Radeon HD 4870: Better Than GTX 260!

[hannibal]

what's up with RV770 and UE3? I hadn't realized until now that the GeForce cards really pull ahead in those tests. With any other engine it wouldn't be that big a deal, but UE3 is kind of important.

It's because Nvidia has Physx driver support, so better drivers in big time in UE3 engine.

 

[urahozer]

im guessing because on a 30" even the GTX 280 wasnt pumping out playable FPS

 

[homerdog]

what's up with RV770 and UE3? I hadn't realized until now that the GeForce cards really pull ahead in those tests. With any other engine it wouldn't be that big a deal, but UE3 is kind of important.

It's because Nvidia has Physx driver support, so better drivers in big time in UE3 engine.

Was that active in these benches?

Even if it was I don't think physics calculations are the limiting factor at 1920x1200 with 4xAA. In fact, I would expect physics processing on the GPU to do nothing but slow things down in already GPU limited situations e.g. 1920x1200 with AA.

 

[Guest]

Any chance of Dropping a racing game from the tests, and adding Age of Conan. I want to upgrade my system for Age of Conan, but I am hearing that ATI is bad, just terrible when it comes to that game, so on one hand $300 for a 4870 seems an awesome deal, but if it fails in the one game that counts, what good is it.

Otherwise good review. Any chance at seeing 2 of these in Xfire against a SLI 260 rig?

 

[hannibal]

Age of Conan is "As it was mean to be played" game in big time... So it will take guite a lot time until ATI can tweak their drivers for that game, so that it can compete Nvidia in some level.
Many people still underestimate the game engines optimising towars some GPU. The effect can be guite big! I expect the next Starcraft game to beat Nvidia cards like Age of Conan beats ATI cards...
But in anyway we are back in the situation where some games are better with one card and some with another. You just make your pick depending on what you want to play (and in what settings)

 

[geckoar]

Where are they getting the temps for the cards. A 3870 idle at 59 and load at 87...!!?!?!?!?!? I have a 3870 and idle is 33 and load is 56. What are they talking about. But yeah the 4870X2 will come with 2gb of GDDR5 RAM. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-Radeon-4870-X2,5816.html

 

[trackman2010]

Radeon HD 4870: Better Than GTX 260!

O rly?! :O
You don't say!

 

[Guest]

If they can release a 4870x2 with 2gb of ram, for $500, nvidia is in for some trouble.

 

[falchard]

I have a theory that the most rescent patch made for UT3 was actually a nerf ATI patch. I bought UT3 on release and it performed pretty good on my 3870, however after the patch it performed far worse.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

You should have tested this stuff with 8x AA, then you could have changed the title too "Radeon HD 4870: Better Than GTX 280!"

 

[spac13]

i think it's a joke that everyone on here is amazed that the NEW top of the range ATI card beats NVidias new BUDGET card......

and even worse. the new ati card doesn't even beat nvidias top range from LAST GEN...........

i think it's a joke..... this whole "new gen" is a joke. what happend to the days when a car company wouldn't release a card for the sake of having a new card, but when they did release there was actually a good performance jump. not the 2 or 3 FPS we get these days.

i remember going from a 4200Ti to a 6800 and over doubling my FPS..... thats a 2 gen jump. now if i jump from my 8800 to a 280.... i'm lucky to get an extra 10 FPS and i have to pay out a SH!T load of money to get it.

it's a shame these companies now that there are so many people out there who believe they have to have "top of the line" gear to play games well. and these people go out and buy every new thing that is released....

this range of new cards keep on saying about "bang for your buck"..... go buy 2 8800GT or 8800 ultra cards for LESS money and get the same performance.... that's bang for your buck.

 

[hellwig]

I've been wanting to try ATI for years now (been using NVIDIA since GeForce2), but their offerings were either too buggy (8000 series), too expensive (x1950, 2900) or simply unable to compete (3850/3870). With these new 4800 series, I will definately need to move over to ATI (especially since my poor 7600GT is feeling the presure). I've always been an AMD guy, so it will be nice to add ATI into the mix.

 

[Luscious]

[citation][nom]stm1185[/nom]If they can release a 4870x2 with 2gb of ram, for $500, nvidia is in for some trouble.[/citation]
And if you can put two 4870x2 boards in crossfire mode with 4GB total video memory for $1000, it will make pc gaming a whole new experience again.

 

[Chazwuzzer]

Just ordered one from Antares. Wish I had it before the weekend, but whatever. Looking forward to replacing my 8800GTS, which was the most disappointing nVidia product I ever purchased. Don't get me wrong - I've bought a stinker from ATi before too - but this new card would have to burst into flames to bum me out more than the GTS.

 

[falchard]

Memory on the Video Card isn't all that important. There are benchmarks that show just a memory increase on the same card doesn't offer much of an impact. This is because the games just aren't designed to utilize it.

I still think it would be interesting to actually test AMDs platform claims. Phenom might suck on its own tested with an 8800 GT compared to a Core 2. But how does it stack up using a complete AMD package. 790FX chipset with a SB750 Southbridge, and an ATI 4870. Against a Core 2 platform using a P45 with an ATI 4870. Then see what kind of performance difference occurs when both platforms use a G280. I haven't seen tomshardware actually test AMDs platform claims before.

 

[mr roboto]

Still testing vista without Aero? Who uses vista without Aero? Why not just use WinXP then? Seriously I don't understand the logic in that.

 

[zarksentinel]

thats why i like ATI babe.

 

[nukemaster]

[citation][nom]Mr Roboto[/nom]Still testing vista without Aero? Who uses vista without Aero? Why not just use WinXP then? Seriously I don't understand the logic in that.[/citation]
They want MAX performance. I do have to agree, one of vista's main features is aero(it just makes windows feel smoother).

Its good to see how this card performs.

[citation][nom]ram1009[/nom]I've had nothing but problems from all the ATI boards I've owned. Very bad drivers. I'll stay with Nvidia.[/citation]
ATI drivers are no less stable then Nvidia's and in some cases they are MORE stable.

 

[ZootyGray]

Falchard, that's an interesting idea. There's many more POV's that could be presented. Anandtech has a really brutally in-depth review of the new quad 9950-Black Edition Phenom and show it kicking some (but not all) quad-Intel butt (surprisedly).

Does anyone know of a Review of a 700-series Southbridge mobo?

I get a little tired of hearing more about Nvid in the middle of a review about a new AMD product - of course this review started with that in it's title. I guess we have to tolerate this until next gen when AMD owns 'em all, whether in price/perf or just price.

Personally, as a proud AMD fan, I would be happy just hearing about the genuine improvements that the ATI cards have made - I am ethically opposed to supporting Nvid or Ntel - and so, I have little interest in how EXPENSIVE they are or what little they can do for all that money.

So yes, I am very Interested in an all-AMD Review; cos the rest is just comparison for money, takky marketing (let me disrupt your launch, and rain on your parade by conning people about whatever - latest is proprietary fizzx)

- well, they can go fizzz all they want. Treating people like idiots makes for a sad world. Just show us the goods; cos I see through the marketing.

 

[master9716]

wait wait wait!! good article but you guys forgot something? something along of OC'ing??

 

[ZootyGray]

wow - I actually said all that without ranting - well, almost, kinda, for the most part - LMAO at me!

 

[Gazz]

Great article but he is bius toward nvidia he was forever changing the way he read the graph to suit what he was writting
If did tests both with aa and without and one card was fast with the aa then without you still have to be consistent right thoughout all the test as to what the one you use as the lean
Aparently the 4870 had to lead in bouth the aa tests and the non get get put in the front of nvidia
be consistent dont manipulate the readings just to make the statement that one was far superior or better
But all up it was a very good aprasil of the cards in question

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]Luscious[/nom]And if you can put two 4870x2 boards in crossfire mode with 4GB total video memory for $1000, it will make pc gaming a whole new experience again.[/citation]

LOL, a 2GB 4870X2 would give you 1GB of usable RAM. Two in Crossfire would still give you 1GB of useable RAM. I'd like three in Crossfire, with 6 graphics processors...but only 1GB of useable RAM.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]Mr Roboto[/nom]Still testing vista without Aero? Who uses vista without Aero? Why not just use WinXP then? Seriously I don't understand the logic in that.[/citation]

Because XP is an End Of Life product. So you want the best performance, but if you can't buy XP (or soon won't be able to) you use Vista and disable Aero.

 

[Lozil]

Go ATI(AMD) go...

http://free-and-useful.blogspot.com