4890X2 coming

[error8]

4890X2

It is said to be the first card with 2X8 pin power connectors. This will probably be the hottest card on earth.

 

[nemesismk2]

Yes it might be the hottest card on earth but is it the fastest card on earth?

 

[Rifter]

sweet i can save money on hydro by cooking on it insead of my stove.

 

[error8]

I would guess that it will trade blows with gtx 295. But I don't want to imagine the power consumption of this thing. Each 8 pin connector is able to give 150W , so two of them means 300 watts + the PCI Express 2.0 slot can give an extra 150 Watts. Of course that it's not going to hit 450 watts, but it will go over 300 W, which is just tremendous, in my opinion.
These cards will probably come out with a stock water cooler.

 

[theAnimal]

4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

 

[mhouck]

+1 for theAnimal. The 4890 is not as hot or as power hungry as the 4870 so the x2 version would in all likely hood be a step in the same direction.

But if it does come with a stock waterblock that's just a bonus!!:beer:

 

[BFG10K]

Originally posted by: theAnimal

4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Unless they raise the clocks from the 4890, as some rumors were suggesting a pair of 1 GHz GPUs.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
Yes it might be the hottest card on earth but is it the fastest card on earth?

Yeah! Each gpu will be HD4890OC speeds. At stock speeds it's beating GTX295.

http://i5.techpowerup.com/revi...clearsky_1680_1050.gif

http://i1.techpowerup.com/revi...s/crysis_1680_1050.gif

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images...sli-hd4890cf/fear2.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images...sli-hd4890cf/codww.png

 

[soccerballtux]

Oh SNAP. Wow.

 

[OCGuy]

Why do I have the feeling that if you have a CF board, getting 2X 4890 is going to be cheaper....

 

[mhouck]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

Anand Overclock

Compares Load and Idle and Overclocks
load 4870 1gb @ 286.6 and 4890 @ 287 =.4 watt diff. (within the margin of error)
idle 4870 1b @ 214 and 4890@ 207.7 = -6.3 watt diff

So it really is drawing basically the same amount of power under load

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: mhouck

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

Anand Overclock

Compares Load and Idle and Overclocks
load 4870 1gb @ 286.6 and 4890 @ 287 =.4 watt diff. (within the margin of error)
idle 4870 1b @ 214 and 4890@ 207.7 = -6.3 watt diff

So it really is drawing basically the same amount of power under load

Some other places have numbers showing the HD4890 using more power. THG also had it using ~30w more.
It might be AT which has the funny numbers, and not the other sites. It does seem weird though. AMD spent some transistors on power management, but that may only affect idle. Certainly it might be an idea to compare power figures from lots of websites to work out whether it really does use more power or not, because there is no complete consensus.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: mhouck

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

Anand Overclock

Compares Load and Idle and Overclocks
load 4870 1gb @ 286.6 and 4890 @ 287 =.4 watt diff. (within the margin of error)
idle 4870 1b @ 214 and 4890@ 207.7 = -6.3 watt diff

So it really is drawing basically the same amount of power under load

It doesn't make any sense for 4890 to use less power then 4870. It defies logic, because it has more transistors on to the chip, higher vcore and higher frequencies. All these on the same manufacturing process of 55 nm, no die shrink, no nothing. You can even see that the stock 4890 cooler has an extra heat pipe for better thermal transfer . So, while idle power has been reduced, since ATi dropped the core clock a lot under idle, full load power consumption is surely higher. This is just one time I can't agree with Anandtech's review.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: mhouck

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

Anand Overclock

Compares Load and Idle and Overclocks
load 4870 1gb @ 286.6 and 4890 @ 287 =.4 watt diff. (within the margin of error)
idle 4870 1b @ 214 and 4890@ 207.7 = -6.3 watt diff

So it really is drawing basically the same amount of power under load

It doesn't make any sense for 4890 to use less power then 4870. It defies logic, because it has more transistors on to the chip, higher vcore and higher frequencies. All these on the same manufacturing process of 55 nm, no die shrink, no nothing. You can even see that the stock 4890 cooler has an extra heat pipe for better thermal transfer . So, while idle power has been reduced, since ATi dropped the core clock a lot under idle, full load power consumption is surely higher. This is just one time I can't agree with Anandtech's review.

The extra transistors are for power management, and they could (through a maturing manufacturing process) possibly drop the voltages required for the speeds, resulting in equal power draw at increased clock speeds.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

What a waste of money, both for consumers and AMD.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem
What a waste of money, both for consumers and AMD.

Looks like a sweet card to me. I loved my 4870X2 and this should easily prove 15-25% faster depending on the clocks.

 

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem
What a waste of money, both for consumers and AMD.

While it's exciting to see new products launch, this was my first thought. King of the hill is a battle best fought with adequate resources and when the timing is right. I'd be surprised to see more than a couple partners invest in manufacturing it. So close to next gen, and with 4890 CF rather accessible?

 

[Tempered81]

yah 4890 CF is the best bang for buck, and makes the most sense. But this is just to earn performance crown back. And is good for people who don't have Crossfire motherboards.

 

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
yah 4890 CF is the best bang for buck, and makes the most sense. But this is just to earn performance crown back. And is good for people who don't have Crossfire motherboards.

People have non-CrossFire motherboards?

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: Hauk

Originally posted by: jaredpace
yah 4890 CF is the best bang for buck, and makes the most sense. But this is just to earn performance crown back. And is good for people who don't have Crossfire motherboards.

People have non-CrossFire motherboards?

hey c'mon! some dont.

For instance, I have a crappy mainboard without a pci-e that houses a GMA 950

 

[fffblackmage]

i dont have a xfire mobo either.

and the 4890x2 is gonna have one uber leaf blower isn't it?

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: mhouck

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

Anand Overclock

Compares Load and Idle and Overclocks
load 4870 1gb @ 286.6 and 4890 @ 287 =.4 watt diff. (within the margin of error)
idle 4870 1b @ 214 and 4890@ 207.7 = -6.3 watt diff

So it really is drawing basically the same amount of power under load

It doesn't make any sense for 4890 to use less power then 4870. It defies logic, because it has more transistors on to the chip, higher vcore and higher frequencies. All these on the same manufacturing process of 55 nm, no die shrink, no nothing. You can even see that the stock 4890 cooler has an extra heat pipe for better thermal transfer . So, while idle power has been reduced, since ATi dropped the core clock a lot under idle, full load power consumption is surely higher. This is just one time I can't agree with Anandtech's review.

The RV790 had over 1000 hand made optimizatios for higher overclockability within the same thermal envelopes as the RV770, which means that there's less leakage, resistance, hence less heat dissipation at idle or full load when is ran at same speed as the HD 4870, so it gave more room to the HD 4890 to run at higher clock speeds without increasing considerably it's TDP, something that wouldn't be possible with the HD 4870.

Originally posted by: jaredpace

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
Yes it might be the hottest card on earth but is it the fastest card on earth?

Yeah! Each gpu will be HD4890OC speeds. At stock speeds it's beating GTX295.

http://i5.techpowerup.com/revi...clearsky_1680_1050.gif

http://i1.techpowerup.com/revi...s/crysis_1680_1050.gif

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images...sli-hd4890cf/fear2.png

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images...sli-hd4890cf/codww.png

The HD 4870X2 is only slighly slower than the GTX 295 except when 8x is used, so It will be easy for the HD 4890X2 to claim the crown as the fastest videocard on earth.

 

[theAnimal]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

TDP is not power consumption. My numbers are from xbitlabs which has the 4890 using 10W less than the 4870 at load.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: theAnimal

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: theAnimal
4890 uses less power than 4870, so 4890x2 should be lower than 4870x2.

Where did you get that? It uses less power in idle over 4870, but loads at 30 Watts more. It has a TDP of 190 W, where 4870 has 160 W. link

TDP is not power consumption. My numbers are from xbitlabs which has the 4890 using 10W less than the 4870 at load.

TDP is power consumption, since all the electrical power the card sucks gets transformed into heat.