Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Building A Radeon HD 4890

ATI Radeon HD 4890: Playing To Win Or Played Again?
By

Architecturally, the RV790 graphics processor is identical to RV770. The vital specs haven’t changed one bit. It’s still a 55 nm component, though transistor count is up just slightly to approximately 959 million transistors (from 956 million). The GPU is still made up of 800 stream processors, 40 texture units, and 16 ROPs. It still sports a 1 GB GDDR5 frame buffer on a 256-bit memory bus, too.

Where it differs most is clock speed—on its core and memory bus. Stock Radeon HD 4870s employed a 750 MHz engine and quad data rate memory running at 900 MHz. This new offering cruises at 850 MHz with 975 MHz GDDR5 memory.

In order to get those elevated frequencies, ATI had to do some work to the GPU’s core. In short, the RV770 consistently had issues clocking beyond a certain point—a fact that was evident in many of our System Builder Marathon overclocking attempts, which generally fell short at the same frequency range.

The company’s engineers went in looking for slow electrical paths and re-wired them in such a way that they wouldn’t inhibit faster frequencies. Physically, the GPU is fractions of a millimeter larger due to additional capacitors that clean up power to the chip. But it remains the same ol’ design popularized mid-2008. As you can see from the table above, clock-for-clock RV770 and RV790 perform nearly-identically clock-for-clock.


Radeon HD 4870 X2
Radeon HD 4890Radeon HD 4870
GeForce GTX 285
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
Manufacturing Process55 nm TSMC55 nm TSMC55 nm TSMC55 nm TSMC55 nm TSMC
SPs1,600 (2 x 800)
800800240
216
Core Clock750 MHz850 MHz
750 MHz648 MHz
576 MHz
Shader Clock750 MHz850 MHz750 MHz1,476 MHz
1,242 MHz
Memory Clock900 MHz GDDR5
975 MHz GDDR5
900 MHz GDDR51,242 MHz GDDR3
999 MHz GDDR3
Frame Buffer2 x 1 GB
1 GB
1 GB / 512 MB
1 GB
896 MB
Memory Bus Width2 x 256-bit
256-bit
256-bit
512-bit
448-bit
ROPs2 x 16
16
16
32
28
Price$400
$249~$180
$340
~$180


Not surprisingly, the 4890 card itself is easily mistaken for a Radeon HD 4870. They’re the same length; they both employ dual-slot coolers and the same dual-DVI plus video output configuration. Subtle differences set the two cards apart, giving away the fact that these two boards are indeed based on different GPUs.  And despite the slight increase in load power consumption as a result of the 4890’s higher clock speed, ATI still gets away arming the card with two six-pin auxiliary power connectors.

Back of the Radeon HD 4890Back of the Radeon HD 4890Back of the Radeon HD 4870Back of the Radeon HD 4870

As of right now, ATI doesn’t have plans for a Radeon HD 4890 X2 variant, as it likely wouldn’t offer much more than a Radeon HD 4870 X2. And the chip’s extra full-load power consumption would create additional heat that’d need to be cooled.

Overclocking

The principal benefit from moving from HD 4870 to HD 4890 would, in our minds, be overclocking headroom. Stock-to-stock, you’re looking at a 100 MHz frequency increase. However, right out of the gate, ATI’s board partners will be shipping juiced models running a 50 MHz-faster core clock. According to AMD, the new GPU layout should be capable of going even faster than that.

The driver’s Overdrive sub-routine now offers a maximum frequency of 1 GHz, suggesting ATI is fairly comfortable with its enthusiast customers running at that speed. Rather than push our card that high and run the risk of misrepresenting performance with a hand-picked sample, however, we ran our HIS Radeon HD 4890 Turbo sample at its stock 900/975 MHz speeds and compared it to the reference clocks ATI is officially launching.

Upping the core clocks to 900 MHz is good for gains between five and 10% at 2560x1600. One of these factory-overclocked boards undoubtedly enhances the value of ATI’s Radeon HD 4890 versus the 4870 1 GB. However, there will undoubtedly be an additional price premium over the reference cards, too, softening the worth of that extra performance to some degree.

Ask a Category Expert

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

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 93 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 5 Hide
    mbbs20 , April 2, 2009 4:45 AM
    overclocking ?
  • 2 Hide
    eklipz330 , April 2, 2009 4:56 AM
    i usually don't bitch and moan about them not having enough test gpu's, but i'd really like to see that sapphire 2gb 4870 up there, seeing how its in the same price range as the 4890...

    any of these cards would suffice for me, 1680*1050 does save you a pretty penny
  • 4 Hide
    ravenware , April 2, 2009 4:57 AM
    http://firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_4890_nvidia_geforce_gtx_275/page4.asp

    It seems to overclock well and outpaces the 275.

    The stalker results seem odd from both review sites. But stalker is glitchy.

    If priced right this should be a decent addition to the 4x series.
    It holds its own against the 275 and in certain games the 285.

    Perhaps sapphire will release a dual card.
    The 4850x2 they released performed extremely well.
  • 2 Hide
    megamanx00 , April 2, 2009 4:58 AM
    The 4850X2 is absent to compare to I see. Still nice to finally see a review of this thing. Nice gains over the 4870.
  • 0 Hide
    eklipz330 , April 2, 2009 5:01 AM
    Quote:
    Stalker: Clear Sky benchmarks are fairly new in our graphics card reviews, even if the game itself isn’t particularly fresh.Let us know what you think of this one in the comments section. At the very least, it’s a beautiful looking game.


    any benchmark is welcome i suppose

    too bad price goes up exponentially for minimal improvements... the 4890 will be about %50 more than the 4870 [assuming the latter is $180 and the former $270)for a ~10% performance increase... hopefully the gap will shrink by summer
  • 2 Hide
    cangelini , April 2, 2009 5:11 AM
    Both the 2 GB card and the 4850 X2 are exclusive to Sapphire, and neither has been sent over. Nevertheless, we'll be following up with SLI/CrossFire scores in the near future and I'll see if either of those two solutions might be lined up for that story.
  • 1 Hide
    eklipz330 , April 2, 2009 5:18 AM
    cangelini, you are the man.

    just thought i'd let you know. this article was very well written, and you said everything i was thinking including the pricing. too bad you have to go to the other article to refer to gtx275 comparisons. regardless of that, gj
  • 0 Hide
    cangelini , April 2, 2009 5:24 AM
    Thanks Ek. Truth be told, both companies pulled their launches in, allowing about a week to get the testing/writing done. Usually that's pretty tight for one new launch. Two is a little rougher. But hopefully there was enough cross-linking between the pair to convey the right messages.
  • 0 Hide
    mbbs20 , April 2, 2009 5:37 AM
    a good read...hardocp has a good one up as well
  • -3 Hide
    ifko_pifko , April 2, 2009 6:07 AM
    I'll post it here as well as in the GTX275 review:
    Summing all the framerates is just nonsense. ;-) The games with higher fps will weigh more than the others.
  • 0 Hide
    cangelini , April 2, 2009 6:17 AM
    Which is what I'm pretty sure it says in the GTX 275 review. For one reason or another, there are folks who like to see the numbers summed, so they're provided =)
  • -6 Hide
    Anonymous , April 2, 2009 6:26 AM
    Umm...hello, OVERCLOCK the card! This card was designed to go faster than where the stock card is at. With the stock cooler you can max out the GPU and the RAM!

    READ THIS: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYzNiwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
  • 0 Hide
    Cuddles , April 2, 2009 6:36 AM
    I would like to see how far you can really push this card. Maybe do an OC test with the 4890, 4870 2GB, 2870 X 2, and 4870 1 GB. Would be interesting to see how each card really rates against each other when taken to the furthest extreme they can be pushed.
  • 0 Hide
    cangelini , April 2, 2009 6:47 AM
    Thanks for the feedback byusing. FYI, we'll test overclocking when we can get retail boards in our System Builder Marathon series.
  • 2 Hide
    Proximon , April 2, 2009 6:55 AM
    Wow, you really nailed the conclusion I felt. I was shocked to read exactly what I was thinking.

    I can reach almost those speeds (well, I can but some slight instability) with my Toxic edition 4870. I turned it down to stock speeds because I really couldn't see a difference on 1680x1050.

    Nothing wrong with the card if it happens to fit your price point, but it's not anything to get my adrenaline flowing.
  • 0 Hide
    JAYDEEJOHN , April 2, 2009 7:01 AM
    "True, we’re only four months in to 2009. But we’ve already seen Nvidia reclaim the “fastest card” title with its GeForce GTX 295—"
    Ummm were only into 09 by 4 months, but the 4870x2 has been king for how long? Makes it sound as if nVidia took back the crown right away, which obviously it didnt
  • -1 Hide
    gkay09 , April 2, 2009 7:08 AM
    Well this case is very similar to the 8800GTX and the introduction of the 8800GT 512(Nearly the same performance for less price)
  • 0 Hide
    gkay09 , April 2, 2009 7:13 AM
    Well the above comment was w.r.t the GTX275 and GTX285
  • 0 Hide
    armistitiu , April 2, 2009 8:07 AM
    Nice article. From what i see the power consumption isn't that much higher . I'm guessing someone will make a 4890 X2 that will be right on par with 295 (perhaps a bit better). I'm hoping they fixed the idle power consumption in the retail boards. I find this card a bit pointless but hey...i'm no serious gamer that will give anything for 10% more fps. So rv790 is the first chip to go over 1Ghz ? I think so... Nice going AMD
  • 2 Hide
    pulasky , April 2, 2009 8:46 AM
    As usual fishy review http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd4890.html
Display more comments