end up choking when compared to other 512mb cards. Doesn't mean it will suck but it wil be like running WinXP with 1GB of RAM instead of 2GB.

you don't need a 512bit bus with GDDR5, all that bandwidth would be wasted while you would be hitching for lack of video mememory in many new games (1920x1200 4xAA framebuffer + tons of textures like in Age of Conan = problem).

[ceevee]

someone posted results for crysis 4870 at vr-zone, but seems fake. why would 4870CF scale so well in crysis when we know 4850CF doesn't really?

Also seems kind of low GTX280 scores, at DX10 1920x1200 I am getting much higher fps than they show.

[Papu]

lol so you too want to argue/oppose me..

im talking single 512MB

2 x 512MB is not same

yes it is , they still seem to share the memory so whats in one cards Vram is in the other.

[Shocker003]

Why are most of you throwing deaf ears at my question. Am not a fanboy i go for the most cost effective card, that has most of the options i want and i don´t upgrade in a hurry. Will the HD 4870 support Physx in near future?

[madmossy]

Why are most of you throwing deaf ears at my question. Am not a fanboy i go for the most cost effective card, that has most of the options i want and i don´t upgrade in a hurry. Will the HD 4870 support Physx in near future?

It could do as NVidia have offered Physx to ATI if they adopt CUDA to the ATI hardware, is it going to happen ?

Your guess is as good as mine.

[Papu]

Why are most of you throwing deaf ears at my question. Am not a fanboy i go for the most cost effective card, that has most of the options i want and i don´t upgrade in a hurry. Will the HD 4870 support Physx in near future?

AMD/ati will support havok which is more usefull , but really , without PhysX being in 100% of the market , developers will not impliment it , havok is owned by intel , and shared to AMD , so all CPU manufactures have this technology

why want physX anyway? it slows down your Fps and doesnt really do anything

[[XC] hipno650]

napalm is right. 512MB is not enough for some of today's games @ 1920X1200 and up and it is certainly will not be enough for tomorrows games i am not going to buy a brand new card and have it crap out performance wise in 2 months. 512mb is enough for 1280x1024 but anything more is seriously going to limit the cards usability down the road. i remember when people said 256mb was enough now it can't even take 1280x1024

[003]

Why are most of you throwing deaf ears at my question. Am not a fanboy i go for the most cost effective card, that has most of the options i want and i don´t upgrade in a hurry. Will the HD 4870 support Physx in near future?

It never will. To support PhysX, even though it's now an "open" API, they would need to support CUDA to make it work. That will never happen for a number of reasons. But first and foremost, it will basically mean AMD/ATI admits the failure of Brook+.

If you want PhysX, you will need a separate PhysX card.

[STaRGaZeR]

lol so you too want to argue/oppose me..

im talking single 512MB

2 x 512MB is not same

It's the same. Data is mirrored.

[Papu]

napalm is right. 512MB is not enough for some of today's games @ 1920X1200 and up and it is certainly will not be enough for tomorrows games i am not going to buy a brand new card and have it crap out performance wise in 2 months. 512mb is enough for 1280x1024 but anything more is seriously going to limit the cards usability down the road. i remember when people said 256mb was enough now it can't even take 1280x1024

how do you explain 4850 crossfire getting 150+ fps on very high 1900X1200 and 4Xaa ,
Tbh gig cards are not yet needed...

[kryptobs2000]

playing half-life at 1920x1200 is different than playing Crysis (or future games) at 1920x1200. It's not like the resolution is the only thing that determines the amount of vram used. Stop talking like it's an absolute number.

[xlink]

lol so you too want to argue/oppose me..

im talking single 512MB

2 x 512MB is not same

they have the same amount of addressable space. the data on both memory banks is mirrored.

as in completely identical.
as in no additional data can be stored over a single card solution.

playing half-life at 1920x1200 is different than playing Crysis (or future games) at 1920x1200. It's not like the resolution is the only thing that determines the amount of vram used. Stop talking like it's an absolute number.

by the time future games make use of it, the 4800s and GTX 280s will be obsolete so the point is rather moot.

I SWEAR HAVE PEOPLE YET TO FIGURE OUT THAT FUTURE PROOFING DOESN'T WORK?

[Dimitriman]

This 512MB version might explain why you can find the 4870 for sub or around 250 euro in some sites

http://www.electronicagigant.nl/nl/product/420297

http://azerty.nl/producten/product_d...press-x16.html

http://www.sallandautomatisering.nl/?pid=51287&ref=2

also I heard that ATI allows the 3rd party to decide upon all the stats on the memory, so expect a lot of different versions on this card.

[Shocker003]

AMD/ati will support havok which is more usefull , but really , without PhysX being in 100% of the market , developers will not impliment it , havok is owned by intel , and shared to AMD , so all CPU manufactures have this technology

why want physX anyway? it slows down your Fps and doesnt really do anything

I woun´t like to be taken by surprise by the ever changing wind of VGA technology and games. If 4870 will support physx that means that i am safe when physx games starts coming out and X2 will be a good option as one core will handle grahpics while the second core will maybe handle physx. It´s just a wish Nvidia has made this leap with their 280 and i know the game programmers will soon start coming up with games with physx engine. I have a ATI onboard grahpic in my HTPC and am damn impressed with the picture quality and i will like to pick up a 4870 x2 when it comes out but if physx is not supported then i have to go with Nvidia

[Blacky]

Hmm the fan design looks the same as HD2900, the heatpipe looks good tho

[xlink]

I'd much rather they used a 512 mega bit bus to either that 512MB or 1GB of RAM. It will end up choking when compared to other 512mb cards. Doesn't mean it will suck but it wil be like running WinXP with 1GB of RAM instead of 2GB.

a 512,000,000 bit bus is pointless at this time and far too costly.

[kromosto]

why want physX anyway? it slows down your Fps and doesnt really do anything

slows down fps? my fps is increased in ut3 very nicely.

I woun´t like to be taken by surprise by the ever changing wind of VGA technology and games. If 4870 will support physx that means that i am safe when physx games starts coming out and X2 will be a good option as one core will handle grahpics while the second core will maybe handle physx. It´s just a wish Nvidia has made this leap with their 280 and i know the game programmers will soon start coming up with games with physx engine. I have a ATI onboard grahpic in my HTPC and am damn impressed with the picture quality and i will like to pick up a 4870 x2 when it comes out but if physx is not supported then i have to go with Nvidia

dont worry about physx support that much.

nvidia has physx but ati have the advantage of running 2 gpus on nehalem. yes it is not such near future as 4870x2 but a nehalem + ati (like 4850) cf may be better as nehalem + nvidia (like 9800gtx+) with physx in a physix game.

[Thallid]

a 512,000,000 bit bus is pointless at this time and far too costly.

On topic: I think we'll se some nice 1 GB GDDR5 versions of this card.

[NapalmV5]

yes it is , they still seem to share the memory so whats in one cards Vram is in the other.

you too?

It's the same. Data is mirrored.

not you too.. lol

how do you explain 4850 crossfire getting 150+ fps on very high 1900X1200 and 4Xaa ,
Tbh gig cards are not yet needed...

again cf @ 2 x 512MB

they have the same amount of addressable space. the data on both memory banks is mirrored.

as in completely identical.
as in no additional data can be stored over a single card solution.


by the time future games make use of it, the 4800s and GTX 280s will be obsolete so the point is rather moot.

I SWEAR HAVE PEOPLE YET TO FIGURE OUT THAT FUTURE PROOFING DOESN'T WORK?

yes correct.. what do you guys take me for?

but..

1st gpu/512MB = 50%
2nd gpu/512MB = the other 50%

this goes back to the voodoo2/5 days


not future proofing.. all i want is to be able to play @ max high quality 1920 @ single gpu/1024MB.. is that too much too ask.. im paying

a 512,000,000 bit bus is pointless at this time and far too costly.

same was said about 128 -> 256-> now 512 and so will @ 1024

[YMAA]

why want physX anyway? it slows down your Fps and doesnt really do anything

Depends on the reasoning for wanting it. If the game needs your PhysX processor to create those effects, then the game will run slower because you're adding content for the GPU to render. However, if the game needs PhysX to accelerate what's already there, the game will run faster. Sounds like UT3 uses a PhysX processor to speed up content that will be there regardless of the presence of hardware. UT3 installs a PhysX driver and library, to run the effects in software mode. So in that sense it would be nice to have a PhysX hardware accelerator.

[STaRGaZeR]

yes correct.. what do you guys take me for?

1st gpu/512MB = 50%
2nd gpu/512MB = the other 50%

For a complete ignorant in multiGPU solutions. Data is mirrored in both cards. The only thing you're right about is that 512MB is not enough for 1920x1200, let alone AA.

[NapalmV5]

For a complete ignorant in multiGPU solutions. Data is mirrored in both cards. The only thing you're right about is that 512MB is not enough for 1920x1200, let alone AA.

lol

so 1xgpu/512MB vs 2xgpu/2x512MB vs 4xgpu/4x512MB is all the same

i see.. you guys win!

[biohead]

yes it is , they still seem to share the memory so whats in one cards Vram is in the other.

you too?

It's the same. Data is mirrored.

not you too.. lol

how do you explain 4850 crossfire getting 150+ fps on very high 1900X1200 and 4Xaa ,
Tbh gig cards are not yet needed...

again cf @ 2 x 512MB

they have the same amount of addressable space. the data on both memory banks is mirrored.

as in completely identical.
as in no additional data can be stored over a single card solution.


by the time future games make use of it, the 4800s and GTX 280s will be obsolete so the point is rather moot.

I SWEAR HAVE PEOPLE YET TO FIGURE OUT THAT FUTURE PROOFING DOESN'T WORK?

yes correct.. what do you guys take me for?

but..

1st gpu/512MB = 50%
2nd gpu/512MB = the other 50%

I'd much rather they used a 512 mega bit bus to either that 512MB or 1GB of RAM. It will end up choking when compared to other 512mb cards. Doesn't mean it will suck but it wil be like running WinXP with 1GB of RAM instead of 2GB.

a 512,000,000 bit bus is pointless at this time and far too costly.

same was said about 128 -> 256-> now 512 and so will @ 1024

Good lord. Someone could punch you in the face and you wouldn't notice.

[Hornet331]

lol

so 1xgpu/512MB vs 2xgpu/2x512MB vs 4xgpu/4x512MB is all the same

i see.. you guys win!

yes, 4 gpus in afr mode with each 512mb have only have 512mb for texture caching. Thats one of the reasons why you see quad sli failing (2xgx2) while 280gtx still can output a picture that seems to move and not only show less then 1fps.

[STaRGaZeR]

lol

so 1xgpu/512MB vs 2xgpu/2x512MB vs 4xgpu/4x512MB is all the same

i see.. you guys win!

Erm, yes. You have the same data at the same time in the four cards.

Your avatar is ironic after reading you, remember we are not in the Voodoo days