ATI Radeon HD 4770 Info Leaked

Japanese website PC Pop managed to acquire a batch of slides pertaining to the upcoming ATI Radeon HD 4770, complete with the first 40nm desktop chip.

You have to admit: there's something sweet about leaked images, whether they're stills from an upcoming movie or the hardware specs of an upcoming graphics card. In this case, PC Pop scored the latter, acquiring six slides showcasing the upcoming ATI Radeon HD 4770.

According to the provided specs, the Radeon HD 4770 (RV470) will run faster than Nvidia's 9800GT, and one slide even announces its $99 price point, lower than the 9800GT's current price tag ranging from $119 to $139. A head-to-head slide reveals that the Radeon HD 4770 features 40nm processing; the 9800GT uses 65nm and 55nm processing. Additionally, the Radeon HD 4770 provides GDDR5 memory, 960 GLOPs of processing power, 12.0 GFLOPS per watt, and 9.7 GFLOPS per dollar. Nvidia's 9800GT isn't quiet as spectacular, using GDDR3 memory and offering 504 GFLOPs of processing power; users also get 4.8 GFLOPs per watt and 5.1 GFLOPs per dollar. To rub Nvidia's face even more into the dirt, AMD's new card supports DirectX 10.1; the 9800GT supports DirectX 10.

Is there a big difference between DirectX 10 and 10.1? A chart provided by AMD shows an improvement, using the PC game STALKER: Clear Sky as a benchmark. Set at 1920x1200 during the day, the game's DirectX 10.1 patch cranks up the frames per second to almost 40. That's not exactly fluid, however it's slightly better than 36 frames per second supplied by DirectX 10. By turning on the sunshafts, DirectX 10.1 still performs better than DirectX 10 without shafts, cranking out around 38 frames per second; DirectX 10 is only capable of 35 frames per second with sunshafts activated.

Outside the DirectX performance, the ATI Radeon HD 4770 features 826 million transistors; the 4670 uses 514 million and the 4850 uses 956 million. Clocking at 750 MHz, the 4770 also features 640 stream processors, a memory clock of 800 MHz using a 128-bit memory bus, a frame buffer size of 512 MB, and consumes 80 watts of power. While the card clocks at the same speed and uses the same memory bus as the 4670, it offers better performance using GDDR5, however it's still not quite as speedy as the 4850. With a compute performance of 1.0 TFLOPs, the 4850 coughs up a core clock of 625 MHz, but provides 800 stream processors, GDDR3 memory using a 256-bit bus, and a memory clock of 1000 MHz to make up the difference.

Sitting between the 4670 and 4850, the upcoming Radeon HD 4770 doesn't look too shabby, and with a $99 price tag, the card should be quite the hot item when it hits retail shelves soon. To check out all eight slides, click on the 4770 pictured above.

  • Good I can't wait for the prices to drop even more so I could afford to do sli with my 9800gt 1gb.
    the card sounds good but i wonder if it will be able to do DX11 when it comes out XD
  • 40 fps is fluid!
    Anything below 20-25 becomes laggy and unplayable.
    I'm sure you won't even notice the extra fps, but as a former ati fan, I can be happy to know it still holds the crown!
  • hannibal
    Well now $99 is really coming the new middle range cards price segment. Let's hope that allso entry level $35-50 will see some speed up. Because it's those cards that define the main game development because they are the most selled cards around (after integrated graphics of course...)
  • solymnar
    Seems nice. The proof of course is always in the benchmarks (and finding out how much headroom it has as a new 40nm part).

    Also have to wonder how hot and loud it runs since it advertises more performance per watt and is on a smaller process while still having a double slot cooling mech.

    Either way filling in brackets and increasing competitive pressure is usually a win for us consumers. :)
  • hellwig
    Why don't GPU's follow CPU scaling? CPUs went from 65-45nm, but GPUs went from 65-55-40nm? Wouldn't it make sense (especially since AMD/GlobalFoundry produces both CPUs and GPUs) to use the same process?
  • eklipz330
    i know the article ceases to mention this, but this is a replacement for the 4830, and you would think the 4830 is better than the 4770, but they're about the same..4770 might be a little better cause of the gddr5

    i think ati is learning naming schemes from nvidia =
  • sublifer
    eklipz330i know the article ceases to mention this, but this is a replacement for the 4830, and you would think the 4830 is better than the 4770, but they're about the same..4770 might be a little better cause of the gddr5i think ati is learning naming schemes from nvidia =From what I hear they're retiring the 4830 and at least they went backwards on the numbering... shouldn't be many confused souls out there trying to upgrade from a 4830 to a 4770 (which may or may not be an upgrade) I'd rather this than they rebadge a 3870 as a 4820 or whatever (That'd be closer to what nvidia has been doing)
  • Mucke
    DX10.1 vs DX10
  • eklipz330
    ct16151. it looks like a linear move from the 4830, not a real upgrade (although both are excellent cards)2. does anyone really care about DX10.0 with DX 11 around the corner?
    1. yes, its supposed to be linear, but with a lesser power requirement i think

    2. i don't think dx11 will catch on as fast as people think...maybe one or two games to set the bar, but it really has to be something to overtake dx9, which dx10 cudn't do