Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4870 vs. 4890 on 1440x900 Monitor?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
April 6, 2009 5:18:32 PM

Does the 4890 make a $60-100 performance difference at 1440x900, or should i just get the 4870? I want to be able to max out every game i choose to play, but i dont want to just throw money away if its not going to make a difference. I have no problem spending the extra cash if the 4890 outperforms the 4870 at 1440x900.

If you recommend getting the 4870, should i get the 512MB, 1GB, or 2GB? Again, im trying to get maxed out performance without wasting my money on something thats overkill.
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
April 6, 2009 5:31:41 PM

Most likely a couple FPS is all that separates each GPU class at that resolution. I game at 1680x1050 with an Athlon64 X2 6400+ BE. Bought a GTX 260 (192) (factory OC'd) to replace my two year old 8800 GTX. I only got a few FPS more in most games - it was a little smoother but often unnoticeable. Depending on your CPU I would think you'd find yourself in a similar situation (with the difference between the group).

Most likely an HD 4870 512MB would be the sweet spot in regards to performance and $$ value (without knowing your CPU).
April 6, 2009 5:35:32 PM

jeffredo said:
Most likely a couple FPS is all that separates each GPU class at that resolution. I game at 1680x1050 with an Athlon64 X2 6400+ BE. Bought a GTX 260 (192) (factory OC'd) to replace my two year old 8800 GTX. I only got a few FPS more in most games - it was a little smoother but often unnoticeable. Depending on your CPU I would think you'd find yourself in a similar situation (with the difference between the group).

Most likely an HD 4870 512MB would be the sweet spot in regards to performance and $$ value (without knowing your CPU).


Agreed!

I went for a GTX 260 at 1680x1050 paired with my oc'd 6000+ :love: 

Having a 1440x900 or 1680x1050 monitor/tv can definitely save you some money on your gpu expenses...4870 is a great recommendation and will definitely shine at your resolution!
Related resources
April 6, 2009 5:49:45 PM

my cpu is AMD PII 940 3.0GHz

April 6, 2009 6:23:33 PM

So will the performance difference between the 4870 1GB and the 4890 1GB be worth the extra $60-70?
April 6, 2009 7:43:15 PM

At 1440x900...I don't think so. It is a matter of opinion, though.
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
April 6, 2009 8:46:05 PM

Nice CPU, any change of upgrading to a bigger monitor in the future? A 24" would be great with that and the HD 4870 1GB or HD 4890. Since you do have a strong CPU I definitely wouldn't get anything lower than an HD 4870. You should see some extra benefit from loading on full eye candy vs. the lower cards. A 1GB card really wouldn't help at that res though - 512MB should be enough.
April 6, 2009 9:00:35 PM

ive tossed around the idea of getting a 21.5" 1920x1080 monitor but ive got other things to spend money on at the moment lol.

Im still not sure what i want to do with this damn card though, i almost just want to get the 4890 for the hell of it, but im still very undecided. I wish it wasnt so hard to find comparison charts for 1440x900, does anyone know where i can find some?
April 6, 2009 9:15:11 PM

lasoski311 said:
this chart really doesnt help me cause its 1024x768 and not maxed out, im more interested in seeing a chart thats 1440x900 maxed out.

Well my point is that even in such a low resolution 1024x768 the 4870 is significant faster than the 4850. So the difference between these cards will be bigger in resolution 1440x900.
a c 86 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
April 6, 2009 9:21:57 PM

well the 1440x900 is rather odd resolution, 19'' WS (or some laptop). Most 19 inchers were old fashioned 4:3 or 5:4 screens, while the 22'' was the first widespread widescreen monitor for enthusiasts. Later the bigger screens got even bigger and the smaller ones didn't attract that much of attention...

I'd say go with the 4890 1gig if you plan to buy a bigger screen in -say- about a year or ½...
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
April 6, 2009 9:33:57 PM

Have a look at
http://www.guru3d.com/category/vga_charts/

1280 x 1024 has about 1% more pixels than 1440 x 900 so the results re very similar

You have more processor power than the e8400 they use too and that will affect your results
April 7, 2009 1:05:29 AM

thanks for the help guys, if anyone else has anymore advice it would be greatly appreciated. I think at this point im leaning towards getting the 4890 because im assuming that i will eventually upgrade my monitor, but im still not 100% convinced that thats what i want to do
April 7, 2009 5:42:58 PM

^^^ i reworded the original post ^^^

more help would be greatly appreciated

thanks
April 7, 2009 6:54:53 PM

From what iv seen benchmark wise and as long as your not exceeding 1440x900 the 4870 is the better value

Now vram is questionable i know my monitor which is 1680x1050 can game just fine on 512mb but i believe the price difference is only 15$ give or take a buck so definitely go for 1gb

Read through this thread and there are definitely some good points...really a 4890 is just an oc'd 4870

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=3091723


If i where you i'd just settle on the 4870 1gb
April 7, 2009 7:07:27 PM

I game at 1080p on a 32" and I use a Ph II 720 not OCed yet. and a 4870 512mb and I max all my games with full aa and AF. not crysis :D  mass effect, dead space, RA3, UT3, AC, I had Fry Cry 2 and that was maxed but i didnt like the game so I got rid of it but I had 45-50FPS maxed with FC2. So dont get the 2gb card. I would say get a 1gb card because my card starts to run out of steam with crysis.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Thats a good one with good cooling and its 189.99
April 7, 2009 7:20:09 PM

rewindlabs said:
From what iv seen benchmark wise and as long as your not exceeding 1440x900 the 4870 is the better value

Now vram is questionable i know my monitor which is 1680x1050 can game just fine on 512mb but i believe the price difference is only 15$ give or take a buck so definitely go for 1gb

Read through this thread and there are definitely some good points...really a 4890 is just an oc'd 4870

http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=3091723


If i where you i'd just settle on the 4870 1gb


im not really concerned about whats the best value, i am more concerned about playing games to their full potential on a 1440x900 19" monitor....

so the real question is, Does the 4890 perform noticeably better than the 4870 at 1440x900?
April 8, 2009 5:22:26 AM

And the thread i linked to will explain that for you...the 4890 is just an overclocked 4870...you could oc a 4870 and save the cash for a lowly performance loss...but then again the 4890 can overclock to

To compare to the 4890 you have to overclock the 4870 and you can of course take a look at the benchmarks for 1280x1024 and see the difference...you could leave the 4890 at its stock clock and youv got the 4870 beat and you can overclock the 4890 and you have a comparable card to the gtx 285

If i where you and had the cash to spend id go for the 4890 since it should last you till the start of dx11(if that happens)
a b U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
April 8, 2009 5:31:42 AM

Yes, it performs noticeably better. No, I wouldn't consider it to be worth the money - the 4870 is already amazingly fast.
!