HD 4770

Not sure if this has been posted yet.
http://vr-zone.com/forums/418725/h [...] price.html
Theres quite a few people looking forwards to this cards release, so heres the "official" slides

1.5 a 9800 GT? is that like a 4870 standards?
Whats funny though is it does amazing in every game except grid lol....

I dunno how much of this I can actually believe.

Its a nice find, but 1.5 in company of heroes?

I'll wait until real benchmarks, but if this card really is what the benchmarks so, they pretty much killed off their 4850, and the 4870 lol.

The last slide is jokes though lol, though u have to see the 8800 GTs staying power. 2007-2009 champ of its level.

I thought the company of heroes bench looked a bit weird myself tbh.

Overall they are saying it's about 33% faster than an 8800gt but those 'benchmarks' shown are pretty scant on details. 50% more of 10fps is still only 15fps.

It has the same pixel fillrate as a 4870 and 4/5th's of the 4870's texture fillrate. Memory bandwith looks low but at 800mhz ddr5 you'd have to imagine that will overclock by a huge amount.

Could be interesting to quadfire these. I dont see Nvidia having an answer except for dropping the 250gts to the same price point, at which point ATI will just drop the 4770 lower. I reckon it will be within 5% of a 4850/9800gtx in performance, possibly even faster than a 4850.

trust me, if these are true, add 30% to the 9800 GT power, the 4850 is worthless.



Given this table shows the 4850 only 10% on avg @ 1920x1200 faster than the 9800 GT, so this 30% (if true) would kick off the 4850 and the 4830, and send them to the discontinused bin, since these cards won't be able to have their price cut as much as the 128 40 nm 4770.

add 30% to the 4770, you have a card that can tie the 4870 1 gig and beat the 4870 512.

I doubt ATI is stupid enough to have a card that kicks that man cards out with 100$ price tag.

Not only that, but their series numbers will be screwed up, the 4830 is slower than the 4770? Same witht he 4850? and now the 4870 ?

These benches either don't make sense, or ATI lost it.

I would much rather call BS benchmarks...

considering that ur link shows the tests done at 1920x1200 on avg with 1 @ 2560x1600 and 1 @ 1600x1050, I think my post stands.

If this card is accurate like the 4850 situation like u said, ATI just killed their 4850, 4830 and 4870 (512 megs atleast)

So, you think a 4870 is only 25% faster than a GT, when we know its at least that much faster than a 4850

As a 40nm part you'd have to think it will overclock like an absolute beast, well ahead of a 4850 at any rate.

Tbh I don't think ATI are really bothered about killing off the 4850 anyway. It's already sold millions of units and now the 4870 is pretty much lower priced than the 4850 was on release. I mean, is anyone actually buying a 4850 now? To me it's overpriced and has been for a while.

I still think the 4770 is a bit of a strange card. First 40nm given a 128-bit bus, but it still doesn't quite make the 75w TDP that would really make it incredible. All I can really think of the reason for it is, ATI truly want to bury the ghost of the 8800 once and for all.

Problem with that is the starting point, it could be read the 4850 is 16% faster than the GT, or the GT shows 20% less , depending on the starting point.
I understand your concerns, and its a possibility that these cars may be better, and if the rumors run true, ATI is currently running , or ordering alot of 40nm wafers thru TSMC. It could be theyre really going to give nVidia a price war, with this card leading the way, and everything else is to be cleared out, but thats speculation, but off of good rumors as well.

I still think itll perform close to those earlier leaked benches, and the naming will be apropo. The tranny number shows a change here. Maybe in certain games we will see huge gains, and others where they were already strong, not so much. I havnt seen the details yet, so who knows for sure. If anyone has em, please post. Die shot would be nice

enough with the X2 cards lol....when did dual GPU become mainstream, what happenend to the whole, add another card once ur card just can't produce factor?

Well dual-GPU became mainstream once Crossfire and SLI boards started selling for sub-$100.....that's just my guess though. lol
It is all about the price/performance ratio. Why get a single 4870 1GB, when you can have much more performance for just a few dollars more? Personally, I think it is all because of this economy, but, once again, that is just my guess.

i would still rather have crossfired two 4850's than the 4770's the benches have been out for awhile and it will slide in between the 4850 and 4830, either way for 200 bucks you can have an amazing gaming experience, and 4 would be great to see also with so many good motherboards around. ddr5 makes up for the bandwidth lack thierof.

HOWEVER
the real rabbit in the whole for ati is a 4770 x2 product at around or under the 200dollar range would just sell like crazy!!!!!!!
due to the low power consumption,
the price,
and for those people with one pci-e 2.0 slot!
and its up to date technology!
i know its cleche but i gotta use it, this could be the death knell to nvidia!

k well, let's say the 6600gt could SLI... (not sure if it can)... would you have added a 6600gt instead of getting a 4850?

I've seen more than one person in this forum and online get excited about overclocking, since this card's built on 40nm tech. I don't get it, why? Does the smaller architecture allow for better OCing or something?

Process shrinks usually consume less power, thereby letting off less heat, allowing for higher overclocks (usually). Companies also tend to throw in a few optimizations/revise a few things when they shrink a chip (Like how Penryn has SSE 4.1)

You sir, seem to be in need of a bit of a math lesson. Not meant to be cruel or as an insult. I'm just trying to help.

These graphs make sense when you are comparing ALL the items listed against one median, in this case the GTX275. The entire chart is every other card's relation to that specific median, represented as a percentage of said median. It is important to understand that percent changes do not add in the usual way, if/when applied sequentially. The percentage difference between items in this chart cannot be directly applied to the percentage differences between two sub-items on this chart because their comparison would involve a completely different median. A percentage rate attained using one item on a list as a median, applied to percentage rate attained used against an entirely different median is NOT cumulative, as it seems you may have been initially suggesting.

Now, that said, and I hope clearly enough, basically, if you want an honest point of reference for the 4770, find some recent stock 8800/9800GT benchmarks that include the 4830, 4850, and 4870 that use the same test hardware (which was probably AMD/ATI, and no one seems to use an AMD/ATI testbed, anywhere, other than AMD/ATI themselves), the same drivers (there's a major point you completely overlooked), operating system, DirectX version (AMD probably used 10.1 for their card since they actually support it) and the same versions of the game in question. Once you've done all that, then we'll see where things end up.

Since the above won't happen, just wait and see and stop speculating, cause it's hurting my brain to think this hard so late at night.

P.S. This applies to all such % graphs.

6600gt never came sli that i know of, and i used that card way past its expiration date, so with my previous statement about adding another card i meant, most current up to date ie dx 10 or 10.1 cards show decent improvement in sli crossfire scaling to warrant the upgrade. the 4770 will be no different i suspect, and "should" scale the best yet.