HD4770 512MB now or 1GB later?

[bupkus]

I got the go-ahead from my nephew to buy him an HD4770 to replace his failed 7900gt but I recently read that if you CF two 4770s you should look to the 1GB models.

The problem in deciding is the possibility that he will replace his failing 19" CRT with an LCD in the near. Since most of these LCD sweet spots ($/acreage) fall into about 22" screens I'm wondering if an upgrade path is the smart plan.
Of course, he doesn't currently have a CF mobo but a new system just may not be too far off, especially if he finds a new game to justify the move.

Which begs the questions:
1. how important will the 1GB model be for CF and
2. how long before the 1GB 4770 makes it's debut and at what price?

 

[fffblackmage]

I don't think the 4770 1GB version in xfire will make too big of a difference at 1680x1050 resolution.

You could always get the 4770 for now, and get another one for xfire once you make the move to a new comp.

 

[Stoneburner]

I would also like to know when the 1gb models would come out.

This is a massive pain in the ass. First I was going to buy a 4670 for my HTPC. Then i saw the 4770 was coming. Then the 4770 is released and I decide to wait for the exhaust cooler design. Somebody finds xfx exhaust cooler 4770's on mwave, but then I decide to wait for the 1gb model. ANd how about factory overclocked?

 

[Modular]

You can wait and wait and wait for tech. And then you can keep waiting. At some point, you have to make a decision and just be happy with it.

 

[jiffylube1024]

For 1680x1050 (22") the 512MB is totally fine. If you plan on getting a 24" (1920x1200), it's probably best to wait for the 1GB version.

 

[Rifter]

PULL THE TRIGGER 🙂 You can wait and wait and there will always be something better just around the corner. I mean really yeah in month or two Factory OC 1 GB 4770's will be out, then a few months from that the DX 11 cards will be out as well as newer 40nm ATI chips, then after that you will see factory OC and non referance cooler DX 11 cards and so on and so forth it never ends

 

[MrK6]

The problem with the 4770 1GB is that it's small memory bus is still going to cripple it. If they released overclocked versions of the card with at least 1GHz chips (~64GB/s bandwidth) that might make a 1GB version viable, as overclocked to 1.1GHz+ would be yield at least 70GB/s+ bandwidth. However, below these speeds you're still going to see the card crippled when using higher resolutions or lots of AA. While more capacity will alleviate stuttering and some performance issues, FPS will still tank when the card can't deal with the memory requirements of the resolution. I'd personally just grab the 4770 512MB for now and upgrade to a better single GPU later if it's necessary.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: Modular
You can wait and wait and wait for tech. And then you can keep waiting. At some point, you have to make a decision and just be happy with it.

At some point a manufacturer has to release the product I actually want to buy, and then we can both be happy.

Sapphire's 4870 1GB with the huge cooler for under $200 comes immediately to my mind.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814102801

They produced a card with excellent thermals, it exhausts at least part of the heat produced outside of my case, delivered it for a good price, and it is nearly completely silent. I get the card I wanted all along and Sapphire gets a sale.

 

[Valis]

When is ATI coming out with a bigger version of the 4770-chip (RV740)? Say with 256-bit bus and some more bite.

 

[solofly]

For resolutions 1680x1050/1600x1200 and up I recommend a 1GB video card. Two years ago I would tell you 512 is enough but today that ain't so...

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: solofly
For resolutions 1680x1050/1600x1200 and up I recommend a 1GB video card. Two years ago I would tell you 512 is enough but today that ain't so...

Based on recent benchmarks, I would have to disagree and say that 512MB is plenty for 1680x1050 and is even fine for a lot of games at 1920x1200.

Take a look at the numbers in the recent AnandTech ATI Radeon HD 4890 vs. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275 review.

Age of Conan - 1680x1050 - 4xAA - Highest Quality
39.5 FPS - 4870 1GB
39.1 FPS - 4870 512MB

Age of Conan - 1920x1200 - 4xAA - Highest Quality
36.0 FPS - 4870 1GB
35.9 FPS - 4870 512MB

Age of Conan - 2560x1600 - 4xAA - Highest Quality
26.0 FPS - 4870 1GB
25.5 FPS - 4870 512MB

No appreciable difference in framerates between 512MB 4870 and 1GB 4870, even out to 2560x1600. This shows that there was no lack of VRAM buffer, otherwise framerates would have dropped significantly at some point between the two cards.

Call of Duty World at War - 1680x1050 - 4xAA - Gamer (Enthusiast Shaders)
61.0 FPS - 4870 1GB
60.8 FPS - 4870 512MB

Call of Duty World at War - 1920x1200 - 4xAA - Gamer (Enthusiast Shaders)
50.2 FPS - 4870 1GB
50.4 FPS - 4870 512MB

Call of Duty World at War - 2560x1600 - 4xAA - Gamer (Enthusiast Shaders)
33.2 FPS - 4870 1GB
30.8 FPS - 4870 512MB

Same here.

Crysis Warhead - 1680x1050 - 4xAA
33.3 FPS - 4870 1GB
30.7 FPS - 4870 512MB

Crysis Warhead - 1920x1200 - 4xAA
27.9 FPS - 4870 1GB
26.2 FPS - 4870 512MB

Crysis Warhead - 2560x1600 - 4xAA
18.0 FPS - 4870 1GB
16.2 FPS - 4870 512MB

And here.

Fallout 3 - 1680x1050 - 4xAA 16xAF - Ultra (custom)
55.5 FPS - 4870 1GB
52.8 FPS - 4870 512MB

Fallout 3 - 1920x1200 - 4xAA 16xAF - Ultra (custom)
52.1 FPS - 4870 1GB
49.3 FPS - 4870 512MB

Fallout 3 - 2560x1600 - 4xAA 16xAF - Ultra (custom)
41.3 FPS - 4870 1GB
25.9 FPS - 4870 512MB

Aaahhh... Now here we can see the clear sign of a video card running out of VRAM. Suddenly the framerate on the 512MB 4870 dropped to 25.9 FPS whereas the 1GB model was still at 41.3 FPS. But that's only at 2560x1600. This clearly shows that even at 1920x1200, 512MB of VRAM was plenty for this game.

FarCry 2 - 1680x1050 - 4xAA DX10 - Ultra Quality
37.8 FPS - 4870 1GB
31.3 FPS - 4870 512MB

FarCry 2 - 1920x1200 - 4xAA DX10 - Ultra Quality
35.5 FPS - 4870 1GB
29.2 FPS - 4870 512MB

FarCry 2 - 2560x1600 - 4xAA DX10 - Ultra Quality
25.4 FPS - 4870 1GB
8.5 FPS - 4870 512MB

I'm not quite sure what to make of this one. At 1680x1050 and 1920x1200, the 512MB 4870 is consistently around 6 FPS slower than the 1GB model, which could lead you to suspect that it was VRAM limited right from the get-go. But when you look at 2560x1600, you clearly see the telltale VRAM limitation framerate dropoff. The 1GB 4870 is still at 25.4 FPS while the 512MB 4870 tanks at only 8.5 FPS. So I would have to conclude that the VRAM ran out at 2560x1600, just as it did in Fallout 3.

Left 4 Dead - 1680x1050 - Highest Quality
87.4 FPS - 4870 1GB
86.5 FPS - 4870 512MB

Left 4 Dead - 1920x1200 - Highest Quality
74.0 FPS - 4870 1GB
73.2 FPS - 4870 512MB

Left 4 Dead - 2560x1600 - Highest Quality
46.9 FPS - 4870 1GB
46.0 FPS - 4870 512MB

No real change between both cards all the way up.

Race Driver GRID - 1680x1050 - 4xAA - Highest Quality
83.6 FPS - 4870 1GB
83.1 FPS - 4870 512MB

Race Driver GRID - 1920x1200 - 4xAA - Highest Quality
73.5 FPS - 4870 1GB
72.8 FPS - 4870 512MB

Race Driver GRID - 2560x1600 - 4xAA - Highest Quality
51.2 FPS - 4870 1GB
40.4 FPS - 4870 512MB

Once again, we see a dramatic drop in framerates between the two at 2560x1600 that we can attribute to lack of VRAM.


Obviously this is only a selection of a few games/settings. But the picture it's painting is that 512MB is plenty good for 1680x1050 and will probably handle most games at 1920x1200 as well. Even 2560x1600 isn't showing any difference between a 1GB and 512MB card in a number of games.

I would imagine that there are probably a few games/settings combinations at 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 that would go over the 512MB limit. But 512MB still seems to be going pretty strong.

 

[Stoneburner]

Nice post Creig. Because I ordered a 4770 from ewiz and I had preordred one from amazon, I have two 4770's coming. This is for use on a 1080p screen (HTPC). I may as well crossfire and see what it can do 🙂

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: Valis
When is ATI coming out with a bigger version of the 4770-chip (RV740)? Say with 256-bit bus and some more bite.

The HD4850 was released long before the HD4770, and it has both of what you are asking for. It was the HD 4770 that was late, not the card you are asking for (which has been around for a while now.)

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Valis
When is ATI coming out with a bigger version of the 4770-chip (RV740)? Say with 256-bit bus and some more bite.

The HD4850 was released long before the HD4770, and it has both of what you are asking for. It was the HD 4770 that was late, not the card you are asking for (which has been around for a while now.)

he probably is asking for a 40nm higher clocked version of the 4850 though.

 

[solofly]

Benchmarks only tell you half of the story. I load up a game, set it to its MAX and then I play it. Some games feel smoother than the others and benchmarks could tell you otherwise. I prefer practice over theory...

 

[Creig]

Originally posted by: solofly
Benchmarks only tell you half of the story. I load up a game, set it to its MAX and then I play it. Some games feel smoother than the others and benchmarks could tell you otherwise. I prefer practice over theory...

But unless you're pulling out a 512MB card and putting back in the same model with 1GB, you can't really say for sure if it was the lack of VRAM causing your gameplay issues or something else, possibly even the game itself.

 

[Valis]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Valis
When is ATI coming out with a bigger version of the 4770-chip (RV740)? Say with 256-bit bus and some more bite.

The HD4850 was released long before the HD4770, and it has both of what you are asking for. It was the HD 4770 that was late, not the card you are asking for (which has been around for a while now.)

he probably is asking for a 40nm higher clocked version of the 4850 though.

Yeah, I am, also the lower power consumption that the 40nm shows. Also seeing since it's only using 128-bits mem bus there could be some performance gain to be had here.

(I have a 4850 already, it's a killer card TBH for the price) It's just that a 256-bit 4770 and some tweaks could be faster and consume less power for a small mini-tower PC I have, that can only take a gfx card with single slot cooler. (well you know the story).

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Valis

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: Valis
When is ATI coming out with a bigger version of the 4770-chip (RV740)? Say with 256-bit bus and some more bite.

The HD4850 was released long before the HD4770, and it has both of what you are asking for. It was the HD 4770 that was late, not the card you are asking for (which has been around for a while now.)

he probably is asking for a 40nm higher clocked version of the 4850 though.

Yeah, I am, also the lower power consumption that the 40nm shows. Also seeing since it's only using 128-bits mem bus there could be some performance gain to be had here.

(I have a 4850 already, it's a killer card TBH for the price) It's just that a 256-bit 4770 and some tweaks could be faster and consume less power for a small mini-tower PC I have, that can only take a gfx card with single slot cooler. (well you know the story).

We all agree. But the waiting game is terrible.

 

[nyker96]

i think the answer is easy one. if you plan to xfire, the 1gb will make a huge difference. from benchmarks, this card is mem starved at xfire config. but considering how 4850s with 1gb don't help single card config, if you just staying with single card, i doubt you will see much benefit from extra ram.