• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Radeon HD 4850 X2 Priced at $399, Claims to Outperform GTX 280

isn't this old news ?

I remember seeing those charts on 4870x2 more than a month ago
 
All the mods for oblivion use more than 512. The new Stalker, and who knows what newer games may use more?
 
wolf2009 said:
isn't this old news ?

I remember seeing those charts on 4870x2 more than a month ago
Click to expand...

Yeah, its not exactly new but from everything thats been said (which isnt much) these should actually be out this month.
 
wolf2009 said:
isn't this old news ?

I remember seeing those charts on 4870x2 more than a month ago
Click to expand...

This is a 4850x2......

Are you saying its the same charts rebadged?
 
TRIPTEX_MTL said:
You should remember that running 2 4850s in crossfire would still only equal a 512mb frame buffer/GPU. The 4850x2 is sharing 2Gb so in effect it gets a 1Gb frame buffer/GPU.

You would have to buy 2 x 4850 1Gb with dual slot coolers to rival the efficiency here.
Click to expand...
Bah -- any card with a 256bit bus and only GDDR3 doesn't seem to really benefit from having more than 512MB of RAM, at least from what I've seen from reviews and benchmarks. Once they get up to 1900x1200 (or whatever) and beyond, they perform the same as cards with only 512MB of RAM on a 256bit bus. I've seen the same thing form the 3850 1GB's and the 8800GT 1GB's.

(In converse, the 4870's GDDR5 paired with a 256-bit bus is very efficient at high resolutions, but that GDDR5 is expensive as hell. :p)

Maybe stuff's different now -- it's been a while since I really noticed in reviews. Maybe with newer GDDR3 clocked really, really high it might be different -- any reviews show this?
 
mdm-adph said:
Maybe with newer GDDR3 clocked really, really high it might be different -- any reviews show this?
Click to expand...

Thats what I am thinking. I can't find any proof to the assumption that it will benefit from it. :confused:
 
DaedalusHelios said:
Thats what I am thinking. I can't find any proof to the assumption that it will benefit from it. :confused:
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm sure it will benefit -- by having increased sales! :laugh:
 
mdm-adph said:
Bah -- any card with a 256bit bus and only GDDR3 doesn't seem to really benefit from having more than 512MB of RAM, at least from what I've seen from reviews and benchmarks. Once they get up to 1900x1200 (or whatever) and beyond, they perform the same as cards with only 512MB of RAM on a 256bit bus. I've seen the same thing form the 3850 1GB's and the 8800GT 1GB's.

(In converse, the 4870's GDDR5 paired with a 256-bit bus is very efficient at high resolutions, but that GDDR5 is expensive as hell. :p)

Maybe stuff's different now -- it's been a while since I really noticed in reviews. Maybe with newer GDDR3 clocked really, really high it might be different -- any reviews show this?
Click to expand...


The 4850 1Gb review I saw showed little improvement over the 512mb version. So from what I've read you are right. I'm just banking on the hope that AMD/ATI wouldnt pack the RAM on this card just for giggles.
 
wolf2009 said:
no I'm saying AMD showed these charts for 4850x2 when 4870x2 was launched .
Click to expand...

Those were GTX 280 vs 4870 X2, with a different y axis.
 
OOOPS my fingers got in teh way, shoulda read GTS'. Thought I saw then for 120$, hmmm
 
Anyways, we will see, as newer games will use alot of memory, like stalker, and even older oblivion mods. This is obviously aimed at higher res tho. Look at the dropoff with the 4850 at higher res.
 
Having 2 cores should help, actually use that 1 gig, otherwise, ATI wouldnt have released the 4870x2 with 1 gig, theyd have gone with 512.
 
jaydeejohn said:
Having 2 cores should help, actually use that 1 gig, otherwise, ATI wouldnt have released the 4870x2 with 1 gig, theyd have gone with 512.
Click to expand...

The 4870X2 uses GDDR5 -- it's fine with 1GB on a 256-bit bus.
 
So 320 or 384 or 448 isnt effective on GDDR3? Or only 256? Or 512, as in the 2900? Id need links to show that you need GDDR5 in order to effectively use it on 256 vs GDDR3. And thtad also have to be done on the new 4xxx series as well. Like someone said, we will have to see the benchmarks before we start guessing
 
jaydeejohn said:
So 320 or 384 or 448 isnt effective on GDDR3? Or only 256? Or 512, as in the 2900? Id need links to show that you need GDDR5 in order to effectively use it on 256 vs GDDR3. And thtad also have to be done on the new 4xxx series as well. Like someone said, we will have to see the benchmarks before we start guessing
Click to expand...

No -- 320, 384, or 448-bit is very effective with more than 512-bit of GDDR3 -- nobody said otherwise. :P

But yeah, we need some performance charts -- maybe ATI pulled it off (GDDR3 with 256-bit bus). They've always been slightly better with "memory management at high resolutions" (or at least that's what reviews are always saying ;)).
 
TRIPTEX_MTL said:
The 4850 1Gb review I saw showed little improvement over the 512mb version. So from what I've read you are right. I'm just banking on the hope that AMD/ATI wouldnt pack the RAM on this card just for giggles.
Click to expand...

I also saw a review somewhere of the in game performance of a 1GB 4850 vs a 512mb version and yes there was very little difference in average frame through the resolutions.
 
Widjaja said:
I also saw a review somewhere of the in game performance of a 1GB 4850 vs a 512mb version and yes there was very little difference in average frame through the resolutions.
Click to expand...

You were probably looking at Age of Conan benches. I bet Crysis would eat as much resources as possible aswell. :)
 
Dont forget the better plx chip used in the new 4xxx series x2s. That will have the desired effect, tho Im guessing here
 
jaydeejohn said:
Dont forget the better plx chip used in the new 4xxx series x2s. That will have the desired effect, tho Im guessing here
Click to expand...

I remember reading that "sideport" was disabled though.;)

Will it make a difference in performance? I have no idea.:confused:
 
Last edited:
Theres been rumors about activation, and it isnt disabled as much as not being used. But Im talking about the higher /better plx chip, which is being used, and why it helps in x2 cards
 
ATi has definately made a comeback worth of praise and glory ............... they nailed Nvidia current gen cards into their coffins for a fact .
 
zOaib said:
ATi has definately made a comeback worth of praise and glory ............... they nailed Nvidia current gen cards into their coffins for a fact .
Click to expand...

Competition is what its called to go back and forth with the best value.

If AMD doesn't start profiting and paying off its debts, ATi will fall within it in bankruptsy. Thats the real coffin.

I hope they start being more competitive in their other markets or there will be no competition whatsoever when AMD falls. :(

Its good ATi is getting a bigger piece of the pie, but AMD is eating it, not ATi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top