Tuesday, January 22nd 2008

ATI Radeon HD 3870 X2 (R680) 1GB First Full Review Posted

The guys over at PConline.com.cn have managed again to be the first to post a full review of a graphics card that should be available later next month, the ATI Radeon HD 3870 X2 1GB (R680). First thing you'll notice is that the card beats NVIDIA's GeForce 8800 Ultra in every Futuremark benchmark and almost every game by quite a margin. Have a good time reading the full story here.

Source: PConline.com.cn
Add your own comment

144 Comments on ATI Radeon HD 3870 X2 (R680) 1GB First Full Review Posted

#1
snuif09
i love that card already:D
Posted on Reply
#2
Weer
It's hard to load the pages, but from the only one I saw so far, the 8800 Ultra beats the hell out of it in Lost Planet.
Posted on Reply
#3
MikeJeng
This is better than the Ultra but it's also X2...



I still like Nvidia.:)
Posted on Reply
#5
cmberry20
wow! Very surprising. I wasn't expecting the performance to be as much as that. Well done ATI/AMD.

However, I worried about the price - I think they should sell it at < £250/€350 which would be the top end of most peoples (enthusiasts) budget. > £300/€400 (which it looks like it is) & your budgeting for the rich only & a niche market.
Posted on Reply
#6
cmberry20
btw, what board is that behind the X2 in the thrird picture - is that a 8800 ultra?
Posted on Reply
#7
Wile E
Power User
by: WildCat87


Weak.
This card is also much cheaper than an Ultra. It's supposed to retail around the price of a GTX.
Posted on Reply
#8
cmberry20
by: Wile E
This card is also much cheaper than an Ultra. It's supposed to retail around the price of a GTX.
Well, considering you can now pick up a 8000GTX for £240/€330 lets hope so!!
Posted on Reply
#9
erocker
Also the HD3870 is new, while the Ultra has been around a while. A month or two and the 3870x2 beats the Ultra in Crysis.
Posted on Reply
#10
WildCat87
by: erocker
Also the HD3870 is new, while the Ultra has been around a while. A month or two and the 3870x2 beats the Ultra in Crysis.
All I see is a brand new high-end dual-GPU video card that barely cracks 40 FPS at a low resolution with NO AA.

Weak. lol
Posted on Reply
#11
Wile E
Power User
by: WildCat87
All I see is a brand new high-end dual-GPU video card that barely cracks 40 FPS at a low resolution with NO AA.

Weak. lol
Until you realize that the drivers aren't anywhere near mature, and it's still faster then the nVidia offering in the same price range.
Posted on Reply
#12
erocker
by: WildCat87
All I see is a brand new high-end dual-GPU video card that barely cracks 40 FPS at a low resolution with NO AA.

Weak. lol
I wouldn't be suprised if there is a 20 - 40% gain with a patch and/or new drivers. Give it a little time, the card isn't even in retail yet!
Posted on Reply
#13
WildCat87
by: Wile E
Until you realize that the drivers aren't anywhere near mature, and it's still faster then the nVidia offering in the same price range.
I won't argue about the drivers.

A brand new, high-end, dual-GPU video card, even if only $50, getting just 1 frame more than an old, single-GPU card is still weak. Excellent price/performance ratio, but I was truly expecting more as far as pure performance, even with launch drivers.
Posted on Reply
#14
erocker
When a card beats out another card in everything else... it's drivers. I'm sure they are working on it.
Posted on Reply
#15
Blacklash
I'd love a card that just works. It looks like with this one if the title doesn't traditionally do well with Crossfire you are going to be left with slightly worse than a single HD 3870 result. See; WiC, Crysis, and Lost Planet. I bet it blows in DiRT too. It will probably do fine in Crysis on the DX9 path. I know my 3850s do.

I am going to hold onto my money for now. Hopefully someone will deliver a single GPU that can beat my GTX well soon. It's 661|2040 with a 1600 shader clock.
Posted on Reply
#16
Mussels
Moderprator
lets see how it goes. It seems fast in DX9 and weak in DX10.
Posted on Reply
#17
erocker
by: Mussels
lets see how it goes. It seems fast in DX9 and weak in DX10.
Like everything else! We literally haven't seen a real high-end DX10 card from either side. I think this card has the greatest potential out of all of them though.
Posted on Reply
#18
Xaser04
Could someone possibly give a quick run down of the results as the website does not load at all here at work.

I am seriously interested in one of these as something new to play with.

Cheers
Posted on Reply
#19
Live OR Die
Benchmarks don't show how the card is really is goin to proform in really world gaming, this is ATI high end card, when nvidia 9800GTX is not far off, like the saying goes 2 is better than 1, i would guess this would beat the 8800Ultra because it has 2 GPU working on one thing with more memory, would be a good card if not priced to high, but i will fall behind Nvidia's 9800GX2 in muti GPU cards. my 8800GTS 512MB comes like 100Points off the Ultra in 3DMark 06 but sure does not proform like a Ultra lol.
Posted on Reply
#20
Mussels
Moderprator
actually on the more memory thing... doesnt crossfire (and SLI) only share GPU power? wouldnt this really be a 512MB card for most purposes?
Posted on Reply
#21
Live OR Die
by: Mussels
actually on the more memory thing... doesnt crossfire (and SLI) only share GPU power? wouldnt this really be a 512MB card for most purposes?
Im not sure i think that is only when you uses 2 card not a single card with 2 GPU's, because think it work like 2 GPU's running off the same memory thats 1GB, does any one know if windows it picks the card up as one or two card, and do you have to turn crossfire/SLI on in the video cards control panel?
Posted on Reply
#22
Darkmag
by: Xaser04
Could someone possibly give a quick run down of the results as the website does not load at all here at work.

I am seriously interested in one of these as something new to play with.

Cheers
Hope this helps



















Performance diffrence in terms of R680 to 8800Ultra
Bioshock 1280*1024 = 4% Slower
Bioshock 1920x1200 = 24% Faster
Bioshock 2560*1600 = 39% Faster

COJ 1280*1024 = 11% Faster
COJ 1920x1200 = 24% Faster
COJ 2560*1600 = 10% Faster

COJ 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 13% Faster
COJ 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 23% Faster

Lost Planet 1280*1024 = 27% Slower
Lost Planet 1920x1200 = 30% Slower
Lost Planet 2560*1600 = 37% Faster

Lost Planet 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 18% Slower
Lost Planet 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 18% Slower
Lost Planet 2560*1600 4AA 16AF = 10% Faster

Crysis 1280*1024 = 13% Slower
Crysis 1920x1200 = 2% Slower
Crysis 2560*1600 = 12% slower

COD4 1280*1024 = 42% Faster
COD4 1920x1200 = 32% Faster
COD4 2560*1600 = 26% Faster

COD4 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 27% Faster
COD4 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 20% Faster
COD4 2560*1600 4AA 16AF = 16% Faster

NFS:Pro 1280*1024 = 32% Faster
NFS:Pro 1920x1200 = 38% Faster

NFS:Pro 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 72% Slower
NFS:Pro 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 67% Slower

Serious Sam 2 1280*1024 HAA 16AF = 30% Faster
Serious Sam 2 1920x1200 HAA 16AF = 45% Faster
Serious Sam 2 2560*1600 HAA 16AF = 78% Faster

UT3 1280*1024 = 7% Faster
UT3 1920x1200 = 24% Faster
UT3 2560*1600 = 37% Faster

F.E.A.R. 1600*1200 = 20% Faster
F.E.A.R. 2048*1536 = 20% Faster
Posted on Reply
#23
OnBoard
Must be a driver bug with ProStreet with AA/AF, it run nearly same 30FPS on my comp with 2xAA/8xAF =)
Posted on Reply
#24
Mussels
Moderprator
summary: drivers are immature, people are expecting to be about 30-50% faster than an ultra, for about 75% the price of an ultra.
Posted on Reply
#25
Xaser04
by: Darkmag
Hope this helps



















Performance diffrence in terms of R680 to 8800Ultra
Bioshock 1280*1024 = 4% Slower
Bioshock 1920x1200 = 24% Faster
Bioshock 2560*1600 = 39% Faster

COJ 1280*1024 = 11% Faster
COJ 1920x1200 = 24% Faster
COJ 2560*1600 = 10% Faster

COJ 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 13% Faster
COJ 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 23% Faster

Lost Planet 1280*1024 = 27% Slower
Lost Planet 1920x1200 = 30% Slower
Lost Planet 2560*1600 = 37% Faster

Lost Planet 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 18% Slower
Lost Planet 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 18% Slower
Lost Planet 2560*1600 4AA 16AF = 10% Faster

Crysis 1280*1024 = 13% Slower
Crysis 1920x1200 = 2% Slower
Crysis 2560*1600 = 12% slower

COD4 1280*1024 = 42% Faster
COD4 1920x1200 = 32% Faster
COD4 2560*1600 = 26% Faster

COD4 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 27% Faster
COD4 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 20% Faster
COD4 2560*1600 4AA 16AF = 16% Faster

NFS:Pro 1280*1024 = 32% Faster
NFS:Pro 1920x1200 = 38% Faster

NFS:Pro 1280*1024 4AA 16AF = 72% Slower
NFS:Pro 1920x1200 4AA 16AF = 67% Slower

Serious Sam 2 1280*1024 HAA 16AF = 30% Faster
Serious Sam 2 1920x1200 HAA 16AF = 45% Faster
Serious Sam 2 2560*1600 HAA 16AF = 78% Faster

UT3 1280*1024 = 7% Faster
UT3 1920x1200 = 24% Faster
UT3 2560*1600 = 37% Faster

F.E.A.R. 1600*1200 = 20% Faster
F.E.A.R. 2048*1536 = 20% Faster
Brilliant Thanks for that :)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment