Power Consumption
We were disappointed with the Radeon HD 4850’s high power consumption at idle, though it was under control under load. Let’s see how the Radeon HD 4870 did in that department.
Unfortunately, the Radeon HD 4870 posted even higher consumption than the 4850 at idle – 22 W more overall, measured at the power supply. When just displaying the desktop ("at idle"), the card drops the GPU speed to 550. As soon as it displays 3D data, it increases the GPU speed to the nominal/maximum speed of 750. Compared to the Radeon HD 3870, the difference is 44 W, or a 40% increase in total consumption for the PC! So the poor power-management performance of the Radeon HD 4800 series has been confirmed. Another problem is that unlike the HD 4850, the Radeon HD 4870’s power consumption isn’t very economical while gaming. Here again its consumption was higher than the GeForce GTX 260’s. Performance-wise, that makes sense, but not in terms of the difference in number of transistors and the high-end process.
Related Stories :
- AMD Partners Debate Radeon HD 4870 Price
- Radeon HD 4870 X2: Four Cards Compared
- 270 Watt For The Performance Crown: AMD's Radeon HD 4870 X2
- AMD's Radeon HD 4870 X2: R700 First-Look
- AMD Radeon HD 4870 X2 Ready By August
- Radeon HD 4870: Better Than GTX 260!
- MSI And GeCube Unveil ATI Radeon HD 4870-based Graphics Cards
- MSI Releases Its Radeon HD 7730
- Quick Take: PowerColor's Passively-Cooled Radeon HD 7850 SCS3
- AMD Releases Radeon HD 8970M Mobile GPU
finally ATI is getting some love
I have the 4950 and it is great
nice review..I wonder why the 4850 can not render race driver : GRID
for the pure gamer at heart, the 4870 seems to be a steal.
however, what are the possibilities for a CUDA like processing environment or handling Physics engines? I think AMD has done a great job making a pure video card, but I believe the future will be with unified technologies of having the GPU assist in other tasks as well.
Time will Tell
Would REALLY help alot if there were charts with these new cards and some of the last gen (what's in the desktop charts now) that way I could
see how much I could gain by upgrading. Maybe thats an update to the desktop charts that just hasnt been dont yet? Seems like it would have already been.
Under load, the heat sink did its job and the temperature didn’t rise all that much – at least not as much as the little Radeon HD 4850.
The 4850 went up 6* and the 4870 went up 10*... I think the 4870 went up more, but you (Tom's) said it went up less.
LOL you don't even have your drivers working properly if a 3870 and 3870x2 are matching each other in performance. Crossfire on the card isn't even working properly, check any bench of a 3870x2 vs 3870 in Call of Duty 4 (ATI preferred drivers).
The real key is what all the prices on these cards are when Nehalem is released.
LOTS of enthusiasts are planning a Nehalem build toward the end of the year. I image they will be getting 4850/4870s or GTX260/GTX280s. All depending on where the prices are I imagine.
Would REALLY help alot if there were charts with these new cards and some of the last gen (what's in the desktop charts now) that way I couldsee how much I could gain by upgrading. Maybe thats an update to the desktop charts that just hasnt been dont yet? Seems like it would have already been.
I agree about the charts. I don't consider buying a 4870 vs an older card like an x1950, but it sure would be nice to see how much it has improved over time.
Thank you ATI. Though I won't be buying your card cause I just bought an 8800 GT maybe this will force nVidia to drop there prices and give me a cheap step up
.
I loved ati since the rage era, im so glad they are back in the game again, i might even consider trading in my 9800gtx sli for a 4850 crossfire down the line, maybe when i setup to ddr3. But for now best bang for the buck cards are the 9800gtx and the 4850 in my opinion
I want either a 48701GB or a 4870X2. I have a 2900Pro 1GB and going to 512MB would not work for me. Plus I wounder if at much higher resolutions if another 512MB would help.
Gawd, I can't wait to get my mits on one of these. I should prolly get my order in now...
I wonder where they tested these cards? My 4850 runs between 52C idle and usually never above 65C while under load. I just use ASUS SmartDoctor which allows you to control the fan speed. Before using smartdoctor the fan speed never changed and it did run at 80C under load.
WTF is going on with those locked minimum clock speeds? I'm already pissed off by HD 3870 running at 300/1126 in XP, what a waste of power! Why don't they offer the possibility to manually (in control panel) underclock the card all the way down to 150-200/300-400 MHz is beyond me.
Finally AM/ATI's on the field. Glad to see the card is performing well esp. given the price. Now all ATI has to do optimize the drivers. Congrats to Toms on a good article written in a while.
Would be interesting if they actually tested these cards on an AMD Platform. Why do that always test AMD parts seperately?
WTF is going on with those locked minimum clock speeds? I'm already pissed off by HD 3870 running at 300/1126 in XP, what a waste of power! Why don't they offer the possibility to manually (in control panel) underclock the card all the way down to 150-200/300-400 MHz is beyond me.
This is because just like underclocking a CPU there is a minimum frequency and a minimum voltage that is needed. Also these are gaming class GPUs aimed at raw power(= more power use + heat)and not really to be energy efficient. Although energy efficiency (usually goes hand in hand with heat output) counts to a certain extent when OCing and higher clock speeds these negatives of lower energy efficiency can be overcome through better HSFs/smaller manufacturing process etc.
Would be interesting if they actually tested these cards on an AMD Platform. Why do that always test AMD parts seperately?
Because the Phenom's aren't very good!
From what Ive heard, the 150 clock is one of the gen clocks on a few of the bios, just not implemented yet. Give it time