AMD's Radeon HD 4770 Specs Revealed

[zedx]

"Additionally, the 40nm Radeon HD 4770 utilizes GDDR5 memory (512 MB, 128-bit) and provides 1960 GFLOPs of processing power; the 65nm/55nm 9800 GT uses GDDR3 (256-bit) memory and provides 504 GFLOPs of processing power."

Please that is 960 GFLOP/s , not 1960. Man Tom's is getting buggier by the day :\

 

[kelfen]

blizzard is going to use havok for there next games sc2 and dioblo 3

 

[graviongr]

[citation][nom]ohim[/nom]the thing that keeps me away from ati is the need to install .net framework just to install the drivers .... i don`t want to be forced to install that just for the drivers.[/citation]

Well you're in luck because you don't need the .NET framework to install drivers for ATI/AMD cards.

The only time you'll want to install .NET framework is if you want to install the CCC (catalyst control center) along with the driver.

Anyways, I have .NET installed and use CCC and have no problems, under Windows XP Home 32bit anyways.

 

[Tindytim]

[citation][nom]scarpa[/nom]If Ati doesn't gain market share given its superior performance per dollar then the consumers must be retarded.[/citation]
I agree with that to a degree. I stay as far away from ATI as I can, but that's because their support for linux is extremely hit and miss. I hope they can get more of Nvida's market share (the big dog, with more resources) so their forced to make something much better.

But until ATI gets consistent support for Linux, I'm sticking with Nvidia.

 

[KyleSTL]

Bottom line is it costs money to go green. I have an HD3850 that I am happy with, it suits me fine for now. I would be saving electricity by going with the HD4770 for sure, but them I would fall under the category of wasteful spending and consuming extra material resources. If you have a car that is five years or older, just go out and buy a new one, you'll save gasoline/petrol and and have a much smaller footprint on the environment. It isn't as easy being "green" as some environmentalists make it out to be is it?

Same reason I'm still rocking the P4, it does what I need it to do (barely). There isn't really a need to spend money to replace it.

 

[sonofliberty08]

80W are good , but if under 72W will be perfect , so we don't need the 6pin extra power . wonder how good it's when compare to 4830 on the game .

 

[Guest]

Someone asked about the performance, so here is what I think and why:

The HD4770 should be equivalent in performance to the HD4850. Just look at the stats:

4770 4850
---- ----
Clock Speed (MHz) 750 625
Stream Processors 640 800
Bandwidth (GB/s) 51.2 57.2

To get a rough idea of the performance, i will multiply the # of stream processors by the clock speed. (I don't know how to explain what this means so i won't, but it is a very good measure of performance.)

4770 = 480,000
4850 = 500,000

Based on these figures, the 4850 is approximately 4% faster. However, Clock speed counts more then the # of Stream processors, so the 4770 may actually end up being faster.

The second aspect affecting performance is memory bandwidth. The 4850 wins by 12%. However, the effect of bandwidth on performance is not as important as the previously stated factors. Also, the choice of the slower 800 MHz memory over 900 MHz or 1000 MHz memory seems to indicate that it makes very little difference.

Conclusion:

Overall the 4770 should be equivalent to the 4850. For $99 this card delivers performance that can only be beaten for $200+. I think the choice is obvious:

HD 4770 IS THE CARD TO BUY

 

[megamanx00]

I'd really like to see some benchmarks for this card, but I guess those will come soon enough. I assume that the model with GDDR3 will be named the 4750, where I previously thought it would be named the 4730 and the GDDR5 version the 4750. This will probably be the new budget board of choice and will probably force down the price of the 9800GT even more, which is certainly good news for owners of an SLi board and one 9800GT.

 

[Guest]

If ATI could only get its act together and do the right thing with Linux, it would be a no-brainer. As it is, I will probably stick with Nvidia.

Also, I have not had problems with either brand card in years. Can't say the same about mobo's.

 

[martel80]

[citation][nom]jaragon13[/nom]SAVE THE WHALES!Give me a break, racist eurotrash.[/citation]
Racist? Do you even know the meaning of the word? Since when has the American consumer behaviour anything to do with race? It seems that you're affected by your American affairs more than I am by my European ones.
Take it easy, man. You're already switching from 3+ liter cars to more reasonable ones so there's hope for you still.

 

[Tindytim]

[citation][nom]anonymousNvidiaboi[/nom]If ATI could only get its act together and do the right thing with Linux[/citation]
I don't understand why they haven't. I can really see a low power, high efficiency system, with all open source software really marketing well to granola eating, smelly, dirty hippies.

 

[matt_b]

[citation][nom]hairycat101[/nom]@ Matt_BI wasn't arguing for PhysX over Havok. Some games do, in fact, use PhysX and the eye-candy for those games is a bonus if you have an old card laying around that can bring it out. That is it. That is all. That is the only point I was making concerning PhysX. While we are on the topic, though, some big name developers are starting to look at PhysX more and more. Who knows... it may die out or might gain in popularity.[/citation]
I realize that, I was taking what you had to say about PhysX running off of the GPU and running with it, that's all. Sorry if I came across as calling you out or anything like that.

 

[cybot_x1024]

Looks like the 4770 OC will give the 9800GTX+ a run for its money considering the stock will have 960 GFlops (compared to 4850 which is 1 TFLOP). I cant wait for the showdown.

 

[Guest]

This is a great card, it beats the sh it out of Nvidias older cards, so what if they're older? Nvidia keeps rebranding them, so it's relevant. Besides, this isn't supposed to be the high-end, it's supposed to be blazingly fast per $$$, this is the perfect product for the times.

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]wargamer[/nom]Someone asked about the performance, so here is what I think and why....[/citation]
Good analysis, I've been saying the same thing for the last two months. ATI's new lineup should be 4890, 4870, 4770, 4750, 4670...

 

[deathblooms2k1]

[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]Good analysis, I've been saying the same thing for the last two months. ATI's new lineup should be 4890, 4870, 4770, 4750, 4670...[/citation]
Wow and as a consumer would I be able to conclude that the 4890 is faster then the 4770 and that the 4770 is faster then the 4750 without doing any research?

Someone do the nvidia lineup. Part of the reason I'm planning on replacing my 8800 GTS with an ATI card is because I don't feel like wasting time trying to figure out what exactly I'm buying when looking at the nvidia cards.

 

[bounty]

Yea, but is your 4830 faster or slower than your 4770? I can clearly tell by the model # that the 4830 is in fact faster............................................................ or is it?

 

[bl3azy]

Someone should do some Massive ATI/Vidia card benchmarking for the current series of cards in a clear and concise manner to just, uum, I dunno, clear any confusion? maybe there is, I haven't personaly looked.

 

[Tindytim]

[citation][nom]deathblooms2k1[/nom]Part of the reason I'm planning on replacing my 8800 GTS with an ATI card is because I don't feel like wasting time trying to figure out what exactly I'm buying when looking at the nvidia cards.[/citation]
I'm sorry, but that's pretty silly.

It doesn't matter which is faster, but how much faster it is, and how much more it costs.

If you want the most for your money, you'll have to do research. Just like any other product.

 

[KyleSTL]

The HD4770 should be equivalent in performance to the HD4850. Just look at the stats:
...

But you're forgetting ROP and TMU count, those are both very important. Too few of those and your powerhouse budget card suddenly becomes an expensive entry-level GPU (I'm not saying I think this will be the case, but you're not looking at all the units in your comparison, only shaders).

 

[Guest]

i believe that 4770 will not be faster than 4830;
4770 (128 bit memory interface with gddr5) probably will not be faster than 4830 (256 bit memory interface with gddr3) - they will be very close, but i could be wrong - we will se 😛

 

[boudy]

I cant wait to see the overclocking abilities of this card, as well as the Crossfire.

 

[boudy]

[citation][nom]cybot_x1024[/nom]Looks like the 4770 OC will give the 9800GTX+ a run for its money...
...I cant wait for the showdown.[/citation]

You mean the GTS 250, right? lol I cant believe Nvidia keeps renaming their cards...

Anyway, I too would like to see how Nvidia responds to this. Obviously their card wont compete with the 4770 price/performance-wise (or power consumption for that matter).
So how will Nvidia deal with a card like this on the market?

 

[boudy]

Sorry to have 3 comments in a row here, but I keep forgetting to add something.

I see the 4770 REPLACING the 4850.
My first reason to come to this conclusion is that the 4770 looks to be close to the 4850 in performance (it will probably be between the 4830 and 4850 performance-wise).
My second reason that I believe this is the fact that the 4850 uses GDDR3 memory and the 4770 uses GDDR5 memory. It doesnt make sense to have a GDDR3 card in the middle of 2 GDDR5 cards.
My last reason is that there is a 4750 coming out. The performance difference between the 4670 and the 4830 was almost equal to the performance difference between the 4850 and the 4830. So where exactly would the 4750 fit in, especially if it is a down-clocked version of the 4770 with GDDR3 memory? My guess is right where the 4830 is, but for less money.

 

[amdfangirl]

[citation][nom]sonofliberty08[/nom]80W are good , but if under 72W will be perfect , so we don't need the 6pin extra power . wonder how good it's when compare to 4830 on the game .[/citation]

Chuckles in background...

Just got a 740G...