- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (33) |
- Share
If you’re due for a graphics card purchase, odds are good that you’re not starting from scratch. Perhaps you’re doing one of those every-three-years-or-so PC makeovers common in the mainstream desktop crowd. Well, three years ago, ATI (still independent from AMD at that point) had just released its Radeon X1950 parts, with the XTX variant ringing in right around $450. At this time, everyone was still obsessing over speeds, feeds, and gaming features. As such, the press liked to tout the fact that the XTX was making the jump to GDDR-4 memory, although the other X1950 models were all doing well with their 256-bit wide GDDR-3 memory buses. Chips were built on a 90 nm fabrication process, cards generally used the PCI Express x16 slot interface, and the graphics libraries supported with the then-current DirectX 9.0c and OpenGL 2.0. The object of the game was to use traditional architectures and just ratchet them up as fast as possible.
What a difference a few years makes. Just as we’ve seen happen with CPUs, graphics processors made several architectural leaps. The new goal wasn’t necessarily to strive for lightning fast frequencies. If cores could made more efficient and make better use of parallel processing, total performance would naturally follow. For example, the following year, with the advent of the HD 2000-series, ATI made the leap to unified shaders in its desktop GPUs. A shader is a little program designed primarily to perform a graphics rendering task. For example, vertex shaders would alter the shape of an object, while pixel shaders could apply textures to individual pixels. Inside the GPU, designers dedicated blocks of circuitry to running those shader tasks. The X1950 had integrated hardware for eight vertex shaders and 48 pixel shaders. The downside of this architecture was that if, for instance, an application needed a lot of vertex operations done but not much pixel processing, all eight vertex shaders would be cranking away while most of the pixel shader circuitry would sit around idle, filing its nails, waiting for something to do. The 2000-series introduced unified, programmable shaders, so any block of shader circuitry could perform any suitable shader task—vertex, pixel, or otherwise. A mid-range 2000-series card could suddenly blow through that vertex-intensive task in less time than the X1950 XTX, even when based on lower clock speeds and at lower price points.
Similar sorts of advances have appeared in other areas around the GPU. The ring bus architecture that debuted with the X1000 evolved, widened, and grew to encompass a PCI Express bus connection, allowing for more efficient data exchanges with the surrounding system. The PCI Express bus itself migrated from version 1.0 to 2.0, doubling the interface bandwidth. Graphics library support updated all the way to DirectX 10.1 and OpenGL 3.0. By the time, AMD/ATI reached the 4650/70 chips (code-named RV730), the fab process had shrunk to 55 nm and the number of transistors in each processor mushroomed to 514 million—over five times the 80 to 90 million found in the X1950 chips made only two years prior.
What was AMD doing with all of that extra circuitry? Keep reading.
- The Short List: the Best Gaming Videocards for the money [Graphic & Displays]
- Radeon 4350 512mb or 1gb [Graphic & Displays]
- New graphics card for old pc [Graphic & Displays]
- Intel Pentium D 940 HUGE BOTTLENECK! [CPU & Components]
- Old guy with a new game [Graphic & Displays]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
- 1 / 2
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
Related news
Related articles
-
You can tell that Gigabyte is serious about this AGP-based offering right from the get-go. It sports a full gigabyte of RAM, and the large cooler is glorious overkill for the very mainstream RV730 PRO graphics processor. The package is somewhat...
-
We chose the “Fixed Benchmark” option in the Resident Evil 5 test in order to compare performance between different PC configurations. Note that we used two test systems: a Core i7-920-based system for the majority of the benchmarks and a Core 2 Quad...
-
Up front, we have to say that there is no way to turn off vsync in this game. Forcing vsync off with the Radeon or GeForce drivers had no effect. While EA was nice enough to provide us with testing materials, it wasn't able to give us access to the...
Best offers
|
GeForce GTX 295 Video Card (1.75GB,... | $549.99 Dell Home More info |
|
GeForce GTX 260 Video Card (896MB,... | $214.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
GeForce 9800 GTX Video Card (512MB,... | $129.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Radeon HD 5770 Video Card (1GB,... | $179.99 Newegg.com More info |
|
Radeon HD 4890 Cyclone OC Video Card... | $209.99 Directron More info |
- ati mobility radeon™ hd4650 graphics
- opengl 3.0 game
- ati mobility radeon hd4650 graphics card
- radeon hd 5000 series
- problem with radeon hd4650
- radeon hd 5000 series release date
- xtx ati radeon 4650
- ati 4650 pixel shader version
- ati radeon hd4650 mobile
- ati mobility radeon hd4650 performance
- hd 4650 pixel shader 3
- hd4670 windows 2000
- reviews of ati mobility radeon hd4650
Partners
The Games selection
adventure :
Ray
Adventure game, South Park style. Pick the way the story goes by picking an answer among those offered.
|
crazy :
Interactive Boogy
Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
|








I would keep reading, but a giant fucking ad keeps covering half the pages.
At least give us the links to some of the 4650/70 benchmarks... Other than that, great read, great recommendations, looking to upgrade my pentium 4, 1.4ghz 256mb (ddr). Was looking at using the HD4200 on the 785g series from AMD, but if I can make a true gaming computer out of it ... hm... tempting.
I'm waiting for a HIS HD4670 1GB to arrive soon. It even has HDMI output.
Got it really cheap from newegg. It'll do fine with my Intel E5200. Nothing like a super gaming machine, but hope to play TF2 and L4D with good gfx. That's all i play atm.
Advertorial? How much did AMD pay for this?
Not that it's not good content, but come on. Doesn't Tom's make enough from normal ads?
Was looking at using the HD4200 on the 785g series from AMD, but if I can make a true gaming computer out of it ... hm... tempting.
on their gaming charts the 4670 is listed. plays FEAR 2 pretty well. i assume it can than handle all Source games as well but at lower resolutions, medium settings, no AA, the usual.
Assuming I'm assembling a new system and the HD 4650/4670 is the most cost-effective graphics card... what then is the most cost-effective processor to pair with it?
Good thing to see ATI marketing their 4650/4670.
I was hoping to see more of their mid-range cards.
great article these are some nice cards for the price, i wonder though if you got 2 of them and tried to put them in a crossfire config. since they dont require a power source, other then the pci-e slot, would 2 of them cause any problems drawing all that current through the motherboard? kinda wondering if there would be any impact there.
Ati making great job. In my office there was need to meka PC with 6 individual monitors. Solution - mainboard asus p5q-e + 3 ati 3650 video cards with vga+DVI outputs. Great working very cheep in cost. Tried to meke the same with nvidia 8400gt - no result 4 monitors individual maximum. Ati - rulezzz
+
Installed an Sapphire 4650 AGP on a backup system in August.
Overclocked it & almost pissed myself on how good the image quality was on that system.
Article confirms....
value based articles are refreshing
I absolutely agree. The Ferrari / Focus analogy is particularly apt. If I didn't already have a 4850 in my primary system, another 4670 like the one in my secondary would have been fine (I don't play Crysis).
As far as running two of them on mobo power, some mobos have an auxiliary molex power connector on them to help with this.
anyone see the charts for the 4650? i went to the link (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/graphics-cards,1.html and looked everywhere, like 3 times over and even used the find on page , feautre in internet explorer and could not find it anywhere.
Nice article. Here is a benchie against nvidia's latest: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?a [...] pert&pid=3
they have a great article that is up today on toms homepage. just noticed. and it has the 4650 and 4670. thanks
here is the link. but im sure everyone seen it alrdy on homepage since its new
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] ,2445.html
"Advertorial"... this is a result of the new legistlation requiring all 'bloggers' to disclose whether or not they're paid for their articles.
Assuming I'm assembling a new system and the HD 4650/4670 is the most cost-effective graphics card... what then is the most cost-effective processor to pair with it?
I guess it depends what you want to use it for really. For watching high-def video, it doesn't matter much since all the processing is done on the GPU. The new dual-core Celerons/Athlons are great for this. For gaming, Toms has a pretty good monthly "Best Gaming CPU for the Money." Though again, it won't matter much since the GPU will be the bottle neck, though the ~$80 E6300 and Athlon II x2 250 are both phenomenal overclockers.
"Advertorial"... this is a result of the new legistlation requiring all 'bloggers' to disclose whether or not they're paid for their articles.
No, this is a result of an editorial department that cares about its readers by drawing a clear line between editorial and advertorial content, and still trying to make the advertorial educational/worth reading.
As a HD 4650 GDDR3 user i totally agree with this article.
I'm confused, I thought Hybrid CrossFireX only supported 3 desktop card, the ATI 2400, 3450 and 3470 NOT the 4650 or 4670. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
They need to mark Advert even if they weren't directly paid. Any gift, like letting Tom's keep the video cards, counts in this legislation. Tom's could write an article absolutely crushing a product but still be required to mark it as advert because they get to keep the company's product.