techPowerUp! Forums HD4850 Vs. 9800GTX w/AA, review inside .
 techPowerUp! Register FAQ Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 Jun 19, 2008, 10:48 AM #26 OEGUSAndy     Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 71 (0.04/day) Thanks: 8 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post 280 gtx donīt really seems to have that big muscles only 28% faster than 4850 in gaming...
 Jun 19, 2008, 10:52 AM #27 lemonadesoda Eligible for custom title     Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,347 (2.15/day) Thanks: 750 Thanked 960 Times in 710 Posts System Specs ^^ if you take the table above as the "muscle test" benchmark, then the GTX280 is 39% faster (not 28%) than the 4850. That's not insignificant, since it is a bigger improvement over the 4850 (38.7%) than the 4850 is over the 3870 (31.9%)! GTX280 >> 4850 than 4850 > 3870
 Jun 19, 2008, 11:01 AM #28 OEGUSAndy     Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 71 (0.04/day) Thanks: 8 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post ok lets do it then.. we have to transform it in 182.9 base so: 100/182.9 *100 = 54.6 => 280 has 45.4% more muscle than 3870 next is 4850: 131.9/182.9 * 100 = 72.1 => 280 has 27.9% more muscle than 4850 comparing 4850 and 3870 in base 131.9(4850 base) 100/131.9 * 100 = 75.8 => 4850 has 24.2% more muscle that 3870 GTX280 >> 4850 than 4850 > 3870 your point is correct but not really acurate because we have to utilise or 260 GTX or 4870 that woult be only fair. Andy
Jun 19, 2008, 11:26 AM   #29
DarkMatter
Banned

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,694 (0.81/day)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 188 Times in 152 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by OEGUSAndy ok lets do it then.. we have to transform it in 182.9 base so: 100/182.9 *100 = 54.6 => 280 has 45.4% more muscle than 3870 next is 4850: 131.9/182.9 * 100 = 72.1 => 280 has 27.9% more muscle than 4850 comparing 4850 and 3870 in base 131.9(4850 base) 100/131.9 * 100 = 75.8 => 4850 has 24.2% more muscle that 3870 GTX280 >> 4850 than 4850 > 3870 your point is correct but not really acurate because we have to utilise or 260 GTX or 4870 that woult be only fair. Andy
You did it wrong or must I say you interpreted it wrong. By your calculations (i.e 54.6) the HD3870 has 45.4% LESS muscle than the 280 and not the other way. Just compare 75 and 100 numbers to a baseline of 50 annd then the other way around.

100/50 * 100 = 200% >> 100 is double of 50, right.

75/50 * 100 = 150% >> and 75 is 50% more than 50, right again

50/100 * 100 = 50% >> 100 is 50% more than 50, WRONG

50/75 * 100 = 67% >> 75 is 33 % more than 50, wrong again.

EDIT: Anyway IMO both RV770 and GT200 (as well as faster G92 cards) are performing less in games than what their actual performance is. The higher you go in the stack the bigger the impact is, lesser the performance compared to it's full potential. This is because most games are using engines 5 years old!! Almost all engines used in the games are based on Doom3, Source and UE2. Even Unreal Engine 3 is very little more than a revamped UE2 really. Take into account those engines and games were created with consoles in mind that use technology almost 8 years old!! With more horsepower, with unified shaders in the case of the Xbox but rather old nonetheless.

EDIT2: Uff I exagerated a bit. I thought Radeon 9700 was of around year 2000. Sometimes the time doesn't pass as fast as we could first think, but there's been so many cards in between...

Last edited by DarkMatter; Jun 19, 2008 at 11:43 AM.

Jun 19, 2008, 11:47 AM   #30
DarkMatter
Banned

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,694 (0.81/day)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 188 Times in 152 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by lemonadesoda ^^ your wish is my command WOW. Big change in stats. LOL nvidia must be enjoying this
After a second thought, the results in fact should be the same. The difference is probably in the rounding, but WOW the difference is big. Almost 5% in the case of the GTX280!

 Jun 19, 2008, 11:55 AM #31 wolf2009 Guest   Posts: n/a (0/day) guys this is not a stats class, everything is going over my head . LOL .
Jun 19, 2008, 12:00 PM   #32
OEGUSAndy

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 71 (0.04/day)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

DarkMatter i think both are correct. It depends of the viewer. In the chart that lemonadesoda did, i would use as a baseline 280GTX as 100% then you could really see the diferencte in %. But using 3870 is the same thing only diferent perception.

Andy

Edit:
Quote:
 Originally Posted by wolf2009 guys this is not a stats class, everything is going over my head . LOL .
Youre tottaly right. We should wait one week or so and with all the data we should do it again. Then will se. Wee could do it with price performance and everyone will se it. The best worst buy

Jun 19, 2008, 12:13 PM   #33
Megasty

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Kingdom of Au
Posts: 1,209 (0.63/day)
Thanks: 76
Thanked 83 Times in 76 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by wolf2009 guys this is not a stats class, everything is going over my head . LOL .
They're just doing what NV & AMD did with their respective propaganda. Taking a baseline as the 3870 & using the other cards as a 100+ percentile over that. It doesn't work unless you use each card as a baseline & then work a percentile scale for the other cards. Trying to compare the 4850 & GTX280 from the 3870 only works in dunt-da-dunt land. I didn't spend half my life in a classroom for nothing
__________________
gods are created through gaming not 3dmark...

Comcast is great, isn't it...

 Jun 19, 2008, 12:19 PM #34 EastCoasthandle Eligible for custom title     Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 6,244 (2.09/day) Thanks: 382 Thanked 1,528 Times in 865 Posts System Specs I took the data from the 9800 GTX, Ultra, and 260 to allow for a better comparison.
 The Following User Says Thank You to EastCoasthandle For This Useful Post:
Jun 19, 2008, 12:30 PM   #35
DarkMatter
Banned

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,694 (0.81/day)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 188 Times in 152 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Megasty They're just doing what NV & AMD did with their respective propaganda. Taking a baseline as the 3870 & using the other cards as a 100+ percentile over that. It doesn't work unless you use each card as a baseline & then work a percentile scale for the other cards. Trying to compare the 4850 & GTX280 from the 3870 only works in dunt-da-dunt land. I didn't spend half my life in a classroom for nothing
I am not doing anything. I'm just correcting a conception that is inevitably wrong. As I said in the above 100 is 100% more or double of 50, 50 is 50% of 100 and/or 50% less than 100 too, 100 is NOT 50% more than 50, that's 75. Period.

Jun 19, 2008, 12:34 PM   #36
Eligible for custom title

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,347 (2.15/day)
Thanks: 750
Thanked 960 Times in 710 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Megasty I didn't spend half my life in a classroom for nothing
I think you just did. ROFL

Jun 19, 2008, 12:37 PM   #37
Megasty

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Kingdom of Au
Posts: 1,209 (0.63/day)
Thanks: 76
Thanked 83 Times in 76 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DarkMatter I am not doing anything. I'm just correcting a conception that is inevitably wrong. As I said in the above 100 is 100% more or double of 50, 50 is 50% of 100 and/or 50% less than 100 too, 100 is NOT 50% more than 50, that's 75. Period.
I'm just saying if you want to compare the 4850 & GTX280 by indexing them then use the 4850 as 100%. The first chart w/o the indexing has nothing wrong but the indexed chart is just comparing the other cards with the 3870. I'm only saying this because I made the same mistake on a research paper back in the day & the GD professor tore it up in my face

Quote:
 Originally Posted by lemonadesoda I think you just did. ROFL
My 4hr work days & my bank account says differently
__________________
gods are created through gaming not 3dmark...

Comcast is great, isn't it...

 Jun 19, 2008, 12:41 PM #38 Azazel     Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,625 (0.82/day) Thanks: 475 Thanked 166 Times in 151 Posts System Specs man..i cant wait for the 4870x2 __________________ Steam: housam92
 Jun 19, 2008, 12:42 PM #39 lemonadesoda Eligible for custom title     Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,347 (2.15/day) Thanks: 750 Thanked 960 Times in 710 Posts System Specs 1./ The 4850 "is a" 9800GTX overall, with a small +/- in any ONE game 2./ The 4850 is 31.9% faster than the 3870 3./ The GTX280 is 39.1% faster than the 4850
 The Following User Says Thank You to lemonadesoda For This Useful Post:
Jun 19, 2008, 12:43 PM   #40
Eligible for custom title

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,347 (2.15/day)
Thanks: 750
Thanked 960 Times in 710 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Megasty My 4hr work days & my bank account says differently
I believe in job sharing LOL Gimme gimme
P.S. So long as you arent in finance... that's OK... or there will probably be another banking crisis coming if you're at the helm. LOL
P.P.S. I cant believe you guys are making me recut these numbers. Nothing has changed by more than a few marginal % (less than a driver update IMO). But anyway, there you go.
Attached Files
 MUSCLE TEST.xls (22.0 KB, 134 views)

Jun 19, 2008, 12:49 PM   #41
Megasty

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Kingdom of Au
Posts: 1,209 (0.63/day)
Thanks: 76
Thanked 83 Times in 76 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by lemonadesoda 1./ The 4850 "is a" 9800GTX overall, with a small +/- in any ONE game 2./ The 4850 is 31.9% faster than the 3870 3./ The GTX280 is 39.1% faster than the 4850
...& that's the answer That 4850 is a fighter. Even if its a small sample size, the overall difference between it & the 9800GTX are nil. Increasing the number of games will only yield the same results. Everyone is going nuts over how CF is beating the GTX280 when it actually should do much better than that. It also means that CFx still scales like garbage
__________________
gods are created through gaming not 3dmark...

Comcast is great, isn't it...

 Jun 19, 2008, 12:54 PM #42 Ravenas     Join Date: May 2007 Location: Tennessee Posts: 4,020 (1.81/day) Thanks: 393 Thanked 330 Times in 256 Posts System Specs Those cards are cheap enough. Go ahead and buy 2 or 3 guys
Jun 19, 2008, 01:17 PM   #43
Disruptor4

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 190 (0.10/day)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 20 Times in 16 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by lemonadesoda Interesting test report. Here's a summary: 3./ STILL cannot play crysis at 1920x1600. OMG what's wrong with that game? LOL
Performance and scaling in Crysis is poor. Don't expect much to run it.
This is a post on another forum:
Quote:
 If they had done what they said they were going to do, Crysis would have been fine. Crysis does not run on computers 3 years old. It barely runs on computers that are 3 days old. I could put my settings on 800x600, no AA, everything low, and i would still get lag in multiplayer, with an 8800GTX and an overclocked Quad core. They failed to deliver on performance scaling and that was it's biggest downfall, because hardly anyone could play it, or would put up with the terrible frame rates with no second option. I made this sarcastic picture to send to a friend back when the BETA was on. It still holds true today:

Jun 19, 2008, 01:18 PM   #44
OEGUSAndy

Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 71 (0.04/day)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

I wonder what image will have with some mature drivers from Ati. Time will tell.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Ravenas Those cards are cheap enough. Go ahead and buy 2 or 3 guys
Not yet. I would say that the smarthest thing is to wait till August till the 4870x2 gets out and then decide.

Jun 19, 2008, 01:30 PM   #45
Megasty

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Kingdom of Au
Posts: 1,209 (0.63/day)
Thanks: 76
Thanked 83 Times in 76 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by OEGUSAndy I wonder what image will have with some mature drivers from Ati. Time will tell. Not yet. I would say that the smarthest thing is to wait till August till the 4870x2 gets out and then decide.
Never Hell its been 4 friggin months for the 3870x2 & its still getting noticeable performance increases. That PLX chip is bottlenecting the hell out of that thing. The subtle increases are coming from the drivers allowing data to move move efficiently through the PLX

The 4870x2 won't have that problem but its architecture is still an experiment which will see stupid performance increases from 2 yrs down the line
__________________
gods are created through gaming not 3dmark...

Comcast is great, isn't it...

 Jun 19, 2008, 02:50 PM #46 lemonadesoda Eligible for custom title     Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,347 (2.15/day) Thanks: 750 Thanked 960 Times in 710 Posts System Specs I'm updating the table to include the 1600x1200 results from w1z. If anyone spots any mistakes in the table, let me know. (UPDATED) GTX280 averaging 49.2% 38.7% faster than 4850. Big drop due to bizarre Quake4 results Last edited by lemonadesoda; Jun 19, 2008 at 03:15 PM.
 The Following User Says Thank You to lemonadesoda For This Useful Post:
Jun 19, 2008, 02:57 PM   #47
DarkMatter
Banned

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,694 (0.81/day)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 188 Times in 152 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by lemonadesoda I'm updating the table to include the 1600x1200 results from w1z. If anyone spots any mistakes in the table, let me know.
Hmm Wizz's results are a lot more favorable to both new cards than the other one.

EDIT: It's a lot more favorable to soposedly faster cards, not only new ones. Kind of fits with my previous claim of system bottleneck?

 Jun 19, 2008, 02:59 PM #48 yogurt_21     Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 4,058 (1.51/day) Thanks: 2,249 Thanked 542 Times in 443 Posts System Specs it seems like this will definetly be the cad to buy at 200\$ we'll see how the 4870 come in on price/performance but thus far from what I'm seeing we finally have something that beats the 8800gt in that category.
Jun 19, 2008, 03:11 PM   #49
DarkMatter
Banned

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,694 (0.81/day)
Thanks: 43
Thanked 188 Times in 152 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by yogurt_21 it seems like this will definetly be the cad to buy at 200\$ we'll see how the 4870 come in on price/performance but thus far from what I'm seeing we finally have something that beats the 8800gt in that category.
8800 GT is a lot cheaper AFAIK. The price is more on the line of the GTS, this one being overpriced due to the lack of compentence. They will come down, while I would expect Radeon prices to go up. It's a better buy at \$200 anyway if only because of the power consumption and noise. Temps are way too high on the other hand, hopefully fan speeds can be turned up easily.

Jun 19, 2008, 03:22 PM   #50
yogurt_21

Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,058 (1.51/day)
Thanks: 2,249
Thanked 542 Times in 443 Posts

System Specs

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DarkMatter 8800 GT is a lot cheaper AFAIK. The price is more on the line of the GTS, this one being overpriced due to the lack of compentence. They will come down, while I would expect Radeon prices to go up. It's a better buy at \$200 anyway if only because of the power consumption and noise. Temps are way too high on the other hand, hopefully fan speeds can be turned up easily.
price/performance ie 200\$/performance index vs the 8800gt's 170\$/performance index. thus far the 4850 easily has a better ratio.

 Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Hardware     General Hardware     Graphics Cards         NVIDIA         AMD / ATI     Overclocking & Cooling     Motherboards & Memory     System Builder's Advice     Cases, Modding & Electronics     Storage     Networking & Security     Project Logs     Audio, Video & Home Theater     Official Vendor Support & Information Forums         be quiet!         NZXT         Thermaltake Software     Games     Linux / BSD / Mac OS X     General Software     Programming & Webmastering Other     General Nonsense     Science & Technology     Folding@Home     World Community Grid (WCG)     Buy/Sell/Trade/Giveaway Forum     Hot Deals     techPowerUp! Club Forum www.techpowerup.com     Comments & Feedback     Reviews     Articles     News         TPU Frontpage Polls     Case Mod Gallery     Contests Our Software     GPU-Z         GPU-Z Test Builds         GPU-Z Translations     ATITool         ATITool Beta Area         ATITool Bug Reports     RBE     RealTemp

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post -=SNIPER=- NVIDIA 16 Mar 31, 2008 12:39 PM MikeJeng General Hardware 24 Mar 27, 2008 09:29 AM

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:47 AM.

 -- Default Style -- Lightweight Contact Us - techPowerUp! - Archive - Top