-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
raedon 4770......4870.....gts 250....
- Thread starter JEDIYoda
- Start date
JEDIYoda
Lifer
I am looking to purchase a video card.
Why does it seem like spec wise the 4770 is equal to the 4870 and the gts 250 is possibly a better card?
My system is...
AMD Phenom ll X4 940 processor 3.0 Ghz
6 GB RAM
I presently have a raedon HD 4650 that came with the computer. I am not happy at all with the Video card. I am getting under 70 fps in Quake Live and in the near future I will be venturing into other games.
With my old system I was getting 125 fps...with a Geforce 7300....my old system was a p4 EE.
Any suggestions would be appreciated!!
Why does it seem like spec wise the 4770 is equal to the 4870 and the gts 250 is possibly a better card?
My system is...
AMD Phenom ll X4 940 processor 3.0 Ghz
6 GB RAM
I presently have a raedon HD 4650 that came with the computer. I am not happy at all with the Video card. I am getting under 70 fps in Quake Live and in the near future I will be venturing into other games.
With my old system I was getting 125 fps...with a Geforce 7300....my old system was a p4 EE.
Any suggestions would be appreciated!!
what games? only quake live? i just recently went from a 7750BE w/ 4830 to a 940BE w/ 4890 and all i can say is wow, my 4830 was fine for all older games but the newer ones at high res and high settings it really struggles such as crysis, fallout 3 etc. I wanted to run with AA though it did ok without the AA. Now i can chew through crysis at 1080P high detail and dont notice it slow down. Also i can now rip apart all the older valve games L4D, HL2, TF2, CSS with 4-8xAA. Also was res? if you play at below 1080P with low or no AA i would stick with a 4770/4850/GTS250 as a $100 card will do fine at lower res, if you game at higher res i would go with a 1GB 4870/4890/GTS260/GTS275. If you want something thats going to last a few years and play all new games at high settings you will have to look to a crossfire/SLI solution with 4890's or GTS 275's. Thats said 4770 crossfire is a good solution right now, i was going to go that way but decided on the faster single GPU solution and got a 4890.
BTW the 4770 is between the 4830 and 4850 in most games, the 4870 still usually beats it unless we are talking in crossfire, for some reason the 4770 scales really well in crossfire from what i have seen.
BTW the 4770 is between the 4830 and 4850 in most games, the 4870 still usually beats it unless we are talking in crossfire, for some reason the 4770 scales really well in crossfire from what i have seen.
masteryoda34
Golden Member
4870 has more shaders and more / faster memory.
4870 is definately better than GTS 250.
4870 is definately better than GTS 250.
Spike
Diamond Member
To my knowledge those three cards would go 4870 > GTS 250 > 4770. The 4770 is a great card but hard to find right now and kinda pricey, the 4850 is just about the same price and faster though it is loud and hot. The 4870 1GB can normally be found in the $150 range (I believe) and is a great gaming card. It will handle any major games out right now at very nice res. If your a green fan check out th GTS 260 core 216 for similar performance at a similar price.
fffblackmage
Platinum Member
spec-wise, the 4770=/=4870. not even close. If anything, the 4770 is much more like the 4830. Same number of SP, but clocked higher. Memory bandwidth is somewhat similar as well. Reason for that is because the 4770 uses 128-bit gddr5 (4 bits per clock cycle), and the 4830 uses 256-bit gddr3 (2 bits per clock cycle). Freq is a bit different, but is still fairly similar.
Like masteryoda34 says, the 4870 is faster than the gts250, and the 4770/4830 as well.
Like masteryoda34 says, the 4870 is faster than the gts250, and the 4770/4830 as well.
Sylvanas
Diamond Member
hans030390
Diamond Member
Wait...the Geforce 7300 was faster in Quake Live than your HD 4650? 😕
The 4770 performs better than the GTS 250 at 1920x1080 or higher, worse at less than 1680x1050, and about the same at 1680x1050. The 4770 is cheaper, cooler, and uses less power. Therefore, if its between those two you should get the 4770 unless your resolution is below 1680x1050 in which case its a close call and you could go either way. The 4870 is a jump up from either but also cost 20-30 dollars more for 512mb. The gtx 260 216 is very close in performance to the 4870 512 mb but it has a slight edge. The 4870 1gb has the edge on the 260 216. I'm just gonna stop there.
TurtleCrusher
Lifer
Unless you have proof, it truly didn't happen. A 4650 is lightyears ahead of the 7300. And your Phenom makes your FPS that much better compared to any P4 EE.
MegaWorks
Diamond Member
frozentundra123456
Lifer
Agreed, the 4650 should be faster than a 7300.
I have a 4650. I am not that pleased with the card because it does not overclock worth a c***, but it should be much, much faster than a GeForce 7300.
Either the 4650 is not working properly (driver issues???), or the card you are comparing it to must be something better than a 7300.
I have a 4650. I am not that pleased with the card because it does not overclock worth a c***, but it should be much, much faster than a GeForce 7300.
Either the 4650 is not working properly (driver issues???), or the card you are comparing it to must be something better than a 7300.
MrK6
Diamond Member
I don't think Quake live would stress either card (7300 or 4650). It's probably a driver-related issue (maybe directly related to the plug-in, who knows), and reflects some difference in NVIDIA vs. ATI drivers. That said, if the 4650 isn't playing other games well I'd suggest moving up to a 4770. It's within 5% performance of the GTS 250 and uses about half the power, nevermind that it's cheaper and overclocks like mad.
forget all that, just get the 4850 for $75AR onsale here: http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2306256&enterthread=y
evolucion8
Platinum Member
Let me put this in a simplistic way, HD 4870 is faster than the HD 4850 which is faster than the HD 4770 which trade blows with the GTS250.
BenSkywalker
Diamond Member
You know what Quake Live is, right? Athlon 1.3GHZ. Yeah, a P4 could hit 125fps, actually, probably the slowest P4 ever made could. Heh, was curious so I looked that up too- the slowest P4 ever can push almost 200fps. The video card used for the P4 test is a GeForce2. A 7300 may be a joke by today's standards, but it will handily whip a GF2 senseless with ease.
Yea, Quake Live should in no way stress a modern CPU/videocard.
The grahpics and animation are really simplistic for modern standards.
Perhaps you have vsync enabled? That way you can never get a framerate higher than the refreshrate of your screen. Most screens have a refreshrate between 60 and 75 Hz, which would mean you never got over 75 fps.
Doesn't mean the card can't go faster.
As already said, a Radeon 4650 should be much faster than a GeForce 7300. So either it's vsync enabled, or you are having some kind of driver/software problems.
It can't be the Radeon 4650 itself, it's not the fastest card in the world, but it's not THAT slow.
The grahpics and animation are really simplistic for modern standards.
Perhaps you have vsync enabled? That way you can never get a framerate higher than the refreshrate of your screen. Most screens have a refreshrate between 60 and 75 Hz, which would mean you never got over 75 fps.
Doesn't mean the card can't go faster.
As already said, a Radeon 4650 should be much faster than a GeForce 7300. So either it's vsync enabled, or you are having some kind of driver/software problems.
It can't be the Radeon 4650 itself, it's not the fastest card in the world, but it's not THAT slow.
As stated earlier what bout the 4890? I mean surely that should be a contender given its current price? with that said if its not a contender why not? and should people rather be saving their money and waiting for summin else or whats the deal? and im asking bcoz im very interested and am in the process of buying one for R2700 (South Africa), should i rather be patient and wait for the next gen or should i grab one while i can 🙂
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: 25K
-
-
-
