ATi 4xxx Series Review

[AzN]

One interesting about 4850 is that it's FP16 Blending fillrate is neck and neck with 280gtx. This would be the biggest improvement far as their texture fillrate goes. But bililear fillrate tests show it's lower than 9800gtx. But if you remember 8800gtx or the ultra it's texture fillrate was lower than 9800gtx but easily matching 9800gtx performance because it had same amount of FP16 Blending fillrate. Of course 8800gtx has a little more ROP and a little more bandwidth that kind of helped in it's performance.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well I thought this 4850 launch was handled wonderfully.
Many here see the value of 4850. Its only going to get better. Partners have full controll of what these cards can use for features memory/heatsinks. gpu clocking . Don't worry about the 9800gtx+. By the time this paper launch is good ATI partners will have faster 4850s out. Plus the 4850s have DX10.1 no small deal at all. 4.1 shader model. As driver support increaseses it will just get better and better. Next week we get the 4870 reviews if not sooner. Already seen 1 its looking solid. I would like to add more but I can't as it could go just a little offtopic. But you guys haven't seen the best yet thats still coming .

 

[BFG10K]

Whats the Diffrence between 8xAA and 8xQAA ?

8x = 4xMSAA + 4xCSAA.
8xQ = 8xMSAA.

Coverage samples decouple color/z/stencil data but retain binary coverage data. In many cases you can get similar IQ as the same amount of MSAA samples for a much smaller performance hit.

3870 was clearly better raw performer than 9600gt about 10-20% depending on the game.

Huh? 9600 GT is faster than the 3870 with AA in almost every situation.

 

[chizow]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Wow, the Nvidia fanboyism is strong here... Wreckage, Rollo, and Chizow too! I find it hilarious that you dont recognize how much the 4850 spanks the 9800 GTX in AA (which is what matters) in 80% of the reviews out there, and you cherry pick the one that shows different results... So predictable

I dont know how someone can be so blind, and for a company that doesnt give a shit about consumers

Actually I did recognize the major improvements in AA and CF (when it actually scales) that 4850s in CF brought. As for cherry picked reviews? You do realize the 9800GTX+ reviews were released late last night right? Those were the first two available and they seem to confirm the 4850's victory was short-lived as the part everyone loves to ignore, G92, just needed a clock speed bump and maybe a few enhancements to surpass the 4850. Personally I was surprised by the turnaround the GTX+ made with AA too and would like to see more results confirm or deny those results.

As for the fanboyism, I just like calling out the BS from certain folks that only show up and run their mouths around launch time. Then when whatever product they're backing falls flat on its face, they poof for another 6-8 months. As an admitted NV hater I'm surprised you're still here.

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
chizow, why are you in here thread crapping?

Bringing people back to reality after all the wild speculation over the past 2-3 months is thread crapping? The reality of it is most people oogling over the 4850 aren't as nonpartisan as they'd have you believe. If they were truly unbiased, they'd already have some type of G80 or G92 part in their rig and wouldn't be so enamored with the marginal improvement 4850 brings to the table. Case in point is the GTX+ that needed a clock speed boost to push 4850 back into mediocrity.

We've chatted about inciting and baiting the other users and it doesn't seem to be doing you much good. Hopefully a short vacation will help you out.

-ViRGE

 

[AzN]

BFG? Are you upgrading your ultra?

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Quincunx AA is a supersampling algorithm

Quincunx is not super-sampling. It's a post-filter that uses pixel sampling from neighboring pixels like ATi?s CFAA does

More to the point, 8xQ is not Quincunx. Quincunx has been dead for 5 years now, let's keep it that way.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself
Wow, the Nvidia fanboyism is strong here... Wreckage, Rollo, and Chizow too! I find it hilarious that you dont recognize how much the 4850 spanks the 9800 GTX in AA (which is what matters) in 80% of the reviews out there, and you cherry pick the one that shows different results... So predictable

I dont know how someone can be so blind, and for a company that doesnt give a shit about consumers

Actually I did recognize the major improvements in AA and CF (when it actually scales) that 4850s in CF brought. As for cherry picked reviews? You do realize the 9800GTX+ reviews were released late last night right? Those were the first two available and they seem to confirm the 4850's victory was short-lived as the part everyone loves to ignore, G92, just needed a clock speed bump and maybe a few enhancements to surpass the 4850. Personally I was surprised by the turnaround the GTX+ made with AA too and would like to see more results confirm or deny those results.

As for the fanboyism, I just like calling out the BS from certain folks that only show up and run their mouths around launch time. Then when whatever product they're backing falls flat on its face, they poof for another 6-8 months. As an admitted NV hater I'm surprised you're still here.

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
chizow, why are you in here thread crapping?

Bringing people back to reality after all the wild speculation over the past 2-3 months is thread crapping? The reality of it is most people oogling over the 4850 aren't as nonpartisan as they'd have you believe. If they were truly unbiased, they'd already have some type of G80 or G92 part in their rig and wouldn't be so enamored with the marginal improvement 4850 brings to the table. Case in point is the GTX+ that needed a clock speed boost to push 4850 back into mediocrity.

Let's not forget Chizow. 4850 is actually a lot more than 9800gtx will ever be even if somehow 9800gtx+ is 5% faster although all the major not skewed websites says it won't. It has whole lot more processing power for future processor heavy games. Not to mention higher FP16 blending fillrate for better minimum frame rate and higher resolution.

 

[BFG10K]

BFG? Are you upgrading your ultra?

Yes, but not until I see the 4870. I have the feeling neither the price or performance war is over so there's no need for me to rush out and buy anything.

I'd better start thinking about benchmarking my 8800 Ultra for the inevitable comparison.

More to the point, 8xQ is not Quincunx. Quincunx has been dead for 5 years now, let's keep it that way.

Aye, the xQ nomenclature can be confusing.

 

[MarcVenice]

@chizow

How can you say the 9800gtx+ pushed a 4850 back into mediocrity? It's ridiculous, AMD releases a new videocard, that outperforms the 9800gtx, for a lot less money. That's all there is to it. Even if the 9800gtx+ magically outperforms the 4850, with a mere bump in core and shaderclocks, then the 4850 did what it had to do, bring back competition. Besides, the 9800gtx+ SHOULD frigging outperform the 4850, because a 4850 costs 195$, and a 9800gtx+ costs 229$. So a 9800gtx+, bang for buck wise, should outperform the 4850 by at least 10%. But even then a 9800gtx+ isn't an option for me, my PSU, alonside MANY MANY others, doesn't have a 8 pin pci-e connector. And I wouldn't feel to comfortable using an adapter. So if I had to pick a videocard right now, it would be a 4850.

I don't read all your posts chizow, but I think your edging mightily close to what people accuse you of, fanboyism. Even nrollo can admit that a 4850 is a good product. He does so to look slightly impartial, but that's not the point.

 

[biostud]

it's strange that in call of duty 4 CF shows more than 100% scaling in the AT review

 

[AmberClad]

I'm really interested in seeing how the 4870 compares, both to the single and the CF 4850, and which eventually ends up being the best value proposition.

I also hope we start to see some improved, non-reference cooling solutions for the 4850 soon. I've only glossed over the comments and criticism here briefly, but I can only say this - if you take any of the mid range or high end GPUs and rip off its dual slot cooler and give it a puny single slot cooler, it's going to run unpleasantly hot.

Anyways, I was planning on ordering a couple of 8-pin PCIe modular cables for my Corsair, but I think I'm going to be holding off on that until the dust settles and it becomes more clear what the best buy is, and which brand to go with. It looks like the ATI cards still use the 6-pins, so it'd be kind of pointless to get the new cables and then possibly not need them.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well these cards tested were all pretty much binned to produce the same O/Cs 0n the 4850 . I must say ATI handle this launch with much insight . . With the 4850 we won't see there true power till the partners release their cards . With better cooling and overhead for higher clocks. The 9800gtx+ hasn't won anything . Once you can buy 1 in a store than and only than can you compare . Onless one has futurview. ATI partners will have an answer to the 9800gtx+ With some nicely souped up 4850s . Since we see some 4850 selling for $175 with rebate. We know ATI has good margins on this card. Some partners upgrading memory and heatsink could bring out a nice 4850 ++ for $229. I also found it interesting that on the Intel based systems that were O/C the ATI 4850 scaled better. Review sights don't use the same setups so that really makes it fun to look at things.

I thought ATs review was the best . Because it showed the trueth when using Xfire. When it works it works when it doesn't it doesn't. But ATI with AMD will solve these problems in near term . I would say the R800. We still haven't seen the 4870x2 and well likely see major improvements there with shared cache and all. ATs choice of game test were perfect. Showing zero bias oneway or the other. So it really comes down to the games YOU play. Also driver improvements.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: Azn
Anyway I think ATI engineers really have outdone themselves. With current generation of games it performs as good as 9800gtx. Really good AA performance. Very efficient and lower power consumption than 9800gtx. With 1 teraflop of processing power it will outlast a 9800gtx for sure when more shader intensive graphic heavy games start to appear.

It pains me to say this but for once Azn i agree with you, this doesnt mean we can go for drinks though ok mate!

ok, I see this post...and your post count is now 666...something is afoot at the circle k!

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: AmberClad
I'm really interested in seeing how the 4870 compares, both to the single and the CF 4850, and which eventually ends up being the best value proposition.

I also hope we start to see some improved, non-reference cooling solutions for the 4850 soon. I've only glossed over the comments and criticism here briefly, but I can only say this - if you take any of the mid range or high end GPUs and rip off its dual slot cooler and give it a puny single slot cooler, it's going to run unpleasantly hot.

Anyways, I was planning on ordering a couple of 8-pin PCIe modular cables for my Corsair, but I think I'm going to be holding off on that until the dust settles and it becomes more clear what the best buy is, and which brand to go with. It looks like the ATI cards still use the 6-pins, so it'd be kind of pointless to get the new cables and then possibly not need them.

did we already talk about this? Just in case we didn't, pm yellowbeard and he can send you some 6+2 pin cables for simply the cost of shipping.

For those of you who don't know, Amberclad and I have older modular hx520's. they were supposed to come with 2 six pin and 2 six + 2 6+2 pin pci-e cables. however, ours both came with 4 x 6 pin connectors, instead. corsair will fix that problem for anybody, you just have to ask them to send you the 2 x 6+2 pin adapers. They have a rep on the AT forums, his name is yellowbeard. He hangs out in the psu forums a lot and is very helpful.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
atreus21 was commenting that he's impressed with 4850 performance. He's not the only one...

@op 4850 xfire should be = gtx 280 when you factor in the games that DON'T scale very well. in games that do scale, it should be quite a bit faster. check out your favorites and see how they do in xfire, if they all scale well then you'll be gtg. what mobo do you have btw?

I think the AT review pretty effectively demonstrates why CF costs less than a GTX280-
they got no/very poor scaling in 3 of 7 games tested.

When you throw microstutter, mouse lag, and other multi card issues into the mix, it becomes apparent that the 4850s are priced appropriately.

That said, I think the 4850 looks to be a very solid performer at it's price point as a single card, and in some games transcends it's price point in CF.

ok, somebody pull up all of rollo's posts from the 9800gx2 launch period. I'm too lazy to do it, but something tells me that multi-gpu scaling issues weren't brought up then.

on a happier note, rollo and keys please tell your friends at the green team that putting f@h on the g80 and newer gpus was a GREAT idea. This makes it that much harder to not root for them. Of course, we do have 1:35 am emails to anand talking about the 9800gtx+ that remind us this is still a business...

ok, I was too drunk last night to figure out this ###ing search feature, but an anonymous good samaritan has helped me out.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...154535&highlight_key=y

read the next-to-last post. Rollo, I mean this with all sincerity: if you ever decide that whatever you're doing gets old, you can come sell cars for me any time.

 

[AmberClad]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
did we already talk about this? Just in case we didn't, pm yellowbeard and he can send you some 6+2 pin cables for simply the cost of shipping.

Yes we did...and I'm too frackin lazy to arrange to get those cables shipped to me. Yellowbeard sent me the contact info for whoever that handles these sorts of things. I actually already contacted that e-mail a while ago, but I think they might have a spam filter on Gmail addresses. I don't feel like getting it sorted out at this point, unless it becomes clear that I need them.

 

[ChaosDivine]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
For those of you who don't know, Amberclad and I have older modular hx520's. they were supposed to come with 2 six pin and 2 six + 2 6+2 pin pci-e cables. however, ours both came with 4 x 6 pin connectors, instead. corsair will fix that problem for anybody, you just have to ask them to send you the 2 x 6+2 pin adapers. They have a rep on the AT forums, his name is yellowbeard. He hangs out in the psu forums a lot and is very helpful.

Thanks for the info! Have 3x HX520s here.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: dadach
nvidia is too sad...basically what they are saying to their customers is: "we have been ripping you off...come again" ...what other reason would there be to have so much headroom to drop prices?

Cant really blame them for wanting to make as much money as possible as a company... Its just that their methods are horrible... I wish a new gfx company came up out of nowhere and took their spot, then we could all enjoy a healthy video card war with fairplay, not the low blows and shady tactics Nvidia uses.

Actually, it's quite funny how similar these recent nV tactics have been to what AMD did in the days of the A64 vs P4. I mean, when the first X2-3800+ launched it sold for >$300 and they held the price there until forced to reduce it (by the launch of the C2D chips).

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: HOOfan 1
Legit Reviews compares the HD4850 against the yet to be released 55nm 9800GTX+

The GTX+ wins pretty much every benchmark. It sure did not take long for NVIDIA to retake the mid-range lead.

You are such a choad it's unbelieveable. The 9800GTX+ and the 4850 are very competitive with one another, the 9800GTX+ slightly faster. Ofcourse once you introduce AA the 4850 will probably be faster, especially 8x AA. Also, the 4850 is available right now, today, for $199.99. One of them on Newegg is even available with a $25 rebate, that puts it under $175. The 9800GTX+ will cost $229.99. So, the 9800GTX performs slightly better then the 4850 for $30-$55 more money as long as you don't use AA, and probably worse with AA. Nvidia hasn't recaptured anything, they've introduced a more expensive card that sometimes performs better.

*edit - I see a 4850 with a $30 rebate now available, that puts it at $169.99 after rebate. Compared to an unavailable $229.99 card that sometimes is faster, soemtimes not. How exactly does that recapture the mid range lead for Nvidia?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

*edit - I see a 4850 with a $30 rebate now available, that puts it at $169.99 after rebate. Compared to an unavailable $229.99 card that sometimes is faster, soemtimes not. How exactly does that recapture the mid range lead for Nvidia?

You personal attack aside, you clearly did not read read that review or the one from Firingsquad. The 9800GTX+ wins nearly all the benchmarks. It probably would have won in Tomb Raider by the ATI card would only go as high as 4xAA while they ran the GTX+ at 16XAA

It's not "sometimes" it wins, it's nearly every time.

Your remark about AA is also grossly inaccurate. Lets see some ATI benches at 16xAA.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

im more impressed with this 4800 series than i was with the new nvidia offering. sure the GT200 series are fast but i dunno, at 1.4billion trannies and 512bit memory bus i was just expecting a little bit more, especiallly for a $650 card.

who knows, maybe we havent seen the best of those cards yet. But still this new Radeon offers quite astonishing performance for its relatively diminutive price tag. i'd defo pay more for a version with a better cooler, dual slot style, so hopefully one of the AIB partners will get one of those out the door.

well done AMD!

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

*edit - I see a 4850 with a $30 rebate now available, that puts it at $169.99 after rebate. Compared to an unavailable $229.99 card that sometimes is faster, soemtimes not. How exactly does that recapture the mid range lead for Nvidia?

You personal attack aside, you clearly did not read read that review or the one from Firingsquad. The 9800GTX+ wins nearly all the benchmarks. It probably would have won in Tomb Raider by the ATI card would only go as high as 4xAA while they ran the GTX+ at 16XAA

It's not "sometimes" it wins, it's nearly every time.

Your remark about AA is also grossly inaccurate. Lets see some ATI benches at 16xAA.

That would be awesome, it would have an even easier time stomping the GTX :thumbsup: Im all for it

The thing though is, even in the original 4850 Firingsquad article, the 4850 performs much worse than in pretty much every other site... Now, Firingsquad was actually one of my favourite review sites, so I dont know what happened, but when their results go agaisnt everyone else, I have no option but to discard them

Ill wait for computerbase and Xbit labs before pointing fingers, since they are the ones doing the most extensive benchmarks, with loads of settings and games

 

[Mem]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

*edit - I see a 4850 with a $30 rebate now available, that puts it at $169.99 after rebate. Compared to an unavailable $229.99 card that sometimes is faster, soemtimes not. How exactly does that recapture the mid range lead for Nvidia?

You personal attack aside, you clearly did not read read that review or the one from Firingsquad. The 9800GTX+ wins nearly all the benchmarks. It probably would have won in Tomb Raider by the ATI card would only go as high as 4xAA while they ran the GTX+ at 16XAA

It's not "sometimes" it wins, it's nearly every time.

Your remark about AA is also grossly inaccurate. Lets see some ATI benches at 16xAA.

I wonder how long before we see factory overclocked 4850 cards being sold at $199,the 9800GTX+ is priced at 229 so its $30 more then a 4850 which you can buy right now.

True DX10.1 card as well...I just feel Nvidia has not really done enough and its their fault they are in this situation ,got to love AMD/ATI for keeping Nvidia on their toes and giving us more choices.

 

[ddarko]

Originally posted by: chizow
As for the fanboyism, I just like calling out the BS from certain folks that only show up and run their mouths around launch time. Then when whatever product they're backing falls flat on its face, they poof for another 6-8 months.

And opposed to someone like you, who spouts BS continuously and endlessly.

Some of your own words from a thread at the end of 2007 discussing Nvidia's statement that it didn't plan on releasing a higher performing part than the 8800 Ultra anytime soon and suggesting that people who wanted higher performance should use SLI:

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...AR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear

Originally posted by: chizow
Makes sense from a business/economic standpoint as the old business model of creating a high-end part only to artificially neuter it for lower product segments made no sense for NV/AMD or the end-user. Hopefully, if they go the SLI/CF route, that means they'll actually focus on improving performance in multi-GPU configurations to the point its a viable upgrade path/alternative. Personally I'd like to see multi-GPU solutions on the same die or package with hardware bridges/controllers rather than reliance on software SLI/CF.

And your response to someone complaining about Nvidia's stated plans:

Originally posted by: chizow

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
Its a scam, basically Nvidia are going to stop making high end cards so the only way we will be able to play our games will be to buy more than 1 card, what a rip off.

No, that's not what NV/AMD said. Instead of making a revolutionary new transistor monster every year or two, they'd go with incremental upgrades that could then be used in multi-GPU configurations to reach the high-end performance a new transistor monster would offer.

This offers a better alternative for the mainstream end-user who could expect to get the fastest single-card solution for a reasonable price ($200-300), with those wanting high-end performance going with multiple GPUs to reach the high-end.

Isn't it amazing that when it seemed like Nvidia would go the multi GPU route, chizow was all for it but now, several months later, he's crapping all over it? Tough to read such BS hypocrisy but there it is in his own words.

 

[HurleyBird]

It's hotfix time!

http://support.ati.com/ics/sup...default.asp?deptID=894

The information in this article applies to the following configuration(s):
* Radeon? HD 4870 series
* Radeon? HD 4850 series
This Hotfix improves overall performance and stability.