HD4850 vs. HD4870

[Tullphan]

I have the opportunity to sell my 4850 & purchase a 4870 for not much more than my selling price of the 4850.
The 4870 has 512mb of DDR5 where my 4850 has 512mb of DDR3.
Overall, will I notice any difference (probably not)?
Is there any games that will be hindered by the 512mb on the 4870?
How long before games w/DX 11 be out as I was considering the 5770 as well.
Thanks.

 

[shangshang]

the 4870 will be faster than the 5770. Main problem with your proposed 4870 is that it's the 512mb version. If you plan on gaming at resolution 1680x1024 or lower, then a 4870 512mb should be able to satisfy you through 2010.

Regarding DX11. DX11 games won't be out in bunches until a year from now, and by then you can dump the 4870 and get the 5850 or 5870 for cheap, and that's when you'll notice a big change in performance. AMD is rumored to have a new series of cards in the 4th quarter of 2010, so I expect a lot of great deals on the 5850/5870 cards by then.

 

[dug777]

Impression I get is that the 4870 512mb delivers quite a noticeable improvement over the 4850 512mb due to core speed bump and mem bandwidth. From the few benchmarks I've seen (and thus, I could be entirely wrong), stepping up to 1Gb doesn't actually help you in any meaningful fashion (ie you see improvements, but the fps tends to be so low that it's practically meaningless). What the benchmarks don't tell you (and hence, what I'm not in a position to confirm or deny), is that the 1gb variants might offer you is increased smoothness at the edge of playability...

My 4850 does 800 core, but won't budge more tha 5% on the mem. I get a decent improvement out of that, but it's crippled by the bandwidth I suspect...it's still no 4870 512mb, despite spanking it handily re core speeds

 

[bunnyfubbles]

If the price of upgrading your 512MB 4850 to a 512MB 4870 really is negligible, I would recommend you go ahead and do it. A 1GB card would obviously have more staying power but a 4870 is certainly a significant enough upgrade over a 4850. As dug777 illustrated, there simply is no way to make up for the difference in memory bandwidth.

That being said, a 5770 would certainly have even more staying power thanks to its 1GB of ram and DX11 support, but I wouldn't consider it if the price difference was a lot more than swapping the 4850 for a 512MB 4870. Although chances are that by the time DX11 is a significant factor, you will be looking to upgrade your card yet again if not have already done so

 

[MrK6]

If it's almost a free exchange and you won't miss the time spent swapping out the parts, go for it.

 

[BFG10K]

There?s a huge performance difference between the two cards. You?ll be looking at 30%-40%, if not more.

You?ll still be held back in a lot of situations with only 512 MB though.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
There?s a huge performance difference between the two cards. You?ll be looking at 30%-40%, if not more.

You?ll still be held back in a lot of situations with only 512 MB though.

um what? since when is a 4870 512mb 40% or more faster than a 4850? around 25% is the average from all the benchmarks I am seeing. 30% seems to be the max.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: toyota

um what? since when is a 4870 512mb 40% or more faster than a 4850? around 25% is the average from all the benchmarks I am seeing. 30% seems to be the max.

http://www.computerbase.de/art...rmancerating_qualitaet

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: toyota

um what? since when is a 4870 512mb 40% or more faster than a 4850? around 25% is the average from all the benchmarks I am seeing. 30% seems to be the max.

http://www.computerbase.de/art...rmancerating_qualitaet

is that a 4870 512mb? I am looking at several 4870 512mb reviews right now and it is not ever over 30% faster than a 4850 and averages about 25% or so.

EDIT: looking through Anandtechs original 4850 4870 review the 4870 is over 30% in one game at 1920x1200 with AA. in other games it barely averages much over 20% faster.

so from 3 different sites I am getting just under 25% average that the 4870 512 has over the 4850 512mb.

 

[Zstream]

Originally posted by: toyota

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: toyota

um what? since when is a 4870 512mb 40% or more faster than a 4850? around 25% is the average from all the benchmarks I am seeing. 30% seems to be the max.

http://www.computerbase.de/art...rmancerating_qualitaet

is that a 4870 512mb? I am looking at several 4870 512mb reviews right now and it is not ever over 30% faster than a 4850 and averages about 25% or so.

EDIT: looking through Anandtechs original 4850 4870 review the 4870 is over 30% in one game at 1920x1200 with AA. in other games it barely averages much over 20% faster.

so from 3 different sites I am getting just under 25% average that the 4870 512 has over the 4850 512mb.

I have to agree with you here, I game at 1680*1050. Went from two 4850's to a 4870 then to a single 4850.

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: toyota

is that a 4870 512mb?

Yes, which is why I said ?you?ll still be held back in a lot of situations with only 512 MB though.?

 

[MODEL3]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

Originally posted by: toyota

is that a 4870 512mb?

Yes, which is why I said ?you?ll still be held back in a lot of situations with only 512 MB though.?

It's 1GB.

ATi Radeon HD 4870 X2 (750/1.800), 2x 1.024 MB
ATi Radeon HD 4890 (850/1.950), 1.024 MB
ATi Radeon HD 4870 (750/1.800), 1.024 MB
ATi Radeon HD 4850 (625/993), 512 MB

http://www.computerbase.de/art...n_hd_5770_crossfire/4/

Also if you check the Stalker Clear Sky scores (1920X1200 4X AA 16X AF) it makes perfect sense, because there is no way in this game at this resolution the 4870 512MB to be faster than 5770 1GB. (this game has heavy memory needs at this resolution and the 4870 1GB should be at least 20-25% faster than 4870 512MB.

the average difference between 4870 512MB & 4850 512Mb should be no higher than 30%.

 

[RussianSensation]

1680x1050.

STALKER: Clear Sky 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 29.9 (+54%)
4870 512 = 23.3 (+20%)
4850 512 = 19.4

Far Cry 2 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 45.8 (+85%)
4870 512 = 37.9 (+53%)
4850 512 = 24.7

World in Conflict 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 37.0 (+32%)
4870 512 = 36.0 (+29%)
4850 512 = 28.0

Crysis 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 21.7 (+26%)
4870 512 = 21.5 (+25%)
4850 512 = 17.2
slow...

Crysis Warhead 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 18.9
4870 512 = 17.7
4850 512 = 14.8
I am not even bothering calculating speed increase.

CoH 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 54.2 (+15%)
4870 512 = 49.4 (+5%)
4850 512 = 47.1
a wash.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Crysis Warhead 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 18.9 (+27.7%)
4870 512 = 17.7 (+19.6%)
4850 512 = 14.8
I am not even bothering calculating speed increase.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Crysis Warhead 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 18.9 (+27.7%)
4870 512 = 17.7 (+19.6%)
4850 512 = 14.8
I am not even bothering calculating speed increase.

All 3 unplayable :brokenheart:

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Crysis Warhead 4AA/16AF
4870 1GB = 18.9 (+27.7%)
4870 512 = 17.7 (+19.6%)
4850 512 = 14.8
I am not even bothering calculating speed increase.

All 3 unplayable :brokenheart:

Yeh...

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3658&p=5

HD4870 1GB = 30 (+42%)
HD4850 512 = 21.1

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: MODEL3

It's 1GB.

Sorry, I was trying to say it was 1 GB but for some reason I misread his quote. I thought he was asking if it was 1 GB, so I answered yes.

 

[MODEL3]

Sorry, my bad.
When i first read it, it crossed my mind that you meant something like:

"No, which is why I said ?you?ll still be held back in a lot of situations with only 512 MB though.?

because it made much more sense like this, but i replied anyway just to clarify.