Crysis 4870 benchmarks (includes CF):

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=292315

God I hope these are true.

I've been reading from the Nvidia fanboys about how the 4870 won't get near the new GTX cards. Either of them. If these pictures are true, then the 4870 looks to be the GTX 260s "equal" with only the GTX 280 to look up to. Considering that the 260 is slower, and costs more, calling it the equal to the 4870 is wrong.

Again, assuming these are not photoshopped. The thing I don't get is why AMD didn't announce these gains earlier. I thought they claimed that the 4870 was going to go up against the 8800GTS, while the 4850 was going to compete with the 8800GT. Instead, the 4850 is going up against the 9800GTX, and the 4870 is looking to take out the GTX260.

@4745454b: ok maybe maybe. the AMD people's strategy was to downsize their product. and the moment the benchmarks come out. boom, you got a winner. not against what they claimed they are trying to compete. but against the ones which are stronger.
after all, if their produce failed to go against the 9800GTX, an GTX260. they still can say, we said our products will go against the 8800GT and 8800GTS and it did infact do that.

it is like, they down hyped it. made a safety net in case of failure of their product. and then they won it by defeating the higher guns of nvidia which werent supposed to defeat.

hope my language and thoughts are understood.

Yeah but those are the same people who do not have any concept of value, or more like they were never taught the value of "value", you know people with more money than sense...

Hmmm... these results are from amd??? and not even official..., so take them so... Nvidia says that 9800GTX+ is 22% faster than 4850, and now ATI says that sigle 4870 as fast as 9800GX2...??? Well there definitely is some bias with both companies announses.
The truth is still out there somewhere, but not in these two "official" benshmarks...

for those of you whos really earger in knowing the price point, heres a little teaser for ya
(few competitive firms in Aus have the GTX 260 and HD4870 on sale since last week)
*all currency in AUD*
Gainward GTX260 575Mhz 896Mb PCI-E ~$459.00
Powercolor HD4870 512Mb DDR5 PCI-E ~$399.00
also note:
XFX GTX280 600Mhz 1Gb PCI-E ~$799.00
Powercolor, HIS, Sapphire HD4850 625Mhz 512Mb PCI-E ~$229.00

AMD takes so much flax for pre-release FUD that they probably decided to just let the numbers speak for themselves. We will know for sure next week, but if the 4870 scales up in performance from the 4850, then it looks good.

The 4870x2 looks even better. No need for me to upgrade from the 3870x2 right now, as that does well vs. the GTX series. I never expected my card to be in second or third place in benchmarks vs. the GTX280. In some the 9800gx2 wins, in others, the GTX280, but the 3870x2 isn't far behind and is well ahead of other last gen Nvidia cards.

Now, if AMD can make this kind of comeback with Deneb at the holiday season, then I'll be even happier! Deneb doesn't have to beat Nehalem, it just needs to be competitive at my price range vs. a Penryn.

Yes and, as stupid as it sounds, people will buy more than one 4870x2. Two of those should beat the GTX280 in triple SLI -- especially as CrossfireX matures.

Whats with the performance of the 9800gx2 in those graphs....? seems a little low considering that it beats the gtx280??

Makes me think that something maybe fake..

^^And nvidia's worst enemy is nvidia

Those benchmarks seem seriously off to me. My 9800GTX (OC) gets higher FPS than every single card shown there (1680x1050), only being beaten by SLI/CF. I know there's no info on the hardware used for the rest of the test builds, but I'm sure my rig can't be that much faster (if at all) than the system they were benching on.

I wouldn't be surprised if these same people are gaming an a 24" or less monitor; which is a waste given that SLI/CF really shines on a bigger screen and higher resolutions. I just can't imagine spending (*cough*wasting*cough*) over $1200USD on two gpus especially in the light of the 4850/4870. Definetely more money than sense...

There is a certain irony in that one of the reasons why ATI/AMD gpus will continue to sell well and gain market share is because of Intel. Intel may be beating AMD when it comes to desktop cpus but at the same time they are also indirectly putting money in ATI/AMD's pocket by exculsively supporting CF.

Well, if that's the case, the small ammount of self pity I felt for not waiting for these new cards has passed.

I'm not sure how the new Ati's are doing with AA, but that used to be a heavy performance hitting feature for them. That might be the reason why they perform so good now.

But I let my wallet speak and at this moment the best price would be a 48*0. I hope a lot of people will buy them all but wait with buying the 280 for the price to drop. Show Nvidia those days are dead, everything is getting more expansive, we have less money to spend and they increase the price again.

4xAA pretty much comes for free on the 4850...



Don't forget, the only reason the RV600/RV670 got hit so hard on AA was a result of the DirectX 10.1 debacle.

(Before some come and say RV600 didn't support 10.1, it apparently supported the first pass shader which is what made the AA difference IIRC)

nice.... now I'll just wait untill it comes out and the price will drop

but what can they do? They will probably go for a die shrink to 55 nm, but then what? i can't imagine it will be able to make up for this huge difference in performance per watt (or cm2 )

And nobody thinks about grains of salt when reading AMD at the top right corner?

Remember the days of the XTX? When will ATi be bringing that back? They could with the 4870 line, it runs well enough for them to do so.

Has anyone seen benchmarks with the hotfix from Dammit for the 48x0 series?

If these are true then I will buy 2 and overclock them so I can reach that $1300 cards performance level.... These do seem about right, this is Crysis after all and Nvidia and it would seem recently ATI are making sure their cards shine in Crysis.

Nvidia boards cost so much more compared to RV770. They can't really drop the price like that and not lose money.

So does my timedemo benchmarks but their testing mythology might be different.

We already have data about 9800gtx+ vs 4850. In performance I say they are about even. 9800gtx+ is better raw performer in most cases and 4850 is better in AA performance. Kind of like 3870 vs 9600gt was but the roles have reversed in performance anyway and cost factor too not to mention 1 teraflop of processing power.

Take this with a grain of salt. Wait for real benches to show up to make conclusion but I don't doubt that 4870 will be very competitive with 260gtx or a bit higher than it's performance imo.

Salt is good ;-)
I really hope that 4870 is so fast as predigted. AMD really needs something that can make them some profit! It allso means that I can change my old sturdy 1800XT to something faster... It's good card, but getting a little bit slow with new games.
I am allways a little bit sceptical with both companies, when they announce that they have invented the "second coming" or something like that. They allways shows their own card at the best light.
All in all what is good is that both companies have now reasonable good cards! It's healthy situation. Many have said that 9800GTX+ is only 8800 gt version 3... so what the 8800 gt has been good consept for customers, why not make tweaked version of it? You don't have to reinvent everything. And now ATI has made really good upadate to 3800 series that can beat their Nvidia rivals. Very impressive!
Now I only have to hope that AMD can make their high metal gate ready and give intel something to be a little bit worried... The situation in CPU side is not so good at all.

Wait until DX10 is about 3 to 5 years old and everybody knows how to strech it's limits...
It seems that this time game companies expected faster development in GPU sector. I expect now faster development as both comapanies have reasonable fast middle range cards. If only AMD would not be so much in depts, so that it could put more money to ATI, so that it could take some risks and try to developt it's own super highend GPU's to compete with Nvidia 200 series. Maybe two or four core chip if that is what they want. Now the highend GPU's are too big risk to AMD take because they have not enough money. It would not help much normal customers in short time range, but in long way some things that works well, could be seen in middle range cards... and it would force the Nvidia work harder with their highend parts...

still disappointed that no card setup can play crysis very high at 1920x1200...

o well guess i'll wait for the next gen