Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Crysis 4870 benchmarks (includes CF):

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Crysis
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 23, 2008 6:44:03 AM

More about : crysis 4870 benchmarks includes

June 23, 2008 6:49:51 AM

Excellent. Even one single 4870 can outperform some of nVidia's best guns.
It would be better if it can play with AA on.
a c 189 U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 6:53:28 AM

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.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 7:28:42 AM

After the debacle of the 2900, it seems fitting to go conservative. Im not so sure these are on the money, but if they are, itll sure be IN the money for ATI
June 23, 2008 7:32:26 AM

@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. :) 
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 7:41:03 AM

Nvidia still has the most powerful setup, even if it costs them alot more to make it. As stupid as it sounds, people will buy 2 or more GTX280s.
June 23, 2008 7:52:19 AM

randomizer said:
Nvidia still has the most powerful setup, even if it costs them alot more to make it. As stupid as it sounds, people will buy 2 or more GTX280s.


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...
June 23, 2008 8:31:08 AM

4870 fits the bill for my 22inch samsung LCD @ 1680x1050 and since I've got an X48 chipset I'll be able to pop in another 4870 later after a few price drops.
June 23, 2008 9:46:13 AM

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...
June 23, 2008 9:53:28 AM

nvidea fanboys cant seem to take the fact that nvidea lost this round. get over it
June 23, 2008 10:07:25 AM

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
;) 
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 10:21:04 AM

Competitive firms in Aus? Where?! Oh MSY, right.
June 23, 2008 10:53:04 AM

4745454b said:


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.


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.

randomizer said:
Nvidia still has the most powerful setup, even if it costs them alot more to make it. As stupid as it sounds, people will buy 2 or more GTX280s.


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.
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 11:15:37 AM

yipsl said:
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.

By then the GTX280 should be cheaper too. I doubt it will stay at its current price for long. But as I've said before, why not rip off the consumer when you have a monopoly in the high end? AMD hasn't released a competitor yet, they've only shown us graphs.
June 23, 2008 11:21:22 AM

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..
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 11:21:55 AM

Haha, I love this. I 've seen so many people say they like the 4870/50 because their INTEL motherboard has Crossfire. So, right now ATI's best ally is...INTEL!
June 23, 2008 11:27:01 AM

^^And nvidia's worst enemy is nvidia
June 23, 2008 11:31:00 AM

randomizer said:
By then the GTX280 should be cheaper too. I doubt it will stay at its current price for long. But as I've said before, why not rip off the consumer when you have a monopoly in the high end? AMD hasn't released a competitor yet, they've only shown us graphs.


By your logic, Nvidia should drop the price $200 come high noon on Wednesday. I expect the card will only drop in price by $50 to $100 after the 4870x2 arrives. I don't see Nvidia dropping the price on this soon. How much has the Ultra dropped in price and how long did that take?

I know, you're an Nvidia fan and want to see Nvidia win. I'm an ATI fan and don't care about ATI wins at the high end, because I don't allow a trickle down effect where I make my decisions on what to buy based on what's the high end at the time.

Oh all right, I did buy one high end card the month it was out and on top; my current 3870x2, but I had quite a bit of a tax return and no major bills so I could splurge for once. Since then, it's dropped about $51 and I still don't have a 24" LCD to do the card justice, or the CPU to match.

So, maybe I was the idiot then? But there are "Nvidiots" in every card generation who pay around $600 for Huang's high end single GPU monster. At least I didn't pay more than $449 for my card the week it was released, and it's factory overclocked.

Know what? When ATI occasionally has the high end, they still don't rip off consumers.

EXT64 said:
Haha, I love this. I 've seen so many people say they like the 4870/50 because their INTEL motherboard has Crossfire. So, right now ATI's best ally is...INTEL!


No, Nvidia's worst enemy is Nvidia's CEO. If Nvidia had allowed Intel a free SLI license, then we might be seeing SLI on Intel, though I think Intel does see using Crossfire as an easy way to keep AMD alive as a competitor and to stave off regulators. ATI keeps AMD afloat and Intel using ATI standards and sharing Havok does not endanger competition in the CPU arena. We'll see how it all pans out once Larabee is in the marketplace. Hopefully, it will use Crossfire as it's standard too.

Nvidia's going for the gold but getting a silver. Huang insists on massive monster GPU's, can't give CUDA away and talks trash vs. Intel long before Intel has Larabee to market. Nvidia partners with Via at the low end to compete against Atom and has no high end CPU plans they'll talk about for the days when Fusion arrives.

To get SLI, you need Nvidia chipsets, so perhaps that's their way of ensuring a total platform for the loyal fans?
June 23, 2008 12:09:46 PM

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.
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 12:22:56 PM

randomizer said:
Nvidia still has the most powerful setup, even if it costs them alot more to make it. As stupid as it sounds, people will buy 2 or more GTX280s.
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...



EXT64 said:
Haha, I love this. I 've seen so many people say they like the 4870/50 because their INTEL motherboard has Crossfire. So, right now ATI's best ally is...INTEL!
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.


June 23, 2008 12:23:09 PM

i dunno...Anandtech.com has benchmarks of the 4850 and it seems to be competing (and beating in some catagories) with the gtx 260 and 280 fairly nicely...and the 4850 is $199 on newegg right now....ill be more than happy to spend $199 to get performance on par or better than a $400 OR $600 card. Just my opinion.
June 23, 2008 12:33:47 PM

mothhive said:
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 think you answered your own question. :-)

Your card is overclocked, and we do not know the rest of the hardware. Relatively speaking these do seem reasonable.
June 23, 2008 12:45:26 PM

njalterio said:
I think you answered your own question. :-)

Your card is overclocked, and we do not know the rest of the hardware. Relatively speaking these do seem reasonable.


Well, if that's the case, the small ammount of self pity I felt for not waiting for these new cards has passed. :D 
June 23, 2008 1:30:35 PM

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.
June 23, 2008 1:33:12 PM

Doesn't look to bad, a single 4870 almost performs as a single 280 GTX. Though I'm more interested in the 4870 X2 though.

If the 4870 X2 is going to take the performance crown this time, NVIDIA better come up with something quick. Using GDDR3 doesn't cut it anymore.
June 23, 2008 2:03:18 PM

trinix said:
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.


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)
June 23, 2008 2:08:26 PM

*Drools at benchmarks* .... dammmnnn i hope those aren't bogus benchies
June 23, 2008 2:19:44 PM

nice.... now I'll just wait untill it comes out and the price will drop :) 
June 23, 2008 2:27:47 PM

For some reason I think Nvidia has something up their sleeve for shortly after the 4870 launches. I sincerely doubt they have laid all their marbles out on the table for this battle.
June 23, 2008 2:45:39 PM

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 :p )
June 23, 2008 2:49:06 PM

The funny thing about this is that with $1300 of graphics cards, you can barely play crysis on a 20 inch monitor with settings on very high...
June 23, 2008 2:53:55 PM

And nobody thinks about grains of salt when reading AMD at the top right corner?
June 23, 2008 3:18:35 PM

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?
June 23, 2008 3:20:06 PM

John Vuong said:
Doesn't look to bad, a single 4870 almost performs as a single 280 GTX. Though I'm more interested in the 4870 X2 though.

If the 4870 X2 is going to take the performance crown this time, NVIDIA better come up with something quick. Using GDDR3 doesn't cut it anymore.


Wow what a conclusion. Let’s assume that the numbers are spot on. The card performs slightly better than 4850 with GDDR3 and lower clock speed. OC the 4850 to match and I bet the performance about the same. Not sure how you came to your conclusion considering that the 4870 is still slower than the GDDR 3 GTX 280. The 4870 only appears to perform about 10% better than the 4850 which is clocked about 20% slower.

This card still fits between the 260 and 280 and the price is good until you throw the 4850 into the mix. The 4850 at $200 is only slightly slower about 10% vs. the expected price of $299 for the 4870. The 4870 x2 at $399 might change the game in August but right now the 4850 is a much better buy.
June 23, 2008 3:25:11 PM

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.
June 23, 2008 3:33:45 PM

randomizer said:
By then the GTX280 should be cheaper too. I doubt it will stay at its current price for long. But as I've said before, why not rip off the consumer when you have a monopoly in the high end? AMD hasn't released a competitor yet, they've only shown us graphs.


As much of an nVidia fan as I am as well, its kind of sad to keep having to pay these high prices for more or less $200-$300 performance. The only thing holding me back from going ATI is that red PCB ... lol, but as soon as that 4870 X2 comes out I will probably be with ATI.
June 23, 2008 3:49:18 PM

randomizer said:
By then the GTX280 should be cheaper too. I doubt it will stay at its current price for long. But as I've said before, why not rip off the consumer when you have a monopoly in the high end? AMD hasn't released a competitor yet, they've only shown us graphs.


Nvidia boards cost so much more compared to RV770. They can't really drop the price like that and not lose money.
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 3:49:30 PM

Dont get it wrong. The 4850 isnt competing with the 4870. When the prices of the G260 come down the 4870 will go lower, as will the 4850. The 4850 will go 170 soon, and no card can compete with that pricing. The 4870 will go 280 too, and again, no card will compete with that pricing. Having the fastest card for 500 dollars is very doable from ATI, I cant say the same for nVidia at this time
June 23, 2008 3:50:25 PM

mothhive said:
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.


So does my timedemo benchmarks but their testing mythology might be different.
June 23, 2008 4:20:40 PM

hannibal said:
Nvidia says that 9800GTX+ is 22% faster than 4850


June 23, 2008 4:29:26 PM

hannibal said:
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...


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.

June 23, 2008 6:42:03 PM

These benchmarks need anti-aliasing. They are not stressing the cards enough. With AA enabled the 4870 could blow the gtx280 out of the water, or it could be a flop! We badly need AA benchmarks
June 23, 2008 6:56:35 PM

marvelous211 said:

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.
June 23, 2008 7:00:41 PM

where is the time, when there came out a new game, you could run it with highend card with 100fps and everything maxed out.

i miss those times
June 23, 2008 7:25:00 PM

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...
June 23, 2008 7:27:49 PM

vochtige said:
where is the time, when there came out a new game, you could run it with highend card with 100fps and everything maxed out.

i miss those times

Yeah those days were good, but i dont think were being ripped off. Back in the day all you had to do was add more bandwidth and maybe a few more mhz and small revision in architecture....and hey presto you can run any game and ultra fast speeds.

Now we demands higher res, AA & AF, and games demand vastly more processing from shaders...lighting etc.

I still have a vodoo summit or other that cost a considerable amount when i got it...its about the size of a network card.
Todays cards are huge in comparison...not saying its good, but the manufacturing costs alone must be much higher.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
June 23, 2008 7:54:16 PM

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

o well guess i'll wait for the next gen
June 23, 2008 8:07:23 PM

I dono... I play Crysis at 1920x1200 with all settings to very high other than motion blur (that is off) and AA and it runs like a dream for me.

Just a BFG 8800 GTX OC2, Q6600 stock speed, 8GB of RAM DDR2 800 and an X-fi fatality for **** and giggles.

I never did run the fps test... I should.
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!