• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

June 2008: Battleground for PC Graphics - Geforce GTX 200 v Radeon HD 4800

godhandiscen said:
DX10 very high?

I'll get Vista 64 installed in the next week or two, maybe this weekend. I do have a license but it isn't installed right now.

My bigger concern at the moment is getting my LPCM surround working.

Interestingly I used the auto-tune and overclocked the system substantially (690 GPU, 1168 RAM), but Crysis didn't really run any faster on high. Must be hitting some bottleneck.
 
beermonkey@tehbias said:
I'll get Vista 64 installed in the next week or two, maybe this weekend. I do have a license but it isn't installed right now.

My bigger concern at the moment is getting my LPCM surround working.

Interestingly I used the auto-tune and overclocked the system substantially (690 GPU, 1168 RAM), but Crysis didn't really run any faster on high. Must be hitting some bottleneck.
Could you try the DMC4 demo bench?
 
zoku88 said:
very high? Doesn't it say low, medium, and high there?
I read the chart wrong. Also, BeerMonkey, why dont you try Very High?

edit: Ahh you dont have Vista yet. Ok.
 
Vic said:
Could you try the DMC4 demo bench?

OK, give me a bit.

I don't think ATI Overdrive is actually keeping my higher clock settings after the test, so I don't think I've really tested Crysis overclocked yet. Not a big deal to me, though.
 
beermonkey@tehbias said:
OK, give me a bit.

I don't think ATI Overdrive is actually keeping my higher clock settings after the test, so I don't think I've really tested Crysis overclocked yet. Not a big deal to me, though.
When you go back, do you actually see that your settings remain the same?
 
godhandiscen said:
When you go back, do you actually see that your settings remain the same?

The bottom boxes with the 'current' settings don't get updated even after the test succeeds and I tell it to apply the settings.
 
beermonkey@tehbias said:
The bottom boxes with the 'current' settings don't get updated even after the test succeeds and I tell it to apply the settings.
The bottom boxes never get updated. When you see overdrive you are in desktop mode, so thats why you see that. If you are right though, then maybe the boxes did get updated in 8.5 because I just updated to 8.6 and it shows the same to me.
 
godhandiscen said:
The GTX200b series will hit in early 2009 and that could turn things around. .

is the 200b supposed to be a "GTX280 Ultra" of some sorts or will this be a refresh of what we have now?
 
Vic said:
Could you try the DMC4 demo bench?

Since my TV can never go over 60fps, I turned on vsync and ran it at max settings (8x MSAA, Super High shadows, Super High textures, etc). Remember, this is 720p.

It ran a perfect 60fps, the line on the chart never wavered and each scene averaged 60fps.

Of course it gave me a 'B' rank and said I might want to upgrade. :lol

I'm running it again without vsync just to see what the averages are for each scene.

godhandiscen said:
The bottom boxes never get updated. When you see overdrive you are in desktop mode, so thats why you see that. If you are right though, then maybe the boxes did get updated in 8.5 because I just updated to 8.6 and it shows the same to me.

Desktop mode, that makes sense.

I'm going to do a 3DMark 06 at both standard and overclocked speeds.
 
mr stroke said:
is the 200b supposed to be a "GTX280 Ultra" of some sorts or will this be a refresh of what we have now?

Its a die shrink to 55nm. Whether Nvidia choose to increase clocks or tweak the architecture remains to be seen.
 
bathala said:
dammit very tempting with my PSU shipped also I'm all set.

but the cooling/temperature is worrying me. cuz some brands have good cooling

All of the launch cards use the same reference design and the same cooler.
 
mr stroke said:
is the 200b supposed to be a "GTX280 Ultra" of some sorts or will this be a refresh of what we have now?
I dont know, but my bet is just a refresh. Nvidia right now is being pressured because for the first time in 2 years they are not in the lead. So this refresh could be rushed or something. By then ATI will also have something up to its sleeve.

edit:
brain_stew said:
Its a die shrink to 55nm. Whether Nvidia choose to increase clocks or tweak the architecture remains to be seen.
Corrected.
 
beermonkey@tehbias said:
All of the launch cards use the same reference design and the same cooler.
so wat's the verdict on cooling? not bad? no squeeling sound? fan not like xbox 360?

because i'm ready to push that place your order button
 
beermonkey@tehbias said:
Since my TV can never go over 60fps, I turned on vsync and ran it at max settings (8x MSAA, Super High shadows, Super High textures, etc). Remember, this is 720p.

It ran a perfect 60fps, the line on the chart never wavered and each scene averaged 60fps.

Of course it gave me a 'B' rank and said I might want to upgrade. :lol

I'm running it again without vsync just to see what the averages are for each scene.



Desktop mode, that makes sense.

I'm going to do a 3DMark 06 at both standard and overclocked speeds.
So if you game at 720p, or a little higher at 1280x1024, and you don't want to play Crysis, how much video card would you really need? I feel like we're in this weird phase where, for the most part, the hardware has outpaced the software.
 
bathala said:
so wat's the verdict on cooling? not bad? no squeeling sound? fan not like xbox 360?

because i'm ready to push that place your order button
Quiet. Thats all I have read. Supposedly the temps are what you would expect of a card this gen.
 
SapientWolf said:
So if you game at 720p, or a little higher at 1280x1024, and you don't want to play Crysis, how much video card would you really need? I feel like we're in this weird phase where, for the most part, the hardware has outpaced the software.

Like it was said earlier, it feels like 9700 all over again!
 
I'm still using a 9700 gen part. That was a fantastic leap in performance.

This feels different though, almost better in some ways. Creepishly™ outstanding performance at incredible prices. I'm thinking about trying to get another SFF box together now, but my main concern will be silence as opposed to size this time. I'm starting to get my plans together :D
 
The Empire strikes back?! (unverified?)
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/9702/nvidia_surprise_with_9800_gtx_graphics_card/index.html

The GeForce 9800 GTX+ takes the highly efficient G92-based GeForce 9800 GTX and offers unbeatable value for value conscious gamers.

Key product points:
• GeForce 9800 GTX+ is the best single card price/performance at $229; the original GeForce 9800 GTX will transition to $199
• Processor clock of 1836MHz and graphics clock of 738MHz
• GeForce PhysX support! World’s only physics API for both the CPU and the GPU!
• Support for CUDA-based applications, including Folding@Home and Badaboom video transcoding applications.
• Support for 2-way and 3-way SLI

The 9800 GTX is now directly priced against the HD4850, fun times ahead :D
 
Tweaktown has got 4850 single/CF benchmarks! NDA lifted?!
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1470/3/radeon_hd_4850_in_crossfire_at_4ghz/index.html

Final Thoughts

What's great about the HD 4850 isn't just the fact that it offers excellent value for money in Crossfire, but also that the performance you get is the difference between playing games at 1920 x 1200 and not. While the HD 4850 on its lonesome is probably best for gaming at up to about 1680 x 1050, if you really want to up the ante and get some 1920 x 1200 or 2560 x 1600 gaming in, going Crossfire is definitely the right thing to do.

Pretty much what I suspected - the GTX280 starts to beat out the 4850CF, at very high resolutions (eg. 2560x1600). In other tests they come out almost equal.

The single HD4850 is good enough for 1680x1050 gaming, and at a good price.
 
Pimpbaa said:
My radeon 3870 is feeling old...MUST RESIST BUYING NEW CARD!


3870 runs pretty damn good :) overclocked mine quite a bit though. I prob upgrade when Spore comes out though
 
Pachael said:
Tweaktown has got 4850 single/CF benchmarks! NDA lifted?!
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1470/3/radeon_hd_4850_in_crossfire_at_4ghz/index.html



Pretty much what I suspected - the GTX280 starts to beat out the 4850CF, at very high resolutions (eg. 2560x1600). In other tests they come out almost equal.

The single HD4850 is good enough for 1680x1050 gaming, and at a good price.

Yeah NDA has been partially lifted from the 4850.

http://www.techpowerup.com/63335/AMD_launches_Radeon_HD_48xx_Series_Today.html

Yes we have just made a decision to change something.

Here’s what we’re planning to do. Effective 3:00 PM EDT today we will be lifting the embargo preventing the publishing of ATI Radeon HD 4850 performance previews. These performance previews may include ATI Radeon HD 4850 benchmarks, photos of the ATI Radeon HD 4850 hardware, information printed on related packaging or photos of the packaging itself, information provided in the ATI Radeon HD 4800 series strategy deck (attached) and related pricing information.

All other ATI Radeon HD 4850 related information provided at the NDA press briefings continues to fall under the embargo until 12:01am EDT on June 25th, as does all information and benchmarks related to the ATI Radeon HD 4870.

Basically what’s happened is our partners have started selling the products and in some cases reviewers that we have and have not sampled have already bought and received the product and published stories. We’re not able to control the situation anymore so we need to give the media the ability to publish info.

Here's another preview with a few benchmarks.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=579
 
Here's something interesting. Someone's managed to crossfire 2x 4850 with a 3870:

One of our readers has found an interesting post on the Forumdeluxx.de website which shows two ATI Radeon HD 4850 cards paired up with a Radeon HD 3870 DDR4 card in CrossFireX.

Even the user that wrote the post, didn't expect it to work, but it apparently it does and without any problem. The mentioned trio in CrossFireX scores 14,180 marks in 3DMark06. Before sticking in the HD 3870 card, the system scored 12,300 marks under Windows Vista 64-bit.

It is a nice boost when you consider that we are probably talking about the first tests of this kind, and we are sure that the red team will do some more optimizations before the HD 4850 hits the store shelves.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7993&Itemid=1
 
Cheeto said:
The 9800GTX is faster for the settings I use.

That'll change once a few driver revisions have hit for the 4850.

@ 16x12 8xAA/16xAF it nearly doubles the performance of a 9800GTX. You may not play at the resolution, but that tells you which card has the better power and future-proofing.
 
Outdoor Miner said:
That'll change once a few driver revisions have hit for the 4850.

@ 16x12 8xAA/16xAF it nearly doubles the performance of a 9800GTX. That tells you clearly one is better for future-proofing.
Yeah I think I'll go with the 4850, but none of the manufacturers offer the awesome programs like EVGA does. Any chance that EVGA will offer ATi cards, or are they an NVidia exclusive partner?
 
Geometry Shader performance in GTX280 is a major improvement over G80/G92.

gsvu9.png



http://www.ixbt.com/video3/gt200-part2.shtml
 
camineet said:
Geometry Shader performance in GTX280 is a major improvement over G80/G92.
It is, but look at 3870 outscoring the 8800 Ultra, yet there is big performance difference. I doubt how much of it will translate into gaming performance.
 
Top Bottom