Cthen
join:2004-08-01
Ypsilanti, MI
1 edit |  Radeon 4850 vs 4870
Is the performance that much better on the Radeon 4870 to justify it being almost $100 more than the 4850? In some cases I have seen the 4870 a little over $100 more than the 4850. |
|
Juke Box
Free From Marketing
Premium
join:2001-01-29
Bar & Grill
 ·Comcast
| Depends. 4870 from reputable companies are just shy of 300 bucks with some variations. And yes, there is a difference between both models.
I just got this MSI 4870 O/C from our friends at Newegg.
--
If you are having half as much fun as I am, then I must be having twice the fun than you are. Do The Math! |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
| reply to Cthen
i think its a 15-20% gain from 4850 to a 4870 if memory serves. There are different benches out there that claim different gains. But something interesting i remember was that if you plan to go crossfire, the difference in framerates is very minimal - like 5-10 fps average. |
|
Juke Box
Free From Marketing
Premium
join:2001-01-29
Bar & Grill
·Comcast
| said by sixstring  :i think its a 15-20% gain from 4850 to a 4870 if memory serves. There are different benches out there that claim different gains. But something interesting i remember was that if you plan to go crossfire, the difference in framerates is very minimal - like 5-10 fps average. The difference is greater then 15 - 20% gain and 5 - 10 fps.
Show us your sources.
--
If you are having half as much fun as I am, then I must be having twice the fun than you are. Do The Math! |
|
asdfdfdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net
| reply to Cthen
Actually 20% isn't that far off in many instances.
One can easily search the 4870 reviews at tomshardware and anandtech.
Of course it varies significantly depending on the game and the resolution so we really need to know both the game and resolution to try to give a clear answer.
Certainly if you are wanting to know if the increase in performance is generally commensurate with the increase in price the answer is no. |
|
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| reply to Cthen
said by Cthen :Is the performance that much better on the Radeon 4870 to justify it being almost $100 more than the 4850? In some cases I have seen the 4870 a little over $100 more than the 4850. depends on the situation. if you:
game @ 1920x1080 or higher
expect the highest quality settings
play newer games
have an adequate CPU (X2 5400+ or higher , Core2Duo 6xxx or higher)
then yes you'll benefit from going with the pricier HD4870. if you play at 1600x1200 or lower (with no plans to upgrade monitor) or play older games then i'd see no reason spending extra.
the difference is noticeable in most currently and commonly benchmarked games. there's a real-world advantage to the 4870 (or GTX260) over the 4850 at higher resolutions in games ranging from Assassin's Creed, Crysis, World in Conflict, Age of Conan, and others. |
|
jouno53
Palin 2012
join:2006-03-04
United State | Does the larger memory bandwidth and DDR5 make a big difference on the 4870? |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
2 edits | reply to Juke Box
said by Juke Box :said by sixstring :i think its a 15-20% gain from 4850 to a 4870 if memory serves. There are different benches out there that claim different gains. But something interesting i remember was that if you plan to go crossfire, the difference in framerates is very minimal - like 5-10 fps average. The difference is greater then 15 - 20% gain and 5 - 10 fps. Show us your sources. Source article:
»www.overclockersclub.com/reviews···0/10.htm
it depends on what resolution you play your games at. At higher res the difference may be a bit more for certain games.
i forgot where i saw the multi-GPU (SLI/Xfire) comparison, i was shopping for a card so i must've read over 20 articles.. i'll look for it though.
EDIT:
Found it, here's the source:
»www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1481/8···dex.html
all comparisons are average fps at 1920x1200 in crossfire:
World in Conflict: 4850 @ 41 fps vs. 4870 @ 41 fps
Crysis: 4850 @ 17.47 vs. 4870 @ 19.33 fps
UT3: 4850 @ 112.36 fps vs 4870 @ 112.21 fps
3dmark06: 4850 @ 15472 vs. 4870 @ 16093
The difference is very minimal, now that i read through it again, you're probably looking at less than 5 fps difference in most cases. |
|
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| said by sixstring :said by Juke Box :said by sixstring :i think its a 15-20% gain from 4850 to a 4870 if memory serves. There are different benches out there that claim different gains. But something interesting i remember was that if you plan to go crossfire, the difference in framerates is very minimal - like 5-10 fps average. The difference is greater then 15 - 20% gain and 5 - 10 fps. Show us your sources. Source article: » www.overclockersclub.com/reviews···0/10.htmit depends on what resolution you play your games at. At higher res the difference may be a bit more for certain games. i forgot where i saw the multi-GPU (SLI/Xfire) comparison, i was shopping for a card so i must've read over 20 articles.. i'll look for it though. CoD4 is a weak GFX game.
check out Bioshock: »www.overclockersclub.com/reviews···70/9.htm
Call of Juarez: »www.overclockersclub.com/reviews···0/12.htm |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
| Yeah, it depends on the game. I was searching for benches from the games i played, like CoD4, CoH, etc so i can compare with my own experience from my 8800GTS SLI.
Because games do differ usually for a comprehensive bench i just use 3DMark.
»www.overclockersclub.com/reviews···0/14.htm |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
| reply to Juke Box
said by Juke Box :The difference is greater then 15 - 20% gain and 5 - 10 fps. Show us your sources. I'd be interested to see a comparison that shows more than 5-10fps (average) in crossfire between these cards. I'd appreciate a link, TIA. |
|
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs: | OP never once mentioned CF/SLI. |
|
Cthen
join:2004-08-01
Ypsilanti, MI
·Comcast
| reply to Somnambul33t
said by Somnambul33t :said by Cthen :Is the performance that much better on the Radeon 4870 to justify it being almost $100 more than the 4850? In some cases I have seen the 4870 a little over $100 more than the 4850. depends on the situation. if you: game @ 1920x1080 or higher expect the highest quality settings play newer games have an adequate CPU (X2 5400+ or higher , Core2Duo 6xxx or higher) then yes you'll benefit from going with the pricier HD4870. if you play at 1600x1200 or lower (with no plans to upgrade monitor) or play older games then i'd see no reason spending extra. the difference is noticeable in most currently and commonly benchmarked games. there's a real-world advantage to the 4870 (or GTX260) over the 4850 at higher resolutions in games ranging from Assassin's Creed, Crysis, World in Conflict, Age of Conan, and others. That's the only difference from what you mentioned. I run a lower resolution (1280x768) than that on a 22" widescreen. However I do play the newer games (currently TF2 being my fav.) in 1280x768 as well. The rest of the system is up to par but with the new cards out for a bit it's finally time to replace this x800 gto2.  |
|
asdfdfdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net | reply to Cthen
For TF2 at 1280 resolution a 4850 should be plenty. |
|
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| reply to Cthen
you run 1280 on a 22" widescreen? the 4850 will run TF2 at max quality with some FSAA at native 1680x1050 no probs with a decent CPU and 2GB+ ram.
4850 is same speed as the 9800GTX and i ran TF2 at 1920x1080 at highest possible in-game quality, including 8x MSAA and 16x AF and was pulling 60fps minimum. |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
| reply to Somnambul33t
said by Somnambul33t :OP never once mentioned CF/SLI. That reply wasn't for the OP, i quoted a post from someone else.
However CF/SLI is still relevant because its still a factor in choosing a graphics card. |
|
Cthen
join:2004-08-01
Ypsilanti, MI
·Comcast
| said by sixstring :said by Somnambul33t :OP never once mentioned CF/SLI. That reply wasn't for the OP, i quoted a post from someone else. However CF/SLI is still relevant because its still a factor in choosing a graphics card. Yes I'm glad someone brought it up because I do plan on using CF down the road (might be awhile though). Based on what everyone has told me so far, it looks like the 4850 is the winner for me. However I have a question now about CF. Do you have to have the same cards or can we still mix and match them as long as they are CF supported? |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
| Yep, in case someone asks for the source:
»www.engadget.com/2008/02/22/atis···-tested/  |
|
Cthen
join:2004-08-01
Ypsilanti, MI
·Comcast
| Excellent! Thank you to everyone for all the info and you all have been a big help. Now.....I'm off to go shopping!  |
|
sixstring
join:2002-09-16
Pasadena, CA
·Comcast
| said by Cthen :Excellent! Thank you to everyone for all the info and you all have been a big help. Now.....I'm off to go shopping! there might be another price drop when Nvidia releases their GTX+. I dont know if you want to wait, but there may be better options for the price point you're looking at. I was going to wait for the 4870x2 release before i got mine, but i decided to stick with the SLI platform and got a GTX260 instead. I don't know if you can wait, though. |
|
