Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4890 crossfire or 4870x2

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 19, 2009 10:18:49 PM

I am looking at those 2 cards, either 4890CF or 4870x2. I know in general 4890CF should perform better than 4870x2, but my MB has 2 PIC-E2.0 slots, if running CF will be running x8. So I am not sure if 4890CF at x8 x8, is still going to beat 4870x2 in x16 in this case.

anyone has any imput?

More about : 4890 crossfire 4870x2

May 19, 2009 10:34:05 PM

Oh yes it will. Only monster cards like the GTX295 or HD4870X2 can bottleneck PCI 2.0 8X. The two 4890s will be fine. What are you planning to run, at what res? (just asking)
May 19, 2009 10:40:11 PM

the highest i can get with playable fps. 4870x2 is about $40 cheaper than the cheapest 2 x 4890 cards i can find, so i am not sure which I should go for. I am afraid that CF will cause me some unpredictable problems as I have never done it.
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
May 19, 2009 11:48:43 PM

4870 X2 is crossfire, just on one board. However if you're concerned about it then you'd be better off going with the 4870 X2. It's still an incredible card and the prices recently are even more amazing.
May 20, 2009 12:03:46 AM

i would recommend 2 4890s over a 4870 X2, just like I would recommend 2 4870s over a 4870 X2.

For some reason Ati's X2s don't perform quit as well as their dual Card counter parts.

Another reason why I would recommend the 4890s is because theyr are beast Ocers:) 
a b U Graphics card
May 20, 2009 1:08:24 AM

Go with the two card solution if you can afford and have decent cooling. L1quid is right, unless you have an aversion to dual cards get two 4890s. Personally I like sticking to single super fast cards as I would just assume sell an older card and upgrade to something higher end.

As well as the 4890 overclocks you can't go wrong.
May 20, 2009 2:50:13 PM

What kind of cooling do I need? I didn't order any special cooling parts.
May 20, 2009 3:09:21 PM

A case with good airflow.
a b U Graphics card
May 21, 2009 10:04:25 AM

smithereen said:
A case with good airflow.


This ^

Sorry I should have been more specific. Yes, a roomy case, good airflow, nothing exotic or anything. I wouldn't necessarily cram two cards in a crappy case with horrible cable management and little airflow.
May 21, 2009 10:41:14 AM

L1qu1d said:
i would recommend 2 4890s over a 4870 X2, just like I would recommend 2 4870s over a 4870 X2.

For some reason Ati's X2s don't perform quit as well as their dual Card counter parts.

Another reason why I would recommend the 4890s is because theyr are beast Ocers:) 


This is a little misleading, ALL X2 cards (7950 GX2, 3870 X2, 9800 GX2, 4870 X2, 4850 X2, GTX 295) perform under the equivalent dual GPU match such as 2 8800 GTS 512mb vs 9800 GX2 or 2 4850s vs 4850 X2, not just ATI ones. As a matter of fact ATI dual GPU cards tend to be a bit close than nVidia if you look at the 4870 X2 vs GTX 295.
May 21, 2009 2:55:12 PM

So this means 4870 crossfire will beat 4870x2 always?
May 21, 2009 3:06:21 PM

@ blood_raven

The 9800 GX2 is an underclocked 8800 GTS, while the 4870 X2, is clocked the same. Thats the difference.
a b U Graphics card
May 21, 2009 3:06:36 PM

Pretty much but the differences are very slim, talking about 2-3 fps at scores well over 100fps anyway.
May 21, 2009 7:32:47 PM

L1qu1d said:
@ blood_raven

The 9800 GX2 is an underclocked 8800 GTS, while the 4870 X2, is clocked the same. Thats the difference.


Not totally true either, the 9800 GX2 runs @ 600mhz core and 1000mhz memory and the 8800 GTS 512 runs @ 650mhz core and 970mhz memory, so they both are a bit higher in different areas. Dual 4870 1GBs are almost identical to a 4870 X2, so no there is not difference between ATI and nVidia's X2 card's performance versus their parent setups.
May 21, 2009 8:26:32 PM

The moral of the story is, 9800 GX2 is not the same clock as its "counter" part, but the 4870 X2 is.

I don't get why there is such a big subject, I'm not the only 1 that saw the pattern, yes the difference isn't that great, but I'd rather have 2 physical cards than 1 dual GPU.

LIke I said before, 2 4890s is your best chocie, it can't be compared to the 4870 X2. Much better bang for the buck.
May 22, 2009 2:49:38 PM

Yes but how much more visible is what I'm hoping someone will clarify. If it's merely 5-10 FPS when you are getting 70+ in most games then $80 dollars isn't worth it imo. But then if its more like 20-30 or more, which I doubt but can't be certain, then the $80 starts becoming a little more worth it.
May 22, 2009 3:18:37 PM

NO one really knows the answer, there isn't any benchmark avaliable other than that tweaktown one.
May 22, 2009 7:20:39 PM

L1qu1d said:
The moral of the story is, 9800 GX2 is not the same clock as its "counter" part, but the 4870 X2 is.

I don't get why there is such a big subject, I'm not the only 1 that saw the pattern, yes the difference isn't that great, but I'd rather have 2 physical cards than 1 dual GPU.

LIke I said before, 2 4890s is your best chocie, it can't be compared to the 4870 X2. Much better bang for the buck.


I am only stating that ALL dual GPU cards are slower than the 2 card setup version by about the same amount, not just ATI GPUS, not even more so than nVidia.
May 22, 2009 9:29:41 PM

The HD4870X2 is about as fast, because it doesn't have to cross the PCI-E bus to communicate between cores.
May 22, 2009 11:33:26 PM

raven stop trying to make this what it isn't, The 4870 X2 is advertised as 4870 x's 2. OK,

The 9800 GX2 wasn't advertised as a 9800 GTX, or a 8800 GTS. Its just a 9800 chip X's 2. Just like the 295 GTX isn't really a card, its just 2 chips put together.

I'm not saying ATI is the only 1, I'm saying that ATI is advertised as 2 4870s. I'm not trying to bring down either company.

why is every1 on the offense so much.

See the difference, 295 GTX ...there is no 295 GTX single GPU card...so you can't say well I bought a 295 GTX expecting 280 GTX x's speeds, because it wasn't advertised.
While with the 4870 X2, as I've seen from benchmarks, sometimes the difference is nill, sometimes its alot (take alot with a grain of salt). So really I don't get what there is to argue.

I'm talking about the situation as a business point, not as a card point.

Nothing against the card, its a great card for the value. I'm just saying the 4890 ATM, is better. It can be found for 250$ after 50$ MIR if your lucky, and its a stronger card when in Crossfire...alot better, considering its OC potential.
May 22, 2009 11:40:20 PM

Consider the power idnezes dude.
Nothing can bottleneck them unless its not afraid of its power

4890 = 4+8+9+0 ) x 2 = 42

4870 = 4+8+7+0) x 2 = 38

42>38

go for it.
May 23, 2009 4:31:11 PM

L1qu1d said:
For some reason Ati's X2s don't perform quit as well as their dual Card counter parts.


Reread it. I was just correcting that statement so that people who know little about computer hardware, likely a majority of the people who read these forums, don't start think there is anything wrong with ATI's X2 that is not wrong with nVidia cards.

Also, http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3372&p=1

As you can see the 4870 X2 actually performs slightly better than 2 4870s in CF, however the 1GB version of the 4870 performs a bit better, but the 4870 X2 more like a 4870 512mb than the 1GB version.

Either way I very much agree that 2 4890s in crossfire would be much better and are at a great price.
May 23, 2009 6:25:46 PM

no u weren't correcting the statement you were adding 2 it. I was merely say that they don't perfom as advertised.

Why would I be talking about the 512s? the 4870 is 1 gig per pcb not 512. So yeah, it will get outperformed.

As for your last statement, I agree you agree with the 4890 statement. I would've bought 1 too, but the 4770 was just to good to pass up.
June 21, 2009 3:44:59 AM

wow you guy sound like you know your stuff but that fact that a 4870x2 is 2 gb and 2 STANDARD 4870's is only 512 x2, and if ya wanna complain about it, just look at which ones came out first, and from personal experience the 512 were the first out, then a week later the 1gb came out (considering my cousin worked at a computer store and i purchased them in the 2nd day they were out indicates to me this in that exact sequence).

talking from experience cause i have 2x 4850, 2x 4870 and a 4870x2 (which i have sold at the present time and only have 1 4850 and a 4870x2) the 4870x2 out performed my cf 4870, especially at high res, the only time it was close was at low res, mind you the only difference was about 15-20 or so fps at low res but about 40-50 at high res. now i have not got the 4890 but i have been told from someone that has it that a 4890 cf on 2 x8 pci-e slot will not perform as good as a 4870x2. the amount of restriction that a 4890 cf will have, exceeds the bottleneck of a 4870x2, if ya had both x16 slots, then 4890 would be a definate winner, considering is between a 4890 cf and only 1 4870x2 (with teh new catalyst control centre 9 update, ati got a boost of around 10-15 fps on crysis with a 4870x2 from my onld CCC 7)

now in terms of fps, the difference between the two on crysis on dx9 @ 1920 x 1200 is;
on crysis with my 4870x2 and my q9550 oc @ 3.8 is about 48-49 fps (nearly 50)
a single 4890 on crysis with my cousins qx9650 at stock, he got a measly 34 fps average (on a his 4890, an xfx 4890 would do better for example)
now his pci-e are x16 and x8, mine dont matter cause its only 1 pce-e slot, so this may be exactly what ya lookin or it just may be a good indication,
his 4890 cf (which he still has) averages around 43-45 fps between two tests on a x8 and x8 motherboard, whether he overclock the pci ports or left them stock i didnt ask so i dont know that peice of info for sure.

but that fact is that if his cpu was at 3.8, like mine chances are that maybe they would of been the same or close enoguh to be the same, but i dont know.

the problem isnt the difference between the g-cards, the probelms is that not all part perform the same, like my q9550 i can get to 3.8, my mates cant get past 3.4, i have an antec 1200, he has an old coolermaster ammo 533, i have a GIGABYTE ROCKET II at 2,600 rpm and he has a SCYTHE KAMA at 1,200 rpm. so im just saying that the performance i get may veary from what you would get, or what anyone else on this forum would get, every part is not the same, some performe a minute bit better and some become faulty, and thats the truth.

so basically i would recomend a 4870x2, as its a single card, runs cool at around high 30's degrees and around 50 under load, understanding that i run the fan at 80%-90% non-stop at the click of alt and either f-11 or f-12, it is a great performer alround that the fact that a can no get a second for 600 is the winning factor.

but if you were to go for a 4890, first get a new mother board, then the benefits would be just simply, MORE PERFORMANCE, but atm in WA australia, the cheapest 4890 i can find at netplus is 315, so that would be 630, plu about 200 for say a Asus P5Q-PRO Intel P45 (supports pci-e x16 and x16 slots) so thats 830. but i would recomend a good gigybyte CF x16/x16 board which could be around 300ish.

basically if ya wanna get a 4890 CF ya would have to get a new mother board to get full performance, but if ya wanna get a 4870x2 then you would only need a single card. its $600 AU dollars vs approx $850-900 AU dollars, its solely your choice, honestly the performance i found was awsome and the benchmarks my cousin did (yes the above benchmarks were done by the same cousin that works at the computer store, which is also gettin a GB-extreme x58 so no one dam say whats the use of gettin CF for an x16 and x8 mother board) was honestly only a lil behind, but it would be an extra 300 buks.

now thats the bench's out of the way but now to the common sence, if ya gettin it on a 20" lcd or smaller, its a lil bit of a waist cause smaller screen ultimately need less powerful cards so ya waisting ya money, atm i get a 22" lcd and a 4870x2, with a q9550 at 3.8 on a gigabyte x48 ds4 and everything is working fine but i could of got by with my old 4850, it just that i know that i wont have to upgrade or touch it for at least 2-3 years, if nothing goes wrong, but if ya like my mate who sold his setup of his old q9550 that couldnt exceed 3.4 for a core i7, then ya just a idiot and trying to show off and compete against every other dam person in this world.

basically make a decision why u want it, if the reason is not "i wanna show of/ i wanna beat my friend or families computers" just learn to be happy with what ya got, but if its cause you wanna play high quality games and need it, then by all means go for it.

the rest is up to you mate, hope this is of some help.

and to all the wingers that make a complaint or try and say ati, or nvidia suck, get over it, this forum is here to help make decisions and make people feel that lil bit more confident about their purchases, not make other think "man i hate that guy", so be more supportive and if ya wanna express ya own oppinion then stop being so confrunting.


July 6, 2009 11:14:45 PM

So would it infact be better to get 2 4890 Factory Overclocked *Sapphire VaporX Cards * and run then on a X58 gigabyte UD4 board in crossfire or just run a single 4870X2 and in the 4-5 months get another one.


Any thoughts?
July 14, 2009 5:52:07 PM

Yes, two VaporX cards will be a much better buy. What res are you gaming at? They are probably overkill.
July 15, 2009 1:03:01 AM

seems like ppl don't see when this forum was last posted in
July 15, 2009 1:16:14 AM

Umberto resurrected it with an essay, blackthorn asked a relevant question here rather than in a new forum, and I answered him.
July 15, 2009 5:27:20 AM

Christopher11 said:
Consider the power idnezes dude.
Nothing can bottleneck them unless its not afraid of its power

4890 = 4+8+9+0 ) x 2 = 42

4870 = 4+8+7+0) x 2 = 38

42>38

go for it.


Stop the number thing. My i7 920 is not less than an AMD 955. 9+2+0=11.....9+5+5=19... i7 920>955

The number thing doesn't work. It is very very annoying and misleading to other people. Hence the reason you're using it......
a b U Graphics card
July 15, 2009 5:38:49 AM

Christopher11 said:
Consider the power idnezes dude.
Nothing can bottleneck them unless its not afraid of its power

4890 = 4+8+9+0 ) x 2 = 42

4870 = 4+8+7+0) x 2 = 38

42>38

go for it.


4670 = 4+6+7 = 17
3850 = 3+8+5 = 16

but 3850 > 4670

number idea fails...
July 21, 2009 4:21:12 PM

Excellent observation...
!