http://www.pcper.com/article.php?a [...] pert&pid=1

in the review the 4850 is only able to match the 8800GTS but still behind 9800GTX. but in somewhere else we have seen much higher result. so think again! from what im seeing the review on the net is being hand picked so only the good ones will be shown where as the underperforming onese has been put away.

and the release of 9800GTX+ which will have higher clock then the one use in all the review will be either catch up with hd4850 or extend the lead depend on whether the reviews we are seeing is true. and it will be sold at the same price as the 9800GTX now and the 9800GTX will drop to $199

but no doubt that the price for the card you will get is brilliant.

also one more thing to consider. something that current AMD is not capable of no matter how to argue it.
http://translate.google.com/transl [...] h-CN&tl=en

in the result chart the numbers on the left is with physics and on the right no physics.

Im waiting for the 4870 X2 1 Gb, it should own Nvidia and for less than $400...Hopefully. Should be a nice upgrade from my 8800 GTS 640Mb.

Old news. We already know it perform between 8800gt(g92, 112sp) and 8800gts/9800gtx(g92, 128sp). At $200, it's not really good value compared to a 8800gts at $160 after mir. Not sure about 9800gtx, it's still overpriced considering it performs the same as 8800gts, and with slightly lower overclocking headroom.

If you run dual gpu, 4850 is better value though, since you won't have to buy an overpriced and underperforming nvidia chipset motherboard.

As for physics, unforunately, Ageia still has very low adoption rate. If game developers don't bother to use it, there's no point. Nearly all recent games, even high end games with high physics effects like Crysis, do not support Ageia, but rather use generic physics engines optimized to run on spare cpu cores in a dual/quad/octo cpu.

That is the worst review I have ever read. Stick to good sites like Anandtech, 3DGuru and the like. If you visit their sites today, you will find their reviews and I trust theirs a hundred times more than this one. In their reviews, the 4850 bests the 9800GTX in almost all tests.

Nvidia guys are screwed either way.

Buy a new GPU for $600+ or


Buy 2 New GPUs for $400 and a $200 motherboard.


Either way Nvidia fanboys are gonna have to drop $600 to play ball with the new tech from either side.

But still... for under $200 and almost as fast as 9800GTX!!!! That's a bargain!

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php? [...] 3&Itemid=1

stabgotham i have read more then 10 review about the 4850 and this is one of them. which somehow give different result to others just want to share with all you guys on hyper mode.

i wonder how CF will do on the new card as SLI on GT200 give all very positive results. but i still dont think the performance justify the price tag its wearing. but price cut is comming soon. it might bring the price/performance gap closer then before.

i really looking forward to the new 55nm die shrink as Nvidia has taken at least 2 gens or cards time to develop it. will that bring the G92(B) and the GT200 to another whole new level and at a lower or same price tag.

things are getting interesting this year. its very surprising that Intel and Nvidia do discount!maybe they really want to take out AMD for once?or at least take it to as low as it can get?

I doubt a die shrink alone will do anything for performance. Look at what die shrink did for 65nm vs 45nm cpus.

no a die shrink will allow lower heat output which result in you can OC it further hence give more oomph! now you get it? come on!you should know this since you are talking about 65nm vs 45nm CPUs!

But if they do that there prized card get's stomped!

I mean com'on it's already over and every legit review site has came to the same conclusion that 4850 MOP'S the floor with the 9800GTX for 100$ less!

Go cry emo fanboi's.

I do love me a good anand review.

Man all these cards suk!! Guys with a two year old pair of 8800GTX's don't have any reason to upgrade as they still stomp all these overhyped new cards.

That's just the problem. Q9450(45nm) didn't end up oc better than q6600(65nm), and q9300(45nm) ocs worse. Of course, gpus are different. We'll see if they fare any better.

Actually they do OC better in theory then the q6600, its just Intel screwed us on the multi, because they do OC so good.

Fox news should start doing PC hardware reviews. You know they are "Fair and Balanced."

Look closer in that pcper review. Both these cards were oceed. So a oceed card that isnt cheap, against a brand new with baby drivers card, shows it holds it own on a bad review, which goes against the grain of every other review out there, especially the better sites? And this is good? Something to look forward to?

It beats the 9800GTX.

That's all I need to know.

If nvidia didn't already realize this, they wouldn't have cut the 9800GTX to the same price and be releasing 9800GTX+ to try and compete.

Lets assume for the briefest of moments that the 9800GTX ~ 4850 ~ 8800GTS. And that the newest 9800GTX+ will only increase that lead. Next month we should see the 4870, which will be even faster. A few months after that, the high end card, the 4870x2.

The problem is that there are reviews out there that show the 4850 over the 9800GTX, even in some games able to keep up with the 260. If all these other reviews are right and this one is wrong, then the 4870 should be even closer to the 260's equal. Last, the 4870x2 should be better then the 280. If you take cost into this, then these cards will be considered monsters, assuming they hit the price points they are supposed to.

I didn't catch that at first because I was skimming through them too fast but after a second look I did notice that they used the GT on roids. I do like to see OC card comparisons but baselines are a little more....transparent?