MMM
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Crysis bench: ATI 4870 vs 9800GX2

  1. #1
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Canada, by the mountains
    Posts
    931

    Crysis bench: ATI 4870 vs 9800GX2

    Kinda interesting:

    http://forums.legitreviews.com/about15370.html

    EDIT: just realized this is the same test mentioned in the Radeon 4000 Reveal sticky.
    Last edited by TedShred; 04-29-2008 at 07:08 PM.
    Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so. Douglas Adams
    QX9650 @ 3825mhz CoolIT FZone
    2x HD3870X2 @ 845/946mhz air
    Asus Maximus Formula 0907
    2x2048mb OCZ Reaper 8500
    2x Raptor 150G Raid0; 'Cuda 1000G
    1200W Thermaltake
    xFi Extreme Gamer/ Z-5500
    Vista Ult. 64
    Cosmos 1000
    30" NEC

  2. #2
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,917
    i'm as excited about the 4870's as anyone else is, but i'm not holding my breath for a single 4870 to be faster than a 9800 GX2. take all leaked tests with a grain of salt. anyone can make a fake graph.
    My Videos
    GRID Demolition Derby * GRID Camaro vs. Mustang * Audiosurf - Speed Racer
    I Shot the Hosties * Slightly Stupid * Dump Truck


    Intel Haswell 4770K * 2x8GB Mushkin Redline DDR3 1866 CL9 * Asus Maximus VI Gene * Sapphire 7870 GHz Edition
    500GB Samsung 840 Series SSD + 2TB WD Raid Edition 3 magnetic * SilverStone Temjin case * Corsair TX750 PSU * Corsair H60 water cooler * Win7 Pro x64

  3. #3
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    133
    scores are looking sexzy...but i can't wait until some proto types are released to some review sites for real testing =)
    My System:
    Intel Q9450 @ 1.38v 3.6ghz 1800fsb (450x8)
    OCZ Vendetta HSF w/AC MX-2 Paste
    EVGA 780i MOBO (pencil modded)
    2X EVGA 8800GTS 512mb (g92) in SLI
    G.Skill PC8000 DDR2 2x2gb @ 1000mhz 5-5-5-15 2.0v
    2xWD AALS 500gb Black Edition HD's in Raid=0 1xSAMSUNG Spinpoint F1 HD103UJ 1TB HD for storage
    Corsair 750TX PSU
    Antec 1200 Case
    Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit
    HEATWARE

  4. #4
    One-Eyed Killing Machine
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Inside a pot
    Posts
    6,340
    Those are 100% percent fake.
    Could be real ? A single 4870 beating the 9800GX2 by that much ? No, not really.

    BTW, remember the site with the supposed pre-release ( prior to ATi's HD2900XT release ) benchmarks featuring the 8800GTX and the unreleased ( back then ) HD2900XT in Crysis ( they claimed to have a beta ) and 3D Mark06 which have been proven to be fake ?
    It was the same site.

  5. #5
    I am Xtreme zanzabar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SF bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,871
    Quote Originally Posted by BenchZowner View Post
    Those are 100% percent fake.
    Could be real ? A single 4870 beating the 9800GX2 by that much ? No, not really.

    BTW, remember the site with the supposed pre-release ( prior to ATi's HD2900XT release ) benchmarks featuring the 8800GTX and the unreleased ( back then ) HD2900XT in Crysis ( they claimed to have a beta ) and 3D Mark06 which have been proven to be fake ?
    It was the same site.
    i hate to say this but i agree in 3dmark that seams imposable with an 800mhz gpu (thats not even the clocks of the 4850s projected speed) and gddr5 cant make that much of a difference with only a 3ghz cpu, that 8.5-10k sm2 and sm3 scores is just looks wrong

    also crysis dosnt use the shaders in a 3870 so in a 4870 it wouldent use the bonus shaders, this is unbelievably fake
    Last edited by zanzabar; 05-01-2008 at 12:54 AM.
    5930k, R5E, samsung 8GBx4 d-die, vega 56, wd gold 8TB, wd 4TB red, 2TB raid1 wd blue 5400
    samsung 840 evo 500GB, HP EX 1TB NVME , CM690II, swiftech h220, corsair 750hxi

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by zanzabar View Post
    then the crysis scores are stupid, it dosnt use the shaders in the 3870 why would it in the 4870 with more shders get a score of 3x a 3870
    Wait, I thought one of the biggest reasons the HD2k and HD3k series sucked at playing Crysis was because it was limited by its texture units. nVidia have a lot more texture units and is the reason why it shines in Crysis (and its been more optimized than ATI's GPU's). The HD4850/4870 have twice the amount of texture units, far more shading power and higher clock speeds so its bound to be atleast twice as powerful than the HD3850/3870, which is still faster than any single nVidia GPU, though the GX2 should still be faster.

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Wherever I may roam...
    Posts
    591
    Quote Originally Posted by zanzabar View Post
    i hate to say this but i agree in 3dmark that seams imposable with an 800mhz gpu (thats not even the clocks of the 4850s projected speed) and gddr5 cant make that much of a difference with only a 3ghz cpu, that would need 8.5-9k sm2 and sm3 scores


    then the crysis scores are stupid, it dosnt use the shaders in the 3870 why would it in the 4870 with more shders get a score of 3x a 3870
    My thoughts exactly. Though I will be excited (hopefully with good reason) to see what the 4870's can do.

  8. #8
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    154
    too bad thats not the real scores
    Abit IP35 Pro
    Intel Q6700
    Crucial Ballistics Tracers 4x1gb 1066 DDR2
    ATI X1800XT
    Seagate 250gb / 750gb SATA
    OCZ 600w
    Swiftech Storm, GPU, Pump, Res, BI GT240 Stealth

  9. #9
    I am Xtreme zanzabar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SF bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,871
    Quote Originally Posted by _FAKE_ View Post
    Wait, I thought one of the biggest reasons the HD2k and HD3k series sucked at playing Crysis was because it was limited by its texture units. nVidia have a lot more texture units and is the reason why it shines in Crysis (and its been more optimized than ATI's GPU's). The HD4850/4870 have twice the amount of texture units, far more shading power and higher clock speeds so its bound to be atleast twice as powerful than the HD3850/3870, which is still faster than any single nVidia GPU, though the GX2 should still be faster.
    NV has more filtering per shader (much higher clocks) not more TMU, with shaders at higher speeds and cysis is made for high speed shaders (and may or may not limit the total usable shaders)


    as of now NV and ati have the same Gpixle/s but then NV can use a different clock for the texture filtering so they have 2x more texture filtering since the shader clock for textures and for pixles are 3x higher for textures

    this isnt from more shading its from having a card full of vertex shaders that can down clock and do pixle shading, and not having a true "stream" processor, thats why the g92 isnt DX10.1


    the rv770 will go against this by upping the TMU per ROP, but if stuff still has problems using more than 128 shaders then NV sponsored games (unreal engine specifically) will still have lower fps than non NV games other than assassins creed until it gets patched
    Last edited by zanzabar; 05-02-2008 at 12:34 PM.
    5930k, R5E, samsung 8GBx4 d-die, vega 56, wd gold 8TB, wd 4TB red, 2TB raid1 wd blue 5400
    samsung 840 evo 500GB, HP EX 1TB NVME , CM690II, swiftech h220, corsair 750hxi

  10. #10
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    751
    Quote Originally Posted by _FAKE_ View Post
    Wait, I thought one of the biggest reasons the HD2k and HD3k series sucked at playing Crysis was because it was limited by its texture units. nVidia have a lot more texture units and is the reason why it shines in Crysis (and its been more optimized than ATI's GPU's). The HD4850/4870 have twice the amount of texture units, far more shading power and higher clock speeds so its bound to be atleast twice as powerful than the HD3850/3870, which is still faster than any single nVidia GPU, though the GX2 should still be faster.
    Also because the nvidia drivers were "cheated" so that when crysis.exe was run, the GPU(s) would sacrifice image quality slightly for better performance. If you were to rename crysis.exe to something else, the performance on a nvidia card would decrease.
    i7 860 @ 4.2Ghz | ASUS Maximus III Formula | 8GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600 | ATi 5970 | 3x WD Raptor X HDD's | NZXT Khaos Case | Corsair 1000w PSU | Swiftech H20 Cooling CPU | Windows 7 x64 | Sony Bravia 52" LCD Display


    3DMark06 Score - 20k Club | Youtube Account

  11. #11
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Waymon3X6 View Post
    Also because the nvidia drivers were "cheated" so that when crysis.exe was run, the GPU(s) would sacrifice image quality slightly for better performance. If you were to rename crysis.exe to something else, the performance on a nvidia card would decrease.
    that was one particular driver and it was last year. no need to fan that flame anymore.
    My Videos
    GRID Demolition Derby * GRID Camaro vs. Mustang * Audiosurf - Speed Racer
    I Shot the Hosties * Slightly Stupid * Dump Truck


    Intel Haswell 4770K * 2x8GB Mushkin Redline DDR3 1866 CL9 * Asus Maximus VI Gene * Sapphire 7870 GHz Edition
    500GB Samsung 840 Series SSD + 2TB WD Raid Edition 3 magnetic * SilverStone Temjin case * Corsair TX750 PSU * Corsair H60 water cooler * Win7 Pro x64

  12. #12
    I am Xtreme zanzabar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SF bay area, CA
    Posts
    15,871
    Quote Originally Posted by xMrBunglex View Post
    that was one particular driver and it was last year. no need to fan that flame anymore.
    it also mods the config file, and i never heard that they stopped doing it
    5930k, R5E, samsung 8GBx4 d-die, vega 56, wd gold 8TB, wd 4TB red, 2TB raid1 wd blue 5400
    samsung 840 evo 500GB, HP EX 1TB NVME , CM690II, swiftech h220, corsair 750hxi

  13. #13
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    751
    and i never heard that they stopped doing it
    Neither did I....
    i7 860 @ 4.2Ghz | ASUS Maximus III Formula | 8GB Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600 | ATi 5970 | 3x WD Raptor X HDD's | NZXT Khaos Case | Corsair 1000w PSU | Swiftech H20 Cooling CPU | Windows 7 x64 | Sony Bravia 52" LCD Display


    3DMark06 Score - 20k Club | Youtube Account

  14. #14
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Burbank, CA
    Posts
    3,766
    WOW, some people are really bored making charts and going through the trouble to put out fake stuff

  15. #15
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,917
    Quote Originally Posted by GAR View Post
    WOW, some people are really bored making charts and going through the trouble to put out fake stuff
    people always do that. remember how the 9800 GTX was rumored to be a 1+ TeraFLOP card? it was supposed to have 1 Gig of GDDR5 and all sorts of other goodies that weren't even almost true.
    My Videos
    GRID Demolition Derby * GRID Camaro vs. Mustang * Audiosurf - Speed Racer
    I Shot the Hosties * Slightly Stupid * Dump Truck


    Intel Haswell 4770K * 2x8GB Mushkin Redline DDR3 1866 CL9 * Asus Maximus VI Gene * Sapphire 7870 GHz Edition
    500GB Samsung 840 Series SSD + 2TB WD Raid Edition 3 magnetic * SilverStone Temjin case * Corsair TX750 PSU * Corsair H60 water cooler * Win7 Pro x64

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,609
    Quote Originally Posted by xMrBunglex View Post
    people always do that. remember how the 9800 GTX was rumored to be a 1+ TeraFLOP card? it was supposed to have 1 Gig of GDDR5 and all sorts of other goodies that weren't even almost true.
    Thats what you get for believing fudzilla

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •