Radeon HD 4890 3DMark Performance Revealed

ShogoXT · Mar 18, 2009

WarEagleAU said:
I hate that my work blocks pictures of yalls results. Looks to be a nice little improvement, but ATI needs to get on the Physx deal.

Not really, its only serving to make Nvidia look better in this synthetic benchmark. Is that worth paying Nvidia money for?

EDIT: Sorry if that sounded fanboish, just annoyed how that works in Vantage. It screws the score....

TheMailMan78 · Mar 18, 2009

ShogoXT said:
Not really, its only serving to make Nvidia look better in this synthetic benchmark. Is that worth paying Nvidia money for?

Well this may be news but some games use Physx. To bad Vantage doesnt use Havok instead.

farlex85 · Mar 18, 2009

EastCoasthandle said:
The results are comparable IMO. Many here believe that Vista is just as good as XP. Furthermore, the 3D06 is CPU bound. The results with a quad core should have been higher then a dual core using XP.

It's been shown time and time again the in 3d06 xp yeilds better scores than in vista. Note that the i7920 did score 1500 points more in cpu score at 1ghz lower clock than the e8400. Sounds about right. This is a preliminary score w/o proper drivers and completely at stock (who here benches their stuff at stock?). It's also a 4890, not a 5870. Once it is released it will be a bit faster than the 4870, but not by a landslide. These seem about right considering.

EastCoasthandle · Mar 18, 2009

OnBoard said:
You are on XP, results are not comparable (XP scores higher).

WarEagleAU: EastCoasthandle got 16155 3DMarks SM2:6907 SM3:8525 CPU:3364 on XP

The results are comparable IMO. Many here believe that Vista is just as good as XP. Furthermore, the 3D06 is CPU bound. Having a quad core can increase the overall results of the benchmark when compared to a dual core. Therefore, IMO, the 920 quad core should have been higher then a overclocked dual core using XP. The results of the 920 clearly show a higher benchmark result the E8400 at 3.60GHz.

farlex85 said:
It's been shown time and time again the in 3d06 xp yeilds better scores. Note that the i7920 did score 1000 points more in cpu score at 1ghz lower clock. Sounds about right. This is a preliminary score w/o proper drivers and completely at stock (who here benches their stuff at stock?). It's a 4890, not a 5870. Once it is released it will be a bit faster than the 4870, but not by a landslide. These seem about right considering.

I would rather wait for other benchmark results. Do to the higher CPU scores there doesn't appear to be any correlation with overall results. If you look at both SM2.0 and SM3.0 they are much lower and I've seen higher results then that when using a Q2C.

erocker · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
All I meant by my card, was that I was comparing a heavily OC'd GTX 260, to effectively a heavily OC'd 4870, so thought they would be closer matched than these results.

That's just speculation. It's not a heavily OC'd 4870 it's a stock 4890. We have no idea what kind of overclocks these cards get yet. I love my GTX 260 too, but since I love new cards, it's getting a playmate!

alexp999 · Mar 18, 2009

erocker said:
That's just speculation. It's not a heavily OC'd 4870 it's a stock 4890. We have no idea what kind of overclocks these cards get yet. I love my GTX 260 too, but since I love new cards, it's getting a playmate!

Even if I hadnt made that comment, you must agree that these clocks seem unexplainably low. Iam basing my comments of what I know now, which afaik, is that the RV770 brings nothing more than higher clocks.

Take EastCoastHandle's results for example. His CPU score is lower, yet the SM scores are higher with the 4870 clocked at the same speed.

farlex85 · Mar 18, 2009

EastCoasthandle said:
I would rather wait for other benchmark results. Do to the higher CPU scores there doesn't appear to be any correlation with overall results. If you look at both SM2.0 and SM3.0 they are much lower and I've seen higher results then that when using a Q2C.

alexp999 said:
Even if I hadnt made that comment, you must agree that these clocks seem unexplainably low. Iam basing my comments of what I know now, which afaik, is that the RV770 brings nothing more than higher clocks.

Take EastCoastHandle's results for example. His CPU score is lower, yet the SM scores are higher with the 4870 clocked at the same speed.

Drivers, this is an unreleased card

cdawall · Mar 18, 2009

i could see it running with a GTX260 considering with both cards oc'd my G92 8800GTS keeps up with a 4850 oc'd and the 4870 runs with a 9800GTX

alexp999 · Mar 18, 2009

farlex85 said:
Drivers

But if it is based off an RV770 then there should be no excuse on the drivers front.

farlex85 · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
But if it is based off an RV770 then there should be no excuse on the drivers front.

I was under the impression it was an RV790. Even if it's similar, it's going to be a tad different. For all we know, the only difference may be on the software level. Either way, it's a preliminary benchmark of an unreleased card (thus not to be expected as full results).

johnnyfiive · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
That seems a little low. My GTX 260 beats that.

It should, physx.

ghost101 · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
That seems a little low. My GTX 260 beats that.

Because your cpu (physx) score is through the roof.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For comparison:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=895112

HD4870 using cat 9.2, at 850mhz and q9300 @ 3.3ghz. I get a gpu score of 10,034 and overall score of P10613

The HD4890 is an overclocked hd4870, which is basically what the name of the card suggested.

btarunr · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
But if it is based off an RV770 then there should be no excuse on the drivers front.

It's not based off an RV770.

ghost101 · Mar 18, 2009

btarunr said:
It's not based off an RV770.

What makes you so sure? I think it is if these results are true.

btarunr · Mar 18, 2009

ghost101 said:
What makes you so sure? I think it is if these results are true.

Results aside, we were talking about drivers. It's not that existing drivers (the ones used in this test) seamlessly support RV790 just because it has a lot in common with the RV770.

alexp999 · Mar 18, 2009

btarunr said:
It's not based off an RV770.

You're article said it was! :confused:

ghost101 said:
Because your cpu (physx) score is through the roof.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For comparison:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dmv=895112

HD4870 using cat 9.2, at 850mhz and q9300 @ 3.3ghz. I get a gpu score of 10,034 and overall score of P10613

The HD4890 is an overclocked hd4870, which is basically what the name of the card suggested.

I was only referring to the GPU score as I know physx affects the CPu score.

ghost101 · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
I was only referring to the GPU score as I know physx affects the CPu score.

Fair enough. What do you get with the 260 gtx? Is it overclocked?

alexp999 · Mar 18, 2009

ghost101 said:
Fair enough. What do you get with the 260 gtx? Is it overclocked?

I get about 10,800 GPU score and yes it is overclocked. But this card seems way too far behind. I know the 4870 cant quite match a GTX 260, but I only have a 192SP version, and I would have thought the RV790 would be capable of more than that.

Now I'm not throughing doubt on this, I'm just speaking my mind, when I say this.
How do we know this is even genuine? You could quite easily edit the fields in the screenies. Only reason I say this, is cus they have blanked out the BIOS version. WHY???

niko084 · Mar 18, 2009

http://pchardwareblips.dailyradar.com/story/rv790_to_become_radeon_hd_4890/

Looks like the news is, it is indeed a different core.

btarunr · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
You're article said it was!

"It is effectively only an overclocked RV770" true, since its specs are identical to the point where clock speeds get in. But it wasn't said they had the same IDs, or the same ASICs.

alexp999 · Mar 18, 2009

btarunr said:
"It is effectively only an overclocked RV770" true, since its specs are identical to the point where clock speeds get in. But it wasn't said they had the same IDs, or the same ASICs.

If it has the same fab process, same number of stream processors, TMU's and ROP's, same memory interface. That in my book means based off. I didn't say it was an RV770, but the architecture must be so close to being the same (if not the same), then I cant see a reason for the drivers not to be fully optimized.

farlex85 · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
I get about 10,800 GPU score and yes it is overclocked. But this card seems way too far behind. I know the 4870 cant quite match a GTX 260, but I only have a 192SP version, and I would have thought the RV790 would be capable of more than that.

Now I'm not throughing doubt on this, I'm just speaking my mind, when I say this.
How do we know this is even genuine? You could quite easily edit the fields in the screenies. Only reason I say this, is cus they have blanked out the BIOS version. WHY???

It could be fake. Given the circumstances it seems far more likely that it's just not running on all software cylinders yet. Either way, it's the first numbers, never trust them fully.

alexp999 said:
If it has the same fab process, same number of stream processors, TMU's and ROP's, same memory interface. That in my book means based off. I didn't say it was an RV770, but the architecture must be so close to being the same (if not the same), then I cant see a reason for the drivers not to be fully optimized.

Again the main difference b/t the cards may lie at the software level. Perhaps you are expecting too much.

niko084 · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
I get about 10,800 GPU score and yes it is overclocked. But this card seems way too far behind. I know the 4870 cant quite match a GTX 260, but I only have a 192SP version, and I would have thought the RV790 would be capable of more than that.

Now I'm not throughing doubt on this, I'm just speaking my mind, when I say this.
How do we know this is even genuine? You could quite easily edit the fields in the screenies. Only reason I say this, is cus they have blanked out the BIOS version. WHY???

We don't realistically.

But also the 4870 can come pretty close...
http://service.futuremark.com/resultComparison.action?compareResultId=522177&compareResultType=19

We have to take into account that this card is at "Stock Clocks" if it's even real, and is on pre-release drivers.

Do NOT take any of the numbers posted up as accurate, expect anywhere up to 20% or so off, if you look at a lot of cards numbers that seemingly get released before the release, they range from 5-20% off, in either direction.

EastCoasthandle · Mar 18, 2009

farlex85 said:
It could be fake. Given the circumstances it seems far more likely that it's just not running on all software cylinders yet. Either way, it's the first numbers, never trust them fully.

Again the main difference b/t the cards may lie at the software level. This is certainly the most likely cause for low numbers.

If anything was tweaked I am willing to believe it was to optimize the shaders making them more efficient. Other then that we really have to wait and see once the card is released in order to know if anything was changed or not. That would IMO determine if drivers for the 4870 wouldn't be as effective for the 4890, for example.

Furthermore, I honestly don't believe those results are correct. Here is a i7 920 and 4870 (750/900) stock using Vista:
3D Marks 16057
SM2.0 = 6013
SM3.0 = 7481
CPU = 5050
CPU clocked at 2.673GHz
source

Yet they are claiming 16096 using 850/975 also using a i7 920. Come on, something is obviously not adding up with that result.
3D Mark 16096
sm 2.0 = 6155
sm 3.0 = 7521
cpu = 4836

btarunr · Mar 18, 2009

alexp999 said:
If it has the same fab process, same number of stream processors, TMU's and ROP's, same memory interface. That in my book means based off.

Your book excludes the ASIC design itself as a factor.

Processor	AMD Ryzen 1700 @ 3.825ghz 1.36v
Motherboard	ASRock x370 Taichi
Cooling	Noctua NH-C14s
Memory	Corsair Vengeance RGB 16gb 3200
Video Card(s)	Gigabyte GTX 1080 ti
Display(s)	LG 4k IPS
Case	Be Quiet Pure Base 600 + more fans
Audio Device(s)	Sound Blaster Z
Power Supply	EVGA P2 750w
Mouse	G900
Keyboard	G810
Software	Windows 10 Pro

System Name	TheMailbox 5.0 / The Mailbox 4.5
Processor	RYZEN 1700X / Intel i7 2600k @ 4.2GHz
Motherboard	Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 / Gigabyte Z77X-UP5 TH Intel LGA 1155
Cooling	MasterLiquid PRO 280 / Scythe Katana 4
Memory	ADATA RGB 16GB DDR4 2666 16-16-16-39 / G.SKILL Sniper Series 16GB DDR3 1866: 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s)	MSI 1080 "Duke" with 8Gb of RAM. Boost Clock 1847 MHz / ASUS 780ti
Storage	256Gb M4 SSD / 128Gb Agelity 4 SSD , 500Gb WD (7200)
Display(s)	LG 29" Class 21:9 UltraWide® IPS LED Monitor 2560 x 1080 / Dell 27"
Case	Cooler Master MASTERBOX 5t / Cooler Master 922 HAF
Audio Device(s)	Realtek ALC1220 Audio Codec / SupremeFX X-Fi with Bose Companion 2 speakers.
Power Supply	Seasonic FOCUS Plus Series SSR-750PX 750W Platinum / SeaSonic X Series X650 Gold
Mouse	SteelSeries Sensei (RAW) / Logitech G5
Keyboard	Razer BlackWidow / Logitech (Unknown)
Software	Windows 10 Pro (64-bit)
Benchmark Scores	Benching is for bitches.

System Name	Aquarium
Processor	Ryzen 9 7950x
Motherboard	ROG Strix X670-E
Cooling	Lian Li Galahead 360 AIO
Memory	2x16gb Flare X5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR5-6000 PC5-48000
Video Card(s)	Asus RTX 3060
Storage	2TB WD SN850X Black NVMe, 500GB Samsung 970 NVMe
Display(s)	Gigabyte 32" IPS 144Hz
Case	Hyte Y60
Power Supply	Corsair RMx 850
Software	Win 11 Pro/ PopOS!

System Name	MY PC
Processor	E8400 @ 3.80Ghz > Q9650 3.60Ghz
Motherboard	Maximus Formula
Cooling	D5, 7/16" ID Tubing, Maze4 with Fuzion CPU WB
Memory	XMS 8500C5D @ 1066MHz
Video Card(s)	HD 2900 XT 858/900 to 4870 to 5870 (Keep Vreg area clean)
Storage	2
Display(s)	24"
Case	P180
Audio Device(s)	X-fi Plantinum
Power Supply	Silencer 750
Software	XP Pro SP3 to Windows 7
Benchmark Scores	This varies from one driver to another.

Processor	AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard	ASUS TUF x670e-Plus Wifi
Cooling	EK AIO 360. Phantek T30 fans.
Memory	32GB G.Skill 6000Mhz
Video Card(s)	Asus RTX 4090
Storage	WD/Samsung m.2's
Display(s)	LG C2 Evo OLED 42"
Case	Lian Li PC 011 Dynamic Evo
Audio Device(s)	Topping E70 DAC, SMSL SP200 Amp, Adam Audio T5V's, Hifiman Sundara's.
Power Supply	FSP Hydro Ti PRO 1000W
Mouse	Razer Basilisk V3 Pro
Keyboard	Epomaker 84 key
Software	Windows 11 Pro

Radeon HD 4890 3DMark Performance Revealed

ShogoXT

TheMailMan78

Big Member

farlex85

EastCoasthandle

New Member

erocker

*

alexp999

Staff

farlex85

cdawall

where the hell are my stars

alexp999

Staff

farlex85

johnnyfiive

ghost101

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator

ghost101

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator

alexp999

Staff

ghost101

alexp999

Staff

niko084

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator

alexp999

Staff

farlex85

niko084

EastCoasthandle

New Member

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator

System Name	Gaming Rig \| Uni Laptop
Processor	Intel Q6600 G0 (2007) @ 3.6Ghz @ 1.45625v (LLC) / 4 GHz Bench @ 1.63v \| AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 2 GHz
Motherboard	ASUS P5Q Deluxe (Intel P45) \| HP 6715b
Cooling	Xigmatek Dark Knight w/AC MX2 ~ Case Fans: 2 x 180mm + 1 x 120mm Silverstone Fans
Memory	4GB OCZ Platinum PC2-8000 @ 1000Mhz 5-5-5-15 2.1v \| 2 x 1GB DDR2 667 MHz
Video Card(s)	XFX GTX 285 1GB, Modded FTW BIOS @ 725/1512/1350 w/Accelero Xtreme GTX 280 + Scythe sinks\| ATI X1250
Storage	2x WD6400AAKS 1 TB Raid 0, 140GB Raid 1 & 80GB Maxtor Basics External HDD (storage) \| 160GB 2.5"
Display(s)	Samsung SyncMaster SM2433BW @ 1920 x 1200 via DVI-D \| 15.4" WSXGA+ (1680 x 1050 resolution)
Case	Silverstone Fortress FT01B-W ~ Logitech G15 R1 / Microsoft Laser Mouse 6000
Audio Device(s)	Soundmax AD2000BX Onboard Sound, via Logitech X-230 2.1 \| ADI SoundMAX HD Audio
Power Supply	Corsair TX650W \| HP 90W
Software	Windows 7 Ultimate Build 7100 x64 \| Windows 7 Ultimate Build 7100 x64
Benchmark Scores	3DM06: 19519, Vantage: P16170 ~ Win7: -CPU 7.5 -MEM 7.5 -AERO 7.9 -GFX 6.0 -HDD 6.0

System Name	All the cores
Processor	2990WX
Motherboard	Asrock X399M
Cooling	CPU-XSPC RayStorm Neo, 2x240mm+360mm, D5PWM+140mL, GPU-2x360mm, 2xbyski, D4+D5+100mL
Memory	4x16GB G.Skill 3600
Video Card(s)	(2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's
Storage	2x Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s)	Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case	Caselabs Mercury S5+pedestal
Audio Device(s)	Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply	Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse	Thermaltake Theron, Steam controller
Keyboard	Keychron K8
Software	W10P

System Name	RBMK-1000
Processor	AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard	ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling	DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory	2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s)	Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage	Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s)	BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case	Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s)	ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply	Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse	ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard	Gamdias Hermes E2
Software	Windows 11 Pro

System Name	Back to Blue
Processor	i9 14900k
Motherboard	Asrock Z790 Nova
Cooling	Corsair H150i Elite
Memory	64GB Corsair Dominator DDR5-6400 @ 6600
Video Card(s)	EVGA RTX 3090 Ultra FTW3
Storage	4TB WD 850x NVME, 4TB WD Black, 10TB Seagate Barracuda Pro
Display(s)	1x Samsung Odyssey G7 Neo and 1x Dell u2518d
Case	Lian Li o11 DXL w/custom vented front panel
Audio Device(s)	Focusrite Saffire PRO 14 -> DBX DriveRack PA+ -> Mackie MR8 and MR10 / Senn PX38X -> SB AE-5 Plus
Power Supply	Corsair RM1000i
Mouse	Logitech G502x
Keyboard	Corsair K95 Platinum
Software	Windows 11 x64 Pro
Benchmark Scores	31k multicore Cinebench - CPU limited 125w