Sapphire HD 4870 X2 2048 MB

[Tatty_Two]

well its nice that this has become a fanboi load of nonsense.

look at the scores in most games the 4870X2 beats the GTX280 done end of story.

wait here let me go through the NV fanboi complaints.

uses more power

response from me:
your dropping $550 on a video cards i doubt you will be using a shitty PSU

doesn't scale at low res

response from me:
why the sam hell are you using a low res monitor?

GTX280 55nm beats it
umm no i bet it wont until it gets clocked higher funny thing about die shrinks they don't change performance hence a 130nm P4 @3ghz with the same cache fsb etc performs the same as a 65nm@3ghz.


did i miss any? if i did just say it

perhaps the x2 is a prettier colour?

 

[mandelore]

wow, that is one killer card, for gods sake, why cant i buy one?? bills insist on eating away at my cash supplies.

Nice review!!!

Some of the bashing the 280 takes is quite insane

 

[trt740]

Well I have a 280 gtx and at max setting at 1400x900 widescreen format (not a super high resolution) 19 inch monitor and with all setting at max quality, in 3dmark06, 8x sample, 2 quality and texture set to aniso filtering, level 16x, all my other cards including my 3870x2 didn't run close to as well as this card does. Set your system to those setting and tell me a 280 gtx or 4870x2 won't benefit a user such as my self. I am going to get a little higher resolution monitor for Xmas but games look great on this one.

 

[Ourasi]

I agree, but we disagree on the resolutions, I dont think a bench should be eliminated because we guess that the majority of x2 owners will be using 16xx and above monitors when it is a plain fact that the most common resolution remains with 17 and 19inch owners, now WE know that it might be fairly foolish to pay this much for a card to game only at those lower resolutions but do all the people out there who might just buy this card,,,,,they are not all hardware enthusiasts and whilst I would agree a large proportion of x2 buyers will be enthusiasts.....not all of them will be.
IMO reviews are not just for enthusiasts.....if they were they would only be reaching 5-10% of users.

This is a High-End product, witch only stretches it's legs on high resolutions. This is not meant for the masses, and will mostly end up in enthusiast's PC's. If you wan't to accurately review such a high-end product, using 1024x768 0xAA 0xAF is pointless, as it becomes a CPU bench in 99.9% of the games, and you have to overclock CPU like a mad man to even make the card break a sweat even at 1280x1024 2xAA 8xAF. The HD4870x2 is only 50% faster then 9800GTX+ in F.E.A.R. in 1024x768, while at 1920x1200 4xAA 16xAF it's 300% faster.

Using such low resolutions in this review is like testing the supercar Bugatti Veron over speedbumps while carpooling 2.5 kids to school, and saying it's only 50% faster on average compared to a hybrid while complaining that the Veron uses alot of cas....

When reviewing a product in the extreme high-end such as HD4870x2, and using low CPU limited resolutions on half the benches, and conclude it's only 14% faster then the GTX280 based on these numbers, is inaccurate at best.

 

[Ourasi]

Well I have a 280 gtx and at max setting at 1400x900 widescreen format (not a super high resolution) 19 inch monitor and with all setting at max quality, in 3dmark06, 8x sample, 2 quality and texture set to aniso filtering, level 16x, all my other cards including my 3870x2 didn't run close to as well as this card does. Set your system to those setting and tell me a 280 gtx or 4870x2 won't benefit a user such as my self. I am going to get a little higher resolution monitor for Xmas but games look great on this one.

You are just underlining my points, these cards are not meant for 1024x768 0xAA 0xAF/1280x1024 2xAA 8xAF used in this review. For those resolutions to have any meaning at all on these high-end products, you'd have to slap on 16xAA 16xAF, but he did not. And thus it's a CPU bench, not a graphic bench....

If you played your games in 1400x900 0xAA 0xAF with a GTX280, that would be a horrific waste, borderline madness, don't you agree?

 

[Tatty_Two]

This is a High-End product, witch only stretches it's legs on high resolutions. This is not meant for the masses, and will mostly end up in enthusiast's PC's. If you wan't to accurately review such a high-end product, using 1024x768 0xAA 0xAF is pointless, as it becomes a CPU bench in 99.9% of the games, and you have to overclock CPU like a mad man to even make the card break a sweat even at 1280x1024 2xAA 8xAF. The HD4870x2 is only 50% faster then 9800GTX+ in F.E.A.R. in 1024x768, while at 1920x1200 4xAA 16xAF it's 300% faster.

Using such low resolutions in this review is like testing the supercar Bugatti Veron over speedbumps while carpooling 2.5 kids to school, and saying it's only 50% faster on average compared to a hybrid while complaining that the Veron uses alot of cas....

When reviewing a product in the extreme high-end such as HD4870x2, and using low CPU limited resolutions on half the benches, and conclude it's only 14% faster then the GTX280 based on these numbers, is inaccurate at best.

Lol, I know all that, and I agree, my point was.........reviews are supposed to cater for all buyers, you or I do not know how many non enthusists will actually buy the card so who are we to say what users should be included or excluded, many reviews on many sites have included at least 1280 res for thier reviews......and therefore I beleive that it is right to show lower res....I am not suggesting that mid and high res should not be used for one minute, I just think that where possible....as wide an angle is preferable, bottom line is there ARE members in this site that have ordered the x2 with 19 inch monitors so why shouldnt this site cater for them as well as using higher res benches? We do agree on the fact that much of the power and cost of the card is wasted on these lower res tho!

 

[Animalpak]

O.T

Sorry i would know if anybody knows if a 1000 W powersupply is enough for 2 HD 4870X2 in crossfireX ?

Or i need 1200/1300 W powesupply ?

 

[ShadowFold]

A good brand 1kw is fine

 

[imperialreign]

A good brand 1kw is fine

althought you might want to ask your local power company for a firehose connection


I gotta say, I'm surpsied the card is running nearly twice as fast as a 4870. the only thing I would've liked to see in the reviews would've been average min framerates as well. That was the pitfall of the 3870x2 versus crossfired 3870s. I'm kinda hoping to see that ATI had addressed that issue with these cards.

Either way, though . . . wow. It's like seeing the results of the X1900 XTX for the first time. A whalloppin and a whoompin the card has come crashing out of the gates. Trim the price up some more, and it can't be beat.

 

[From_Nowhere]

Too bad ATI priced these cards at ~$550...
Although, the 4870X2's performance is amazing

 

[Mussels]

The performance per dollar graph is still my favourite part of TPU reviews.


ourasi: you keep talking about how 1024x768 is a useless resolution. It is not. Many high definition TV's these days come in 1360x768 resolution, which is just a widened 1024x768. 720P screens are next to impossible to find nowadays, so this is relevant to those users (myself included)

Also, just because its high end doesnt mean squat. assumptions are stupid, w1zzard did those tests to LEARN what resolutions these cards perform best at, and he PROVED its not worth it at low resolution. Proof is far better than faulty logic - the Nvidia FX series of cards was 'high end' and they also ran like crap - assuming at the time that they were for 'high res' only would have been ridiculous.

 

[candle_86]

This is a High-End product, witch only stretches it's legs on high resolutions. This is not meant for the masses, and will mostly end up in enthusiast's PC's. If you wan't to accurately review such a high-end product, using 1024x768 0xAA 0xAF is pointless, as it becomes a CPU bench in 99.9% of the games, and you have to overclock CPU like a mad man to even make the card break a sweat even at 1280x1024 2xAA 8xAF. The HD4870x2 is only 50% faster then 9800GTX+ in F.E.A.R. in 1024x768, while at 1920x1200 4xAA 16xAF it's 300% faster.

Using such low resolutions in this review is like testing the supercar Bugatti Veron over speedbumps while carpooling 2.5 kids to school, and saying it's only 50% faster on average compared to a hybrid while complaining that the Veron uses alot of cas....

When reviewing a product in the extreme high-end such as HD4870x2, and using low CPU limited resolutions on half the benches, and conclude it's only 14% faster then the GTX280 based on these numbers, is inaccurate at best.

see thats not true, I run a 17in moniter and ran crossfire till I switched boards. My viewpoint is quite simple buy high end at release and you won't need a new card for 12x10 for sevral years. My 7950GT 512mb held up quite nicely till I got my 3870 and 3850 in my comp. So people like me care about the 12x10 res, I buy cards like this for one reason, because I upgrade every 1.5 years or I like to as long as my finaces are stable, the last year they havn't been. So to me this res matters, highend isnt just for enthusiats its also for the bang for buck guys, what works better a 500 dollar card every year and a half to 2 years or a 300 dollar card every year, you do the math.

My 6800GT stayed with me till I went to a 7950GT. I had to sell it for cash because I lost my job and get a 7200GS simply to hold me over. My 6800GT replace a 5950XT that was simply an RMA replacement for my Ti-4400. My Ti-4400 replace my Geforce2 GTS. See where im going with this?

 

[Chewy]

O.T

Sorry i would know if anybody knows if a 1000 W powersupply is enough for 2 HD 4870X2 in crossfireX ?

Or i need 1200/1300 W powesupply ?

I think my psu would handle theses in x-fire good enough. I'd guess 600w peak? I have an Enermax 850Watt Dxx, its big. got it for about $225 with tax so I cant complain

Ofc if you do buy a new psu you should get the 1kw varrient of the Enermax Galaxy, if you go with a Galaxy psu.

 

[Darkrealms]

First Ourasi, thank you for keeping this on a professional level. Second on the first page of comments W1zz already said this:

don’t look at 1024x768 if you don’t like to see those results

no 2560x1600 because those huge displays are too expensive to buy, only 3 people each donated $10 so far

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=925292&postcount=24
If he doesn't have the monitor and we (as a forum group) haven't helped him out with it then we can't really blame him for not testing all the possibilities.

If he had it then I'm sure he would be testing it.

 

[LiveOrDie]

are these Company of Heroes scores the max or average i would say there the max to high to be average?

 

[W1zzard]

they are the average, did you disable the fps limit in your testing?

 

[LiveOrDie]

yes and my average was only 191.3 fps ?

 

[LiveOrDie]

this is in the older game ill try that did you all high settings or ultra settings im guess you had DX10 shader off because its in XP

 

[W1zzard]

yeah no dx10 shaders, i selected the highest that could be selected under xp

 

[LiveOrDie]

yeah no dx10 shaders, i selected the highest that could be selected under xp

i set all my settings to high not ultra and still only got whats shown any ideas could it be vista? and here are the setting im running

 

[W1zzard]

Wouldn't it be better to have an % number pr. resolution? Slapping it all together does not tell the whole story IMHO. I imagine people would find it interesting to know that the higher the resolution, the bigger the difference between HD4870x2 vs. GTX280. After all this is a high-end part, and running this at anything below 1680x1050 should be considered a crime........

The Relative performance and performance per watt/$ would look very different if you applied it to each resolution tested. Alot of work, but worth it me thinks

there you go sir: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Powercolor/HD_4850_PCS/26.html 30 pages for a vga review ..

we also changed the algorithm which builds the summary percentages slightly to be more intuitive. discuss the new per-resolution-graphs in the pcs 4850 comments thread please.

 

[Culex]

What hardware was used for these tests? The TF2 and Crysis tests were absolute bogus, since I've seen the 4870x2 beat the gtx280 by 33-50% (in crysis). And wtf with the TF2 tests, which I might remind you is an ATI optiomised game. THE 4870 BEATS the GTX280 in that game, and what was with that CoH test? 198FPS? Bull! These I must say are the most bogus tests I have ever seen carried out, and what's with the 9800GTX beating the 4870 in 3dMark? THE 4850 beats it!!!!!! Anyway, those tests are completely illegitimate and should not be thought of as anything close to reality.

 

[trt740]

What hardware was used for these tests? The TF2 and Crysis tests were absolute bogus, since I've seen the 4870x2 beat the gtx280 by 33-50% (in crysis). And wtf with the TF2 tests, which I might remind you is an ATI optiomised game. THE 4870 BEATS the GTX280 in that game, and what was with that CoH test? 198FPS? Bull! These I must say are the most bogus tests I have ever seen carried out, and what's with the 9800GTX beating the 4870 in 3dMark? THE 4850 beats it!!!!!! Anyway, those tests are completely illegitimate and should not be thought of as anything close to reality.

wow!!!!

 

[Mussels]

yeahhhh... culex, if you read the thing its stated what hardware was used.

 

[candle_86]

What hardware was used for these tests? The TF2 and Crysis tests were absolute bogus, since I've seen the 4870x2 beat the gtx280 by 33-50% (in crysis). And wtf with the TF2 tests, which I might remind you is an ATI optiomised game. THE 4870 BEATS the GTX280 in that game, and what was with that CoH test? 198FPS? Bull! These I must say are the most bogus tests I have ever seen carried out, and what's with the 9800GTX beating the 4870 in 3dMark? THE 4850 beats it!!!!!! Anyway, those tests are completely illegitimate and should not be thought of as anything close to reality.

dude wizz is one of best hardware reviewers around, go get a life kid