ATi 4870/4850 Review Thread

[dingetje]

it is rumoured there will be a new revision of the 48xx core......when will that happen? it would kinda suck to have the first revision if the cooler running new revision is out

 

[chewietobbacca]

Whered you hear the rumor? All that will likely happen is a BIOS fix to enable powerplay, but even drivers might do that.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: srp49ers
I upgraded from my ati 3780 to the 4850 yesterday. And when I go play Hd videos the cpu utilization is very high like 70-80% and the video is not as smooth as with my 3870.
the cpu usage with the 3870 was around 40%.

Anyone else having this problem. could it just be drivers. Im using the hotfix version.

What kind of HD video are you trying to play?

- Codec
- File format (are you playing off discs or a hard disk?)
- Player

CPU utilization @70~80% means zero off-loading from the GPU. Your CPU is doing all the transcoding. Something is not setup right.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: srp49ers
I upgraded from my ati 3780 to the 4850 yesterday. And when I go play Hd videos the cpu utilization is very high like 70-80% and the video is not as smooth as with my 3870.
the cpu usage with the 3870 was around 40%.

Anyone else having this problem. could it just be drivers. Im using the hotfix version.

Yeah thatll be the drivers, if your using Windows media player, goto tools>Options>performance and make sure DirectX Video is ticked.

If using PowerDVD to playback HD then make sure "Use Hardware Acceleration" is ticked.

If Using VLC player then F*ck knows ive not got my head round its settings yet and maybe somone else could tell you how to set it up for best quality playback.

 

[Qbah]

Couldn't resist the urge and bought a 4870 Found one for 1900DKK (400$) which is a steal here! A GTX260 is 2400DKK (510$) , so it's a no-brainer. A 9800GTX is 1500DKK (320$) the cheapest and the 4850 can be had for as little as 1200DKK (255$).

Can't wait to put this puppy to the test

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
<---ignoring chizow. hmmm, I might make that into my sig. Seriously, how many of us other than bfg are even trying to reason with chizow any more? A lot of people wanted 3870 to beat 8800gt but they went away as more and more benchies proved the g92 superiority. Guess what? A lot of people wanted gt200 to beat r(v)7xx, but the value is so much greater with ati this time around that only the blind fanboys are even debating the issue at this point. Nvidia will be back, they'll probably stomp the crap out of ati next round or at least be much more competitive, but for now ati is the card to own. period.

Disagree.

While for gaming the 4870 is a great deal at $100 less MSRP than the GTX260, it lacks:

1. 384MB of RAM the GTX260 has.

2. PhysX that will be integrated into 16 games this year, double that next.

3. MultiGPU flexibility. When ATs review says they're adding support for popular games released last Fall after launch, you have to wonder about support for games that aren't reviewed.

If AMD is truly going to go the multi-GPU route for its high end parts, it needs to enable more consistent support for CF across the board - regardless of whether or not we feature those games in our reviews.

They have since started talking about how the era of the large, "monolithic" GPU is over. I think that's hogwash...... Big chips don't suffer from the quirks of multi-GPU implementations, which never seem to have profiles for newly released games just as you'd want to be playing them......

4. CUDA

The 4870s don't really even compete with GTX280s for the most part.


That said, the 48XX series are a big step forward for AMD and a good value. (just not a "ZOMG! these are teh only cards that exist!" type value you're asserting)

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
<---ignoring chizow. hmmm, I might make that into my sig. Seriously, how many of us other than bfg are even trying to reason with chizow any more? A lot of people wanted 3870 to beat 8800gt but they went away as more and more benchies proved the g92 superiority. Guess what? A lot of people wanted gt200 to beat r(v)7xx, but the value is so much greater with ati this time around that only the blind fanboys are even debating the issue at this point. Nvidia will be back, they'll probably stomp the crap out of ati next round or at least be much more competitive, but for now ati is the card to own. period.

Disagree.

While for gaming the 4870 is a great deal at $100 less MSRP than the GTX260, it lacks:

1. 384MB of RAM the GTX260 has.

2. PhysX that will be integrated into 16 games this year, double that next.

3. MultiGPU flexibility. When ATs review says they're adding support for popular games released last Fall after launch, you have to wonder about support for games that aren't reviewed.

If AMD is truly going to go the multi-GPU route for its high end parts, it needs to enable more consistent support for CF across the board - regardless of whether or not we feature those games in our reviews.

They have since started talking about how the era of the large, "monolithic" GPU is over. I think that's hogwash...... Big chips don't suffer from the quirks of multi-GPU implementations, which never seem to have profiles for newly released games just as you'd want to be playing them......

4. CUDA

The 4870s don't really even compete with GTX280s for the most part.


That said, the 48XX series are a big step forward for AMD and a good value. (just not a "ZOMG! these are teh only cards that exist!" type value you're asserting)

So now we're arguing over specifications? Why do I care that the GTX 260 has 896MB of memory if it does not help it perform well? nVidia needs more VRAM as their cards tend to use it very ineffectively. The HD 4870 performs very well even at 2560x1600 with its 512MB of memory. And 1GB versions will be available for cheaper than the GTX 260 as well.

Havok is integrated into a bunch of games as well. PhysX is a decent selling point, but it's not going to work in every situation. You couldn't put PhysX in Crysis and run it on the GPU... the game needs all the GPU resources it can get for graphics. PhysX on the GPU only works when the game is not challenging to the GPU.

Multi-GPU flexibility as a selling point for nVidia graphics cards? It's the other way around. There is no flexibility with nVidia cards, because 99% of people cannot use SLI. Most people have Intel boards and they support Crossfire. Multi-GPU is a selling point for AMD, not nVidia.

AMD GPUs can run CUDA applications as well (they can't now but that is just because ATI doesn't want their own GPGPU initiative to die). And what do I gain by running CUDA? For the average person on this forums, the answer is nothing.

The bottom line is the GTX 260 is not a good purchase by any stretch of the imagination right now, unless you are stepping up and can get it cheap. The HD 4870 is faster, uses less power, and is $100 cheaper. nVidia needs to drop the GTX 260 to $299, then it will be worth considering and things like PhysX may give it an advantage over the 4870 at the same price point. The GTX 280 needs to drop to the $450-500 price point as well because the 4870 is so close in performance, and beats the 280 when AA/AF are applied in certain situations.

I really hope nVidia is planning on releasing a faster card between now and September. It would be nice to use step-up for once, especially since I paid "$659" for this card according to the invoice (with cashback only $429).

 

[deerhunter716]

Spot on Exte - 99% of forum users and gamers will NOT see the benefit of those supposedly great addons of the 260 when we game. Bottomline ATI has won this round when it comes to the value you get for the $$ spent. They got NV good and I bet there have been many a late night meetings at NVidia.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: deerhunter716
Spot on Exte - 99% of forum users and gamers will NOT see the benefit of those supposedly great addons of the 260 when we game. Bottomline ATI has won this round when it comes to the value you get for the $$ spent. They got NV good and I bet there have been many a late night meetings at NVidia.

That's great and all, but ask Extelleron why he now owns a GTX280?
Perhaps he wanted the best single GPU card he could buy?
Most of his comments do not line up with his purchase decision.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: deerhunter716
Spot on Exte - 99% of forum users and gamers will NOT see the benefit of those supposedly great addons of the 260 when we game. Bottomline ATI has won this round when it comes to the value you get for the $$ spent. They got NV good and I bet there have been many a late night meetings at NVidia.

That's great and all, but ask Extelleron why he now owns a GTX280?
Perhaps he wanted the best single GPU card he could buy?
Most of his comments do not line up with his purchase decision.

Because I got it for cheap? I paid only a little more than I was expecting to pay for a 4870 anyway and I figured the GTX 280 would still be a good bit faster. And it is faster, just not everywhere and not by as much as I thought it would be. PhysX is also a decent selling point, just not worth paying $100 more for a card that is equal/slower in performance. Folding@Home performance on this thing is also amazing (if you want any proof I own a 280 look at my PPD). The prospect of stepping up to a new card if one comes out in response to the 4870 X2 is also interesting. I would hope nVidia has something up their sleeve that is better than the GTX 280. Other than that, nVidia cards tend to provide more consistant performance than AMD (at least with G80 gen vs R600 gen). AMD drivers are good, but they usually take longer to react to newer games than nVidia's drivers. I can remember that R600 performed absolutely horribly in STALKER for example, and that was not fixed for a long time.

But the subject of debate here is the HD 4870 vs GTX 260, not the 280. The 4870 typically performs at a similar level (sometimes faster/sometimes slower) but is $100 cheaper. An extra feature or two present on the GTX 260 does not really justify the extra cost for the same performance. This actually has less to do with the 4870 being impressive than it has to do with the GTX 260 not being impressive. The GTX 260 doesn't outperform the 9800GTX+ by much either, and it is a $229 card. The 4870 isn't the pinnacle of price-performance either; it is maybe 20-30% faster than the 4850 for 60%+ higher cost (current retail prices).

 

[bryanW1995]

bfg, check my signature. the first line in particular is quite appropriate to this situation, no?

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: deerhunter716
Spot on Exte - 99% of forum users and gamers will NOT see the benefit of those supposedly great addons of the 260 when we game. Bottomline ATI has won this round when it comes to the value you get for the $$ spent. They got NV good and I bet there have been many a late night meetings at NVidia.

That's great and all, but ask Extelleron why he now owns a GTX280?
Perhaps he wanted the best single GPU card he could buy?
Most of his comments do not line up with his purchase decision.

the problem with that statement is that it doesn't address the situation as it now stands. gtx 280 is the undisputed performance champ in almost every situation. the vast majority of non-fanboys would happily buy gtx 280 IF IT MADE SENSE. at $649 it doesn't make sense, even with the anticipated premium that comes with the top single gpu. At the $429 that extelleron paid I think that many, perhaps even most, people would buy it over the 487 at $299. The problem this round is that amd's cost is so much lower, nvidia CAN'T drop the price low enough to be competitive in price/performance. Say nvidia drops gtx 280 to $450 and gtx 260 to $299, they will obliterate their margins and for what? amd will just drop 4870 to $250 or so and still kick nvidia's ass on price/performance.

Nvidia knew the score when they went large monolithic die vs amd's smaller midrange plan: they had to beat amd by a large enough margin to justify having people spend the much larger additional amount to purchase their gpu. 3 mos ago most of us (myself included) viewed this as a foregone conclusion. Unfortunately for nvidia, they didn't get enough performance improvement with their new design, and amd hit one out of the park with theirs. As I mentioned earlier, I don't know that we should assume that this will ALWAYS happen, so I don't know that nvidia needs to change their strategy. however, I do think that nvidia needs to execute better next time, especially with that enormous r&d budget advantage that they have over amd.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

So now we're arguing over specifications? Why do I care that the GTX 260 has 896MB of memory if it does not help it perform well? nVidia needs more VRAM as their cards tend to use it very ineffectively. The HD 4870 performs very well even at 2560x1600 with its 512MB of memory. And 1GB versions will be available for cheaper than the GTX 260 as well.

I wasn't aware we are "arguing" at all, I'm simply noting differences that could prove advantageous for the GTX260 in some situations.

Originally posted by: Extelleron
Havok is integrated into a bunch of games as well. PhysX is a decent selling point, but it's not going to work in every situation. You couldn't put PhysX in Crysis and run it on the GPU... the game needs all the GPU resources it can get for graphics. PhysX on the GPU only works when the game is not challenging to the GPU.

According to Richard Huddy, who joined AMD when it acquired graphics chip company ATI Technologies last year, Havok FX is unlikely to be released at all or power many video games.

If AMD is saying HavocFX is in limbo, I'm guessing they aren't counting on it.

Originally posted by: Extelleron
Multi-GPU flexibility as a selling point for nVidia graphics cards? It's the other way around. There is no flexibility with nVidia cards, because 99% of people cannot use SLI. Most people have Intel boards and they support Crossfire. Multi-GPU is a selling point for AMD, not nVidia.

Using a SLi motherboard is a piece of the multi GPU choice, not a "limiting factor". As someone who's used NF4 > 790i motherboards without issue, I don't see how this has "limited" me? OTOH, I've always had the most powerful graphics available by using SLi.

A person can choose to use a SLi motherboard, they can't use a game that doesn't support Crossfire until ATi releases a driver with support. That is limiting- scaling vs not.

Originally posted by: Extelleron
AMD GPUs can run CUDA applications as well (they can't nowbut that is just because ATI doesn't want their own GPGPU initiative to die). And what do I gain by running CUDA? For the average person on this forums, the answer is nothing.

A. See bolded quote
B. I've seen a demo of a CUDA based DVD converter that is many times faster than anything CPU based, superior folding@home performance would be two examples. Also, not everyone is an "average person" and the possibilities of CUDA for work apps are impressive.

Originally posted by: Extelleron
The bottom line is the GTX 260 is not a good purchase by any stretch of the imagination right now, unless you are stepping up and can get it cheap. The HD 4870 is faster, uses less power, and is $100 cheaper. nVidia needs to drop the GTX 260 to $299, then it will be worth considering and things like PhysX may give it an advantage over the 4870 at the same price point. The GTX 280 needs to drop to the $450-500 price point as well because the 4870 is so close in performance, and beats the 280 when AA/AF are applied in certain situations.

I've given some reasons the GTX260 might be worth $100 more to some people.

As far as what the GTX280 costs, look to any other PC component (e.g. RAM, CPU, motherboard) and tell me the "best of the best" doesn't cost $350 more. (at least)

So is your position all top of the line hardware needs to be reduced in price because you say so, or just that NVIDIA shouldn't price their products like other firms in the tech industry?

Can you support that "point"?

Anyway, good discussion, and as noted, I think the 48XX cards are bringing the A game to the mid range for AMD. If they had chosen to incorporate a high end design into their line up, there would be true competition in the market again.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
<---ignoring chizow. hmmm, I might make that into my sig. Seriously, how many of us other than bfg are even trying to reason with chizow any more? A lot of people wanted 3870 to beat 8800gt but they went away as more and more benchies proved the g92 superiority. Guess what? A lot of people wanted gt200 to beat r(v)7xx, but the value is so much greater with ati this time around that only the blind fanboys are even debating the issue at this point. Nvidia will be back, they'll probably stomp the crap out of ati next round or at least be much more competitive, but for now ati is the card to own. period.

Disagree.

While for gaming the 4870 is a great deal at $100 less MSRP than the GTX260, it lacks:

1. 384MB of RAM the GTX260 has.

2. PhysX that will be integrated into 16 games this year, double that next.

3. MultiGPU flexibility. When ATs review says they're adding support for popular games released last Fall after launch, you have to wonder about support for games that aren't reviewed.

If AMD is truly going to go the multi-GPU route for its high end parts, it needs to enable more consistent support for CF across the board - regardless of whether or not we feature those games in our reviews.

They have since started talking about how the era of the large, "monolithic" GPU is over. I think that's hogwash...... Big chips don't suffer from the quirks of multi-GPU implementations, which never seem to have profiles for newly released games just as you'd want to be playing them......

4. CUDA

The 4870s don't really even compete with GTX280s for the most part.


That said, the 48XX series are a big step forward for AMD and a good value. (just not a "ZOMG! these are teh only cards that exist!" type value you're asserting)

chizow, I'm still ignoring you, but are you reading this? rollo doesn't make arguments that he can't win and/or don't make any sense. He instead focuses on areas where nvidia is strong and reminds people of them. His info is factually correct and will be important to some people.

good try rollo. don't worry, the green team will be back.

edit:

2 points of contention rollo:

1. f@h performance is borged right now to give an unfair advantage to nvidia users. as they get more proteins to work on that situation will correct itself. Also, they have a new gpu2 client update coming out soon that will support 48x0. Do you think that 8800gt is going to clobber 4850 in that?

2. that dvd converter is still under development. It will probably introduce a very large gain over intel cpus in dvd conversion, but there's no guarantee that amd can't/won't come out with a similar program. AMD just doesn't have to talk about non-gpu apps b/c they've got a much better gaming gpu right now.

otherwise as I said, keep up the discussions. maybe you could take chizow under your wing and teach him the difference between "blind fanboyism" and "reasonable discussion about features/benfits".

 

[Extelleron]

Using a SLi motherboard is a piece of the multi GPU choice, not a "limiting factor". As someone who's used NF4 > 790i motherboards without issue, I don't see how this has "limited" me? OTOH, I've always had the most powerful graphics available by using SLi.

I don't see what you are getting at here. The point that I made is that with nVidia, you cannot just wake up one day, see a great deal on a 2nd video card, and buy it for SLI. The only reason that you would have an SLI motherboard is if you planned to go SLI and bought an nVidia board. If you are not going SLI, then there is really no reason why you would not go with an Intel board. nVidia boards are not bad but they are more expensive than Intel boards for the same performance levels... you are paying for SLI compatability. With Crossfire, anyone with a high-end Intel setup has a board that will work with it. If you buy a 4870 now and 3 months from now you can get one for $200, you can buy it and use it with your existing setup.

I've given some reasons the GTX260 might be worth $100 more to some people.

The key word is some people. I can agree with what you are saying to an extent, but very few people will fall under the criteria you are talking about. More people care about gaming performance.

As far as what the GTX280 costs, look to any other PC component (e.g. RAM, CPU, motherboard) and tell me the "best of the best" doesn't cost $350 more. (at least)

But it isn't the best of the best, that is the problem. If it were a "best of the best" product like the 8800GTX, then nobody would be arguing over the price. In certain situations, it is actually beaten by the $300 HD 4870. And as much as it makes my purchase look ill advised, it's not even going to be close in performance to R700.

So is your position all top of the line hardware needs to be reduced in price because you say so, or just that NVIDIA shouldn't price their products like other firms in the tech industry?

Can you support that "point"?

Hardware should be priced where it performs. If the GTX 260 was even 15-20% faster than the HD 4870, I think it would be priced well. But it is not.

Anyway, good discussion, and as noted, I think the 48XX cards are bringing the A game to the mid range for AMD. If they had chosen to incorporate a high end design into their line up, there would be true competition in the market again.

Forget about R700? It's just coming a bit later. And before you say it is CF and doesn't count, you may wish to read this article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-9978746-64.html

nVidia just needs to get realistic with pricing, as AMD did when R600 failed. AMD didn't release the HD 2900XTX at $649 and expect people to buy it over the 8800GTX. They realized they could not compete with G80 and released the HD 2900XT at $399, where it competed very well with the 8800GTS 640MB. Whether or not R700 will beat GT200 by the margin that G80 beat R600.... I don't know. But clearly the $399/649 pricing scale cannot hold up if nVidia wants to compete. If they can improve the clocks of GT200, perhaps with the 55nm revision, then I think it will compete with R700 fine. Hopefully a "GTX 290" or some sort of higher end product will be released with ~700MHz core and 1.5GHz+ shaders.

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: nRollo
...

I've given some reasons the GTX260 might be worth $100 more to some people.


...

I understand why you are making a fool out of yourself.
I didn't at the time of X1900XTX and 7800GTX 512MB.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Janooo

Originally posted by: nRollo
...

I've given some reasons the GTX260 might be worth $100 more to some people.


...

I understand why you are making a fool out of yourself.
I didn't at the time of X1900XTX and 7800GTX 512MB.

Janoo, examples were given why some people may think the GTX260 might be worth $100 more to them. And you point a finger and shout "fool". How wise are you?
I'm not going to show you the benefits of CUDA since it is all over the internet. But there is no way you can successfully downplay it at this stage of the game. And Physx? 16 titles this year?
How bout it? AMD cannot accomplish onboard physics at this time. Neither will Intel be able to.
And that is why I think they are the source of Charlie Demerjians article about Futuremark scores which fell flat on it's face in light of Futuremarks quoted comments. Everyone seems to be touting how AMD's GPU technology is more advanced? Where is it?
If you dismiss the advanced features of CUDA and Physx (which by the way is retro all the way back to 8800 series) then what features would you, or would you not dismiss on AMD's last few gens of GPU's including the current? Start with DX 10.1 for example.

Moral: Don't call somebody a fool for stating some facts that can be backed up. Else someone else looks the fool. Be civil dude.

 

[JPB]

I just snagged up a Hd 4870 from Newegg. The Sapphire model.

As soon as I ordered it, and got the confirmation, it went out of stock again. They must have had ONE :shocked:

I finally get to go back to ATI

But I can say this much. A GTX 260 will be going in my wifes computer. Both mine and her pc's will have IDENTICAL specs.

Should make for some nice benchmark comparisons :thumbsup:

Once both cards are recieved, here is the list of games to be benchmarked.

Oblivion
Prey
Area 51
Call Of Duty 2
Call Of Duty 4
Half Life 2
Orange Box
Battlefield 2142
Doom 3
Quake 4
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
Need For Speed Carbon
Need For Speed Most Wanted
Bioshock
Frontlines Fuel Of War
Unreal 3
Age Of Empires 3
Splinter Cell Chaos Theory

I know a lot of these games are *older* but since most review sites only tests *newer* games. I figured this would help out the guys/gals who play these games

 

[dreddfunk]

Rollo is not making a fool of himself, it's just that his affiliation with NVIDIA means that he naturally wants to put the most positive spin possible on NVIDIA parts. Clearly the GTX260 has a few features that the HD4870 does not, and he's pointing that out.

That said, one of those features is not, however, general GPU performance in 3D games.

Are there markets out there for the additional features? Of course.

These tertiary markets are not, however, the primary market for these pieces of hardware. They represent attempts by ATI and NVIDIA to leverage their hardware R&D investments into different product areas. Until the GPGPU market comes of age, however, it remains of little import to the vast majority of consumers who purchase GPUs.

It's like having a house with a two-person bathtub/spa. Will some people be willing to pay a premium for it? Yes. Does it make the house more marketable to the vast majority of buyers? No.

Let's review what Rollo has said.

'There is a fraction of the GPU market that might find the GTX260 a better buy than the HD4870'. While true, it's hardly a ringing endorsement.
'The best parts like the GTX280 always command premium pricing'. Also true, but it hardly makes them an intelligent purchasing decision.

NVIDIA is an excellent company, and I'm happy that ATI is beginning to challenge them to improve and innovate again.

 

[dreddfunk]

Keys - you can't 'downplay' CUDA or PhysX, but they certainly aren't of critical interest to the vast majority of 3D gamers at this time, and 3D gamers are the primary market for these cards.

I understand that you and Rollo both have an interest in pointing out the positive aspects of NVIDIA hardware, and that's valid, but to those of us with no dogs in the fight it seems like you're telescoping in on trees rather than looking at the forest.

[edited for clarity]

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
<---ignoring chizow. hmmm, I might make that into my sig. Seriously, how many of us other than bfg are even trying to reason with chizow any more? A lot of people wanted 3870 to beat 8800gt but they went away as more and more benchies proved the g92 superiority. Guess what? A lot of people wanted gt200 to beat r(v)7xx, but the value is so much greater with ati this time around that only the blind fanboys are even debating the issue at this point. Nvidia will be back, they'll probably stomp the crap out of ati next round or at least be much more competitive, but for now ati is the card to own. period.

Disagree.

While for gaming the 4870 is a great deal at $100 less MSRP than the GTX260, it lacks:

1. 384MB of RAM the GTX260 has.

2. PhysX that will be integrated into 16 games this year, double that next.

3. MultiGPU flexibility. When ATs review says they're adding support for popular games released last Fall after launch, you have to wonder about support for games that aren't reviewed.

If AMD is truly going to go the multi-GPU route for its high end parts, it needs to enable more consistent support for CF across the board - regardless of whether or not we feature those games in our reviews.

They have since started talking about how the era of the large, "monolithic" GPU is over. I think that's hogwash...... Big chips don't suffer from the quirks of multi-GPU implementations, which never seem to have profiles for newly released games just as you'd want to be playing them......

4. CUDA

The 4870s don't really even compete with GTX280s for the most part.


That said, the 48XX series are a big step forward for AMD and a good value. (just not a "ZOMG! these are teh only cards that exist!" type value you're asserting)

chizow, I'm still ignoring you, but are you reading this? rollo doesn't make arguments that he can't win and/or don't make any sense. He instead focuses on areas where nvidia is strong and reminds people of them. His info is factually correct and will be important to some people.

good try rollo. don't worry, the green team will be back.

edit:

2 points of contention rollo:

1. f@h performance is borged right now to give an unfair advantage to nvidia users. as they get more proteins to work on that situation will correct itself. Also, they have a new gpu2 client update coming out soon that will support 48x0. Do you think that 8800gt is going to clobber 4850 in that?

2. that dvd converter is still under development. It will probably introduce a very large gain over intel cpus in dvd conversion, but there's no guarantee that amd can't/won't come out with a similar program. AMD just doesn't have to talk about non-gpu apps b/c they've got a much better gaming gpu right now.

otherwise as I said, keep up the discussions. maybe you could take chizow under your wing and teach him the difference between "blind fanboyism" and "reasonable discussion about features/benfits".

LOL, for real. I haven't read chizows posts since I've returned so I can't comment on the merits of his arguments.

I am glad you see way I go about this, and you are correct, I try to only put out info I can back up. When you're me (read: under much scrutiny due to your connections) you have to be pretty careful about what you post, there's never a shortage of people wanting to tell me I'm wrong.

For that matter, I want them to if I am, so I don't mind being held accountable.

Agreed on your points, but I'm a solo act, not a "post like this to help NVIDIA" teacher. Although the thought of "Rollo's Posting Boot Camp" cracks me up.

:beer:

 

[omber]

I recall news few days ago that the nVidia PhysX middileware was hacked to work on ATI cards with equal or better results (I think this was on Slashdot). If this is so that advantage could be lost quickly..

My question: does anyone have an idea of what kind of power supply should we look at for a dual 4870 HD setup?

What advantage? According to some, there is none. hehe.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: dreddfunk
Keys - you can't 'downplay' CUDA or PhysX, but they certainly aren't of critical interest to the vast majority of 3D gamers at this time, and 3D gamers are the primary market for these cards.

I understand that you and Rollo both have an interest in pointing out the positive aspects of NVIDIA hardware, and that's valid, but to those of us with no dogs in the fight it seems like you're telescoping in on trees rather than looking at the forest.

[edited for clarity]

It is what it is Dred. I am not saying anything that hasn't been said before. Just what is.
I have an interest in pointing out FACTS.

Since when hasn't Physx been of genuine interest to enthusiast gamers? Since Nvidia offers it onboard now? Here is a chainsaw. Cut down that forest so you can see past it. I can see for myself what is going on from both companies, and both are offering very nice products each with their own merits. If I am more familiar with Nvidia products than AMD's, then of course I will speak more of Nvidia's products. Naturally. Just as someone who has been using ATI products forever will have much more to say about them than Nvidia products.

If all of you could just get past this pettiness about our "interests" you'd see that we are merely pointing to facts that can be backed up. Isn't that what all of you want? Facts? Not FUD? I know I do.

 

[JPB]

Originally posted by: omber
I recall news few days ago that the nVidia PhysX middileware was hacked to work on ATI cards with equal or better results (I think this was on Slashdot). If this is so that advantage could be lost quickly..

My question: does anyone have an idea of what kind of power supply should we look at for a dual 4870 HD setup?

Here you go. Direct from AMD

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: JPB

Originally posted by: omber
I recall news few days ago that the nVidia PhysX middileware was hacked to work on ATI cards with equal or better results (I think this was on Slashdot). If this is so that advantage could be lost quickly..

My question: does anyone have an idea of what kind of power supply should we look at for a dual 4870 HD setup?

Here you go. Direct from AMD

Thanks for the PSU link?