Support NeoGAF

[zaidr]

I can honestly say that I'm having more fun with Crysis's single player than I did with COD4. Its the difference between a shooting gallery, and a real FPS. I know the difference now, after playing one after the other.

 

[godhandiscen]

The 4870 is also using GDDR5 to 4850s GDDR3. Apparently there are a bunch of people saying that the 4850 is bandwidth constrained!

I forgot about this. If so, then the GDDR5 version of the 4850 would be hawt stuff.

 

[br0ken_shad0w]

Ugh...Crysis bashing was so last year. Like it or not, it's going to be the de facto game for people to test their rigs.

 

[TheHeretic]

Ugh...Crysis bashing was so last year. Like it or not, it's going to be the de facto game for people to test their rigs.

I love how defensive people are. I even said Crysis was a great game! But of course no PC discussion is complete without the needless degradation of other games all of Queen and Country.

 

[br0ken_shad0w]

I love how defensive people are. I even said Crysis was a great game! But of course no PC discussion is complete without the needless degradation of other games all of Queen and Country.

But why even bring up Crysis anyways? You should have known many people still play it just for its high system requirements and visuals.

 

[TheHeretic]

But why even bring up Crysis anyways? You should have known many people still play it just for its high system requirements and visuals.

Because too many people use Crysis as a point of reference despite the fact that it runs like complete crap on most systems.

 

[Tenacious-V]

I forgot about this. If so, then the GDDR5 version of the 4850 would be hawt stuff.

Yeah no kidding. What I`m thinking though, is you won`t see the full bandwidth utilization of the GDDR5 until you see the 4870X2 hit the field.

GDDR5 is kind of like QDR instead of DDR.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2309888,00.asp

Bandwidth first: A system using GDDR3 memory on a 256-bit memory bus running at 1800MHz (effective DDR speed) would deliver 57.6 GB per second. Think of a GeForce 9600GT, for example. The same speed GDDR5 on the same bus would deliver 115.2 GB per second, or twice that amount. Take any GDDR3 bandwidth on a given clock rate and bus width and double it, and you get GDDR5's bandwidth. Of course, the marketing guys love big numbers and would undoubtedly not call it 1800MHz, just as 1800MHz GDDR3 is really running at 900MHz. Expect the marketing guys to call memory at that speed 3200MHz. (I think it was a typo and it should be 3600Mhz)

I don`t even think the 4870 can saturate that, but once the 4870X2 hits!!

 

[Kevin]

I think if people are going to pay so much for graphics cards then of course Crysis is going to be their top priority since it offers the best graphics which is obviously why people spend so much on cards in the first place.

I personally enjoyed Crysis for the graphics but also for the story and gameplay functionality. The story was short but of what was there, it was still enjoyable. At least more then a lot of FPS games and the gameplay had some interesting features like the nanosuit functions. To me, Crysis is more then just a game with pretty graphics but if I end up buying a real high end card then of course Crysis will be the top game to try out.

 

[godhandiscen]

Yeah no kidding. What I`m thinking though, is you won`t see the full bandwidth utilization of the GDDR5 until you see the 4870X2 hit the field.

GDDR5 is kind of like QDR instead of DDR.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2309888,00.asp



I don`t even think the 4870 can saturate that, but once the 4870X2 hits!!

It pains me to know my 3870X2 was bandwidth crippled specially when the 2900 had better bandwidth.

 

[brain_stew]

I forgot about this. If so, then the GDDR5 version of the 4850 would be hawt stuff.

There's no GDDR5 version of the 4850, well their is but its the 4870. They both come from the same wafer but the 4870 uses the best chips that are guaranteed to run at high clocks and then they're paired with GDDR5 chips and a more efficient cooler so more voltage and higher clocks are not a worry.

If you're playing at high resolutions then the GDDR5 of the 4870 is likely going to give you very significant performance improvements, but at lower levels the gap shouldn't be too huge. What it does mean, is that the 4850s should have great clocking potential, since the existance of the 4870s proves a 25% overclock is possible.

 

[artist]

The difference is that CUDA is actually being used for stuff beyond Folding, like video encoding and there'll be support for it in the next version of Photoshop.

Media transcoding has been present on ATI/AMD gpus for more than three years. I bet, eventually you'll see PhotoShop or other apps also making use of AMD's gpus. When it comes to opening up hardware/software, AMD is MILES ahead of Nvidia that its not even funny.

There's no GDDR5 version of the 4850, well their is but its the 4870. They both come from the same wafer but the 4870 uses the best chips that are guaranteed to run at high clocks and then they're paired with GDDR5 chips and a more efficient cooler so more voltage and higher clocks are not a worry.

If you're playing at high resolutions then the GDDR5 of the 4870 is likely going to give you very significant performance improvements, but at lower levels the gap shouldn't be too huge. What it does mean, is that the 4850s should have great clocking potential, since the existance of the 4870s proves a 25% overclock is possible.

I think 4850 will be good buy, it'll offer very good overclocking support (via vmods) but dont really know how much bandwidth starved it will be. If AMD's AIB partners offer boards with faster memory, that could alleviate it a little bit.

4870 should be in GTX260 territory. I bet in some 360 ports, it should also come close to the 280.

It pains me to know my 3870X2 was bandwidth crippled specially when the 2900 had better bandwidth.

Believe me your 3870X2 made use of its memory more efficiently than the 2900, no need to feel bad.

 

[godhandiscen]

There's no GDDR5 version of the 4850, well their is but its the 4870. They both come from the same wafer but the 4870 uses the best chips that are guaranteed to run at high clocks and then they're paired with GDDR5 chips and a more efficient cooler so more voltage and higher clocks are not a worry.

If you're playing at high resolutions then the GDDR5 of the 4870 is likely going to give you very significant performance improvements, but at lower levels the gap shouldn't be too huge. What it does mean, is that the 4850s should have great clocking potential, since the existance of the 4870s proves a 25% overclock is possible.

No, there IS a GDDR5 version. Its been rumored by partners and will be kept at the same 4850 clock speeds (AMD will not allow partners to release any overclocked version of the 4850). I am not kidding you, look it up in previous pages of this thread.

 

[artist]

No, there IS a GDDR5 version. Its been rumored by partners and will be kept at the same 4850 clock speeds (AMD will not allow partners to release any overclocked version of the 4850). I am not kidding you, look it up in previous pages of this thread.

I read rumors about the possibility of a 4850X2 but not a 4850 w GDDR5 ..

 

[brain_stew]

I think 4850 will be good buy, it'll offer very good overclocking support (via vmods) but dont really know how much bandwidth starved it will be. If AMD's AIB partners offer boards with faster memory, that could alleviate it a little bit.

Oh definitely, if you're playing below 1680x1050 then you might as well save a chunk of cash and pick up the 4850. Having all that extra bandwidth is great but if you're not bandwidth limited its not going to really increase performance much at all. For those that crave IQ and high resolutions, then having twice the bandwidth is going to make a huge difference, and having a better cooling solution and guaranteed higher clocks doesn't hurt either.

 

[Beer Monkey]

No, there IS a GDDR5 version. Its been rumored by partners and will be kept at the same 4850 clock speeds (AMD will not allow partners to release any overclocked version of the 4850). I am not kidding you, look it up in previous pages of this thread.

The GDDR5 4850 has been pulled due to 'internal competition', which to me suggests it was too close to the 4870.

Given the different power envelopes, I still don't expect to see anybody getting a 4850 to run identical to the 4870, it was probably just getting a bit too close for comfort; they want a decent gap between models. However, once ATI allows vendors to make non-reference boards, I suspect to see a GDDR5 version.

I wish they had GDDR5 at launch, because it uses a lot less power than GDDR3. Imagine a 4850 that runs at 75 watts.

 

[Tenacious-V]

Oh definitely, if you're playing below 1680x1050 then you might as well save a chunk of cash and pick up the 4850. Having all that extra bandwidth is great but if you're not bandwidth limited its not going to really increase performance much at all. For those that crave IQ and high resolutions, then having twice the bandwidth is going to make a huge difference, and having a better cooling solution and guaranteed higher clocks doesn't hurt either.

Pretty much, as much as I'd love to have a 4870 or a 4870X2, I only game at 1680x1050 because that's what my monitor`s resolution is. The 4850 is basically perfect for that, hell it still might be overkill for it. I`ll be picking one up soon to replace my 1900XTX, the good girl needs a rest.

 

[Beer Monkey]

A guy over at AVS has picked up a 4850 and is mucking around with it tonight, time permitting (he is busy). He did note that the audio driver appears to not be a Realtek driver like the one that was used for audio in the 3000 series (for cards that supported it, they had low-res PCM stereo and lossy DD 5.1). I hope so, as the Realtek drivers were kind of crappy.

My card has landed at the local airport, so I expect I will be using it tomorrow night. I'm not a big benchmark guy, but I will run it through the Crysis flyby, as I have results for my last couple of cards using that test.

 

[artist]

I wish they had GDDR5 at launch, because it uses a lot less power than GDDR3. Imagine a 4850 that runs at 75 watts.

That would make the overall BoM for the card higher and it will be difficult to hit the sweet price point. In comparison the cost of the die is peanuts. AMD has been buying loads of 55nm wafers (for 38xx) that they'll be making good money on 48xx at even lower price points. Efficiency wise, I doubt we'll see a better gpu.

 

[godhandiscen]

I read rumors about the possibility of a 4850X2 but not a 4850 w GDDR5 ..

Oh yeah, you are right, sorry my bad. There is no point in a 4850 with GDDR5.

 

[Beer Monkey]

That would make the overall BoM for the card higher and it will be difficult to hit the sweet price point. In comparison the cost of the die is peanuts. AMD has been buying loads of 55nm wafers (for 38xx) that they'll be making good money on 48xx at even lower price points. Efficiency wise, I doubt we'll see a better gpu.

Prices will come down on the memory. The cards will be around for a year or two. We see more diverse memory configurations on a lot of current cards now than we did with the first models launched, I still think we might see a 3850 with GDDR5.

I'm not waiting, though, I've got one (on the way) now. And I don't see swapping cards just to drop power and get faster memory. So it's really not applicable to me, but I think we'll see it at some point.

 

[godhandiscen]

I play at 1600x1050, and I cannot complain. Srsly, this resolution is perfect to me. This is why I am so excited about these cards. In my monitor they will just be godly.

 

[Kevin]

Pretty much, as much as I'd love to have a 4870 or a 4870X2, I only game at 1680x1050 because that's what my monitor`s resolution is. The 4850 is basically perfect for that, hell it still might be overkill for it. I`ll be picking one up soon to replace my 1900XTX, the good girl needs a rest.

When it comes to graphics card power, there is no such thing as overkill. You can always eventually find something to utilize all of the horsepower of the card you buy. :lol

 

[aeolist]

So there are still no reviews of the ATi cards?

Aren't they, you know, out?

 

[godhandiscen]

So there are still no reviews of the ATi cards?

Aren't they, you know, out?

Srsly, AMD should have wised up and sent its 4850 Crossfire solutions to major review sistes to create some buzz.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I play at 1600x1050, and I cannot complain. Srsly, this resolution is perfect to me. This is why I am so excited about these cards. In my monitor they will just be godly.

I'm extra excited since I play at 1280x720 or 1365x768 (home theater PC). I don't expect anything to make me crave a better card for a couple of years. Even the Crytek guys are talking about moving to multiplatform so I don't see them pushing the PC harder than they have been for some time.

Even if I switch my plasma to a 1080p model, I'm really at a viewing distance where 720p is about the most a human can visually resolve. The ATI resolution scaling is great, so I can simply use GPU scaling and lower resolutions and still have a great looking image.

 

[godhandiscen]

I'm extra excited since I play at 1280x720 or 1365x768 (home theater PC). I don't expect anything to make me crave a better card for a couple of years. Even the Crytek guys are talking about moving to multiplatform so I don't see them pushing the PC harder than they have been for some time.

Even if I switch my plasma to a 1080p model, I'm really at a viewing distance where 720p is about the most a human can visually resolve. The ATI resolution scaling is great, so I can simply use GPU scaling and lower resolutions and still have a great looking image.

DAMN, that card is really more than what you need if you play at that res.

 

[brain_stew]

So there are still no reviews of the ATi cards?

Aren't they, you know, out?

There's an NDA till the 25th, so none of the big, mainstream sites will be putting their reviews up until then but as you've noted they're arriving in plenty of consumer's hands already. Suppose to be on widespread sale across Europe tomorrow as well, so we've got a good picture of its performance, but we're gonna have to wait an extra week before in depth reviews appear.

The sites have the cards, and have probably wrote their reviews already, they just can't publish them yet. A couple have hinted at what to expect, but they've got to be careful not to break the NDA.

 

[aeolist]

Srsly, AMD should have wised up and sent its 4850 Crossfire solutions to major review sistes to create some buzz.

Yeah. I mean from what little we know I'm much more excited about ATi's cards than nVidia's, and that hasn't happened in years. They need to get these things out there and start hyping shit up, if they can grab the mid-range of the market early that means big bucks. That's where the serious volume and profit are made.

 

[aeolist]

There's an NDA till the 25th, so none of the big, mainstream sites will be putting their reviews up until then but as you've noted they're arriving in plenty of consumer's hands already. Suppose to be on widespread sale across Europe tomorrow as well, so we've got a good picture of its performance, but we're gonna have to wait an extra week before in depth reviews appear.

The sites have the cards, and have probably wrote their reviews already, they just can't publish them yet. A couple have hinted at what to expect, but they've got to be careful not to break the NDA.

That is fucking stupid. AMD finally has what looks like a success on their hands, so I guess they have to do whatever they can to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

[Tenacious-V]

When it comes to graphics card power, there is no such thing as overkill. You can always eventually find something to utilize all of the horsepower of the card you buy. :lol

That`s definitely true. I mostly meant on the games I play right now. Besides, the 4850 is going to be pretty overkill compared to the rest of my system. I`m on a S939 AthlonX2 4800+ with 4GB DDR400 :lol. If I go for anything higher, I might as well build a new rig. But with me moving soon and portability becoming a priority, an XGP Puma notebook is my next system purchase.

 

[antispin]

Is the 9800GTX just a die-shrunk G80? So it's kinda like the 8800GTX? A good pick?

I realise it's kinda off-topic but the new cars are either out of my budget, or are not yet available.

Fake edit: The 8800GTX seems better in specs (esp. ROPs) but does the price-delta between the two justify the 8800GTX? Anyone got handy benches comparing the two?

 

[Beer Monkey]

That is fucking stupid. AMD finally has what looks like a success on their hands, so I guess they have to do whatever they can to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

They'll still sell all the cards that they can make at launch, and the media coverage will catch up quickly since they are only one week behind Nvidia. They might lose a week of hype but they really aren't going to lose anything in the marketplace.

DAMN, that card is really more than what you need if you play at that res.

Yep, but PS3 and 360 look just fine at that res, and a PC with even better framerates, AA/AF, and effects is only better!

Not to mention this is also my lossless surround audio card, so $200 isn't overkill at all for a 720p HTPC, in fact it is a deal!

 

[TheHeretic]

Yeah. I mean from what little we know I'm much more excited about ATi's cards than nVidia's, and that hasn't happened in years. They need to get these things out there and start hyping shit up, if they can grab the mid-range of the market early that means big bucks. That's where the serious volume and profit are made.

Nvidia has always had better marketing.

 

[godhandiscen]

Nvidia has always had better marketing.

No shit, "The way is meant to be played" I picked it up back when I was a noob.

Is the 9800GTX just a die-shrunk G80? So it's kinda like the 8800GTX? A good pick?

I realise it's kinda off-topic but the new cars are either out of my budget, or are not yet available.

Fake edit: The 8800GTX seems better in specs (esp. ROPs) but does the price-delta between the two justify the 8800GTX? Anyone got handy benches comparing the two?

If you can spend $200 just wait for the 4850 unless you have a SLI mobo and are thinking about SLI. Read the thread for tons of benches.

 

[antispin]

No shit, "The way is meant to be played" I picked it up back when I was a noob.


If you can spend $200 just wait for the 4850 unless you have a SLI mobo and are thinking about SLI. Read the thread for tons of benches.

Would love the 4850, but is the 4850 available now? I am importing this through a cousin in the US. The deadline is a few days

 

[godhandiscen]

Would love the 4850, but is the 4850 available now? I am importing this through a cousin in the US. The deadline is a few days

Dude if you are importing, then just order it online. and yes, its available right now. If he orders it today, he could have it by friday.

 

[bathala]

its available right now.

where? where? gimme link. cuz i thought 4850 officially comes out next week

gtx 280 is available now

 

[godhandiscen]

where? where? gimme link. cuz i thought 4850 officially comes out next week

gtx 280 is available now

2 Gaffers in this thread supposedly have ordered them. And another just told me it was widely available. I am going by what they said. They also posted links, look for them.

 

[camineet]

Is the 9800GTX just a die-shrunk G80?

There are some differences. G80 has 384-bit memory bus interface.

All G92 GPUs including 9800GTX have 256-bit memory bus.

That's the biggest difference I know of.

Also, and I am not positive about this, I think G92s might only have 16 ROPs, whereas G80 has 24 ROPs.

Again, I am not certain of that. I might be wrong. G92s might have 24 ROPs like G80.

However, I do know that the twin G92s in the 9800 GX2 card only have 16 ROPs each.

 

[bathala]

2 Gaffers in this thread supposedly have ordered them. And another just told me it was widely available. I am going by what they said. They also posted links, look for them.

oh yah those.
they r not selling them anymore. amazon and buy.com jumped the gun, but then stopped on that day.

 

[Outdoor Miner]

Some more 4850 Crossfire numbers...

C2D E8400 @ 3.80
- Asus Rampage Formula x48
- 8GB Muskin Redline DDR2 1000 @ 1015 5-5-5-12, 7 performance value (per AT Rampage board review)
- PowerColor 4850's in CF clocked to 660 core 1050 mem
- Thermaltake Toughpower 850W PSU
- Catalyst 8.6 Betas
- Vista 64 Premium SP1

3DMark06:
18059 3DMarks, 1920x1200, 4x AA
* This is with 8.6 beta, perhaps finals will improve score further

Vantage build 1.0.1:
P10431
GPU = 11666
CPU = 7916

X5314
GPU = 5226
CPU = 7831


CRYSIS:

1024 x 768, dx9, high, no AA
Min = 28.68
Max = 96.29
Avg = 69.44

1280 x 1024, dx9, high, no AA
Min = 32.59
Max = 86.31
Avg = 62.67

1680 x 1050, dx9, high, no AA
Min = 26.83
Max = 56.83
Avg = 43.84

1900 x 1200, dx9, high, no AA
Min = 24.93
Max = 56.83
Avg = 43.84

1024 x 768 dx9, high 4x AA
Min = 26.28
Max = 81.06
Avg = 59.21

1280 x 1024 dx9, high, 4x AA
Min = 25.47
Max = 65.51
Avg = 49.07

1680 x 1050 dx9, high, 4x AA
Min = 47.53
Max = 47.53
Avg = 36.39

1900 x 1200 dx9, high, 4x AA
Min = 16.16
Max = 37.83
Avg = 29.97

 

[godhandiscen]

Wow, the scores got better when they applied AA... WTF?

 

[Zzoram]

I can honestly say that I'm having more fun with Crysis's single player than I did with COD4. Its the difference between a shooting gallery, and a real FPS. I know the difference now, after playing one after the other.

Crysis got a lot of flack for being gorgeous, but it really is a great game. Even the demo level was enough to convince me it would be a high quality, relatively open ended, and fun FPS.

I think most people bagged on it because:

a) it made people feel inferior (poors with old PCs, console-onlys being overly defensive)
b) they couldn't get past the looks (it's like the blonde bombshell that you can't believe has a brain)

 

[aznpxdd]

Wow, the scores got better when they applied AA... WTF?

You can't read numbers or something? The average FPS dropped with AA on.

 

[Zzoram]

Wow, the scores got better when they applied AA... WTF?

These cards are new, drivers are unoptimized for specific games, so oddities like that are bound to show up. Also, ATI apparently fixed an issue with AA that was hurting performance more than it should from their previous cards, so now AA is only supposed to cause a minor hit.

 

[dLMN8R]

One more vote for the Crysis-was-incredible and Call-of-Duty-4-had-an-average-campaign crowd.

Seriously. Endlessly respawning enemies. Fucking ridiculous chernobyl level when you're at the ferris wheel waiting for the helicopter. Bad AI.


Crysis, on the other and, I would have felt privileged to play even if I had to do so on lower graphical settings. As someone else said, the mindblowing visuals were simply the icing on the cake.

All it is, is the case of "the supermodel can't be intelligent". People see amazing graphics, and automatically assume the rest of the game must suck.

 

[SapientWolf]

Crysis got a lot of flack for being gorgeous, but it really is a great game. Even the demo level was enough to convince me it would be a high quality, relatively open ended, and fun FPS.

I think most people bagged on it because:

a) it made people feel inferior (poors with old PCs, console-onlys being overly defensive)
b) they couldn't get past the looks (it's like the blonde bombshell that you can't believe has a brain)

c) Not everyone likes the open ended gameplay.

 

[Zzoram]

You can't read numbers or something? The average FPS dropped with AA on.

The order of Min/Max/Avg changed in each set. It's easy to get them mixed up in that situation.

But ya, ~40fps average 1680x1050 4xAA High Crysis on Vista SP1 is pretty incredible for a $200 video card.

Edit* $200 x 2 = $400 for CF to get those numbers

 

[aznpxdd]

The order of Min/Max/Avg changed in each set. It's easy to get them mixed up in that situation.

But ya, ~40fps average 1680x1050 4xAA High Crysis on Vista SP1 is pretty incredible for a $200 video card.

CrossFire man...make that $400+.

c) Not everyone likes the open ended gameplay.

Then you can't exactly fault the game for being not fun. Boring players make Crysis' gameplay boring.

 

[Zzoram]

CrossFire man...make that $400+.



Then you can't exactly fault the game for being not fun. Boring players make Crysis' gameplay boring.

I'm not good at making my own fun in GTA IV, but I found the Crysis demo to be very fun.