Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Apr 21, 2009.
To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/HD_4770/
I was right about the heatsink, that is the reference designed heatsink but those damned partners are tryin to cash in:shadedshu
but its really sad they won;t be using it, it looks very good and also acts as a anti flex bar, but they went the cheap route with the POS cooler, i guess if you wanna overclock em you gotta buy you own sinks.
I hope to see a CF review over these cards
Woah it beats the gts250 in some games at stock..... watch out nvidia
Damn video cards are so cheap in the US. Over here that card will have a $180 price tag
Wow... I mean, great looking card, and I'm sure driver optimizations will make it even better, but it got beat out by the 4830 in performance per watt?! And what's all this $110 nonsense on NewEgg?? I'm sure it'll drop over the next week or so, but as it stands the 4830 is still the better buy imo.
Congrats to AMD on 40nm though. I'll bet these things are pretty cheap to make too, at least compared to its bigger brother. Looking forward to seeing what aftermarket variants the AIBs come up with...
This should be a good Card, now i wonder what would happen if the 4850/4830 are released with GDDR5
Palit already has a HD 4850 with GDDR5.
I would SOOOOOOOOO buy a couple of them IF they CF ed with my 4850...
They are just GREAT!
ATI already has something called the HD4870.
End of discussion.
I didn't know they supported it on a card by card basis. Do we have a list somewhere? Or is it easy, like all 4600/4700 support two and all 4800 support up to four?
That info is specific to this card.
Thanks. After reading the review earlier this morning I started looking at other card reviews, AMD's website, and even the Crossfire wiki entry to see if other (newer) cards had that limitation.
Superb price/performance and performance/watt. Silly cooler, needs replacing for something much quieter.
I'm very much tempted. nV needs to move their stuff over to 48nm, 45nm, or 40nm to get their power usage down to compete with noise and power factors.
Is there just no official support for tri-fire and quad-fire? Any review tested that yet? Wonder why they'd leave that out -- this thing's almost as fast as the 4850.
Damn, outperforms the HD4830 and almost matchs an HD4850(and I'm sure it does match it once overclocked, not that the HD4850 can't be overclocked further).
Definitely looks like the card to replace my HD4670, once the release some with decent coolers on em that is. I'll wait for HIS to release the IceQ version, maybe they will just put on the second reference cooler and use that for the IceQ version...
AMD said: "By design, the 4770 is limited to two cards in CrossFireX".
why dont you go out and buy 4 of these cards and find out? amd will sure be happy about your $$$
Why have two crossfire fingers on the card then? Wouldn't only one be needed for crossfire between two cards?
Did the HD4670 support more than two cards?
I mean it is all kind of pointless, since crossfiring with mid-range cards doesn't really pan out cost wise, but I'm still curious.
What exactly does this mean when you list the drivers used?
ATI: Catalyst 9.1, HD 4890: 8.592.1, HD 4770: 8.60
Expreview has two 4770's topping a 4890, so it's not like anyone would be hurting with only two cards, it just seems like the perfect card for a triple Crossfire.
- It's performance would be high. You're going to 4890+ performance all/most of the time.
- The cost would be within reach of a lot of people who would buy a 4890 (especially when they start selling for $99).
- And it extends your e-peen! Which is why the above two reasons make sense to me
I'll buy two if you buy the other two and send them to me. I have a feeling it'll work.
Yes, and apparently it scaled really well, too: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=3428325#post3428325
I don't see why they wouldn't want to do it with the 4770 unless they're scared it'll cut into the profits of the 4890 or something.
Seriosuly what a shit review?
* High idle power consumption
* No architectural improvements
* Could be quieter
* Cooler on our sample does not represent the shipping product
* No support for CUDA / PhysX
No support for CUDA? / PhysX , oh come on! what you'd expect? It's ATi not nVidia and PhysX is nVidia only , also the list with physx support is so small it's even not important anymore . It's like when reviewing a nVidia card you say: It doesn't support AVIVO. Geez...
* Dual slot cooler
When the HD4850 was released everybody was complaining about how hot the card was and that it would be bad for the card to get that warm. Now AMD listened to their customers and they placed a bigger cooler and now you're complaining about the size?
Again a shit negative point
800 MHz GDDR5? Does anybody even make such slow chips?".
I though it was a bit slow for gddr5 then I saw the OC results ... holy crap.
AMD and ATI are freely allowed to use CUDA but they refuse to. Hence its a negative point.
There are still people out there that frown on dual-slot coolers.
The HD4850 needed a dual slot cooler, the single slot cooler was simply not enough to keep the core, memory, and vregs cool. This card does not need a dual-slot cooler, the core runs much cooler, the memory doesn't even need cooling, and the vregs don't need cooling either.
Separate names with a comma.