| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
    |
Posted - 2008.06.21 07:02:00 -
[31]
Buy a new ATI 4850, they are probably better value for money then anything anyone else has suggested in this thread. They are onsale now too, unlike the new 9800GTX+.
They can be bought for as little as ú125 inc VAT>.
 |
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 07:05:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Micia
Is this a good price?
linkage
Just going to be playing EVE.
If you are just playing eve then that card is probably a bit overkill
Go for a 9600GT instead, cheaper and only slightly worse performance.
|
Grimpak
The Republican 1st Strike Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 09:16:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Xrak
Originally by: Micia
Is this a good price?
linkage
Just going to be playing EVE.
If you are just playing eve then that card is probably a bit overkill
Go for a 9600GT instead, cheaper and only slightly worse performance.
9 series of Gforce are freakin' hot aswell.
---
Quote:
The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 09:30:00 -
[34]
Considering the current performance figures the ATI HD4850 may be a very good choice. 9800GTX level performance but at a price of around $199 its a relatively cheap card with amazing performance.
It'll probably run anything you care to throw at it very well (except Crysis, but that'll bring anything to its knees). Just look for a dual slot cooling solution because it gets pretty hot apparently, it'll heat up your case rather a lot otherwise.
As for your performance, how is it that my PC runs ME flawlessly with a similar card but a much weaker CPU? I run it at 1400x1050 everything maxed out with a AMD X2 3800+ and a x1950 Pro (256MB version).
It caps both my cores at 100% while running, but i'm around 40-50 FPS at all times.
 |
Irish Whiskey
Corp 1 Allstars
Consortium Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 09:50:00 -
[35]
Can these new video cards run 2 copies of eve, on 2 monitors, and keep good framerates?
Also, how does the dual monitor thing work when talking about watching bluray?
|
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 10:33:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Meiyang Lee on 21/06/2008 10:33:10
Originally by: Irish Whiskey
Can these new video cards run 2 copies of eve, on 2 monitors, and keep good framerates?
Also, how does the dual monitor thing work when talking about watching bluray?
I wouldn't know to be honest Irish, but considering how EVE is relatively light on the GPU load (ie, usually very high FPS even in premium) i would assume that its possible to do so.
No idea on the bluray playback, but it's probably possible to run the Bluray video on 1 monitor and whatever you like on the second.
|
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 14:52:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
Just look for a dual slot cooling solution because it gets pretty hot apparently, it'll heat up your case rather a lot otherwise.
Dual slot is good idea or you could pre order one of these babies.
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
As for your performance, how is it that my PC runs ME flawlessly with a similar card but a much weaker CPU? I run it at 1400x1050 everything maxed out with a AMD X2 3800+ and a x1950 Pro (256MB version).
It caps both my cores at 100% while running, but i'm around 40-50 FPS at all times.
Not sure but I think that the 7900GS is the worst 7900 card, so your x1950pro is quite alot better.
|
Grimpak
The Republican 1st Strike Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 16:03:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Xrak
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
Just look for a dual slot cooling solution because it gets pretty hot apparently, it'll heat up your case rather a lot otherwise.
Dual slot is good idea or you could pre order one of these babies.
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
As for your performance, how is it that my PC runs ME flawlessly with a similar card but a much weaker CPU? I run it at 1400x1050 everything maxed out with a AMD X2 3800+ and a x1950 Pro (256MB version).
It caps both my cores at 100% while running, but i'm around 40-50 FPS at all times.
Not sure but I think that the 7900GS is the worst 7900 card, so your x1950pro is quite alot better.
and apparently, AMD/ATI scored it well. a pair of 4850's (mainstream cards on the 199$ range), can outperform the top of the line NV (over 600$) in many cases.
read it here
---
Quote:
The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
ReaperOfSly
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 17:15:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: Xrak
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
Just look for a dual slot cooling solution because it gets pretty hot apparently, it'll heat up your case rather a lot otherwise.
Dual slot is good idea or you could pre order one of these babies.
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
As for your performance, how is it that my PC runs ME flawlessly with a similar card but a much weaker CPU? I run it at 1400x1050 everything maxed out with a AMD X2 3800+ and a x1950 Pro (256MB version).
It caps both my cores at 100% while running, but i'm around 40-50 FPS at all times.
Not sure but I think that the 7900GS is the worst 7900 card, so your x1950pro is quite alot better.
and apparently, AMD/ATI scored it well. a pair of 4850's (mainstream cards on the 199$ range), can outperform the top of the line NV (over 600$) in many cases.
read it here
Oh man, I've already spent a load of cash on upgrading my PC this year. And now this lovely new stuff comes along. Damn. 
__________________________
Quote:
...bored, skint, no charter, and a ship that looks like an explosion in a girder factory...
|
Grimpak
The Republican 1st Strike Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 08:47:00 -
[40]
Originally by: ReaperOfSly
Originally by: Grimpak
and apparently, AMD/ATI scored it well. a pair of 4850's (mainstream cards on the 199$ range), can outperform the top of the line NV (over 600$) in many cases.
read it here
Oh man, I've already spent a load of cash on upgrading my PC this year. And now this lovely new stuff comes along. Damn.
yeah. was making plans about upgrading the old junk I have here, and was thinking about a 3850.
now guess which one I'm thinking about
---
Quote:
The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
|
Terinnon
German Trading Association
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 17:47:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Terinnon on 22/06/2008 17:52:15
If u wanna spend up to 200$ or 150Ç buy a ATI 4850... it hase the same performance as the 9800GTX with higher image quality.
If u dont want to spend more as 150$ or 100Ç buy a 3850 512MB or a 8800GT depends on if u prefer ATI or NVIDIA... both cards are well priced with good performance.
9600GT is way faster as a 8600GT...
64 Stream processors (9600GT) vs 32 Stream Processors (8600GT)
256bit Interface (9600GT) vs 128bit Interface (8600GT)
The 9600GT is nearly 100% faster as a 8600GT
but its true, the 9600gt is not very well priced... for the same money you get a 8800GT or 3850 512MB (112 Shaders,256bit -> 8800GT) (320 shaders, 256bit->3850)
both cards are faster.
My advices are : 1 2 3
|
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 17:50:00 -
[42]
don't compare the ATI shader numbers to the nVidia though, their structure is completely different and so are the quantities.
(4850 has 800, the 9800GTX has 240 but performance isn't that far apart)
|
Terinnon
German Trading Association
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 17:56:00 -
[43]
Its true but also false...
9800GTX got 128 Shaders... the GTX280 got 240 but its a 600Ç card -.-
Ther performance of the 3850 is nearly matching the 8800GT (with 8.6 Catalyst)
but the 4850 with its 480 Shaders is way faster as a 8800GT...
the problem is... the 3850 got only 64 stream processors for real with 5 shading units per stream unit...
the 8800GT got 1 stream processor for 1 shading unit so there are 112 for real...
the 4850 got 160 stream processors with 3 shading units.
800shaders is the R700 prototype... this will mayby be a new "Highend" card from ATI...
|
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 18:05:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Meiyang Lee on 22/06/2008 18:06:19
Linkage
First table, halfway down the page, all 4xxx cards are based on the RV770 just different core clocks.
Both the 4850 and the 4870 have 800 streamprocessors with 40 texture units and 16 ROPs.
Higher clock speeds and much faster memory give the 4870 its (sofar theoretical) edge over the 4850. But the 4850 is a budget gamers dream come true. Very nice performance for an even nicer pricetag.
|
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 18:10:00 -
[45]
All your number mean **** all. Everyone knows the only number that counts is the FPS.
So talk benchmarks not shaders.
|
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 18:13:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Xrak
All your number mean **** all. Everyone knows the only number that counts is the FPS.
So talk benchmarks not shaders.
never said they meant anything, just correcting the post above mine. 
As for benchies, Linkage.
Top post, long list of performance "previews", since the card officially won't be out until wednesday, but ATI dropped the NDA last week.
|
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 18:23:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Terinnon
Its true but also false...
9800GTX got 128 Shaders... the GTX280 got 240 but its a 600Ç card -.-
Ther performance of the 3850 is nearly matching the 8800GT (with 8.6 Catalyst)
but the 4850 with its 480 Shaders is way faster as a 8800GT...
the problem is... the 3850 got only 64 stream processors for real with 5 shading units per stream unit...
the 8800GT got 1 stream processor for 1 shading unit so there are 112 for real...
the 4850 got 160 stream processors with 3 shading units.
800shaders is the R700 prototype... this will mayby be a new "Highend" card from ATI...
The 3850 does NOT come close to the 8800GT.
Also, I haven't bothered looking at numbers yet on the 48xx yet, so I'm just throwing this out there: the 9800GTX is only 200 bucks now.
|
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 18:32:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Meiyang Lee on 22/06/2008 18:32:43
Originally by: Eternal Error
The 3850 does NOT come close to the 8800GT.
Also, I haven't bothered looking at numbers yet on the 48xx yet, so I'm just throwing this out there: the 9800GTX is only 200 bucks now.
The 9800GTX and HD4850 are pretty close in performance, and you are correct, nVidia dropped the price of the 9800GTX down a notch to match the 4850 a couple of hours after the NDA on the ATI cards was dropped. They also released the 9800GTX+ which has been overclocked a little to beat it and that costs $229.
As for the 3850, that had some issues so it indeed doesn't match the 8800GT except maybe in 3Dmark or something. (where it scores remarkably well, in games less so though)
|
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 18:46:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Eternal Error on 22/06/2008 18:46:51
I'm not going to bother posting benchmarks or explaining, as it was debated to death in a "budget pc" thread you can find a few pages back, but the 3850 doesn't even come close to the 8800GT, and the 3870 is still pretty far behind.
Also, the 9800GTX+ hasn't actually been released yet I thought?
|
Meiyang Lee
Azteca Transportation Unlimited
Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 19:00:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Eternal Error
Edited by: Eternal Error on 22/06/2008 18:46:51
I'm not going to bother posting benchmarks or explaining, as it was debated to death in a "budget pc" thread you can find a few pages back, but the 3850 doesn't even come close to the 8800GT, and the 3870 is still pretty far behind.
Also, the 9800GTX+ hasn't actually been released yet I thought?
I wasn't saying you were wrong on the 3850, infact, i was saying you are right.
Its just that it gets very nice 3Dmark scores, but which means nothing for a gamer, which is odd.
As for the 9800GTX+ i believe it'll be out next week, they had it ready to launch a while i think. It was announced and released to the press about a day after the lifting of the NDA on the 4850.
|
|
Grimpak
The Republican 1st Strike Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 19:33:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Grimpak on 22/06/2008 19:34:15
Originally by: Xrak
All your number mean **** all. Everyone knows the only number that counts is the FPS.
So talk benchmarks not shaders.
in small numbers:
a pair of ati 4850's in crossfire mode (each a 199$ card), can beat the NV GTX280, a single card solution that costs 500-600$.
...and the 4870's aren't out yet.
in sum, get more for less (money and more cards ).
problem of crossfire is that it does not work at 100% yet, but it seems that they are ironing those bugs out.
---
Quote:
The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Terinnon
German Trading Association
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 19:41:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Terinnon on 22/06/2008 19:42:43
ok, it looks to be true... but every news posting before said 480 shaders...
and hey... i got a 8800GT and a 3850 512MB... in these Benchmarks they always use the 256MB version
i can say in not NVIDIA THE WAY ITS MEANT TO PLAYED games the performance of the 38xx models is nearly the same as the 8800GT
Here are some Benchmarks i made...
3Dmark Vantage : 5500 points on ATI Radeon 3850 (800/1035) with catalyst 8.6
5300 points with the 8800GT with 730/1800/1050
Performance Setting
World in Conflict DX10 max Details (1680x1050)
ATI Radeon 36FPS Average
8800GT 37FPS Average (wow 1fps more)
EvE Premium Max Details (1680x1050)
ATI Radeon 60-180fps
Geforce 15 (with structure dmg) to 180 fps
Race Driver Grid (1680x1050)
both with arround 60-70fps
ok the main benchmark games are stuff like Stalker or Unrealtournament 3 etc.
every game with Nvidia optimized Engines...
and hey, a Radeon 3850 is arround 20-50 bucks cheaper...
so, still no question about the 4850... it consums less power as the 9800GTX and it outperformes it up to 40% with high quality settings.
Every Benchmark made with :
Q6600 @ 3,2GHZ Quadcore
6GB DDR2 800Mhz
Vista x64
P35 Board
X-Fi Soundcard
Catalyst 8.6
Forceware 174.31
But still ATI got the better Imagequality.
ATI made alot of improvements with the latest drivers (8.5 and 8.6) so alot Benchmarks need to be runned again ;)
|
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 23:24:00 -
[53]
Well unfortunately none of the review sites' benchmarks agree with yours. Assuming we are talking 512mb versions, the 3850 can't hold a candle to the 8800GT, and the 3870 is still an average of 10-15% slower I believe.
|
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 01:53:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Xrak on 23/06/2008 01:53:20
Originally by: Eternal Error
Well unfortunately none of the review sites' benchmarks agree with yours. Assuming we are talking 512mb versions, the 3850 can't hold a candle to the 8800GT, and the 3870 is still an average of 10-15% slower I believe.
Indeed true. I havent seen any benchmarks with new drivers so I guess the 3870 would be much closer to the 8800GT now then when it was released, but I dont know what kind of performance boost the 8800GT has got it, if any from newer drivers.
|
Terinnon
German Trading Association
|
Posted - 2008.06.24 11:21:00 -
[55]
click
There is a good Benchmark, with new Drivers...
ok, there is no 8800GT but there is a 8800ULTRA and a 9800GTX both are faster as the 8800GT... so you can see, if u take the power of the 9800GTX or 8800ULTRA and reduce it to the power of the 8800GT the 3870 can take it on with the 8800GT...
The performance gap from the later versions is gone... just believe it, ATI is back in business and way cheaper...
iam a german, it dont makes any sense for me to post more sites... even my own reviews... all i want to, is that u stop thinkin that the 8800GT is a Highend card, its nothing more as a midrange card like the Radeon 38x0 Series... 3850 OC version with 512MB are only 2-6% slower as a 3870 so there are mayby a gap of 8-10% to the 8800GT with exactly 10-15% price advantage for the ATI cards :)
|
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |