Yeah they may be a bit over hyped but at least they still have the potential to do something important, whereas dx10.1 is a total bust and will be quickly passed over in favour of dx11.
Yeah they may be a bit over hyped but at least they still have the potential to do something important, whereas dx10.1 is a total bust and will be quickly passed over in favour of dx11.
bryanW1995
Lifer
- May 22, 2007
- 11,144
- 32
- 91
How do the XFX 4890 and GTX 275 compare with sapphire, asus, msi,etc? I'm thinking about getting one of these:
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ShowWishList.jsp
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ShowWishList.jsp
bryanW1995
Lifer
- May 22, 2007
- 11,144
- 32
- 91
4890 is under $200 in hot deals section right now. Haven't seen any gtx 275 deals, they probably won't go on sale until/unless more of them become available.
i7 920 @ 3.8GHz. Running on Intel 64GB X25-E SSD, (and a 120GB OCZ Vertex SSD for the pagefile), 6GB DDR1600 RAM. Could I be CPU limited? Maybe, but SLI performance shouldn't be like this IMO. At worst it should be equal, not worse, yet have a higher "framerate" on counter.
I haven't tested lower resolutions, but I really would like to stick to native res.
dug777
Lifer
- Oct 13, 2004
- 24,778
- 4
- 0
I disagree.
Just like DX10.1, they have the potential to do something important. Just like DX10.1, I think they are likely to be passed over (or ported) for the wide adoption of standards that will work with both ATI and Nvidia cards.
It's never going to be a smart business model to shut-out ATI or Nvidia card users for any length of time, hence the inevitability of both circumstances.
EDIT: in deference to the OP, who has already said that he doesn't care about either of these three issues, this will be the last post I make on this matter in this thread
Sounds like microstutter, have you tried turning on vsync or increasing the number of prerendered frames in the driver?
So the 4890 would be the best to get at 1680x1050? What kind of settings would I get with the XFX or the MSI? Which would be better?
there would be no difference in brand if the clock speeds are the same. Board partners such as XFX and MSI usually build their cards the way the designers (ATI/Nvidia) have blueprinted them. Unless you find an overclocked version brand doesn't really make a difference in terms of performance. If I were you I'd look at warranty and service policies and/or bundled software
What are the differences between these 2:
https://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp...p?ProductCode=10010262
https://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp...p?ProductCode=10010263
https://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp...p?ProductCode=10010262
https://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp...p?ProductCode=10010263
Spike
Diamond Member
- Aug 27, 2001
- 6,770
- 1
- 81
As far as I can tell the cheaper one has a core clock of 850 while the slightly more expensive has a core of 875. I would personally get the cheaper once since you are almost guaranteed to be able to oc that measly 25mhz on your own. Most likely you will be able to push 950 or even more though that is not for certain.
850 core is the manufacturer specified "stock" clock speeds. It's the way the board/chip was designed to run, and in theory has the best balance between performance-heat-power consumption.
Overclocking used to be a pastime of mine, but lately I've been pretty reluctant to push clock speeds on graphics cards, especially on ATI cards because they already run so hot. Higher temps means decreased lifespan, which depending on your upgrade cycle may or may not last you until your next intended upgrade time. I'd just get one with 850 core and look for lowest price or best warranty policy.
Overclocking used to be a pastime of mine, but lately I've been pretty reluctant to push clock speeds on graphics cards, especially on ATI cards because they already run so hot. Higher temps means decreased lifespan, which depending on your upgrade cycle may or may not last you until your next intended upgrade time. I'd just get one with 850 core and look for lowest price or best warranty policy.
cusideabelincoln
Diamond Member
- Aug 3, 2008
- 3,275
- 46
- 91
cusideabelincoln
Diamond Member
- Aug 3, 2008
- 3,275
- 46
- 91
What...?
Techpowerup: HD4890 faster than the GTX275.
Computerbase: HD4890 is faster than the GTX275 w/high AA settings.
Anandtech: HD4890 slightly faster than the GTX275.
Firingsquad: HD4890 is faster.
In no tests was the HD4890 slower than the GTX260. And even in one of your benchmarks, the hardwarecanucks one, the HD4890 has better minimum framerates in DX10 w/AA. I'm just not seeing this claimed coup. The cards are, at the very least, about as equal as you can get across a variety of games.
No, I didn't build a $4,000 system just to lower my graphical details...and lots of people indicate the "fix" of reducing texture sizes isn't working for them anyway.
Let's put it this way, if you have to go to a lower resolution or texture size (which are essentially the same thing) to make SLI run, then single card performance would be satisfactory at those settings to start with...thus the reason I dumped one of the cards and am waiting for GT300. Now before you say anything about the amount of money I spent...most of my system cost was sunk into fairly long-term hardware so waiting for the next GPU isn't a terribly failing financial proposition.
Spike
Diamond Member
- Aug 27, 2001
- 6,770
- 1
- 81
It will play the game almost maxed out with smooth frame rates.
As for your core question yes, 850 is fine. With the 4890 the core actually runs cooler than the 4870 so pushing the card up to 950 or even 1000 (if you have a lucky core) is not out of the question.
evolucion8
Platinum Member
- Jun 17, 2005
- 2,867
- 3
- 81
Wrong, games like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky, Tom Clancy's HAWX, BattleForge, Stormrise, Cloud 9 and even Assassin Creed for example, got between 18% and 25% of performance improvements when Anti Aliasing was used, and that can make the difference between playability and unplayability along with the eye candy. DX10.1 also supports real time global illumination which cannot be implemented in real time with DX10.0, it can use some tricks through driver query, but the time that the vendor removes them, it won't work anymore.
But that the 1GB version which has only 512MB for each GPU, and that's not enough for high resolutions with lots of anti aliasing.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter