| Thursday, April 24 2008 |
Thanks to TG Daily we can now talk about the very soon to be released ATI HD 4800 series of graphics cards with more details. One week ahead of its presumable release date, general specifications of the new cards have been revealed. All Radeon 4800 graphics will use the 55nm TSMC produced RV770 GPU, that include over 800 million transistors, 480 stream processors or shader units (96+384), 32 texture units, 16 ROPs, a 256-bit memory controller (512-bit for the Radeon 4870 X2) and native GDDR3/4/5 support as reported before. At first, AMD's graphics division will launch three new cards - Radeon HD 4850, 4870 and 4870 X2:
Source: TG Daily
- ATI Radeon HD 4850 - 650MHz/850MHz/1140MHz core/shader/memory clock speeds, 20.8 GTexel/s (32 TMU x 0.65 GHz) fill-rate, available in 256MB/512MB of GDDR3 memory or 512MB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 1.73GHz
- ATI Radeon HD 4870 - 850MHz/1050MHz/1940MHz core/shader/memory clock speeds, 27.2 GTexel/s (32 TMU x 0.85 GHz) fill-rate, available in 1GB GDDR5 version only
- ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 - unknown core/shader clock speeds, available with 2048MB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 1730MHz
Source: TG Daily
User comments
sic, i hope this owns a 9600gt which i was going to buy in a couple weeks!
So the core is now split to geometry and shader domains with their own clock-gens. Good. close to 4 GHz memory on the HD4870? What for?
by: btarunr;763955what do you mean what for?! speed..performance...
So the core is now split to geometry and shader domains with their own clock-gens. Good. close to 4 GHz memory on the HD4870? What for?
It seams that the GDDR5 memory, power usage wise, is FAR better :)
by: choppy;763956
what do you mean what for?! speed..performance...
Yeah and all that bandwidth is going to be put to use. :rolleyes:
It's more of a marketing feature than something that will credit performance genuinely. GDDR5 ZOMG!
by: btarunr;763959games are getting bigger and demanding much more from gfx cards, within the next year you will understand why!
Yeah and all that bandwidth is going to be put to use. :rolleyes:
It's more of a marketing feature than something that will credit performance genuinely. GDDR5 ZOMG!
by: choppy;763964How much has GDDR4 contributed to the performance leadership of current ATI GPU's over its competition using supposedly slower GDDR3 ? Not much. While I agree that since the memory bus is narrow (256bit for both RV670 and G92), faster memory standards help. But you need a GPU that requires lot of memory bandwidth and that can utilize all that bandwidth. If it doesn't, it remains more of a marketing feature. Watch how the HD3870 X2 uses GDDR3 memory but performs on-par/better than 2x HD3870 which has the faster memory.
games are getting bigger and demanding much more from gfx cards, within the next year you will understand why!
Wonder how much faster these 4870's are compared to 3870's? :confused:
by: btarunr;763967That could be because of this:
How much has GDDR4 contributed to the performance leadership of current ATI GPU's over its competition using supposedly slower GDDR3 ? Not much. While I agree that since the memory bus is narrow (256bit for both RV670 and G92), faster memory standards help. But you need a GPU that requires lot of memory bandwidth and that can utilize all that bandwidth. If it doesn't, it remains more of a marketing feature. Watch how the HD3870 X2 uses GDDR3 memory but performs on-par/better than 2x HD3870 which has the faster memory.
Not sure, though.
The graphics processor itself will integrate more texture memory units (TMUs), which is the Achilles' heel of the R6xx generation: 32 TMUs in the RV770 will challenge the 56/64 units of Nvidia's G92/G92b.
Interesting. Good to know ATI is addressing all issues that held back its previous generations. I'm very optimistic about the RV770 because of a much stronger shader domain of the GPU.
Why not more TMUs??? Why do they always have to be conservative in the parts that matter? I'll probably still get one though lol.
Well it could be cost related for why they don't add more TMU's or maybe, just maybe ati cards are not exactly like nvidia cards and are held back by different things :-O
Hooray for independent shader speeds. :toast:
by: malware;763951What happened to "the 4870 will be the first mass-production GPU with a clock speed higher than 1GHz"?
ATI Radeon HD 4870 - 850MHz/1050MHz/1940MHz core/shader/memory clock speeds, 27.2 GTexel/s (32 TMU x 0.85 GHz) fill-rate, available in 1GB GDDR5 version only
by: newtekie1;764004
What happened to "the 4870 will be the first mass-production GPU with a clock speed higher than 1GHz"?
I think it got lost in the same dimension as 100% efficient SLI. :p
Nasty! ;););)
by: mdm-adph;764005Can you show me an article actually claiming SLI will be 100% efficient?
I think it got lost in the same dimension as 100% efficient SLI. :p
by: newtekie1;764008Nope, cause it's impossible. OOOHH BURNSAUCE.
Can you show me an article actually claiming SLI will be 100% efficient?
by: mdm-adph;764012It is impossible because the claim was never made. However, the 1GHz claim actually WAS made. It is just more marketing BS put out by the graphics cards companies to trap the fanboys.
Nope, cause it's impossible. OOOHH BURNSAUCE.
RV770 vs RV670:
MEM: 123GB/s vs 72GB/s --> +70%
TEX: 27200 vs 12400 --> +120%
GFLOP: 1008 vs 497 --> +102%
My guess is that it will be faster than 3870X2 since that's 2xRV670 at around 70% efficiency. I guess close to or matching 9800GX2. But for sure much faster than 8800GTX, like some suggest.
(based on these results: http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_asus_radeon_hd_3850_x2/20/#abschnitt_performancerating_qualitaet )
Other things to keep in mind is the transistor count and die size advantage ATI will have and already has. RV670 is already smaller than G94 and almost half of G92.
This advantage will only grow with RV770 vs GT200. That's around 800M vs almost 1.1B transistors. I know GT200 will be faster but at what cost?
MEM: 123GB/s vs 72GB/s --> +70%
TEX: 27200 vs 12400 --> +120%
GFLOP: 1008 vs 497 --> +102%
My guess is that it will be faster than 3870X2 since that's 2xRV670 at around 70% efficiency. I guess close to or matching 9800GX2. But for sure much faster than 8800GTX, like some suggest.
(based on these results: http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2008/test_asus_radeon_hd_3850_x2/20/#abschnitt_performancerating_qualitaet )
Other things to keep in mind is the transistor count and die size advantage ATI will have and already has. RV670 is already smaller than G94 and almost half of G92.
This advantage will only grow with RV770 vs GT200. That's around 800M vs almost 1.1B transistors. I know GT200 will be faster but at what cost?
by: newtekie1;764014Oh, I agree about the general nature of marketing BS, but how do you know that the 4870 X2 isn't going to be clocked at 1 GHz?
It is impossible because the claim was never made. However, the 1GHz claim actually WAS made. It is just more marketing BS put out by the graphics cards companies to trap the fanboys.
Maybe because the shader domain of the GPU's have a 1.00+ GHz clock, it would have eluded speculators to thinking the GPU itself was 1+ GHz clocked. Maybe they didn't know the RV770 was split into geometry and shader domains with their own clocks.
by: mdm-adph;764017Whether or not it will be clocked @ 1 GHz isn't what's important: to me, it would be EXTREMELY significant IF 1 single 4850 could match a 3870x2 in performance. Don't know if it can, though.
Oh, I agree about the general nature of marketing BS, but how do you know that the 4870 X2 isn't going to be clocked at 1 GHz?
by: HTC;764020That'd be cool, but there's no way -- a 3870x2 can sure throw out some pixels.
Whether or not it will be clocked @ 1 GHz isn't what's important: to me, it would be EXTREMELY significant IF 1 single 4850 could match a 3870x2 in performance. Don't know if it can, though.
So should i just sell my 3870 now and pick up one of these bad boys when they come out. Waiting will only make the value of my card decrease most likely :(
by: mdm-adph;764021Dunno, but it sure would put the graph market in full throttle, so to speak!
That'd be cool, but there's no way -- a 3870x2 can sure throw out some pixels.
Anyone knows when are this going to be released, im thinking of selling my 3870 if they get released in the following months..
by: sinner33;763970I'm gonna guess 15% at default clocks.
Wonder how much faster these 4870's are compared to 3870's? :confused:
by: batmang;764031That seems extremely conservative. 320 stream processors to 480 is like a 50% increase in that alone. Then theres the 1050mhz shader speed to the 775. The faster memory should help a little, the fact its 1GB. I would say a clear 50%+ increase if i had to guess.
I'm gonna guess 15% at default clocks.
Interesting.
Seems like the HD 4850 512MB GDDR5 is the winner here. Best price/performance/power ratio.
Unfortunately, the jury is still out on raw horsepower. How much faster will the 4850 be compared to the 3850? 50% more shaders. 15% faster RAM, 0% extra ROPs. Higher power consumption, (unless switching to GDDR5).
I would have like to see MORE HORSEPOWER, e.g. Texture units and ROPs, etc. I'm not convinced the extra 50% shaders will do much more than allow 8x AA rather than 4x AA, but still with all other settings the same. I hope I'm wrong.
Excluding the move to GDDR5 (optional), the new ATi cards seem more like a "3950". I dont think they deserve a "4" at the front. After all, performance wise, it's like a X800XT over X800Pro.
Seems like the HD 4850 512MB GDDR5 is the winner here. Best price/performance/power ratio.
Unfortunately, the jury is still out on raw horsepower. How much faster will the 4850 be compared to the 3850? 50% more shaders. 15% faster RAM, 0% extra ROPs. Higher power consumption, (unless switching to GDDR5).
I would have like to see MORE HORSEPOWER, e.g. Texture units and ROPs, etc. I'm not convinced the extra 50% shaders will do much more than allow 8x AA rather than 4x AA, but still with all other settings the same. I hope I'm wrong.
Excluding the move to GDDR5 (optional), the new ATi cards seem more like a "3950". I dont think they deserve a "4" at the front. After all, performance wise, it's like a X800XT over X800Pro.
by: magibeg;764034Ehm..that's 50%
That seems extremely conservative. 320 stream processors to 480 is like a 66% increase in that alone.
All paper talk. Lets just wait for the benchies :)...
We all know what happened with the "awesome" specs of the 2900's.
We all know what happened with the "awesome" specs of the 2900's.
by: btarunr;764038Yea sorry i corrected that after. From a % basis its 66% UP from 320 although in an absolute sense its only 50% more shaders total.
Ehm..that's 50%
by: batmang;764031Did you read what i said here:
I'm gonna guess 15% at default clocks.
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=764016&postcount=21
It will be close to double. But it seems none of you is counting on ANY architectural improvements. Why?
The Radeon 3800 series had a serious flaw called texture low fill-rate, which was addressed by ATI with an increased number of TMUs (Texture Memory Unit) from 16 to 32. The specifications indicate that 16 TMUs can address 80 textures on the fly, which means that 32 units should be able to fetch 160 in the RV770: This should allow the new GPU to catch up with Nvidia’s G92 design. However, the G92 has 64 TMUs that were enabled gradually (some SKUs shipped with 56), resulting in a fill-rate performance that beat the original 8800GTX and Ultra models.
ATI’s RV770 will be rated at a fill rate of 20.8-27.2 GTexel/s (excluding X2 version), which is on the lower end of the GeForce 9 series (9600 GT: 20.8; 9800 GTX: 43.2 9800 GX2: 76.8).
Interesting. Perhaps the "texture fill bottleneck fix" will mean big improvements in SOME situations.
by: lemonadesoda;764035Ah, but it's a completely different core -- something actually deserving of a new number prefix for once. :p
Excluding the move to GDDR5 (optional), the new ATi cards seem more like a "3950". I dont think they deserve a "4" at the front. After all, performance wise, it's like a X800XT over X800Pro.
i may well look into the 4870x2 - just after a card thats cooler/quieter/smaller than my GTX (which seriously takes 4 slots with the cooling i have on it) and less power use at idle.
Then again, i dont NEED it... lol.
Then again, i dont NEED it... lol.
is there an ETA?
does W1Z have one under the microscope as we speak?:toast:
does W1Z have one under the microscope as we speak?:toast:
go ati nice come back
Anyone notice how GT, GTS 512, GTX and Ultra have more Texture Fill Rate
(# of TMUs) x GPU clock rate
&
Pixel Fill Rate
(# of ROPs) x GPU clock rate
but doesn't equate to the same level of frame rates found in games. But that doesn't necessary equal to the performance in games. In some cases it's only a few frames.
If you notice, the GT and GTS 512 models of these video cards have higher texture and pixel fill rates then 3870 regardless if it's twice as high or not. Yes, other factors come into play however, the 3870 doesn't lag behind by the same magnitude which is why I believe it's not very efficient.
Therefore, it will be interesting to see how the 4870 stacks up.
(# of TMUs) x GPU clock rate
&
Pixel Fill Rate
(# of ROPs) x GPU clock rate
but doesn't equate to the same level of frame rates found in games. But that doesn't necessary equal to the performance in games. In some cases it's only a few frames.
If you notice, the GT and GTS 512 models of these video cards have higher texture and pixel fill rates then 3870 regardless if it's twice as high or not. Yes, other factors come into play however, the 3870 doesn't lag behind by the same magnitude which is why I believe it's not very efficient.
Therefore, it will be interesting to see how the 4870 stacks up.
by: mdm-adph;764017That wasn't the claim. The claim was that the HD4870 would be the worlds first production GPU clocked at 1GHz.
Oh, I agree about the general nature of marketing BS, but how do you know that the 4870 X2 isn't going to be clocked at 1 GHz?
@eastcoast, nice table. What a shame there arent standardised 3dmark06 scores in the table, e.g. same stock system like a Q6600 running same benchmark on each card. That would be a nice comparison. Without real-world tests, the stats dont mean a lot. It's like comparing number of screws on a sportscar. There is so much else that comes into the equation once the car gets on the track.
*EDIT*
Wait, I've just found this on google:
Benchmark HD 4870 on beta drivers vs. HD 3870, HD 3870 Crossfire on Cat 8.4 and 8800GT here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=12,590 vs. HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D
ROFL WARNING
*EDIT*
Wait, I've just found this on google:
Benchmark HD 4870 on beta drivers vs. HD 3870, HD 3870 Crossfire on Cat 8.4 and 8800GT here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=12,590 vs. HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D
ROFL WARNING
by: Pinchy;764039+1!!!
All paper talk. Lets just wait for the benchies :)...
We all know what happened with the "awesome" specs of the 2900's.
by: lemonadesoda;764082
@eastcoast, nice table. What a shame there arent standardised 3dmark06 scores in the table. That would be nice
*edit*
I've just found this on google:
ATI's RV770 will be rated at a fill rate of 20.8-27.2 GTexel/s (excluding X2 version), benchmarks against HD 3870 here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=13,340 vs. :D HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D
It's not my table, I googled for it :D. In any case as you can see the magnitude of the texture and pixel fill rates between competing cards leaves a pretty large gap.
I'm sorry, wasn't I thinking about buying an X1950 just one year ago?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
by: Weer;764102Could say the same thing about cars, or almost any product for that matter. Very few things are build from complete scratch and most are gradual innovations over time based on what works.
I'm sorry, wasn't I thinking about buying an X1950 just one year ago?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
by: Weer;764102a 3870 is not the same as a 1950 will its still a good card they are different
I'm sorry, wasn't I thinking about buying an X1950 just one year ago?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
nvidia kinda did that with the 9800 series but then again didnt ati kinda do that between teh 2900-3xxx series?
wonder if the shader will be able to be independantly clocked like with NV cards? now that its unlinked to the gpu speed?
if so that would be awesome!! and a base core clock of 850mhz aint bad, and if the 55nm gpu allows some nice oc headroom i dont see why it cant be overclocked easily past 1ghz, but then again its all iff and assumptions here, still, pretty exciting stuff
if so that would be awesome!! and a base core clock of 850mhz aint bad, and if the 55nm gpu allows some nice oc headroom i dont see why it cant be overclocked easily past 1ghz, but then again its all iff and assumptions here, still, pretty exciting stuff
by: Weer;764102LMFAO , you're saying this about ATI???
I'm sorry, wasn't I thinking about buying an X1950 just one year ago?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
try appling that rant to Nvidia, then you will be onto something
by: Weer;764102old, boring argument. geforce 2 and geforce 4MX was the same thing, GF 6 and 7 were very similar, 8 and 9 share GPU cores, ATI have so many i wont bother listing them all (9500/9800, 1600/1650, 2xx0 3xx0)
I'm sorry, wasn't I thinking about buying an X1950 just one year ago?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
im torn between the 4870 and 9900gtx, im just gonna have to see benchmarks... :banghead:
im gonna need something that can play all games at 1920x1200 smoothly with all settings turned up since im getting a new gateway 24" monitor.
im gonna need something that can play all games at 1920x1200 smoothly with all settings turned up since im getting a new gateway 24" monitor.
Nice specs and price ranges, but ATi really should hire some folk that actually CAN program drivers... when this happens, their lower prices will beat the hell out of nVidia or at least create some real competition.
by: substance90;764137whachusayinwillis?
Nice specs and price ranges, but ATi really should hire some folk that actually CAN program drivers... when this happens, their lower prices will beat the hell out of nVidia or at least create some real competition.
by: substance90;764137i dont think their drivers are the problem also nvidia has traditionally been the one with the driver problems
Nice specs and price ranges, but ATi really should hire some folk that actually CAN program drivers... when this happens, their lower prices will beat the hell out of nVidia or at least create some real competition.
by: das müffin mann;764145both have. repeatedly.
i dont think their drivers are the problem also nvidia has traditionally been the one with the driver problems
Aimed at no one in particular:
ANYTHING YOU SAY ABOUT NV OR ATI SUCKING CAN BE APPLIED EQUALLY TO THE OTHER ONE. PLEASE STOP THIS REPETITIVE FANBOI CRAP.
by: Mussels;764147i can honestly say the quality of ati drivers have fallen.
both have. repeatedly.
Aimed at no one in particular:
ANYTHING YOU SAY ABOUT NV OR ATI SUCKING CAN BE APPLIED EQUALLY TO THE OTHER ONE. PLEASE STOP THIS REPETITIVE FANBOI CRAP.
by: mandelore;764115Actually, he is just saying it in general. I don't say any mention of specific companys at all in his rant. For all you know he is talking about graphics companies in general. Of course an ATi fanboy would instantly take the defensive for ATi, and the fact that you seem to imply that ATi is innocent of this and nVidia isn't just adds more argument to your fanboyism. The fact is both do it.
LMFAO , you're saying this about ATI???
try appling that rant to Nvidia, then you will be onto something
by: Mussels;764147Very very true.
both have. repeatedly.
Aimed at no one in particular:
ANYTHING YOU SAY ABOUT NV OR ATI SUCKING CAN BE APPLIED EQUALLY TO THE OTHER ONE. PLEASE STOP THIS REPETITIVE FANBOI CRAP.
Fillrate... meh all marketing BS. The drivers are the reason why the GPUs dont perform as the specs say they should. Anyway, analysing the fillrate of the HD3850s... it seems pretty obvious why the GPUs had less performance...
However they said "match" we want to see the HD 4800 series MOW DOWN the G92s...
-tkpenalty sighs- although its rather early to judge, I would be surprised if these manage to trample the G92 series. AMD for the R6xx GPUs have obviously had a deficit in the TMUs/ROPs, I find it VERY hard to believe how they oversaw that. Their GPUs have the shader power... but not the texturing power to compensate.
However they said "match" we want to see the HD 4800 series MOW DOWN the G92s...
-tkpenalty sighs- although its rather early to judge, I would be surprised if these manage to trample the G92 series. AMD for the R6xx GPUs have obviously had a deficit in the TMUs/ROPs, I find it VERY hard to believe how they oversaw that. Their GPUs have the shader power... but not the texturing power to compensate.
by: [I.R.A]_FBi;764151when i had my x800 i always used omega drivers, they seemed better.
i can honestly say the quality of ati drivers have fallen.
for my nv card i was using 174.74 and it blue screened occasionally, i downgraded to 169.44 for more stability, im waiting for a new WHQL driver soon. even though WHQL means a bunch of M$ people played with it for a while and said "yup, seems ok to me"
yeah, latest whql is from december .. lame
Looks good, should be 1.5-1.8x as fast, should make the 38xx series rock bottom prices too...
by: magibeg;764034I don't want to set myself up for disappointment, lol. So I'm fibbing to myself. I'm really hoping its 50% faster. That would be fantastic. :rockout:
That seems extremely conservative. 320 stream processors to 480 is like a 50% increase in that alone. Then theres the 1050mhz shader speed to the 775. The faster memory should help a little, the fact its 1GB. I would say a clear 50%+ increase if i had to guess.
by: batmang;764180Disappointment is become sort of a phenomenon off late. 8800 GTX -> 9800 GTX, talk about disappointment.
I don't want to set myself up for disappointment, lol. So I'm fibbing to myself. I'm really hoping its 50% faster. That would be fantastic. :rockout:
by: btarunr;764184I don't see why everyone was so disappointed with the 9800GTX. It is exactly what nVidia said it was going to be. It isn't like they hyped the specs up and then released something that wasn't even close. I still don't understand why everyone heard "G92 based card with higher clocks" and then expected some beast that would blow away everything currently out. You knew what it was from the day it was announced, you can't be disappointed when a card comes out exactly as it was presented.
Disappointment is become sort of a phenomenon off late. 8800 GTX -> 9800 GTX, talk about disappointment.
by: newtekie1;764201its faster than the 8800GTX, uses less power and runs colder. it also has better decoding for HD media (that was missing from the GTX and ultra, while the 8500/8600 always had it)
I don't see why everyone was so disappointed with the 9800GTX. It is exactly what nVidia said it was going to be. It isn't like they hyped the specs up and then released something that wasn't even close. I still don't understand why everyone heard "G92 based card with higher clocks" and then expected some beast that would blow away everything currently out. You knew what it was from the day it was announced, you can't be disappointed when a card comes out exactly as it was presented.
by: choppy;763952A 3870GX2 pwns one of those.
sic, i hope this owns a 9600gt
I wonder what the HD4650 model is going to be like.
by: newtekie1;764201
I don't see why everyone was so disappointed with the 9800GTX. It is exactly what nVidia said it was going to be.
Well, it wasn't quiet. ;)
by: Dangle;764211True, for about double the price, but a single HD3870 does not. A 9600GT is faster than a HD3870.
A 3870GX2 pwns one of those.
Edit: Actually it is closer to triple the price.
I'm hoping the HD4870 is better than the 9800GTX, or at least as good which shouldn't be a problem judging from the specs. I would love to see some decent competition at that price point again. Which I hope will drive prices down about $50.
by: newtekie1;764014
It is impossible because the claim was never made.
I love your logic! If it's not claimed, then it's not possible! :rockout: :rolleyes:
I am disappointed that it seems the 4870 won't have a 1Ghz core speed though.
Well atleast these specs seem to be more believable then the junk we saw a few weeks ago. I'm still aiming for the x2. Its stacking up to be sick monster. I wonder when we'll see a game that can use all that power :D
by: kylew;764239No, you seem to not be able to follow the conversation.
I love your logic! If it's not claimed, then it's not possible! :rockout: :rolleyes:
I am disappointed that it seems the 4870 won't have a 1Ghz core speed though.
I pointed out that there was a claim that the HD4870 would be the worlds first mass produced GPU clocked at 1GHz and asked what happened to that.
He then said it went away just like 100% efficient SLI. Which implies that somewhere it was claimed that SLI would be 100% efficient.
I then asked him to show me where that was claimed, which he was unable to do because it was never claimed. I never said it wasn't possible, I said it wasn't possible for him to produce an article with that claim in it because no article exists.
by: batmang;764031lol at you, plucking random figures from the air. 320 SPs versus 480 SPs, what's the increase there? 50%? Correct. Even the clock increase to 850 on the core is 10%, never mind the independent shader clock. Use common sense and you wouldn't have to pluck random figures out of the air.
I'm gonna guess 15% at default clocks.
by: newtekie1;764254*Cough* I was joking :rolleyes: that's why I didn't quote your whole post :D
No, you seem to not be able to follow the conversation.
I pointed out that there was a claim that the HD4870 would be the worlds first mass produced GPU clocked at 1GHz and asked what happened to that.
He then said it went away just like 100% efficient SLI. Which implies that somewhere it was claimed that SLI would be 100% efficient.
I then asked him to show me where that was claimed, which he was unable to do because it was never claimed. I never said it wasn't possible, I said it wasn't possible for him to produce an article with that claim in it because no article exists.
The renumbering of GPUs is causing market confusion. (Perhaps a few TPU experts canbe excepted from the generalisation). Imagine if every year there was a different car model number. The amount of advertising, reposition of brand and model, and confusion in the marketplace as to which model to buy etc.
I think the same thing is true in the GPU market. There used to be some "stability" were the number increases of the cards were in 50s or 100s. Now we have a 1000 change from one Q to the next.
Too much I say. I'm not confused. But I DO HAVE TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME researching ans staying on top of this product confusion.
Or are the GPU manufacturers doing this DELIBERATELY to get FREE advertising on the various websites and magazines? If they went from 3870 to 3875, perhaps they wouldnt get so much free advertising as when they go from 3870 to 4870 and the "rumours", and the "no tech spec yet", and "tech spec tomorrow", etc. fills the web with all sorts of "brand awareness" copy+paste.
IMO this just goes to show that PR and ad agencies get paid on the WRONG METRIC. They get "paid" for how often information is linked to between websites, and how far up the search engines the information appears.
This only ENCOURAGES smoke and mirrors and tech-site discussion to create page-count to hit the search engines.
AAAARRRGGGHHHH cynic.
Benchmark HD 4870 on beta drivers vs. HD 3870, HD 3870 Crossfire on Cat 8.4 and 8800GT here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=12,590 vs. HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D. It's definitely MUCH faster than you were expecting :roll:
ROFL WARNING
I think the same thing is true in the GPU market. There used to be some "stability" were the number increases of the cards were in 50s or 100s. Now we have a 1000 change from one Q to the next.
Too much I say. I'm not confused. But I DO HAVE TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME researching ans staying on top of this product confusion.
Or are the GPU manufacturers doing this DELIBERATELY to get FREE advertising on the various websites and magazines? If they went from 3870 to 3875, perhaps they wouldnt get so much free advertising as when they go from 3870 to 4870 and the "rumours", and the "no tech spec yet", and "tech spec tomorrow", etc. fills the web with all sorts of "brand awareness" copy+paste.
IMO this just goes to show that PR and ad agencies get paid on the WRONG METRIC. They get "paid" for how often information is linked to between websites, and how far up the search engines the information appears.
This only ENCOURAGES smoke and mirrors and tech-site discussion to create page-count to hit the search engines.
AAAARRRGGGHHHH cynic.
Benchmark HD 4870 on beta drivers vs. HD 3870, HD 3870 Crossfire on Cat 8.4 and 8800GT here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=12,590 vs. HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D. It's definitely MUCH faster than you were expecting :roll:
ROFL WARNING
by: newtekie1;764085
+1!!!
:rolleyes: We actually know this is based on R600 tech though, so we know what the worst will be, and consdidering the 3800s panned out the be pretty good cards (8800 G92s actually ended up with a larger AA hit in the end).
by: lemonadesoda;764262It's a new gen, it's how it works. It would be confusing, and pointless, to try and give products names in small increments of say 25. You're trying to base it on a big number = performance way of thinking about it, when we know a 3600 isn't faster than a 2900. It's a way of distinguishing a different tech. Especially considering the 4XXX are new cores, tweaked from an older architecture, the new name is worthy. At least it's a much larger improvement between HD 2 to HD 3 series.
The renumbering of GPUs is causing market confusion. (Perhaps a few TPU experts canbe excepted from the generalisation). Imagine if every year there was a different car model number. The amount of advertising, reposition of brand and model, and confusion in the marketplace as to which model to buy etc.
I think the same thing is true in the GPU market. There used to be some "stability" were the number increases of the cards were in 50s or 100s. Now we have a 1000 change from one Q to the next.
Too much I say. I'm not confused. But I DO HAVE TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME researching ans staying on top of this product confusion.
Or are the GPU manufacturers doing this DELIBERATELY to get FREE advertising on the various websites and magazines? If they went from 3870 to 3875, perhaps they wouldnt get so much free advertising as when they go from 3870 to 4870 and the "rumours", and the "no tech spec yet", and "tech spec tomorrow", etc. fills the web with all sorts of "brand awareness" copy+paste.
IMO this just goes to show that PR and ad agencies get paid on the WRONG METRIC. They get "paid" for how often information is linked to between websites, and how far up the search engines the information appears.
This only ENCOURAGES smoke and mirrors and tech-site discussion to create page-count to hit the search engines.
AAAARRRGGGHHHH cynic.
Benchmark HD 4870 on beta drivers vs. HD 3870, HD 3870 Crossfire on Cat 8.4 and 8800GT here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=12,590 vs. HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D. It's definitely MUCH faster than you were expecting :roll:
ROFL WARNING
by: Weer;764102
I'm sorry, wasn't I thinking about buying an X1950 just one year ago?
How many more numbers are they going to have to increase before people realize that they are repackaging the same old crap?
Did you know that you have an 9800GTX? No? Well you do now :eek: :D
I don't think it's going to be the 4870 that will be most impressive but the 4870 X2 if rumors are true that it will be 2 GPUs recognized as 1 GPU using shared memory. If that turns out to be true then:
-future video cards as we know it will change
-it will leave a Nvidia without a competing card (unless the GT200 is a dual GPU solution)
if done successfully via price, performance and innovation. This is what I really want to know most. The 4870 won't be bad IMO and at it's price it will be a competing card but it's the 4870 X2 I want to see. Only time will tell, can't wait. :p But remember there is still R800 we haven't seen/heard a peep from yet and it was talked about and rumored to be in development as far as last year (that I know of).
-future video cards as we know it will change
-it will leave a Nvidia without a competing card (unless the GT200 is a dual GPU solution)
if done successfully via price, performance and innovation. This is what I really want to know most. The 4870 won't be bad IMO and at it's price it will be a competing card but it's the 4870 X2 I want to see. Only time will tell, can't wait. :p But remember there is still R800 we haven't seen/heard a peep from yet and it was talked about and rumored to be in development as far as last year (that I know of).
by: lemonadesoda;764262that 4870 score isnt that high - people are doing that in the 06 thread here in TPU. At a guess, that score is for the x2 version.
The renumbering of GPUs is causing market confusion. (Perhaps a few TPU experts canbe excepted from the generalisation). Imagine if every year there was a different car model number. The amount of advertising, reposition of brand and model, and confusion in the marketplace as to which model to buy etc.
I think the same thing is true in the GPU market. There used to be some "stability" were the number increases of the cards were in 50s or 100s. Now we have a 1000 change from one Q to the next.
Too much I say. I'm not confused. But I DO HAVE TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME researching ans staying on top of this product confusion.
Or are the GPU manufacturers doing this DELIBERATELY to get FREE advertising on the various websites and magazines? If they went from 3870 to 3875, perhaps they wouldnt get so much free advertising as when they go from 3870 to 4870 and the "rumours", and the "no tech spec yet", and "tech spec tomorrow", etc. fills the web with all sorts of "brand awareness" copy+paste.
IMO this just goes to show that PR and ad agencies get paid on the WRONG METRIC. They get "paid" for how often information is linked to between websites, and how far up the search engines the information appears.
This only ENCOURAGES smoke and mirrors and tech-site discussion to create page-count to hit the search engines.
AAAARRRGGGHHHH cynic.
Benchmark HD 4870 on beta drivers vs. HD 3870, HD 3870 Crossfire on Cat 8.4 and 8800GT here: HD.3870.3Dmark06=12,590 vs. HD.4870.3Dmark06benchmark.leak.html=21,223 :D. It's definitely MUCH faster than you were expecting :roll:
ROFL WARNING
by: Mussels;764344The 4870 score isn't even real, he is rick rollin' you all.
that 4870 score isnt that high - people are doing that in the 06 thread here in TPU. At a guess, that score is for the x2 version.
I think I know what "rick-rollin" really means now! Yuck!:shadedshu
ha nice try lemonadesoda! but my computer comes with "anti rick roll" protection!
i hope these cards turn out good. even though i just bought my 3870...oh well
i hope these cards turn out good. even though i just bought my 3870...oh well
by: substance90;764137
Nice specs and price ranges, but ATi really should hire some folk that actually CAN program drivers... when this happens, their lower prices will beat the hell out of nVidia or at least create some real competition.
you should check you FACt before you say ATi sucks on drivers, last time i checked NVIDIA crashed vista many more times
more graphics card options??? i just got a headache.
by: wiak;764499NVidia also has a much larger market share, which explains why it causes more Vista crashes.(I believe I actually stated in that news post that some fanboys would try to use those figures to try and say nVidia's driver suck*). The fact is, that if you have more users, you will have more crashes. That doesn't mean anything in terms of drivers. We would need the percentages of people that had problems before we can make that statement.
you should check you FACt before you say ATi sucks on drivers, last time i checked NVIDIA crashed vista many more times
Just saying "nVidia caused more Vista crashes then ATi, so ATi must have better drivers" is false.
Edit: *-Yep I did:http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=56282
^^That's incorrect, the number of crashes on Vista was the result of driver itself not how many people used the video card. The number of people has no merit to the fact that the driver caused the problem.
^^ no you're incorrect, it's nearly impossible to find the real cause behind the matter. By your saying 1 person could have crashed a million times and that would be the reason... somehow I don't think so.....
No all of you are incorrect, this thread is about the hd48xx not whose drivers cause more errors. :slap:
still the fact remains ...nvidia driver suck, there chipsets suck and if they continue on as they are , there next gpu will suck too ;)
If you only have an ATi/AMD computer and say Nvidia drivers suck you are an idiot. :roll:
How would you know? Thats right you wouldn't.
I have two ATi computers and two Nvidia computers. I have had more display driver crashes with ATi drivers but neither have EVER crashed my entire computer.;)
How would you know? Thats right you wouldn't.
I have two ATi computers and two Nvidia computers. I have had more display driver crashes with ATi drivers but neither have EVER crashed my entire computer.;)
ok getting away from the drivers thing i cant wait to see some in game benches i wonder how they would stack up compared to nvidia's lineup in game (i dont care about crysis...lol)
by: newtekie1;764014yet you were trapped by SLI Claiming over 80% performance gain.
It is impossible because the claim was never made. However, the 1GHz claim actually WAS made. It is just more marketing BS put out by the graphics cards companies to trap the fanboys.
by: das müffin mann;764107Sorry the 1950 Line Could not Overclock that well, 3870 and 3850 overclock very well and can be modified.
a 3870 is not the same as a 1950 will its still a good card they are different
nvidia kinda did that with the 9800 series but then again didnt ati kinda do that between teh 2900-3xxx series?
by: newtekie1;764525
NVidia also has a much larger market share, which explains why it causes more Vista crashes.(I believe I actually stated in that news post that some fanboys would try to use those figures to try and say nVidia's driver suck*). The fact is, that if you have more users, you will have more crashes. That doesn't mean anything in terms of drivers. We would need the percentages of people that had problems before we can make that statement.
Just saying "nVidia caused more Vista crashes then ATi, so ATi must have better drivers" is false.
Edit: *-Yep I did:http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=56282
Quick to call people a fanboy I see, you'll get called a fanboy yourself for disregarding the general consensus that ATi drivers are superior to NV's. Even the people who truly know what they are talking about see ATi drivers as being superior. But hey, you know better, because you like NV, they are in every way superior. :) :cool:
Based on the driver gains ATi managed to squeeze from the R600 cores, I find their drivers very impressive, and I'd say one of the reasons NV drives are "inferior" is because they're lazy on driver releases.
by: eidairaman1;764673ok so what does that have to do with what i said?
Sorry the 1950 Line Could not Overclock that well, 3870 and 3850 overclock very well and can be modified.
by: malware;763951HOLY CRAP at the 4870x2 2 GB vram. I heard someone say in tomshardware the core clock will be 1 GHz. And some say at christmas new versions of 4870x2 will be out at a 3 GHz core clock!!!!!!!!!!! This sounds like the end of nvidia. :(
Thanks to TG Daily we can now talk about the very soon to be released ATI HD 4800 series of graphics cards with more details. One week ahead of its presumable release date, general specifications of the new cards have been revealed. All Radeon 4800 graphics will use the 55nm TSMC produced RV770 GPU, that include over 800 million transistors, 480 stream processors or shader units (96+384), 32 texture units, 16 ROPs, a 256-bit memory controller (512-bit for the Radeon 4870 X2) and native GDDR3/4/5 support as reported before. At first, AMD's graphics division will launch three new cards - Radeon HD 4850, 4870 and 4870 X2:The 4850 256MB GDDR3 version will arrive as the successor of the 3850 256MB with a price in the sub-$200 range. The 4850 512MB GDDR3 should retail for $229, while the 4850 512MB GDDR5 will set you back about $249-269. The 1GB GDDR5 powered 4870 will retail between $329-349. The flagship Radeon HD 4870 X2 will ship later this year for $499.
- ATI Radeon HD 4850 - 650MHz/850MHz/1140MHz core/shader/memory clock speeds, 20.8 GTexel/s (32 TMU x 0.65 GHz) fill-rate, available in 256MB/512MB of GDDR3 memory or 512MB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 1.73GHz
- ATI Radeon HD 4870 - 850MHz/1050MHz/1940MHz core/shader/memory clock speeds, 27.2 GTexel/s (32 TMU x 0.85 GHz) fill-rate, available in 1GB GDDR5 version only
- ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 - unknown core/shader clock speeds, available with 2048MB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 1730MHz
Source: TG Daily
Im thinking the core clock on the x2 could be at 1000mhz if not more
i was getting at the point the 3800 Line is a totally different animal than the 1950 Line.
i no i said that...
by: EastCoasthandle;764548Incorrect. If there are more people using the driver, then there will be more crashes. All the information provided gave us was the number of crashes.
^^That's incorrect, the number of crashes on Vista was the result of driver itself not how many people used the video card. The number of people has no merit to the fact that the driver caused the problem.
Example: You take a survey. 25 people report crashes causes by nVidia drivers. 15 people reported crashes caused by ATi drivers. Who has better drivers?(I'll continue the example once you answer this question.)
by: eidairaman1;764671No I wasn't.
yet you were trapped by SLI Claiming over 80% performance gain.
by: kylew;764674You can call me a fanboy all you want for disregarding that, because the people that truly know, the people that use both, will tell you neither is better than the other. Notice how I use both...I'm guessing you don't have an nVidia card in any of your computers, and probably never have. As for lazy driver releases, last I checked nVidia has been pushing out 2+ drivers a month, ATi is lucky to see monthly releases anymore.
Quick to call people a fanboy I see, you'll get called a fanboy yourself for disregarding the general consensus that ATi drivers are superior to NV's. Even the people who truly know what they are talking about see ATi drivers as being superior. But hey, you know better, because you like NV, they are in every way superior. :) :cool:
Based on the driver gains ATi managed to squeeze from the R600 cores, I find their drivers very impressive, and I'd say one of the reasons NV drives are "inferior" is because they're lazy on driver releases.
hey guys lets get back on topic...
:D
:D
newtekie, quit trying to filibuster Nvidia's drivers- your liable to be assassinated lol
defi - I find it interesting that full specs for the 4870x2 weren't leaked - which says to me that ATI is holding that back for the time being. Out of the 4000 series lineup, I think the most impressive will be the 4870x2.
I'm defi curious to find out whether it's being slapped with two RV770s, or if it'll be the first ATI card to stout to dual-core R700. If so, that would pose to be a key point of withoolding those clocks ATM.
Anyway we look at it, though, this series appears to be "bringin-it" back to nVidia. I'm really glad to see hardware between the two competing neck and neck again; it's better for all of us in the long run.
Either way, though - instead of snaggin a 3870x2 within the next couple of months, I might just keep on saving for the release of the 4870x2 instead.
I'm defi curious to find out whether it's being slapped with two RV770s, or if it'll be the first ATI card to stout to dual-core R700. If so, that would pose to be a key point of withoolding those clocks ATM.
Anyway we look at it, though, this series appears to be "bringin-it" back to nVidia. I'm really glad to see hardware between the two competing neck and neck again; it's better for all of us in the long run.
Either way, though - instead of snaggin a 3870x2 within the next couple of months, I might just keep on saving for the release of the 4870x2 instead.
by: Xazax;763443
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2286045,00.asp
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2283081,00.asp
http://www.pcper.com/#NewsID-5540
Things are going to be interesting this Christmas..
Read these? Things will get insane in..
by: newtekie1;764690
Incorrect. If there are more people using the driver, then there will be more crashes. All the information provided gave us was the number of crashes.
Example: You take a survey. 25 people report crashes causes by nVidia drivers. 15 people reported crashes caused by ATi drivers. Who has better drivers?(I'll continue the example once you answer this question.)
....
That is not correct, you are replacing the fact that the issue happened with the number of people who used the driver. The fact remains that the issues happened therefore, the number of people using it is not relevant to that fact. It only shows how many people who did use it experienced the same problem not the fact that people used it as to create some sort of arbitrary percentage.
by: Exceededgoku;764609
^^ no you're incorrect, it's nearly impossible to find the real cause behind the matter. By your saying 1 person could have crashed a million times and that would be the reason... somehow I don't think so.....
The reason was already addressed in a few articles. Google it on your own time as this really is getting off topic to this thread.
seems the fanboys always try to change the subject of the topics, First it was Nvidia's 790i and now its this topic
KEEP THE FRAGGIN TOPIC ON TRACK!!!
KEEP THE FRAGGIN TOPIC ON TRACK!!!
by: eidairaman1;764709You just talked about something off topic............
seems the fanboys always try to change the subject of the topics, First it was Nvidia's 790i and now its this topic
KEEP THE FRAGGIN TOPIC ON TRACK!!!
"seems the fanboys always try to change the subject of the topics, First it was Nvidia's 790i and now its this topic
KEEP THE FRAGGIN TOPIC ON TRACK!!!" <---- Thats off topic
NOTE: So did I posted something off topic too due to this post?
by: newtekie1;764690They actually do release drivers monthly, and I have had NV cards, and I've returned them, as they weren't what I wanted. I considered going 8800GTX SLi, but I saw NV support as being sub par, so I steered clear of them. The reason I find ATi drivers more impressive is how much performance they've gotten out of R600s, especially when it comes to AA, that "issue" seems to have pretty much gone, and they've managed all this without the hardware advantages NV had with their cards.
Incorrect. If there are more people using the driver, then there will be more crashes. All the information provided gave us was the number of crashes.
Example: You take a survey. 25 people report crashes causes by nVidia drivers. 15 people reported crashes caused by ATi drivers. Who has better drivers?(I'll continue the example once you answer this question.)
No I wasn't.
You can call me a fanboy all you want for disregarding that, because the people that truly know, the people that use both, will tell you neither is better than the other. Notice how I use both...I'm guessing you don't have an nVidia card in any of your computers, and probably never have. As for lazy driver releases, last I checked nVidia has been pushing out 2+ drivers a month, ATi is lucky to see monthly releases anymore.
by: EastCoasthandle;764703No, it is incorrect to say it is a fact that nVidia's drivers are worse based on the survey that says they cause more Vista crashes. You need the percentages of nVidia users that had crashes and the percentage of ATi users that had crashes before you can come to that conclusion. The percentage of Vista users, is not the correct information.
That is not correct, you are replacing the fact that the issue happened with the number of people who used the driver. The fact remains that the issues happened therefore, the number of people using it is not relevant to that fact. It only shows how many people who did use it experienced the same problem not the fact that people used it as to create some sort of arbitrary percentage.
by: newtekie1;764724This sounds like your having a debate at court. One person say its opinion. Someone says incorrect I disagree. Then another person says I disagree with you. Then another person says your totally wrong. Then another person comes in and says listen to me your all wrong and then a cop comes in and shoots them with a 0.1 sec short lasting 1 hit ko rocket launcher.
No, it is incorrect to say it is a fact that nVidia's drivers are worse based on the survey that says they cause more Vista crashes. You need the percentages of nVidia users that had crashes and the percentage of ATi users that had crashes before you can come to that conclusion. The percentage of Vista users, is not the correct information.
by: newtekie1;764724
No, it is incorrect to say it is a fact that nVidia's drivers are worse based on the survey that says they cause more Vista crashes. You need the percentages of nVidia users that had crashes and the percentage of ATi users that had crashes before you can come to that conclusion. The percentage of Vista users, is not the correct information.
What I addressed in your post:
...larger market share, which explains why it causes more Vista crashes...
which is wrong.
by: newtekie1;764690nVidia pushes out 2+ beta drivers a month. Usually they only have one alpha release a month. They're on par with ATI; only difference is that ATI doesn't release beta drivers left and right like nVidia does - instead, they rely heavily on feedback crews, and consumer feedback (us) for driver development. If there's an issue they're trying to resolve, we typically see either a hotfix or a beta release.
You can call me a fanboy all you want for disregarding that, because the people that truly know, the people that use both, will tell you neither is better than the other. Notice how I use both...I'm guessing you don't have an nVidia card in any of your computers, and probably never have. As for lazy driver releases, last I checked nVidia has been pushing out 2+ drivers a month, ATi is lucky to see monthly releases anymore.
Now, if we start calling beta drivers as "official" driver releases - than yeah, I'll defi admit that nVidia releases more drivers than ATI does.
And saying that ATI is lucky to see monthly driver releases anymore is absolutely ridiculous - and you know that, man - ATI has been following the same 1 official driver release per month schedule since, what? 2004/2005? We all know round about when the next driver is rolling out, there's no guessing or hoping involved. If there was any evidence that ATI would start cutting back to quarterly or bi-monthly driver releases, we would've seen or heard evidence of that already.
I understand there's a debate going on, but in the heat of a debate one's comments can start coming across to be very fanboish - not calling you a fanboi, newtekie1, but IMO, that quote on the driver releases very much sounded that way.
by: EastCoasthandle;764730.[/quote].[/quote]Which has 3 letters and 3 quotes in 1.
which is wrong[QUOTE=EastCoasthandle;764730]
which is wrong[QUOTE=EastCoasthandle;764730]
which is wrong.
by: imperialreign;764732Yes, but it seems as of late, that the driver releases are coming later and later in the month. We are still seeing driver releases every month though.
nVidia pushes out 2+ beta drivers a month. Usually they only have one alpha release a month. They're on par with ATI; only difference is that ATI doesn't release beta drivers left and right like nVidia does - instead, they rely heavily on feedback crews, and consumer feedback (us) for driver development. If there's an issue they're trying to resolve, we typically see either a hotfix or a beta release.
Now, if we start calling beta drivers as "official" driver releases - than yeah, I'll defi admit that nVidia releases more drivers than ATI does.
And saying that ATI is lucky to see monthly driver releases anymore is absolutely ridiculous - and you know that, man - ATI has been following the same 1 official driver release per month schedule since, what? 2004/2005? We all know round about when the next driver is rolling out, there's no guessing or hoping involved. If there was any evidence that ATI would start cutting back to quarterly or bi-monthly driver releases, we would've seen or heard evidence of that already.
I understand there's a debate going on, but in the heat of a debate one's comments can start coming across to be very fanboish - not calling you a fanboi, newtekie1, but IMO, that quote on the driver releases very much sounded that way.
As for beta driver releases, I don't care if it is beta or not, as long as it works. NVidia has come a long way in terms of keeping new drivers coming, they have come a long way from the early days of the 8800 series where they were screwing over their 7 series owners who didn't see even a beta release for months.
by: spearman914;764735
Which has 3 letters and 3 quotes in 1.
I am consistent :p but I think I said more then 3 letters :)
by: EastCoasthandle;764730No it isn't. It is well known fact that nVidia has a larger Vista market share than ATi, and in general a larger market share. The last report I saw shows nVidia having a 71% share over the descrete graphics card market(Q407 numbers).
What I addressed in your post:
which is wrong.
Newtekie1, you aren't following your own posts any more. What you posted does not explain the crashes mentioned earlier nor does it follow up that you thought it did.
by: newtekie1;764737
Yes, but it seems as of late, that the driver releases are coming later and later in the month. We are still seeing driver releases every month though.
As for beta driver releases, I don't care if it is beta or not, as long as it works. NVidia has come a long way in terms of keeping new drivers coming, they have come a long way from the early days of the 8800 series where they were screwing over their 7 series owners who didn't see even a beta release for months.
exactly the point - but we can't say that nVidia is supporting better because they release more beta drivers. beta drivers are only a means for a company to get feedback from their crews and consumers, in an attempt to release better performing, more stable drivers; and overall a better product from hardware to software - most betas aren't even supported by most manufacturers because it's not considered an "official" release.
ATI just does things differently, and their drivers are quite stable and friendly without the need for numerous beta releases. Could their drivers be better if they did go the same route? Absolutely. I firmly believe that if ATI followed the same feedback method nVidia did, ATI drivers would perform much better than they do now, and we wouldn't run into the occasional hiccup like CAT 8.3 + Crossfire.
not trying to drag this side of the debate out - just wanting to clarify so others don't get confused in the ongoing pandemoneum
by: EastCoasthandle;764743I'm not trying to explain the crashes. What I am trying to do is make people realize that you can not draw the conclusion that nVidia has worse drivers based solely on the fact that more Vista users had crashes caused by nVidia drivers.
Newtekie1, you aren't following your own posts any more. What you posted does not explain the crashes mentioned earlier nor does it follow up that you thought it did.
by: imperialreign;764744Exactly, I don't believe ATi's drivers are worse. Both have their problems, I just don't think nVidia's drivers are any worse than ATi's.
exactly the point - but we can't say that nVidia is supporting better because they release more beta drivers. beta drivers are only a means for a company to get feedback from their crews and consumers, in an attempt to release better performing, more stable drivers; and overall a better product from hardware to software - most betas aren't even supported by most manufacturers because it's not considered an "official" release.
ATI just does things differently, and their drivers are quite stable and friendly without the need for numerous beta releases. Could their drivers be better if they did go the same route? Absolutely. I firmly believe that if ATI followed the same feedback method nVidia did, ATI drivers would perform much better than they do now, and we wouldn't run into the occasional hiccup like CAT 8.3 + Crossfire.
not trying to drag this side of the debate out - just wanting to clarify so others don't get confused in the ongoing pandemoneum
by: newtekie1;764748
I'm not trying to explain the crashes. What I am trying to do is make people realize that you can not draw the conclusion that nVidia has worse drivers based solely on the fact that more Vista users had crashes caused by nVidia drivers.
Actually you did try to explain the crashes (which is the post I original responded to) and you continued to do so in the last few posts. Not only does it not make sense it didn't relate to the fact that the issues were happening.