Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ATI Radeon HD 4770 Specs

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
April 14, 2009 8:28:22 AM

Thought these might be useful:

-40nm technology
-Replaces 4830
-Will compete with 9800GT
-Core Clock speed: 750Mhz
-Memory clock speed: 800Mhz
-Memory bandwidth: 51.2GB/s
-Memory interface: 128-bit GDDR5
-Memory size: 512MB
-Requires 80W
-Release on May 4 at $99

More about : ati radeon 4770 specs

a c 198 U Graphics card
a b } Memory
April 14, 2009 4:45:28 PM

Source?
April 14, 2009 6:03:43 PM

650mhz core I think >D
Related resources
April 14, 2009 9:25:18 PM

r_manic said:
Thought these might be useful:

-Will compete with 9800GT


I would like to change this:

Pricewise, it very well could compete with the 9800GT.

But performance-wise, it looks to kill.
April 14, 2009 9:38:52 PM

What I did like is they managed to save some money by making the card 128 bit and add GDDR5.

I dunno how it will perform against the 9800 GT performance wise, but I hope we see a version with out the 6 pin.
April 14, 2009 9:42:59 PM

I think it'd be cool to have a 4-pin molex version, but I don't know if that's against PCI-e standard. If it's max power draw is 80watts, certainly a 4-pin can supply that. I think that'd help a lot of people justify a 4770 over a 4670. Old PSU's don't have PCI-e 6-pin connectors.
April 14, 2009 9:54:11 PM

well I dont see that happening, seeing as my Corsair 1000HX has 2 4 pins only which are both used combined on my motherboard.

Nor do I see them using 4 pin HDD and CD driver ones either. It would be cool to see Sata style cables used like that though:p  haha.

Anywho 6 pin is fine, I mean my 400 watt managed to power my old 280 GTX before I sold it. I use to have a corsair 620HX in there but I sold that 2 with my 4870 X2. lol

So aot has changed haha:p 

This card will lower prices again thats for sure. Plus I think it will be good for Grid :) 

April 14, 2009 10:04:51 PM

I could have swore PCIE 2.0 provided more than 75W. I thought 75w through the slot was with PCIe 1.0
April 14, 2009 11:55:54 PM

40nm.... overclocking anyone? :) 
April 15, 2009 3:21:09 AM

spathotan said:
I could have swore PCIE 2.0 provided more than 75W. I thought 75w through the slot was with PCIe 1.0



I'm 90% certain they supply the same power.
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 3:48:31 AM

spathotan said:
I could have swore PCIE 2.0 provided more than 75W. I thought 75w through the slot was with PCIe 1.0


That is correct, kinda. PCI-Express slots, no matter the version, provide 75W of power through the actual slots. In addition to that, the original 6-pin PCI-E Graphics power cable added 75W. When PCI-E 2.0 was introduced, so was the 8-pin PCI-E Graphics power cable, which could deliver 150W of power in addition to the 75W from the slot and 75W from the 6-pin.

The slot itself is still limited to 75W, no matter the version. (Source)
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 4:10:23 AM

L1qu1d said:
What I did like is they managed to save some money by making the card 128 bit and add GDDR5.

I dunno how it will perform against the 9800 GT performance wise, but I hope we see a version with out the 6 pin.


Sorry, but I fail to see how that could have saved them any money. Have you got some price lists for 128-bit memory buses vs 256-bit ones? How about GDDR3 vs GDDR5? I'm sure AMD/ATI has plenty of all four lying around to tinker with, but to say they made this configuration decision based on price seems a bit... presumptuous. :) 

Maybe they did it to prove that they could use GDDR5 on mainstream cards and rub yet another card in nVIDIA's face that had it. Let's ask them why. :) 

Could you imagine what kind of memory bandwidth we'd see on ATI cards if they had the same 448-bit memory bus nVIDIA uses? Yikes! Maybe we'll see that for PCI-E 3.0!
April 15, 2009 5:35:31 AM

The card is starting out at 100$, you make ur opinon about that.

Its not like the company needs to prove anything, ATI always seems to bring p/p to the table, I doubt they would give a damn what any1 thinks about the hardware they use.

So yes I'm being presumptuous but I think I'm right:)  Thats why its my opinion.

I would have to say that the die shrink isn't the only reason why they can lower the card that till now shows signs of being 1.3 on avg of a 9800 GT (Based on unofficial charts).

We'll see what happens.
April 15, 2009 5:54:05 AM

I predict the 4770 competing with the GTS 250/9800GTX+, and the 4750 competing with the 9800GT performance-wise, BUT price-wise, I predict the 4770 competing with the 9800GT and the 4750 competing with the 9600GT.

Well, I cant wait to see some reviews. Hopefully we will see some in the next couple of weeks.
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 6:17:26 AM

If you have only 128 connects vs 256, but the 128 are moving twice as fast, theyre the same, except for costs. If 512 was as cheap as a 128 bus, then wed never have any gpus thatre BW starved. Wed all be using 512, and GDDR5 wouldnt be used, as thered be no advantages to it. Even tho it does cost more, maybe ATI just likes to spend money? No, its cheaper in the end
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 6:45:40 AM

I still don't think it had anything to do with price. I think it had everything to do with the memory bandwidth of the card specifically, making sure to give it more than the 4670, but less than the 4850, thus ensuring it couldn't outperform the 4850 in applications/games where memory bandwidth is a major performance factor.

a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 7:04:31 AM

I guess I misunderstood you. Yea, youre right, but also price as well. A cheaper solution that was made to fit.
April 15, 2009 11:55:04 AM

I ensure you that GDDR5 is alot more expensive than GDDR3. I didnt even realize that was up for debate. Youre comparing 4 year old chips made by 1000 different companies compared to 1 year old chips that are made by what....2 companies? Samsung and Quimonda? Hynix?

As far as the "pricetag" on memory BUS goes, the larger the memory bus the bigger the PCB has to be in gereral as it takes up a very good amount of space. You can make your own conclusions from that.

This isnt exactly rocket science here believe it or not.
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 12:30:14 PM

The DDR5 on these 4770's is probably over a year old stock, and not exactly the best of the bunch either. That's why it's clocked at 800mhz and i'm pretty sure ATI are buying it at rock bottom prices.
a b U Graphics card
April 15, 2009 3:51:23 PM

GDDR5 wont continue this high price. Its been out for over a year. Its soon going to be mainstream, so theres little reason for any large costs over GDDR3, soon anyways. Currently it is more expensive. And like Spat said, not having it requires many more things on your pcb, thus making the higher costs redudant, and most likely a cheaper solution than GDDR3 with all the connects, plus the bus itself.
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
April 16, 2009 6:38:41 AM

Whatever the specs of the card may be, is it possible that some website will get a review unit and get benchmarks out on or before the supposed May 4 launch?
a b U Graphics card
April 16, 2009 8:25:20 AM

Many sites will, just like they did with the pre-release 4890s and GTX275s. We saw cards from the partners, then. But, didn't ATI already pass around a few of their "home-grown" or in-house reference boards?
a b U Graphics card
April 16, 2009 8:32:57 AM

boudy said:
I predict the 4770 competing with the GTS 250/9800GTX+, and the 4750 competing with the 9800GT performance-wise, BUT price-wise, I predict the 4770 competing with the 9800GT and the 4750 competing with the 9600GT.

Well, I cant wait to see some reviews. Hopefully we will see some in the next couple of weeks.


So does that mean they'll doing away with the HD 4850 too? Because the GTS 250 already competes with it and oftentimes wins.
a b U Graphics card
April 16, 2009 9:36:53 AM

The only card currently known to be on it's way out is the 4830. Anything else is rumor mill speculation. I don't think we'll know exactly what AMD/ATI has up their sleeves until after the release of the 4770 itself.

And boudy, from the publications we've seen so far, the 4770 is set to eclipse the 8800/9800GT performance and will likely encroach on 9800GTX+/GTS250 performance. As far as match or surpass them, we'll have to wait and see, but I doubt the surpassing part... That's the 4850's job.
a b U Graphics card
April 16, 2009 2:50:23 PM

It was a bit of sarcasm more than anything. I doubt (but one never knows until a decent amount of unbiased testing is done) that it will surpass the HD 4830 by much or at all. As such it won't be competing with the GTS 250, which is the HD 4850's class.

I'm sure it will be a great card for its niche from everything I've read. Think along the lines of X800 XL, 6600 GT or 9600 GT when they first came out.
April 16, 2009 5:30:05 PM

RazberyBandit said:
boudy, from the publications we've seen so far, the 4770 is set to eclipse the 8800/9800GT performance and will likely encroach on 9800GTX+/GTS250 performance. As far as match or surpass them, we'll have to wait and see, but I doubt the surpassing part... That's the 4850's job.


No it wont surpass the GTS 250 performance-wise, but price/performance-wise, you can bet that the 4770 will give it a run for its money.

Quote:
So does that mean they'll doing away with the HD 4850 too? Because the GTS 250 already competes with it and oftentimes wins


It all depends on what this card can actually do, and then Nvidia's reaction.
But to be honest, I just cant see a GDDR3 card right in the middle of 2 GDDR5 cards.............I just cant.....it seems weird to me :lol: 

If this card's performance ends up in the middle of the 4850 and 4830 though, how the heck is Nvidia going to compete with that? Are they just going to rebrand the 9800GTs?
a b U Graphics card
April 16, 2009 7:59:17 PM

Well, considering the 4770 is using 128-bit interface w/ GDDR5, it still has less memory bandwidth than the 4850 with it's 256-bit interface and GDDR3. It's not a huge difference, but that difference is enough to make the 4850 configuration the superior of the two.

Hasn't nVIDIA already rebranded them as the GTS1xx-series cards? And does anyone actually know what GPU is performing the graphics of the nForce 980a northbridge?
a b U Graphics card
April 16, 2009 8:43:40 PM

Yeah, but what about the 100 series? Are they G80's or G92's?
April 16, 2009 9:10:46 PM

G80s haven't been used since summer 07 I believe, ever since hte 8800 GTS 512 and 8800 GT came out.
April 16, 2009 9:11:21 PM

RazberyBandit said:
Yeah, but what about the 100 series? Are they G80's or G92's?


I have heard a lot of rumors.
Here is another on what is going to happen:
Quote:
G92 cards will be known as NVIDIA GeForce GTS 150, G94 should be offered as NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 and G96 will be transformed into NVIDIA GeForce GT 120


It is really confusing me, but I guess we will just have to wait and see.
April 16, 2009 10:10:41 PM

Theres nothing to wait though, Nvidia canceled those cards. They aren't renaming them last I heard.
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
April 17, 2009 2:10:26 AM

RazberyBandit said:
Many sites will, just like they did with the pre-release 4890s and GTX275s. We saw cards from the partners, then. But, didn't ATI already pass around a few of their "home-grown" or in-house reference boards?

I'm honestly not sure. I think most of the info being discussed here originated from a presentation slide that was leaked or made public. It's probable some companies already have the actual hardware, and are under embargo not to reveal anything until launch date?
April 17, 2009 2:59:57 AM

that rv 4750 not 4770
April 17, 2009 3:02:01 AM

but in far cry 2 it almost matches the 4850 and this is the 4750 not the 4770 lol!

K now I know for sure the 4770 is going to wreck the 4850 and pose problems for the 4870:p 
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
April 17, 2009 3:08:43 AM

Which could be a good thing for ATI (and a bad thing for 4870 users), since it will drive sales of a new product? Or will that rumored $100 price point hurt 'em in the end?
a b U Graphics card
April 17, 2009 3:11:24 AM

Check those slides again. The usage of AA is all over the place in them. As you know, the G9x series wasnt great with AA, so its slightly cooked in ATIs favor, so those %'s we see in the slides are a lil tilted.
Remember, hope for the best, expect the worst
April 17, 2009 3:11:57 AM

why is this a good thing for ati?

They are killing their 2 cards lol, casting out the 4850 and the 4870 out....not only that but the it wouldn't make sense with the names

4770 > 4850?
huh?

4750 ~ 4850
about with real drivers, we might see it.
a b U Graphics card
April 17, 2009 3:15:26 AM

Being that the arch is shifted around a bit, and the clocks are higher, it wouldnt surprise me , in a few games to be = to a 4850, at 99$
April 17, 2009 3:27:12 AM

remember like you said, the drivers are beta, the 4850 reached its potential, the 4750 still has to grow, at 3-5 frames difference, I think its very much achevable to eithe mathc it or kick it off.

Not only that remember we're talkin about the 4750 not the 4770. Last I checked the 4770 is 100, what is the 4750?
April 17, 2009 3:30:20 AM

or was the 4750 from the review what we call now the 4770? I might have misread, but even so, it pretty much killed its older brother the 4850.

I wonder what high optimized drivers can do, I mean 5% is pretty given, but some cases 10-15% is possible right jaydee?
a b U Graphics card
April 17, 2009 3:32:12 AM

Cant remember price quotes. 79$?
a b U Graphics card
April 17, 2009 5:32:44 AM

L1qu1d said:
that rv 4750 not 4770


Wrong... From the article:
Quote:
We are going to bring you guys a nice little sneak preview of what ATI is working on. Let me clearly state, nothing in this review is finalized or can be seen as a concluding fact, the specifications (clock frequencies) and configurations might change for all we know. We are testing an early engineering sample here. It will however be a pretty good assessment of what ATI is going to release somewhere in April.

You guys ready? Let's meet the RV740, and though we don't know it's real name just yet, allow us to call this product the Radeon HD 4750 for the ease of understanding, product placement and well... the sake of the most logical name for this product, mmhh okay? Next page please.


4750 is what they called it, nothing at all official from AMD/ATI. It could very well be the 4770 engineering sample, and based on the benchmarks in the review, it probably is. All we know for certain is it used the exact same components listed in the 4770 pre-release information: RV740 core w/ 128-bit GDDR5.
April 17, 2009 6:06:31 AM

yes i said in a post after that it might be the 4770 renamed at the time. Thats why I said I might have misread.
a b U Graphics card
April 17, 2009 6:19:31 AM

Yeah... just re-read your second post and saw you say that... Sorry mate.
April 17, 2009 6:46:44 AM

no worries, I'm a little cranky 2day anyways, got a CPS exam 2morrow, not that ready for it:p 
!