Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Test Setup And Benchmarks

ATI Radeon HD 4890: Playing To Win Or Played Again?
By
Test Hardware
Processor
Intel Core i7 965 Extreme (Bloomfield) 3.2 GHz, 6.4 GT/s, 8 MB L3 Cache, power-saving settings disabled
Motherboard
Asus P6T (LGA 1366) X58/ICH10, BIOS 0403
Memory
Corsair Dominator 6 GB (3 x 2 GB) DDR3-1600 8-8-8-24 @ 1,600 MHz
Hard Drive
Western Digital VelociRaptor WD3000GLFS 300 GB 10,000 RPM SATA 3 Gb/s HDD
Networking
Realtek RTC8111C, 1 Gbps
Graphics CardsHIS Radeon HD 4890 1 GB

ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2 GB

ATI Radeon HD 4870 1 GB

ATI Radeon HD 4870 512 MB

Nvidia GeForce GTX 285 1 GB

Zotac GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 896 MB
Power Supply
Cooler Master UCP 1100 W
CPU Cooler
Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme
System Software And Drivers
Operating System
Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate Edition x64 Service Pack 1
DirectX
DirectX 10
Platform Driver
Intel INF Chipset Update Utility 9.1.0.1012
Graphics Driver
AMD Catalyst 8.592.1 RC1

AMD Catalyst 9.3

Nvidia GeForce 182.08
Benchmark Configuration
BenchmarkConfiguration
World in Conflict Very High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Patch 1009, DirectX 10

Very High Quality Settings, 4x AA / 16x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Patch 1009, DirectX 10
Far Cry 2 High Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Steam Version

High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Steam Version
CrysisHigh Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1900x1200, 2560x1600, Patch 1.2.1, DirectX 10, 64-bit Executable

High Quality Settings, 4x AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1900x1200, 2560x1600 Patch 1.2.1, DirectX 10, 64-bit Executable
Left 4 Dead
Highest Quality Settings, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Steam Version

Highest Quality Settings, 4x AA / 8x AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10, Steam Version
Grand Theft Auto IV
Highest Quality Settings, No AA / "High" AF, vsync off, 1680x1050/1920x1200, 2560x1600, Patch #3
Stalker: Clear Sky
High Quality Setting, No AA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10 lighting

High Quality Setting, 4x MSAA / No AF, vsync off, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600, DirectX 10 lighting
3DMark Vantage Performance Default, High Quality, Extreme Quality
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