Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

HIS H467QT512P CrossFire (Radeon HD 4670, 2 x 512 MB, CF)

Roundup: Mainstream Graphics Cards From ATI And Nvidia
By

To see all the photos in our gallery for this card, click the image below.

Thanks to a dual delivery from HIS, we were also able to test performance with a pair of its IceQ-equipped Radeon HD 4670s, using two flexible bridge connectors to create a CrossFire configuration. Thanks to its dual-GPU horsepower , this configuration is actually able to compete against a Radeon HD 4850, GeForce 9800+ GTX, and GeForce GTS 250.

As mentioned, the GPU clock speed of each board is boosted slightly to 780 MHz instead of the reference 750 MHz setting, which increases the overall performance of a single card by 1.5%. The increase in benchmark scores in CrossFire is much more pronounced, as a second GPU boosts the numbers by nearly 90%. Nearly all games played through smoothly. It took applying 8x AA before the cards started to lag a bit. With Far Cry 2 at 1920x1200 and with 8x AA, the card could only crank out 17.2 FPS.

The prevailing prejudice against multiple graphics processors in a CrossFire configuration has been mitigated somewhat, thanks to improved support and optimization for ATI GPUs in more games and drivers. But the combination of two Radeon HD 4670 cards does enjoy a couple of advantages vis-à-vis dual-GPU cards or a giant high-performance graphics card—two Radeon HD 4670 cards remain very quiet at 37.3 dB(A) (even under heavy load), and when their ability to service the latest 3D engines falls behind, you’ll have two energy-efficient and quiet graphics cards that can make themselves comfortably at home in an office computer or a home-theater PC (HTPC).

The principle CrossFire card’s narrow profile is very handy because it is completely covered by the second card’s circuit board. The temperature does jump from 71° to 79° C in a dual-card configuration under heavy 3D load, but this remains within the comfort range for the cooling fan, which continues to operate at 30% of its full duty cycle, just as it does in single-card situations. The combination of the energy-efficient Radeon HD 4670 and the IceQ cooler from HIS is truly impressive, and even in a CrossFire configuration, it can still make excellent use of the capable fan and dedicated cooling channel. If you want to install a CrossFire rig, however, you must remember to purchase the CrossFire bridge connectors separately or make sure your motherboard comes with them, since HIS does not include them in the retail package.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 74 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 1 Hide
    Bloodblender , August 10, 2009 6:06 AM
    All I can say is that Tom's recent articles have been an excellent read, and this exactly the stuff I (as well as many others) require for their research purposes. Keep up the great work!
  • 3 Hide
    dirtmountain , August 10, 2009 6:21 AM
    Nice article,very well done, but you need to show the 4670 in CF as costing $162, not $81 as shown in the final chart.
  • -4 Hide
    rambo117 , August 10, 2009 6:55 AM
    the iceQ concept is amazing. keeps my 3870s nice and chilly (70C) while hardcore gaming
    and not to mention they both look intimidating in my case ;) 
  • 0 Hide
    pij , August 10, 2009 6:58 AM
    Quick question -

    4770 in crossfire or single 4890 best bet???..
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , August 10, 2009 7:01 AM
    to me the gaming benches are most important but energy efficiency and heat dissipation run a close 2nd. thanks for providing it all!
  • 8 Hide
    Julianbreaker , August 10, 2009 7:36 AM
    Newegg has quite a few 4850s that retail for $100 and it appears to be getting consistently better benchmarks than the 4770. I am confused as to why you would not recommend it over the 4770. Perhaps you are confused by simple maths.
  • -4 Hide
    radiowars , August 10, 2009 8:09 AM
    PijQuick question - 4770 in crossfire or single 4890 best bet???..

    They already did a whole article on that...
  • 8 Hide
    bucifer , August 10, 2009 8:35 AM
    I don't understand why you still won't use the 1GB version of the Radeon 4870. It's clear to me that the card is limited by it's amount of video memory when using hi-res, AA and AF.
    Searching for prices in US and Europe it retails cheaper than the GTX260(192 or 216).
    The point is: the card should be included in the test just as the GTX260-216. It's clearly a better option than the 512 mb version and it's good for comparison!
  • -2 Hide
    masterjaw , August 10, 2009 8:52 AM
    Nice article here. Most importantly, no unnecessary bias included.
  • 8 Hide
    holodust , August 10, 2009 8:57 AM
    Nice article, but I don't see how testing these cards on i7 920@3.8 fits into mainstream.
  • 5 Hide
    Hamsterabed , August 10, 2009 9:08 AM
    makes it a control to make sure they are only ratting the graphics cards and not the cpu. makes sure the GPUS are the limiting factor
  • 0 Hide
    qwertymac93 , August 10, 2009 9:18 AM
    something is bothering me. i have left 4 dead, and when i play it at 8xAA, 16xAF, i get higher frame rates then you do(close to 100). i have a 4830 and the res i play at is 1440x900. i know its not the same as 1650x1050, but the extra AA and AF should at least keep them close, but i get over 20fps more then your 4850! i don't have a fancy i7 and still. my 4830 is clocked at 700/1000. did you set the aa/af in the drivers or in-game, because in-game is almost always better.
  • 0 Hide
    Sihastru , August 10, 2009 9:52 AM
    qwertymac93, probably your driver settings (optimizations) are overriding the in game engine settings.
  • 0 Hide
    pij , August 10, 2009 10:04 AM
    buciferI don't understand why you still won't use the 1GB version of the Radeon 4870. It's clear to me that the card is limited by it's amount of video memory when using hi-res, AA and AF. Searching for prices in US and Europe it retails cheaper than the GTX260(192 or 216).The point is: the card should be included in the test just as the GTX260-216. It's clearly a better option than the 512 mb version and it's good for comparison!



    Sorry I thought the article was 'mainstream graphics cards' not 4890 vs 2x4770's in crossfire ! Blimey I must be going mad.
  • -2 Hide
    pij , August 10, 2009 10:05 AM
    whoops wrong quote - how silly of me.
  • 1 Hide
    pij , August 10, 2009 10:07 AM

    They already did a whole article on that...


    Sorry I thought the article was 'mainstream graphics cards' not 4890 vs 2x4770's in crossfire ! Blimey I must be going mad.

  • 3 Hide
    amnotanoobie , August 10, 2009 10:12 AM
    JulianbreakerNewegg has quite a few 4850s that retail for $100 and it appears to be getting consistently better benchmarks than the 4770. I am confused as to why you would not recommend it over the 4770. Perhaps you are confused by simple maths.


    The only reason that I could think of wherein the 4770 is better, is the smaller manufacturing process which should make it cooler and consume less power. Though if raw performance is your concern, the 4850 may be better.

    holodustNice article, but I don't see how testing these cards on i7 920@3.8 fits into mainstream.


    They usually do it on the highest rig they have to eliminate as much possible bottlenecks as possible. I think they were just making sure that video card's respective scores do not flat-out (i.e. the GTX 275, 260, 4870 and 4890 displaying the same scores when they are clearly a bit different hardware). Ideally even on lower-end hardware this chart should still show the same order in terms of performace, though you'd probably lose a few fps.
  • -2 Hide
    qwertymac93 , August 10, 2009 10:16 AM
    gee, a thumbs down for asking a question, interesting crowd huh. no, all my driver settings are set to "application settings: and i can visually confirm that the AA is indeed working. i think its just a different level. the frame rates i was quoting was from the rooftop part.
  • -2 Hide
    haplo602 , August 10, 2009 10:20 AM
    amnotanoobieThey usually do it on the highest rig they have to eliminate as much possible bottlenecks as possible. I think they were just making sure that video card's respective scores do not flat-out (i.e. the GTX 275, 260, 4870 and 4890 displaying the same scores when they are clearly a bit different hardware). Ideally even on lower-end hardware this chart should still show the same order in terms of performace, though you'd probably lose a few fps.


    well then it begs the question, which card is more platform limited. I mean the driver may scale differently with CPU power, so the card winning on the overclocked i7 may actualy be the worst on a stock PII X3 720 BE, or X2 550 BE.

    thus testing mainstream GPUs on high-end platforms has a flaw here ...
  • 3 Hide
    bucifer , August 10, 2009 10:38 AM
    Pij your IQ is below the sea level.
    masterjawNice article here. Most importantly, no unnecessary bias included.

    As for this statement I have one OBVIOUS mention. Why did they use The Last Remnant for testing again?
Display more comments