ATI 4xxx Series Thread

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: zod96
Will know the how well the 4850 stacks up against the 8800GT tomorrow I get my 4850 then. I have an 8800GT now. I just finished benchmarking my 8800GT with 3dmark 06 and Crysis, I'll compare with the 4850 using the exact same settings and throw up my results...

Can you test the HD 4850 in the Crysis GPU benchmark @ 1920x1200 Very High (DX10), No AA? Not sure what settings you normally use (or if your monitor supports 1920x1200) but if you can that would be great. I'm interested in how it compares to the GTX 280 at those settings.

 

[zod96]

Sorry my LCD can only do 1680x1050. Here are the numbers from my 8800GT running 1680x1050 with everything set to High

1. 0x AA and 0x AF Average: 32
2. 0x AA and 16x AF Average: 28
3. 2x AA and 16x AF Average: 23
4. 4x AA and 16x AF Average: 19

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I sure do hope ANand. review of the ATI 4000 series includes the AC game without the patch. If any game desrves title most modern game it is this one .
I hope they do it as well. Along with any other review site.


Crysis is a game designed for nv gpus and coded to give NV an unfair advantage that just doesn't hold up in other games.
Explain how ATI cards cannot play Crysis?

ATI cards play crysis fine its just that ATI wasn't as involved as NV in this games development. This game isn't that good . Its more a demo for NV hardware.

If you want to compare compare DX10 to DX10.1 . Than the true tech leader shines threw. Anand and other review sites need to bang this message home .
I think you need to bang this "issue" home more than anyone else.
Well DX10.1 is an issue its real and its stays with DX11.

As to how and why NV is tring to keep DX10.1 out of games. A hardware site should fight the good fight and this is something that should not be passed off as an important issue.
You don't have any evidence that supports this claim. No matter how many times you say it, it doesn't automatically make it true.

Facts speak for themselves here. This isn't spin at all its facts.

Soon the hardware sites are going to be dealing with intel. Nv may muscle ATI around . But that won't happen with intel .
Intel doesn't have a single prayer in the foreseeable future against ATI or Nvidia when it comes to graphics.

Intel doesn't need a single player. To influence the software developers . DX11 is perfect example. MS is using the X86 Raytracing as perscibed by intel . It will also be interesting to see MS physics in DV11. For these reasons we now have people saying NV won't support DX11. Physics done threw software . Goes against NV but with Intel ATI . Raytracing using intels X86 instructions . NV is against . But AMD is onboard with it . SO their you have it NV snuffed DX10.1 and DX 11 NV isn't likeing it at all . Had intel not been coming with larrabbee things would be differant . But intel is coming with laaabee and are already influancing the game development without a player as you put it.

SO the hardware sites have a problem. Report the facts now and keep hammering the message.. As to who and why Dx10.1 development has slowed to a crawl.
So you're saying there will be no DX10.1 games coming out ever? Everyone is going straight to DX11?
No . I said NV is holding up development because games have to be coded for both NV wins . AS most developers are coding for DX10 only . Someone will do it right than it will just take off on its own . It is part of DX11 afterall it has to be done.

Because Intel /AMD are your future as NV folds up just like any other company that tries to go off on its own. DX11 . I keep hearing the physics thing mentioned. Also Ray tracing. So as it stands right now I don't know were NV stands some are saying NV won't even use DX11. So NV is tring to steer the ship off course . But with intel entering the ring all of NV influence pretty much vanished
What course is NV taking then? What course it there to steer to other than DX11 and beyond?
What kind of influence do you think Intel has in the graphics industry?
CPU's? For Sure. Graphics? :::: fart noise :::: I don't know what you been readying but NV isn't happy with DX11 at all . X86 raytracing and software physics not something NV is interested . We all ready know NV wants nothing to go with DX10.1 SO you tell me whats DX11 got that has NV interest.

 

[taltamir]

I distinctly recall every review site telling me that AC DX10.1 was buggy and removes actual rendering (when nvidia had a bug that removed rendering in crysis, resulting in increased performance, everyone was saying they are "cheating")...
And then lo and behold, ubisoft admits that there really is such a bug, and that they are patching the game to remove DX10.1 for now, they might bring it back (fixed) later...

I really fail to see the problem, or see the POINT of testing it without the patch...

 

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: zod96
Will know the how well the 4850 stacks up against the 8800GT tomorrow I get my 4850 then. I have an 8800GT now. I just finished benchmarking my 8800GT with 3dmark 06 and Crysis, I'll compare with the 4850 using the exact same settings and throw up my results...

Can you test the HD 4850 in the Crysis GPU benchmark @ 1920x1200 Very High (DX10), No AA? Not sure what settings you normally use (or if your monitor supports 1920x1200) but if you can that would be great. I'm interested in how it compares to the GTX 280 at those settings.

I can do that res and will be testing tonight. I may just get Crysis, Vantage, and 3DMark06 benched but will post later.

Both single and CF, was planning on doing 1680x1050 and 1920x1200:
no AA, 2xAA, 4XAA, high and very high
Anything else?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: happy medium


Where can you get a 4850 for 130.00$ AR??

Well I was going more by retail prices.

The 4850 will also have to compete against a more established product that can afford price cuts.

It will be a hard sell if they are just now releasing a 8800GT competitor and trying to sell it as something new and special.

With the GT200 series here and how much of a performance gain it has, it's pretty clear that the 48xx series is last gen and more of a name change than anything else.

They have rebranded the 2xxx series twice now (3xxx -> 4xxx). Not that this is anything new as the 9xxx series from NVIDIA is not much different than the 8xxx series.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I sure do hope ANand. review of the ATI 4000 series includes the AC game without the patch. If any game desrves title most modern game it is this one .
I hope they do it as well. Along with any other review site.


Crysis is a game designed for nv gpus and coded to give NV an unfair advantage that just doesn't hold up in other games.
Explain how ATI cards cannot play Crysis?

ATI cards play crysis fine its just that ATI wasn't as involved as NV in this games development. This game isn't that good . Its more a demo for NV hardware.

If you want to compare compare DX10 to DX10.1 . Than the true tech leader shines threw. Anand and other review sites need to bang this message home .
I think you need to bang this "issue" home more than anyone else.
Well DX10.1 is an issue its real and its stays with DX11.

As to how and why NV is tring to keep DX10.1 out of games. A hardware site should fight the good fight and this is something that should not be passed off as an important issue.
You don't have any evidence that supports this claim. No matter how many times you say it, it doesn't automatically make it true.

Facts speak for themselves here. This isn't spin at all its facts.

Soon the hardware sites are going to be dealing with intel. Nv may muscle ATI around . But that won't happen with intel .
Intel doesn't have a single prayer in the foreseeable future against ATI or Nvidia when it comes to graphics.

Intel doesn't need a single player. To influence the software developers . DX11 is perfect example. MS is using the X86 Raytracing as perscibed by intel . It will also be interesting to see MS physics in DV11. For these reasons we now have people saying NV won't support DX11. Physics done threw software . Goes against NV but with Intel ATI . Raytracing using intels X86 instructions . NV is against . But AMD is onboard with it . SO their you have it NV snuffed DX10.1 and DX 11 NV isn't likeing it at all . Had intel not been coming with larrabbee things would be differant . But intel is coming with laaabee and are already influancing the game development without a player as you put it.

SO the hardware sites have a problem. Report the facts now and keep hammering the message.. As to who and why Dx10.1 development has slowed to a crawl.
So you're saying there will be no DX10.1 games coming out ever? Everyone is going straight to DX11?
No . I said NV is holding up development because games have to be coded for both NV wins . AS most developers are coding for DX10 only . Someone will do it right than it will just take off on its own . It is part of DX11 afterall it has to be done.

Because Intel /AMD are your future as NV folds up just like any other company that tries to go off on its own. DX11 . I keep hearing the physics thing mentioned. Also Ray tracing. So as it stands right now I don't know were NV stands some are saying NV won't even use DX11. So NV is tring to steer the ship off course . But with intel entering the ring all of NV influence pretty much vanished
What course is NV taking then? What course it there to steer to other than DX11 and beyond?
What kind of influence do you think Intel has in the graphics industry?
CPU's? For Sure. Graphics? :::: fart noise :::: I don't know what you been readying but NV isn't happy with DX11 at all . X86 raytracing and software physics not something NV is interested . We all ready know NV wants nothing to go with DX10.1 SO you tell me whats DX11 got that has NV interest.

I have no idea who responded to what where. Damnit this is a technology discussion thread not a John Updike novel!

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: happy medium


Where can you get a 4850 for 130.00$ AR??

Well I was going more by retail prices.

The 4850 will also have to compete against a more established product that can afford price cuts.

It will be a hard sell if they are just now releasing a 8800GT competitor and trying to sell it as something new and special.

With the GT200 series here and how much of a performance gain it has, it's pretty clear that the 48xx series is last gen and more of a name change than anything else.

They have rebranded the 2xxx series twice now (3xxx -> 4xxx). Not that this is anything new as the 9xxx series from NVIDIA is not much different than the 8xxx series.

-10% over previous high-end is a performance gain?

If the 4870 X2 outperforms the GTX 280, and it is last gen, that what is the GTX 280? :laugh:

I have said this many times, and you have not listened just as many. The HD 4850 is a price competitior with the 8800GT, not a performance competitor. The reason you see AMD compare the 4850 & 8800GT so often is because the 4850 is much faster but will arrive at a similar price. If AMD compared the 4850 & 9800GTX, the 4850 would look much less impressive because they would be similar in performance.

RV770 is a new architecture & a new generation..... it is not a rebranding of the HD 2000 series at all. GT200 is based on G80, just like RV770 is based on R600.

And you call me a fanboy. :laugh:

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1


SO the hardware sites have a problem. Report the facts now and keep hammering the message.. As to who and why Dx10.1 development has slowed to a crawl.

What about all those years of ATI slowing DX9 development by not supporting Shader Model 3 or HDR? How long it took em to figure out dual card support. How about how they slowed DX10 development by the huge delay of the R600. Not to mention their half assed support of OpenGL. You should be really upset at them for the retardation of the gaming industry. :roll:


A lot of games are still being released on DX9 and will be for years to come. Just because ATI adds a .1 to their hardware does not mean that every game developer on the planet needs to drop everything and change their game just for that .1


The hardware sites don't have a problem, because they clearly understand the situation. ATI cards have long lacked features that NVIDIA cards supported. However it's up to the game developers to decide when it's time to implement certain features. Of course I'm also sure you are forgetting that sometimes it takes several years to develop a game so new features can take just as long to show up.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Extelleron


-10% over previous high-end is a performance gain?

If you are referring to the GX2 you do realise it has 2 GPUs right? I'm really starting to think that you don't have any idea at all how video cards work.

If the 4870 X2 outperforms the GTX 280, and it is last gen, that what is the GTX 280? :laugh:

Yes if it takes 2 GPUs to come even close to 1 GPU that makes the 4870 last gen. I am now convinced you have no idea how video cards work.

I have said this many times, and you have not listened just as many. The HD 4850 is a price competitior with the 8800GT, not a performance competitor.

Welcome to last year ATI.

The reason you see AMD compare the 4850 & 8800GT so often is because the 4850 is much faster but will arrive at a similar price.

It's actually slower.

If AMD compared the 4850 & 9800GTX, the 4850 would look much less impressive because they would be similar in performance.

If by similar you mean "not even close"

RV770 is a new architecture & a new generation..... it is not a rebranding of the HD 2000 series at all.

Then why can't 1 GPU keep up with the GT200 series?

And you call me a fanboy. :laugh:

Yes, Yes I do.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: happy medium


Where can you get a 4850 for 130.00$ AR??

Well I was going more by retail prices.

The 4850 will also have to compete against a more established product that can afford price cuts.

It will be a hard sell if they are just now releasing a 8800GT competitor and trying to sell it as something new and special.

With the GT200 series here and how much of a performance gain it has, it's pretty clear that the 48xx series is last gen and more of a name change than anything else.

They have rebranded the 2xxx series twice now (3xxx -> 4xxx). Not that this is anything new as the 9xxx series from NVIDIA is not much different than the 8xxx series.

-10% over previous high-end is a performance gain?

If the 4870 X2 outperforms the GTX 280, and it is last gen, that what is the GTX 280? :laugh:

I have said this many times, and you have not listened just as many. The HD 4850 is a price competitior with the 8800GT, not a performance competitor. The reason you see AMD compare the 4850 & 8800GT so often is because the 4850 is much faster but will arrive at a similar price. If AMD compared the 4850 & 9800GTX, the 4850 would look much less impressive because they would be similar in performance.

RV770 is a new architecture & a new generation..... it is not a rebranding of the HD 2000 series at all. GT200 is based on G80, just like RV770 is based on R600.

And you call me a fanboy. :laugh:

Everywhere I look 8800GT goes for 130$... and the 4850 goes for 200+$ (preorders).
How exactly does it "not compete in performance, but in price with the GT"?

also, preliminary tests show it is faster then an 8800GT, but that remains to be seen until the actual release.

I wonder if we will be seeing any GDDR4 parts, since the R770 supposts GDDR3/4/5.

 

[Nemesis 1]

We went threw this argument years ago when NV needed Sli to be the top dog . Dual gpus was OK than According to the NV guys that posted here. A few years later the shoe is on the other foot so now it doesn't fit . Just Go back and read the old post when sli came out . The trueth lies there waiting . If Dual gpu's was good for NV its good for AMD period.

Its just that the Choir has changed, but the song remains the same .

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: happy medium


Where can you get a 4850 for 130.00$ AR??

Well I was going more by retail prices.

The 4850 will also have to compete against a more established product that can afford price cuts.

It will be a hard sell if they are just now releasing a 8800GT competitor and trying to sell it as something new and special.

With the GT200 series here and how much of a performance gain it has, it's pretty clear that the 48xx series is last gen and more of a name change than anything else.

They have rebranded the 2xxx series twice now (3xxx -> 4xxx). Not that this is anything new as the 9xxx series from NVIDIA is not much different than the 8xxx series.

-10% over previous high-end is a performance gain?

If the 4870 X2 outperforms the GTX 280, and it is last gen, that what is the GTX 280? :laugh:

I have said this many times, and you have not listened just as many. The HD 4850 is a price competitior with the 8800GT, not a performance competitor. The reason you see AMD compare the 4850 & 8800GT so often is because the 4850 is much faster but will arrive at a similar price. If AMD compared the 4850 & 9800GTX, the 4850 would look much less impressive because they would be similar in performance.

RV770 is a new architecture & a new generation..... it is not a rebranding of the HD 2000 series at all. GT200 is based on G80, just like RV770 is based on R600.

And you call me a fanboy. :laugh:

Everywhere I look 8800GT goes for 130$... and the 4850 goes for 200+$ (preorders).
How exactly does it "not compete in performance, but in price with the GT"?

also, preliminary tests show it is faster then an 8800GT, but that remains to be seen until the actual release.

I wonder if we will be seeing any GDDR4 parts, since the R770 supposts GDDR3/4/5.

Stop using such crazy things as FACTS in these threads. It will being scorn and laughter among the masses!

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Extelleron


-10% over previous high-end is a performance gain?

If you are referring to the GX2 you do realise it has 2 GPUs right? I'm really starting to think that you don't have any idea at all how video cards work.

If the 4870 X2 outperforms the GTX 280, and it is last gen, that what is the GTX 280? :laugh:

Yes if it takes 2 GPUs to come even close to 1 GPU that makes the 4870 last gen. I am now convinced you have no idea how video cards work.

I have said this many times, and you have not listened just as many. The HD 4850 is a price competitior with the 8800GT, not a performance competitor.

Welcome to last year ATI.

The reason you see AMD compare the 4850 & 8800GT so often is because the 4850 is much faster but will arrive at a similar price.

It's actually slower.

If AMD compared the 4850 & 9800GTX, the 4850 would look much less impressive because they would be similar in performance.

If by similar you mean "not even close"

RV770 is a new architecture & a new generation..... it is not a rebranding of the HD 2000 series at all.

Then why can't 1 GPU keep up with the GT200 series?

And you call me a fanboy. :laugh:

Yes, Yes I do.

I have never known you as even CLOSE to a unbiased person, but this post absolutely cements you as the largest nVidia fanboy on these forums.

You, like many others before you, seem to find the number of GPUs on a card to be more important than performance and gaming experience. The number of GPUs on the PCB of a graphics card does not in any way harm or negatively affect the performance and gaming experience that a card gives you. If I am getting 100 FPS in Crysis @ Very High with a card made up of 1000 VSA-100 GPUs, would it make a difference what was under the cooler? No, not at all.

You need to get it out of your head that R700's multi-GPU nature has anything to do with AMD not being able to compete with nVidia using a single GPU solution. That is blatantly false. AMD's decision to make R700 multi-GPU was a design choice made years ago so that AMD could acheive the best performance possible in 2008. The argument that R700 and GT200 are not directly comparable because R700 uses 2 GPUs is not at all relevant and reeks of fanboyism. If R700 beats GT200 in price, performance, and gaming experience, then it does not matter, as I said above, if is made up of 1000 VSA-100 processors working in tandem. Your argument is just as valid as saying it is not fair to compare RV770 to GT200, even if they were the same price, because GT200 uses more silicon to acheive its performance. Both arguments are rediculous. And suggesting I don't know how a video card works is ludicrous. I think it is clear from your posts that I know a lot more than you do. The HD 4870 X2 will be a smarter multi-GPU implentation than HD 3870 X2. Crossfire problems that plagued the HD 3870 X2 should not be evident in the 4870 X2.

If you really believe what you say about HD 4850 being slower than the 8800GT, then I suggest you do not read the reviews of June 25th. You may be at risk of heart attack.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Extelleron
The number of GPUs on the PCB of a graphics card does not in any way harm or negatively affect the performance and gaming experience that a card gives you.

Wow folks....before you read anything else that he writes, read this post. This is even a better quote than my sig now!!!!!

 

[HOOfan 1]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31

Originally posted by: Extelleron
The number of GPUs on the PCB of a graphics card does not in any way harm or negatively affect the performance and gaming experience that a card gives you.

Wow folks....before you read anything else that he writes, read this post. This is even a better quote than my sig now!!!!!

yeah that isn't right...what if the PCB has "0" GPUs on it?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Extelleron


You, like many others before you, seem to find the number of GPUs on a card to be more important than performance and gaming experience. The number of GPUs on the PCB of a graphics card does not in any way harm or negatively affect the performance and gaming experience that a card gives you. If I am getting 100 FPS in Crysis @ Very High with a card made up of 1000 VSA-100 GPUs, would it make a difference what was under the cooler? No, not at all.

Yep. Further proof you know nothing about video cards. If a game does not have a profile for your multi-GPU setup you will run at half speed sometime worse. At least NVIDIA will allow you to create your own profiles (not that it helps quad much), with ATI you are boned if your driver does not support that game.

You need to get it out of your head that R700's multi-GPU nature has anything to do with AMD not being able to compete with nVidia using a single GPU solution.

Why, all the facts point to that.

That is blatantly false. AMD's decision to make R700 multi-GPU was a design choice made years ago so that AMD could acheive the best performance possible in 2008.

Actually "years ago" AMD had nothing to do with ATI, R700 or Video Cards. That is blatantly true.

The argument that R700 and GT200 are not directly comparable because R700 uses 2 GPUs is not at all relevant and reeks of fanboyism. If R700 beats GT200 in price, performance, and gaming experience, then it does not matter

It matters because you can SLI a GT200 rendering your point moot.

If you really believe what you say about HD 4850 being slower than the 8800GT, then I suggest you do not read the reviews of June 25th. You may be at risk of heart attack.

Actually I'm not emotionally invested in this, like you. In fact I have said on record that only actual benchmarks on release matter. And I will happily view the results even if the 4850 is twice as fast as quad GT200s. Hell I would even run out and buy one.

 

[airhendrix13]

I think from a consumers standpoint Extelleron is right, but from the Manufacturers standpoint Wreckage is right.

99% of consumers don't really care how it works, just how WELL it works. So single / multi core doesn't really matter.

From a Manufacturing standpoint, having a single GPU would be better for them. It runs cooler (usually), uses less power (again usually), and thus in the end would end up saving them money on cooling and such.

I for one embrace the single core more than the multicore (GPU-wise), but multi-die card is a proven strategy (minus minor scaling issues).

I think there is still too much that needs to be learned from a single die before multi-die becomes mainstream, but what works, works, so bravo to ATi.

 

[Munky]

Are the mods on vacation or something? All I see is a bunch of newbs arguing over hardware that hasn't even been released or tested.

 

[dennilfloss]

Looks like the transition from the Radeon 1800 series to the 1900. Excellent tweaking to fix the flaws made a world of difference.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: airhendrix13

From a Manufacturing standpoint, having a single GPU would be better for them. It runs cooler (usually), uses less power (again usually), and thus in the end would end up saving them money on cooling and such.

I think you are missing some key points:

1) A less complex gpu has higher yields which MORE than offset cooling costs. Compared to wasted wafer space and # of working gpus one can pump out of a 300mm wafer, cooling costs of a gpu are practically immaterial. Think about.

2) A less complex gpu requires lower R&D spend and possibly less respins to get the bugs out/appropriate frequency, etc. There is absolutely no question that it's a lot more risky from a manufacturing and business perspective to attempt to design a large monolithic core that will be outperform the competition.

- you have issues of downscaling those cores to smaller ones while when you have a mid-range gpu, you just package them together (software becomes the scaling problem)

- what happens if your gpu doesn't outperform the competition? We know how this worked out for HD 2900XT...

3) A dual-gpu card will not necessarily run any hotter or use any more power than a large die gpu like GTX 280.

In other news,

"The Radeon 4850 features a 625 MHz core clock and GDDR3 clock in excess of 2000MHz. Corporate documentation explains that the 480 stream processors on the RV770 processor offer considerable enhancements over the 320 stream processors found in the RV670 core, though AMD memos reveal little about how this is accomplished. "

So much for 800 shaders.........

Source

 

[pcgamer321]

Wow, can't even look at or talk about hardware without all this fanboy nonsense............
This thread is going from informative to ATi sucks, or Nvidia sucks. ATi pwns you, no no Nvidia pwns you.

:frown:
:roll:

 

[ghost recon88]

All the ATI-bashing trolls need to go back to their nVidia thread and cry about the launch price of the GTX280.

 

[Extelleron]

I'm not going to argue with you anymore Wreckage. It's clear you and I have different opinions on what AMD/nVidia are doing and nothing that either of us say is going to change that.

BTW Wreckage I just bought an eVGA GTX 280, because I am such a ATI fanboy.

Now I have to hope HD 4870 doesn't touch the GTX 280 at it's $300 price

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: airhendrix13

From a Manufacturing standpoint, having a single GPU would be better for them. It runs cooler (usually), uses less power (again usually), and thus in the end would end up saving them money on cooling and such.

I think you are missing some key points:

1) A less complex gpu has higher yields which MORE than offset cooling costs. Compared to wasted wafer space and # of working gpus one can pump out of a 300mm wafer, cooling costs of a gpu are practically immaterial. Think about.

2) A less complex gpu requires lower R&D spend and possibly less respins to get the bugs out/appropriate frequency, etc. There is absolutely no question that it's a lot more risky from a manufacturing and business perspective to attempt to design a large monolithic core that will be outperform the competition.

- you have issues of downscaling those cores to smaller ones while when you have a mid-range gpu, you just package them together (software becomes the scaling problem)

- what happens if your gpu doesn't outperform the competition? We know how this worked out for HD 2900XT...

3) A dual-gpu card will not necessarily run any hotter or use any more power than a large die gpu like GTX 280.

In other news,

"The Radeon 4850 features a 625 MHz core clock and GDDR3 clock in excess of 2000MHz. Corporate documentation explains that the 480 stream processors on the RV770 processor offer considerable enhancements over the 320 stream processors found in the RV670 core, though AMD memos reveal little about how this is accomplished. "

So much for 800 shaders.........

Source

That same article also says that the RV670 and RV770 have shader model 4.0 support. Don't they have 4.1? I'm still *thinking* it'll be 800, but I guess we have to wait to find out for sure.

Originally posted by: Extelleron
I'm not going to argue with you anymore Wreckage. It's clear you and I have different opinions on what AMD/nVidia are doing and nothing that either of us say is going to change that.

BTW Wreckage I just bought an eVGA GTX 280, because I am such a ATI fanboy.

Now I have to hope HD 4870 doesn't touch the GTX 280 at it's $300 price

So Nvidia has actually sold at least 1 GTX 280.