Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4870 benchmarks

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 21, 2008 10:25:20 PM

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http%3A%2...

from toms hong kong i think

what do you think

More about : 4870 benchmarks

June 21, 2008 10:31:34 PM

rangers said:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http%3A%2...

from toms hong kong i think

what do you think

Is it just me or does that 13k 3dmark06 score seems off? I get just above 15k on the same default settings with a g92 8800gts, which the 4870, at least in theory, should be able to handily outperform. Must be bad drivers. :sarcastic: 
June 21, 2008 11:00:11 PM

it said the driver are 8.6beta and it looks way off to me to
Related resources
June 22, 2008 12:42:21 AM

First of all, they're using a Phenom. I think that accounts for some of the dip in the 3DMark 06 score.\

Secondly, while the 3D Mark 06 score is low, that looks like a damn nice Vantage score to me. P8096. Don't remember off the top of my head what that's comparable to, but it sounds damn nice.

Thirdly, beta drivers and it's translated chinese site.

So all in all, could be a little unreliable, but even if it is, 3DMark isn't everything and different versions handle the cards differently.
June 22, 2008 1:55:48 AM

dagger said:
Is it just me or does that 13k 3dmark06 score seems off? I get just above 15k on the same default settings with a g92 8800gts, which the 4870, at least in theory, should be able to handily outperform. Must be bad drivers. :sarcastic: 


3dmark2k6 is rather old benchmark also swayed by CPU speeds. Your g92 has more texel fillrate that makes the scores a bit higher in 3dmark 2k6 but RV770 has more FP 16 blending fillrate which is faster in HDR. Case in point RV770 is better for modern titles or future titles.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
June 22, 2008 2:28:05 AM

hard to understand lol

IDK if P8000 in vantage is good...

i'm too lazy right now to go look up a gtx 200 review and see what it gets... o well... nice to know its coming soon
June 22, 2008 2:30:22 AM

its too bad they didn't have the sm2/3 scores :[

ah well, I bet some benches will be live on june25 with the official 4850 launch
June 22, 2008 3:02:39 AM

Well according to this review a stock GTX280 scores ~P11000 with a 3GHz QX6850.
June 22, 2008 3:53:23 AM

Looks like its gonna need 2 6pin power connectors, thats a pain. then of course I didn't actually read the article just looked at the pictures.
a b U Graphics card
June 22, 2008 4:11:09 AM

dagger said:
Is it just me or does that 13k 3dmark06 score seems off? I get just above 15k on the same default settings with a g92 8800gts, which the 4870, at least in theory, should be able to handily outperform. Must be bad drivers. :sarcastic: 

You can't compare a 3.6GHz Q6600 vs a stock X4 9850. That's 2K or more 3dmarks alone.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/682/12/
June 22, 2008 4:28:36 AM

Looks like we may still need to reserve our judgment for a little while longer! Thought interesting find OP!

Best,

3Ball
a b U Graphics card
June 22, 2008 4:41:47 AM

Im going with my original guess way back, 10%+ faster than the Ultra. Its looking like alomost 20%, but we will see
June 22, 2008 9:01:25 AM

Yes the complete system is what counts. Pitty that they didn't have 4850 results with same rig, so we would have had some comparison results of how much better 4870 is than 4850...
June 22, 2008 4:17:53 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Im going with my original guess way back, 10%+ faster than the Ultra. Its looking like alomost 20%, but we will see


I think 4870 will be very close to 260gtx and some benches very close to 280gtx.
June 22, 2008 6:33:44 PM

I agree and hope so, ATI has been really hush hush about the 4870. It either does really bad, or really good. Hopefully the latter.
BTW, is it just me or is anyone else discontent with the 9800GTX+? Even if it performs better, its still just another scrap card put together to save Nv's ass, another G92 incarnation, and is last gen! so even if it does better than the 4850, I'd say it isn't a good buy.
a b U Graphics card
June 22, 2008 7:21:21 PM

I was more disappointed by the 9800GTX itself than the 9800GTX+. Neither was all too exciting though. This is the card they should have released from the start instead of now out of desperation.

Now with the pricing drops, the 9800GTX is finally worth considering. I'd rather have the HD4850, but if already owning an SLI mobo, then the 9800GTX or + gains some added value. A lot still depends on the pricing of other G92's though as the 9800GTX (and +) have competition with the cheaper cards not just with the HD4850.

I'm excited about the HD4870 though. It's looking like my next mobo won't be an SLI chipset but instead house a couple of those. Just have to wait and see performance and pricing vs the GTX260 down the road.
a b U Graphics card
June 22, 2008 7:50:04 PM

The way I see it, the refresh of the 4850 looks exciting compared to what weve had. I mean , like Paul saidm the GTX was crap for any kind of upgrade, worse than last gen etc. Im thinking the 45nm version of the 4850 would kill the 45nm version of the GTX++++-++ heheh
June 22, 2008 9:20:55 PM

Paul is right, that is what the 9800GTX should have been originally, not some craappy revision that required more power. BTW, most of the performance gains between the 9800GTX and the 8800GTS/X, can be attributed mainly to newer drivers.
!