|
The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. June 2008 @ 09:47 |
Link to this message
|
they said 8.7 will improve that. but no worries, if rivatuner gets support for the 4 series, then you can downclock the idle / 2d clocks.
and HIS anncounced the ICEQ versions for mid july, but they are not sure if they should stick with the ICEQ3 OR switch to a newer one.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
29. June 2008 @ 10:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Given the power consumption of the X1900XT-X and the temperatures the ICEQ3 achieved, it would certainly be plenty sufficient for an HD4850. Not sure about the HD4870, but it still shouldn't be too much of a problem.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. June 2008 @ 20:38 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
What I might do is get an HD4850 initially, and then some time down the line (probably considerable) try crossfiring it with a 4870.
I heard that actually worked excellently with the 3870 and the 3850. Benchmarks put it close to 2 3870s. Try it and let me know when you do. It should be interesting :)
I'm still going with the Sapphire 4870. I have owned 3 cards made by Sapphire, and the stock cooling has always been adequate. Noise levels aren't a big issue for me, so as long as it doesn't run like the dust buster on my old X850XT, I'm a happy camper.
I only really want to make the upgrade for Crysis. If you've ever spent some time with the very high settings(dx9 or dx10), you'll know why :) It really does look good enough to justify the purchase, IMO.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. June 2008 @ 21:19
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. June 2008 @ 22:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
lol While we are talking about graphics, me and some friends were playing the ORIGINAL halo today. I swear it looked better when it first came out.
I don't think the 4870 is worth getting For a 100 dollars more all you are getting is a card that's overclocked a bit more. Seriously we could probably overclock it to those speeds, especially when the GDDR5 4850 is out.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. June 2008 @ 23:13 |
Link to this message
|
Are the 4870 and 4850 on the same chip and PCB??? I honestly doubt overclocking is going to close up that performance gap.
The 4870 is ahead by miles in some cases. In Crysis it manages a 42FPS average in 1920 x 1200 with all high settings.
I'm looking at running Dx9 very high in 1650 x 1080. I'm expecting about 40 FPS, which is the same speed my 8800GTS runs it in tweaked high settings.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. June 2008 @ 23:16
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
29. June 2008 @ 23:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
As far as I know the only difference right NOW is clock speed and GDDR5. The GDDR5 version of the 4850 IS SUPPOSED to come out. Lets see whats happens when it does.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
29. June 2008 @ 23:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm waiting for a price drop before I make my move. $200 is not worth it for me to upgrade to the 4850, and $300 is a bit much for me to pay right now. I might have to save my money and see what happens to prices. I could buy one now, but I really don't want to just yet. I'm not done enjoying my 8800GTS :)
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
2 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 00:03 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah the 8800GTS is an EXCELLENT card, and is more than enough for more people. Sometimes, all this upgrading seems pointless to me, but it's so damn fun lol.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 00:43 |
Link to this message
|
I upgrade to play the newest games available. My 8800GTX was sweet, but in retrospect, I would have done better to get a 640MB GTS. I paid full price at the time. $550 is a lot of money for one card :/
I sold my 8800GTX to pay bills and was blessed with a GTS 320MB from Grandpa for my birthday. That was also a great card, pulling high frames in all my games. But it was woefully inadequate for my 1920 x 1200 monitor. Anything over 1650 x 1080 would hammer it badly. Not to mention I had to go very easy on eye candy settings.
The 8800GTS 512MB seems to handle high res about as well as my 8800GTX. My only complaint is crappy performance with Quake 3 engine games. Call of Duty 1 sometimes drops into the low 20s with lots of action on the screen. Other times I get over 500 FPS. I've been told it's a driver issue. That seems to be the norm with most Q3 engine games. Wolfenstein has graphical anomalies, MOH:AA refuses to run, and Call of Duty has performance issues. Go figure that the roots of modern FPS games are becoming unsupported :(
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. June 2008 @ 04:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
IICR the circuitry is also different around the VRMs.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 06:54 |
Link to this message
|
Sapphire have always served me well, I've had a 9200-256AGP, X800Pro-AGP, X1600Pro-slim and X1900XT from them, all with good success. Their HD3870 however, is laughable, by the far the worst cooler I have ever seen on a graphics card, and I've seen some pretty bad coolers in my time.
I sincerely hope their 4800 series is better.
Abuzar: You will never overclock a 4850 to be a 4870 - there's a good 30% performance gap between them. It's not like the gens of old, where they just up the clock speeds a few mhz, the 4870 is a big design change, hence the steep price tag.
Estuansis: 320MB hurts for nvidia cards. When a Geforce runs out of memory, it's game over, the frame rates drop off a cliff. Due to the way ATI cards are designed, they can run well beyond the amount of memory they have and the frame rate is affected, but not nearly as much - consequently they're good cards to run with very high resolutions - and given the grunt of the 4800 series, they should be very remarkable.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 07:10 |
Link to this message
|
I've noticed that as well. Sometimes my 8800GTS 320MB would be getting lower FPS than my X1800XT when I was using AA/AF at high resolution. Lower the AA a bit or drop the res, performance skyrockets. So not a big issue in general, but a major annoyance at 1920 x 1200.
I don't remember where exactly, but I read an article that says G80 and G92 had problems with memory management at high res. They would start choking far before the Radeons did. They seem to have addressed this issue with the G94. The 9600GT can sometimes outperform the 8800GT in eye candy mode and seems to handle high res a bit more gracefully.
Something to consider for cheap performance: 9600GTs scale really well in SLI.
I do not fault nVidia for their problems. The GeForce 8 series is still awesome and has had a nice, long run as top dog.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. June 2008 @ 07:15
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 07:25 |
Link to this message
|
Hmm perhaps it is. Seems strange that it was fixed for the 9600GT and not the 9800GTX. We'd have no real way of knowing if it's been fixed for the GTX200 series because they have so much memory anyway, except for perhaps Crysis at 2560x1600 with AA.
Oh yes, and you know what I was saying about ATI's frame rates still being affected by the lack of memory? I'm not so sure...
The 1GB version of the 3870 is also slightly higher clocked...
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. June 2008 @ 07:27
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
I suppose you would need an extreme case to show a difference. Sadly, the Radeon HD3870 seems to be too slow to handle Ep2 at those settings anyway.
I hope the trend continues on the 4870 as that would be very beneficial in eye candy mode. I think that is why 512MB seems to be enough to match even the 800+MB of the GTX280.
Just for future reference. I don't quite get what the GTX280 is. Nvidia have released their GeForce 9 series already. What makes the GTX280/260 so much faster(aside from clocks)? This was something I never even heard of until I looked at HD4870 reviews. Google doesn't turn up much on it.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. June 2008 @ 09:09
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
You'd think so, based on those results wouldn't you? Yet I tried it and it ran fine - noticeably not fluid in some areas, but certainly playable.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:20 |
Link to this message
|
basically they took the G80 and pumped it with steroids to get the GT200 core. (exactly what intel did with the P4s and look how amd destoryed them)
it has 1.4 billion transistors, a 512bit bus, and 1GB of RAM (this is the GTX 280, not the GTX 260) it has 240 shader processors (now called shader cores to compete more with intel)
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:23 |
Link to this message
|
To be fair though, when Intel pumped the P4 with steroids it actually got slower again, the GTX280 is still a lot faster than its predecessors, just not faster enough to warrant the price.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:32 |
Link to this message
|
So it's basically a G80/G92 with overkill specs? That makes sense. And it sounds like a desperate move to maintain market supremacy. Seeing as the only GeForce 9 card worth the PCB it's stamped on is the 9600GT, IMO.
Nvidia newsletter says that this will be their last single core card. Supposedly they are coming out with duals and quads pretty soon. I don't know how that'll work, but I see ATI making the same move eventually.
Also, the 9800GTX has dropped to the $200 price-point at newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814500039
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
Given the current state of Crossfire, that stands to lose nvidia a lot - SLI is good and all, but the gains being posted by AMD's current dual card offering are nothing short of eyepopping compared to how dual GPU performance used to be, and for a big part still is with SLI.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:43 |
Link to this message
|
AFAIK, Crossfire has always scaled better than SLI. Even X850 crossfire was showing near 100% performance gains.
The GTX280 is a very impressive card. But the price a laughable given the $300 price tag on the 4870. I hope Nvidia does not release their next card too soon. AMD/ATI needs some time on the top after a disappointing last gen effort :)
Any news on what AMD plans to do with Phenom? Are they releasing a successor any time soon or are they making any improvements?
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. June 2008 @ 09:46
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes, but how often did you see those gains? :P
As for what nvidia have planned next, I think their next offering will probably be a dual card based on a pair of GTX260s, with some tweaks to get the power consumption similar to that of the GTX280.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:54 |
Link to this message
|
By dual card do you mean something like the 9800GX2? From what I've heard it's going to be an actual dual core. If that's the case, quite a few older games might have compatibility problems like what we saw during the jump from single to dual core processors.
Also, check this out.
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option...d=8001&Itemid=1
If this can be done on a regular basis, I might seriously make the jump back to AMD. If only for brand loyalty.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 30. June 2008 @ 09:58
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 09:59 |
Link to this message
|
I don't really see the advantage of going dual core with graphics cards. Another new technology to have to program for, and it's not as if you multitask with graphics, you're just trying to add processing power... The only benefit I see is if it means the disadvantage of SLI are removed, in which case I'm all for it.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
30. June 2008 @ 10:06 |
Link to this message
|
I can see gains from dual core. But I don't think they have fully tapped the power of single core graphics yet. We are a far ways away from needing an added core. Even Crysis still has the same basic formula as Far Cry. Models, textures, shaders. And that's it. No extra effects to utilize a dual core.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
2. July 2008 @ 06:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
Heh, yes, Age of Conan typically runs at 40-60% GPU usage on ATI cards... what a farce.
|
