• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Come get your 4870 Review's =D

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
This looks very good for AMD. I always love those anandtech reviews. Chinstrap the 9800gtx+ sli beats the 8800gt sli in 2560x1600 so it must be a cpu bound issue.
 
Check the prices of NVidia's new cards. The 4870 performs at or above the GTX 260 in many, many cases, the 4870 is going to be $300 and the GTX 260 is $400. In some cases, the 4870 performs just under the $600-$650 GTX 280. The performance/dollar on that card is out of this world.

Yes, it's hideously overpriced. Ditto for the 260. 9800GX2 at $400 is where it's at :)

Nvidia is gonna have to drop a 9800GX2+ with dual 55nm chips to even have a hope of coming anywhere near the R700, and even then I doubt they can beat it.

edit: Suggestion to OP: Change the anand link to point at the first page of the review :p It's an interesting read.
 
Last edited:
Finally!

It's AMD/ATi's time for payback after the past few years. Good 3dmark scores and game scores.

It's going to be nice to have some competitiveness again.
 
it's been obvious for a while that R700 would beat the 280.
"The big question is how much performance GDDR5 could add to GT200 design."

That's the part that interests me.
 
"The big question is how much performance GDDR5 could add to GT200 design."

That's the part that interests me.

Conversely, what would going from a 256 bus to a 512 bus do for the ATI cards?

GDDR5 is more expensive than GDDR3 so it would seem that making that change on nVidia's side would make the cards even more expensive.

Changing Bus width is a process change that can be done relatively cheap for ATI/AMD...
 
Just finished a thorough read of the anand article. 4850 seems like the real winner in this round of the GPU wars. 4870 is nice, but I have to disagree with one thing. At the end of the article, they mention that in Nvidia pricing, the 4850 should be $250 and the 4870 should be $400. That shows a slight bias on anand's part. 4850 is priced right where is should be, slightly cheaper than 9800GTX+, and 4870 is priced where it should be: about 25% less than a 9800GX2. If the 4870 was $400, it would be competing with GX2 at the same price and get it's butt handed to it.

4850 for $190? Definitely.

4870 for $300? No thanks.

4870 at $250? We'll talk ;)

The real shocker to me is how the 9800GX2 has actually managed to stay way out in front, only losing a couple tests to the GTX280 at 2560x1600, and is priced the same as a GTX 260. They better discontinue the thing fast if they want to sell the GTX 200 series cards at all. And update it with 55nm cores if they want to have a prayer in hell against 4870X2.

I do wish they had OCed the cards, oh well.
 
Just finished a thorough read of the anand article. 4850 seems like the real winner in this round of the GPU wars. 4870 is nice, but I have to disagree with one thing. At the end of the article, they mention that in Nvidia pricing, the 4850 should be $250 and the 4870 should be $400. That shows a slight bias on anand's part. 4850 is priced right where is should be, slightly cheaper than 9800GTX+, and 4870 is priced where it should be: about 25% less than a 9800GX2. If the 4870 was $400, it would be competing with GX2 at the same price and get it's butt handed to it.

4850 for $190? Definitely.

4870 for $300? No thanks.

4870 at $250? We'll talk

The real shocker to me is how the 9800GX2 has actually managed to stay way out in front, only losing a couple tests to the GTX280 at 2560x1600, and is priced the same as a GTX 260. They better discontinue the thing fast if they want to sell the GTX 200 series cards at all. And update it with 55nm cores if they want to have a prayer in hell against 4870X2.

I do wish they had OCed the cards, oh well.
I'm suprised you don't think the $299 price tag of the HD 4870 is good considering it's performance, we have to pay around £175 over here in Europe. And I didn't like the Hexus review because of the limited amount of benches, I read the Anandtech review.

I also think the GTX+ has no right to be priced higher than the HD 4850, but I don't think we'll ever agree on that one so let's not argue.
 
It looks like a single 4870 beats out a single gtx280 in bioshock and grid.. my bed is made.

Also, I'm surprise to see that the 4870 only has 512mb ram.
 
I'm also wondering if their are any pcb changes.

Theirs a big increase in perfomance for supposedly only being higher binned memory chips...
 
I haven't gotten the chance to read all the reviews yet, but did anyone catch one that mentions the temps? I saw in many places where they said "it was too hot to touch, even at idle" but I was hoping someone caught actual temp readings?

Which seems odd to me, the cooler looks REALLY beefy with those massive heatpipes, I'm surprised it idles so high... (even my 9800GTX doesn't idle that high)
 
Conversely, what would going from a 256 bus to a 512 bus do for the ATI cards?

GDDR5 is more expensive than GDDR3 so it would seem that making that change on nVidia's side would make the cards even more expensive.

Changing Bus width is a process change that can be done relatively cheap for ATI/AMD...

I thought that changing the bus width (at least going to a wider bus) would entail a complete redesign of the core, and PCB layout. How is that cheap?

Afaik widening the bus or going w/ faster RAM has the same end result...higher bandwidth. Faster RAM is the cheaper way to do it.

I'm also wondering if their are any pcb changes.

Theirs a big increase in perfomance for supposedly only being higher binned memory chips...

And higher speed core/shaders. I want to see the 4850 and 4870 go head-to-head at the same core-shader speeds, and see how much difference the higher speed RAM makes.

I haven't gotten the chance to read all the reviews yet, but did anyone catch one that mentions the temps? I saw in many places where they said "it was too hot to touch, even at idle" but I was hoping someone caught actual temp readings?

Which seems odd to me, the cooler looks REALLY beefy with those massive heatpipes, I'm surprised it idles so high... (even my 9800GTX doesn't idle that high)

I think a lot of the reason the cards are so hot is b/c of the default fan speed. If you mod the fan to run 100% the 4850 is a lot cooler.
 
Yeah, theirs a thread here where brollocks was testing his and said it defaults to like 12% fan speed. He hard modded the fan to 100% and it stays cooler now.
 
I'm suprised you don't think the $299 price tag of the HD 4870 is good considering it's performance, we have to pay around £175 over here in Europe. And I didn't like the Hexus review because of the limited amount of benches, I read the Anandtech review.

Anandtech is becoming the only site I'll read GPU reviews from. I wish they'd show more min/max/avg scores, but the in depth information is quite revealing.

If there was no 4850 at $190, I would think $300 was OK for the 4870. As is, I don't think 20% more performance for 50% more money than the 4850 is worth it. Might as well get a GX2 if you are already at $300, what's another $100?
 
Cool cool..so my first uber card will be an ATi 4870 pwnage edition:eek:
Upgrading from my 6600GT along with P45 and Intel multi core CPU should send me from 19fps to gaming hyperspace.
I'll be sure to post pics, specs and my "WOOOOT" face when i've built and tested it. Thanks guys for this topic:beer:


Bye bye Nvidia!
 
Back