• Happy holidays, folks! Thanks to each and every one of you for being part of the Tom's Hardware community!

VGA Charts 2008: 101 Configurations Tested

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not to nit pick but ummm where is the Radeon 4870x2 2GB card in those charts or did I miss it you know the one with 2GB memory umm 800x2 shaders GDDR5 memory 3.6Ghz rated at & 750 core x2 whatever.
 
Just curious. Why is it you're using catalyst 8.6 for the ATI cards which doesn't have proper support for the 4000 series cards, instead of 8.7 or 8.8? Yet for the Nvidia cards, you use the most up to date drivers.
 
[citation][nom]Rocky1234[/nom]Not to nit pick but ummm where is the Radeon 4870x2 2GB card in those charts or did I miss it you know the one with 2GB memory umm 800x2 shaders GDDR5 memory 3.6Ghz rated at & 750 core x2 whatever.[/citation]

As mentioned in the charts introduction, these numbers take hours upon hours to compile, which means setting cut-offs for the product submissions and drivers. Unfortunately, the X2 didn't make it. However, there are results for a pair of 4870s in CrossFire, which is a roughly equivalent configuration. You'll also notice that there are no 4600-series Radeons. Again, same issue.
 
Great job, I'm always pointing people to the charts now they can compare the latest hardware.

The charts also show the difference between games they are coded well and ones that aren't. Compare Crysis (very high quality) and HL2 Ep2 at 1920 x 1200 4xAA 8xAF, on Crysis even the best hardware left begging for mercy at around 24fps, yet HL2 EP2 which looks just as good (graphically speaking) IMO will run at 30 FPS on a 8600 GTS (yes an 8600 GTS!) and X1800XL. A small portion of the difference can be put down to DX10 but not all of it.
 
Wonder why you insist on using catalyst 8.6 - a 3/4 months old driver, out *before* the whole HD4xx0 series and not really supporting it. And by the time the 48x0 cards were released you also had a better driver with actual support the the cards (and some 10% performance boost).
 
ATI fanboys have only a reason to whine, if and only IF Tom's used a more recent Nvidia drivers than ATI's (something i don't know)

Otherwise just shut up
 
As a suggestion for permalinking chart comparisons, add an option for permalinking that doesn't contain HTML code. Some forums don't allow posting HTML. Also, using the URL in the browser address bar doesn't work because it contains square brackets, and I think the software tries to parse part of the URL as BBCode and this breaks the link. Otherwise it's just because it's non-standard in a URL. For example:

=on∏[2118]=on]http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/compare,794.html?prod[2113]=on∏[2118]=on

The link breaks because of the []. It should point to http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/compare,794.html?prod%5B2113%5D=on&prod%5B2118%5D=on (permalink with HTML removed).
 
I think for stability reason and to act as control, Tom's won't overclock the CPU but for a lot of these cards, 2.93GHz isn't enough. An e8600 would do a better job, let alone an overclocked 4.5GHz e8600.
 
Glad to see you mentioned the cpu restrictions. At 3Ghz, its simply not enough for todays cards, especially in CF/SLI. Great to see this, this is a long awaited achievement which only puts a + in the Toms site. Great going
 
[citation][nom]jaydeejohn[/nom]Glad to see you mentioned the cpu restrictions. At 3Ghz, its simply not enough for todays cards, especially in CF/SLI. Great to see this, this is a long awaited achievement which only puts a + in the Toms site. Great going[/citation]
Some people are under the impression todays cpus are good enough at their stock speeds. We need more truth about this out there so people understand. I wish for newer updates with newer drivers as they come down the chute, especially when the cards are out and for sale. I hope it isnt too long before we see an update
 
Okay, how does the single most powerful graphics card not make the 'cut-off'? If you've already spent 500 hours doing these benchmarks then what's the problem with spending a couple more? Man, that's annoying. How can you say the 4870 crossfire is similar enough to the 4870 x2 to justify not testing? The x2 has 2x the amount of GDDR5 memory. Stupid...
 
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom][/citation]

I disagree that 2 4870 = 1 4870x2. You do see a slight bump in performance with a 4870x2 over 2x4870. Then 4600 just came out, so you have an excuse for those, but not the 4870x2. Although I doubt my comments will be taken seriously and nothing will come of it, I am just amazed that THG refuses to use a 4870x2. It’s almost like you guys are biased against that card.

It just makes me mad... >:|
 
al the 4860x2 is, is crossfire 4870s with more ram.... not gonna give out much more then reg crossfire 4870s.....

TH had their reasons for doign what the did.
 
[citation][nom]swampthug[/nom]If you've already spent 500 hours doing these benchmarks then what's the problem with spending a couple more? [/citation]
I get sick of work after 4 hours, I can't imagine doing 500. I'd never want to see a 3DMark score again in my life.
 
Did they at least use the hotfix with Cat 8.6?
I mean it's stupid to use a certain driver with cards that it doesn't officially support.
Both the Nvidia and ATi drivers used are from June, but they could have waited a bit until better drivers were out.
This just doesn't offer a good representation of some cards, especially the HD 4000 series.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom