Bioshock see's a 33%+ performance increase.
Call of duty 4 14%
Call of duty 5 3%
Company of heroes 11% increase.
Crysis warhead 10%
Dead space 6%
Devil may cry 5%
Brother in arms 15%
Enemy territory 42%
Fallout 3 16%
Left for dead 3%
Grid 8% 55% in sli
Mass effect 12%
Stalker clear sky 43%
UT3 19%
There were noticeable decreases in performance in
Half life ep 2 -12% -3% sli.
Far cry 2 -10% However SLI saw 20% increase.
If these performance results are true and since I am going to core i7 which hates crossfire(its also the resolution I game at), it makes me regret going AMD.
If these improvements are carried over to the gtx 260 216 and maybe gtx 260, it probably going to make the 4870 lose across the board aside from Grid.
Last edited by tajoh111; 11-17-2008 at 03:49 AM.
Reason: Wanted to indicate how massive.
Wow, that's really quite a difference. Great to see that competitiveness is coming back in the market. As for Nehalem, I'd hold off on making a decision yet. Those poor performance numbers are down to the chipset, not the CPU, and as such I expect to see them improve as AMD learns to optimise for the new platform.
__________________
Rig specs
CPU: i7 920 @ 3.8GHz Mobo: eVGA Classified 760 RAM: 3x2GB OCZ DDR3-1866 Reapers @ 1,800, CAS-8 VGA: Sapphire HD5870 @ Core 900 Mem 1,250
HDD: 6x WD6400AAKS in RAID-6 powered by Highpoint RocketRaid 3520 SFX: Auzentech X-Fi Prelude
PSU: Corsair HX-1000 Case: Silverstone TJ-09 modded for WC OS: Win7 RTM x64 Liquid-cooled
Sub-loop One: EK-Supreme -=- MCR320, 3x Scythe S-FLEX "F" fans -=- 7/16" Pro-LRT -=- 7/16" BP compressions-=- MCP655 w. Typhoon III Sub-loop Two: EK Classified FC -=- 2x MCR120, Scythe S-FLEX "F" fans -=- 7/16" Pro-LRT -=- 7/16" BP compressions-=- MCP655 w. Typhoon III Peripherals
-=- Dell 2408WFP rev.A01 -=- Audio Technica ATH-AD1000 -=- Razer Mamba -=- Microsoft "Natural Ergonomic 7000" keyboard -=-
Wow, that's really quite a difference. Great to see that competitiveness is coming back in the market. As for Nehalem, I'd hold off on making a decision yet. Those poor performance numbers are down to the chipset, not the CPU, and as such I expect to see them improve as AMD learns to optimise for the new platform.
Problem is Amd only releases drivers once a month, and this is going to take more than 1 revision to fix.
Ive tested with 180.47 Press Release ... because NDA is in review only 180.43 ... but results are with last version
Without AA and AF is not GAIN that massive, biggest improvements are in AA performances ...
That the important part anyways since what the point of having such powerful cards and not using those features.
Can you do a comparison between the 4870 1gb and a gtx 260 core 216? I think this would be really important for people in the market for new cards.
Hey when is your gigabyte ex58 extreme review coming out? There are no reviews on the net and I am waiting for yours. Is the overclocking performance the same as the UD5?
Can you do a comparison between the 4870 1gb and a gtx 260 core 216? I think this would be really important for people in the market for new cards.
Hey when is your gigabyte ex58 extreme review coming out? There are no reviews on the net and I am waiting for yours. Is the overclocking performance the same as the UD5?
I have many reviews with higher priority ... then Giga EX58-EXTREME ... first will be out luquid nitrogen weekend action ... then GTX 260 216 versus HD4870 1GB with catalyst 8.11 and GeForce 180.47 ... then will be review of Giga mobo
__________________ Core i7 Ci7 i920 D0, W3540, Ci7 i965 Extreme, 32nm - Ci9 ES, Ci5 ES ... Gigabyte EX58-UD5, Asus Rampage 2 Extreme, eVGA nForce790i Ultra, X58 Classified Nvidia 3x GTX 280 SLi, 5x GTX 260, 2x GTX 295, 2x HD5870 Thermaltake 1000W, Corsair HX 1000W
Watercooled by Swiftech (NB, SB, GPUs) + Apogee GTX + Two Laing D5 pumps + 2x Rads + Waterchiller Lian Li Armosuit PC-P80 Black case
Uhhhh.... UT3 can actually run at 119fps with 16xQ CSAA at 1920x1200?!? I find that hard to believe, unless it's a timedemo of a really simple map. Plus, I've never seen World in Conflict run at over 60fps. With most newer cards, it usually averages out at 30fps. What the hell?
__________________
--two awesome rigs, wildly customized with
5.1 Sony speakers, Stereo 3D, UV tourmaline colors, flame.. 8800GTX, 48701GB, DFI T3eH8, Bloodrage, 24" screens, i7 Four+ Gigahertzzies.. etc..
Too unique for me to let you see the pictures.. sorry!
--SONY GDM-FW900 24" widescreen CRT, overclocked to: 2560x1600 resolution at 68Hz!(from 2304x1440@80Hz)
There are frequent discussions on this board on whether the GTX 260 216 is better than the HD 4870 1GB or vice versa.
A review like that would help immensely
I'd say the GTX260 "reloaded" is better, at least according to this review: http://techreport.com/articles.x/15651
The 4870 still beats the 'old' GTX260, but the extra 24 SPs makes the newer version faster than the 4870.
__________________
"When in doubt, C-4!" -- Jamie Hyneman
My system-The Good Stuff:
Silverstone TJ-09 Case | Corsair HX620 PSU |Auzentech X-Fi Forte Soundcard | Creative T3 2.1 Speakers | AudioTechnica AD900 Headphone |
My system-The Aged Stuff:
AMD Athlon X2 3800+ CPU | DFI LANParty UT nF4 SLI-D Mobo | 2x1GB Corsair DDR1 RAM | XFX GeForce 7800GT GPU | 500GB and 640 GB HDD | My ideal monitor: 24" diagonally - 1920x1200 resolution - 100+ Hz refresh rate - preferable an IPS panel with LED backlight
Uhhhh.... UT3 can actually run at 119fps with 16xQ CSAA at 1920x1200?!? I find that hard to believe, unless it's a timedemo of a really simple map. Plus, I've never seen World in Conflict run at over 60fps. With most newer cards, it usually averages out at 30fps. What the hell?
OOPS.. sorry I didnt realize those were percentages! LOL my bad
__________________
--two awesome rigs, wildly customized with
5.1 Sony speakers, Stereo 3D, UV tourmaline colors, flame.. 8800GTX, 48701GB, DFI T3eH8, Bloodrage, 24" screens, i7 Four+ Gigahertzzies.. etc..
Too unique for me to let you see the pictures.. sorry!
--SONY GDM-FW900 24" widescreen CRT, overclocked to: 2560x1600 resolution at 68Hz!(from 2304x1440@80Hz)
Uhhhh.... UT3 can actually run at 119fps with 16xQ CSAA at 1920x1200?!? I find that hard to believe, unless it's a timedemo of a really simple map. Plus, I've never seen World in Conflict run at over 60fps. With most newer cards, it usually averages out at 30fps. What the hell?
err, i think you missed the point that these values are percentages, where 178.24 = 100%
so ut3 is 19% faster than with the previous driver.
*edit* bra, nevermind, you figured it out already
__________________ 1. Asus P5Q-E / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 @~3612 MHz (8,5x425) / 2x2GB OCZ Platinum XTC (PC2-8000U, CL5) / Sapphire Radeon HD 4850 @690/1093 MHz / WD Caviar Blue 640GB, WD Caviar SE16 320GB, WD Caviar SE 160GB / be quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 550W / Thermaltake Tsunami VA3000BWA / Teufel Concept E Magnum 5.1 Surround Speaker // SysProfile
I'm definitely glad that I've waited on my purchase of a high end card. Thank god my resistance to impulse buying is strong I'm now back into thinking of going to Nvidia as opposed to ATI which was my choice up until today. I'm still going to give things time to pan out and see what comes info wise the next week or so.
I've also seen performance increases but like said mainly if comparing AA performance, otherwise the difference is quite small but 180.xx still being slightly faster overall if no AA is compared as well. But when you think about it, ATI have had a noticable advantage in AA performance so it does make sense that NVIDIA is trying to improve in this category. This is why I also like using NVIDIA so I can play around with new drivers a lot more often. I think these improvements are very nice when you concider it's only changes done to the drivers. However knowing NVIDIA, I wouldn't be suprised if the AA quality is slightly lowered in one way or another to improve performance this way which you probably not by the eye can see but if you'd zoom in a lot you might be able to see some differences. With NVIDIA you should be very suspicious about this if you see huge gains in performance.
__________________
Need a use of your 4.0GHz CPU? Visit PCSX2 Homepage and Forums
I think a deep IQ analysis is in order. The gt200 is heavily based on g80, which is a rather old arch. I hope everything is alright but I find these huge gains in performance out of the blue a little bit weird.
Just my
__________________
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
I think a deep IQ analysis is in order. The gt200 is heavily based on g80, which is a rather old arch. I hope everything is alright but I find these huge gains in performance out of the blue a little bit weird
RV770 is based on R600, which is almost as old as G80 (6 months less IIRC). That doesn't mean anything.
__________________
Friends shouldn't let friends use Windows 7 until Microsoft fixes Windows Explorer (link)
RV770 is based on R600, which is almost as old as G80 (6 months less IIRC). That doesn't mean anything.
And at the same time we don't have an ATI driver that dramatically improves performamce like this set of drivers from Nvidia. I'm not calling cheat by any means. I'm just a skeptical guy by nature and would be glad to see an IQ test with these new drivers proving there's nothing wrong with them.
Everybody wants more performance for free.
__________________
Murray Walker: "And there are flames coming from the back of Prost's McLaren as he enters the Swimming Pool."
James Hunt: "Well, that should put them out then."
The original move to the 90 series drivers gave us performance boosts along the same lines
I miss those days. nV dropped the bomb with the GTS640 and GTX, then the 90 drivers came along and gave performance another punt. TBH....we were spoiled.
OT: Intel could have released the E6400 as the top-end C2D chip and nV could have released the GTS640 as their flagship at the respective times and we still would have clamoured over them. First time I'd seen companies give us waaayyyyy more than they had to
Linear Mode
