Update on 4890...

[L1qu1d]

20% doesn't beat the 285, it matches the 280 lol. Anyways...

For the sake of argument, Nvidia lost basically all of it's ties to the console world for now. Ps3 should've stuck with custom built.

I can't wait to be 30 and to look at integrated GPus, and see if they can match 2 285s then or if we're going to need external video cards at all haha.

@ 4890, 4890 X2 needs to come out, it will be the card that will settle the high end prices.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Heres old news, but worthy :
AMD would be giving the RV770 a refresh, with the introduction of a new graphics processor, which could come out before RV870. This graphics processor is to be codenamed RV790 while the possible new SKU name is kept under the wraps for now. AMD would be looking to maintain the same exact manufacturing process of the RV770 and all its machinery, but it would be making changes to certain parts of the GPU that genuinely facilitate it to run at higher clock-speeds, unleashing the best efficiency level of all its 10 ALU clusters.

Déjà-vu? AMD has already attempted to achieve something similar, with its big plans on the Super-RV770 GPU, where the objective was the same: to achieve higher clock speeds, but the approach wasn’t right. All they did back then, was to put batches of RV770 through binning, pick the best performing parts, and use it on premium SKUs with improved cooling. The attempt evidently wasn’t very successful: no AMD partner was able to sell graphics cards that ran stable out of the box, in clock-speeds they set out to achieve: excess of 950 MHz.

This time around, the objective remains the same: to make the machinery of RV770 operate at very high clock-speeds, to bring out the best performance-efficiency of those 800 stream processors, but the approach would be different: to reengineer parts of the GPU to facilitate higher clock speeds. This aims to bring in a boost to the shader compute power (SCP) of the GPU, and push its performance. What gains are slated to be brought about? Significant and sufficient. Significant, with the increase of reference clock-speeds beyond those of what the current RV770 can reach with overclocking, and sufficient for making it competitive with G200b based products.


http://www.techpowerup.com/75685/AMD_to_Give_RV770_a_Refresh_G200b_Counterattack_Planned.html

Now, it says here a clock of 950. Thats 26% if my math is right, and assuming a non perfect scaling, assuring a 20+% boost is certainly feasible

 

[L1qu1d]

This keeps changing, I think I'm just going to wait and see the card before arguing in the dust.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Thats what Ive been saying all along, the specs have bounced all over the place, and its a pick your spec fest at best, fest. heheh. But these rumors of 900Mhz+ have been consistant, and seeing what TPU said in my link, it isnt JUST a simple how high can it go type of upgrade

 

[spathotan]

While 900mhz+ sounds amazing (it is), some of you are talking about jumping over 2 cards and possibly matching a third. That being GTX 260 216, GTX 280, and matching the GTX 285? That is madness for a revision card.

The 4870 already isnt very efficient and the temps are extremely high, adding another 200mhz to that plus whatever to the memory and youre talking about a rough 10-20c increase in temps from the 4870, guestimation. And all they are doing is "re-engineering" the R770?

Its still the same chip, if it was as simple as just "re-engineering" to get lower temps then why didnt they do that in the first place with the 4870? It sounds like a run around story.

Im not arguing that 900mhz+ isnt possible, im sure it is. My problem is keeping the temps under control.

 

[jennyh]

While 900mhz+ sounds amazing (it is), some of you are talking about jumping over 2 cards and possibly matching a third. That being GTX 260 216, GTX 280, and matching the GTX 285? That is madness for a revision card.

The 4870 already isnt very efficient and the temps are extremely high, adding another 200mhz to that plus whatever to the memory and youre talking about a rough 10-20c increase in temps from the 4870, guestimation. And all they are doing is "re-engineering" the R770?

Its still the same chip, if it was as simple as just "re-engineering" to get lower temps then why didnt they do that in the first place with the 4870? It sounds like a run around story.

Im not arguing that 900mhz+ isnt possible, im sure it is. My problem is keeping the temps under control.

Compare the original 4870 to the original 260 and 280.

Then realise that while Nvidia scrambled to release better and faster versions of their gpu's, ATI did nothing. Now, almost 1 year later, ATI are going to release their ultimate rv770.

Do you seriously believe that it's not going to be better than a 285gtx?

And yes, I know that Nvidia made a die shrink in the process.

 

[L1qu1d]

@spathotan
Thats nothing a custom cooler wont cure haha

@JennyH

Again, it might be better, it might match it, or it might turn out to be worse.

You can be sure of 1 thing, its coming april 2009

 

[jennyh]

@spathotan
Thats nothing a custom cooler wont cure haha

@JennyH

Again, it might be better, it might match it, or it might turn out to be worse.

You can be sure of 1 thing, its coming april 2009

ATI wouldn't release it unless it was better.

I could be wrong, but I don't see how, and I don't see what ATI would have to gain by releasing a slower card than the 285gtx now. Do you? What do ATI have to gain by releasing a slower card except to confirm that Nvidia have taken the lead again?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Its sorta acknowledged that 1gig 4870 matches a 216, just due to mem amount alone, as the 260 has more memory to begin with. This has been the rumor, and now it has a twist to it. Better silicon/rev, better process (GT vs GP), and a few tweaks that werent tried in the beginning as 40nm was expected, and new cards/new arch was to be out June of this year, and knowing that 40nm has been delayed, they could have done a few things, and have them implemented not only on this card, but future cards as well, which makes more sense, as usually nVidia makes a 1 time monster, then just moves on ala 7800GTX512, 8800Ultra etc

 

[L1qu1d]

ATI wouldn't release it unless it was better.

I could be wrong, but I don't see how, and I don't see what ATI would have to gain by releasing a slower card than the 285gtx now. Do you? What do ATI have to gain by releasing a slower card except to confirm that Nvidia have taken the lead again?

Remember ATi seems to be on the offense for p/p...their style is alot better, seeing as their cards use to be 20% slower lets say, but 40% cheaper (give or take, and numbers aren't to scale, but you get the idea).

Look at the 4870 1 gig, its 20% slower than the 280 GTX and its almost 50% cheaper.

Its alot more clever than releasing number 1 for an impossible cost.

 

[jennyh]

Remember ATi seems to be on the offense for p/p...their style is alot better, seeing as their cards use to be 20% slower lets say, but 40% cheaper (give or take, and numbers aren't to scale, but you get the idea).

Look at the 4870 1 gig, its 20% slower than the 280 GTX and its almost 50% cheaper.

Its alot more clever than releasing number 1 for an impossible cost.

The 4870 1 gig isn't 20% slower than a 280gtx. What benchmarks are you viewing to make you think that?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Not sure vwhat you mean here. The 1900 beat the 7900, the 2xxx sucked, the 3 was better but didnt offer perf, and until just recently, the 4870x2 was the fastest single slot gpu out for at least 6 months. Now maybe they want the single gpu title? And it wont require a new arch? Why not?

 

[L1qu1d]

The 4870 1 gig isn't 20% slower than a 280gtx. What benchmarks are you viewing to make you think that?

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-285-review--3way-sli/


@jaydee
4870 x2 I'll assume, yes it was the fastest, but look at the GPus used, they were their high end, and 4870 X2 quad still didn't beat out the 280 GTX tri overall, yet the price was lower.
It was ontop for single GPU that is correct

 

[L1qu1d]

K well have a good nite, i've got some RE5 to finish

 

[jennyh]

http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-285-review--3way-sli/


@jaydee
4870 x2 I'll assume, yes it was the fastest, but look at the GPus used, they were their high end, and 4870 X2 quad still didn't beat out the 280 GTX tri overall, yet the price was lower.
It was ontop for single GPU that is correct

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3520

That one clearly shows that the 1 gig 4870's can match the 285's in multi-card setups. That's the 285 benchmarks, not the 280 which is what I asked for.

Substitute those 4870 1 gigs for 4890's and what do you think the result will be?

 

[L1qu1d]

different website different charts, what makes urs right and mine wrong?

"The 4-way Radeon HD 4870 1GB only leads 3-way GTX 280/285 in 2 out of the 6 tests, though it ties in one of them (Fallout 3 again)"

And its not X2 4870s, its 4 physical 4870s which tend to produce higher frames for some reason. But thats not the point.

We were talking GPU by GPU.

Look at a game like grid, the 4870 kills the 280 GTX (285). Thats a game that likes the SP

We'll see the cards even @ 4890 exchange blows witht he 280s.

You can never have the best of both worlds

And my site compared 4870 1 gig vs 280 vs 285:0

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Even an older check of multi card setups show that trifire or trisli are a better solution, and that trifire shows as good improvements as trisli
http://www.behardware.com/articles/736-15/report-4-radeon-hd-4870s-versus-3-geforce-gtx-280s.html

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Also, looking at my link, youll see the 280 is 13% faster than the 4870, not 20%

 

[L1qu1d]

I'm basing my facts on guru3d, hasn't steered me wrong so far


"Published on December 2, 2008"

Nvidia recently released drivers to improve high res + AA

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Mines Dec 2nd as well

 

[jennyh]

different website different charts, what makes urs right and mine wrong?

"The 4-way Radeon HD 4870 1GB only leads 3-way GTX 280/285 in 2 out of the 6 tests, though it ties in one of them (Fallout 3 again)"

And its not X2 4870s, its 4 physical 4870s which tend to produce higher frames for some reason. But thats not the point.

We were talking GPU by GPU.

Look at a game like grid, the 4870 kills the 280 GTX (285). Thats a game that likes the SP

We'll see the cards even @ 4890 exchange blows witht he 280s.

You can never have the best of both worlds

And my site compared 4870 1 gig vs 280 vs 285:0

Well I didn't ask for multi gpu benchmarks but thats what you linked. I asked for benchmarks showing the 280gtx to be 20% faster than the 1gig 4870 so it's only fair that I linked back what I did.

Your benchmarks showed 1 game where the 280 scored about 20% higher than the 4870 1 gig. The same benchmarks showed the 4870 1 gig beating the 280 in a game (I didn't check the rest of them btw).

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that the 280gtx is 20% faster than the 4870 1 gig? Do you only play that game? What If I play CoD4 or Grid, does that mean the 4870 1 gig is 10% faster than the 280gtx?

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Also
"Our performance index puts the 3 multi-GPU systems at the same level in 4x antialiasing or without antialiasing. The 3 GeForce GTX 280s perform better with 8x antialiasing however, due to the fact that the Radeons have a problem in this mode in Racedriver GRID. If we don’t take this game into account the quad CrossFire X moves in front of the 3 GeForce GTX 280 on our index." Thats since been fixed as well in new drivers

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

So, since theres 2 links showing that the overall difference between a 280 and a 4870 is around 13%, we can dispell the 20% claim

 

[L1qu1d]

Dec 2 was taken from your link Jaydee I should've made that clearerd.

@Jenny
280 GTX gain over 4870 1 gig
Far Cry 2 2560x1600 - 22%
COD5 " - 21%
Fear " - 19%
Brother in hell "- 12%
Crysis Warhead " - 12%
Mass Effect " -16%
Fallout 3 " - 14%
Dead space " - 64%
Left 4 dead " - 15%
AVG 22%

I dunno man

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Wheres Grid? Just adding that game turns those numbers upside down