Radeon HD4870 Benchmark

http://forums.legitreviews.com/about15370.html

Yeah, that site provides two sources for the benchmarks.

I'm not sure what language they're in or how credible they are.

If this review is real, then I know what my next upgrade will be. I might even take two cards for good measure.

Even if true, a little dissapointing they don't have any AA in the tests, and conspicuous by it's absence.

Actually, the question is does it nose dive with AA. That's the big problem with AA on the HD series, you can see it go from competitive with the high end without AA (like the HD2900XT vs GF8800Ultra) to stuggling to keep up with the low end of the enthusiast parts (like the HD2900XT vs GF8800GTS-320).

This is good, but you know that for many people running at 1920x1200 with AA will matter more than 2500x1600 without AA.

Anywhoo, just wish more than high and very high they had VH with no AA and either VH or H with AA, that would've at least given us an idea about what this segment tends to look for, c'mon 1280x1024 with no AA?.

With that kind of performance, I don't care for aa anymore. The gap is just way too large. It's one gpu core against 2, and look at that bar. What happens when the 4870x2 comes out?

Assuming these are legit, the question now becomes:

How will nVidia respond?

I wonder if the GeForce 99xx series will post even bigger numbers.

I really really hope this lives up to these results And I agree with ape, where's the AA? If they had a sample, why wouldn't they test the AA capabilities since that was a major problem with the last generation..

*ponders*

I don't think it will. The 8800GTX has been out since when? November 2006 was it? Nvidia has had well over a year to work on their next gen card.

I think the 9900GTX could be faster. But from what I hear it is not power efficent at all and does create a lot of heat.

Even if the 9900GTX out performs the HD4870 I think the HD4870 has a shot of being the market leader due to value, power consumption, and price.

I read the other day on Tom's Hardware that the DDR5 verison of the HD4870 uses something like 34% less power than the DDR3 verison and has a TDP rating of an amazing 102 Watts!!

That is just incredible performance per watt!

On some of those, the 4870's framerate is nearly 50% more than the 9800gx2's. It would be hard to make up this much of a gap just through "efficiencies from having a single gpu."

Of course, if all the power reduction happens as well as these charts being close to true, some of us will be wondering why we bought such large PSU's, even if we run two cards. I know, I bought the big PSU last year for power hungry graphics cards, but now it may sit there just idling.

@Dagger- I can guess that there were a lot of things that contribute to high efficiency besides a single GPU. But until the cards come out and real benches are posted, I'll reserve final judgment. But I do hope these preliminary charts are at least close to real.

does bench marks DO NOT jive with the changes and the pixal fill rates - but they could be right since there are many changes

My present PSU is supposed to have a very wide efficiency range. Its just that I could have used a 750wt instead of a 850wt.

I agree with the new forum formats. For some reason I'm not getting e-mail notifications of replies on the threads for the past few days. I checked all my settings and they say that I should be getting them, but I don't. Wish Tom's had left well enough alone.

The jump from DDR3 to DDR4 is very minor and DDR4 runs hot.

DDR5 for some reason is a dramatic improvement, runs much faster and cooler too.

I have read that on more than one site.

Seems like it's going to be the opposite.

this is very good.initials are promising!

My point was that the HD 4870's performance with AA on will still beat out the 9800 GX2, even if it takes as much of a hit (44%) as the 3870 X2 does with the filters applied.

If we take the percent reduction values I calculated for the Tom's test, and apply them to the proposed HD 4870 benchmarks, we'd get something like this:

Crysis (Very High, 1600 X 1200, 4X AA)
GeForce 9800 GX2 - 35 fps with a 62.0% reduction for AA = 13.3 fps
Radeon HD 4870 - 44 fps with a 44.1% reduction for AA = 24.6 fps

I'm simply speculating that the HD 4870 will have its frame rates reduced by the same amount as the 3870 X2 when 4X AA is enabled.

Therein lies the fun of speculation.

The G94 handles AA very well for some reason. Which reminds me, what ever happened to the "free 4xAA" that I kept hearing about before. And when is the damn physics card being implemented into the GPU, or by software. anyway that is an awesome 3D mark score. I doubt that that is the 4870, it is probably 4870X2 scores trust me.It just makes more sense. The 4800s were only supposed to be 50% better than the 3800s anyways. Finnally a single card that comes out and totally rapes 3dMark 06. 10000 SM3 score, impressive.

of course, vantage just came out.

hmmm....is that so...it could just be driver support but who knows.

I think Apes right about this. If those marks are true, it doesnt show the AA hit. You add up all the numbers that has been posted, and youll see 200% gains in some areas, not in physical increase, but with clock*physical increase. Going back to FUDs original estimate of 50% better , then reduced later to 40+% better than the 3870, it was done without the knowledge of the core clock being lower, and the shaders higher. It could be like what Ive heard also, that these new cards (4870 and 9900GTX) will do very well in the newer games, with not as great an increase in the older ones, which is still ok, being that almost all older games have been conquered already by current solutions. In other words, too good to be true, unless its the X2 being shown here. But then again, GDDR5 has some amazing potential. Im wondering if itll help with the 4+1 super?

Could be that I will finally be able to retire my 8800GTX's depends on AA performance though Im just the sort of person who likes to run high rez and AA....

My mother board is also crossfire compatible... Although my favourite game isnt

First card in a long while to be interesting, but AA performance will be the deal maker \ breaker for me. If this manages to flop back to 8800 gtx \ultra levels when using AA then it still wont be worth the upgrade...

Yeah, me too!

Very true, but you can't ignore percentages. You have to look at the relative figures and percentages.
I didn't realise the 9800GX2 took such a hit on FPS with AA enabled, that was a very interesting stat.
I'm hoping to get a 24" soon, so hopefully I'll be able to run far less (if any) AA.

No, I'm currently running a 17"!!!! /
I'm expecting to use less AA, because I'm expecting the size of the screen to be that much bigger, that lower AA will be far less noticeable
But yeah, I understand (a bit! ) the differences between LCD & CRT & Native res.