ATI Radeon HD 3800 Series @ [H]

Mister Natural said:
Dugg.
Based on the review, if I were spending my money now I'd still go with the 8800GT.
Click to expand...

Actually on second thought I might not buy anything. I'd like more information on Directx 10.1. Your article mention of this is the first I've heard of DX 10.1. Could it be that the 8800gt will be quickly lacking when Vista SP1 is released?
 
Mister Natural said:
Actually on second thought I might not buy anything. I'd like more information on Directx 10.1. Your article mention of this is the first I've heard of DX 10.1. Could it be that the 8800gt will be quickly lacking when Vista SP1 is released?
Click to expand...

No. DX10.1 is pretty meaningless.
 
snaggletooth said:
i wouldn't go so far as to call dx10.1 meaningless, though it's certainly not critical for this round of games.
Click to expand...

Well its mostly tighter standards for GPUs if I read it correctly. Both ATI and NV already support most of the features anyway with older cards.
 
As a retired ATI fanboy, I have to say I am still disappointed at ATI/AMD's performance of late. The 2900's were just released what? 5 months ago? They drop the nm and lower the price and rehash there uncompetative product to do what? Take more money from fanboys? IMHO the 3870 should have been the 2900xt. I really think it's saying something when my 6 month old 8800gtx (that was 4 months old when I got it) still doesn't even make it into ATI reviews becasue it would make ATI's cards look so bad. I understand the price points are very different but ATI can't release a card that isn't even competative with a year old gpu? Sad ATI, and I used to love you so much.
 
Wow, I'm kinda torn on what to buy as well. I was pretty much set on buying an 8800GT but I don't know now. The 3870 does look kinda tempting now especially since I could potentially grab another one for crossfire.
 
smithy1185 said:
Wow, I'm kinda torn on what to buy as well. I was pretty much set on buying an 8800GT but I don't know now.
Click to expand...

Same here. Newegg has 3870's for $219. That's where I was hoping the 256mb 8800gt would fall. If the price doesn't skyrocket like the 8800gt's did, this is a very viable option.
 
Im glad ATI is putting up some competition finally, if only in the lower end market. Ive never been an ATI user but I'm glad they are making a come back.
 
AOM said:
We'll I found these, so once those sell out at the egg, here comes your inflated prices and I bet will see them at the Egg before the week is out or the weekend is over.

3850 @TigerDirect
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3481320&CatId=2349

3870 @TigerDirect
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3481319&CatId=2349

Not huge price gouging, but it's above MSRP none the less.
Click to expand...


This launch is starting off exactly like the 8800GT. First day buyers got them for 229-249 and then they sold out. The rest is history. Will be interesting to follow the 'Egg's pricing over the next week.
 
so I don't get it, with hardocp leaving out the 8800GTS/GTX cards, does that mean that the amd/ati still can't match its performace?
 
Let the price gouging begin. I doubt we will see good enough supplies, <=MSRP, on both the GT and HD3870 until 1/08.
 
Umm...wow, it must REEEEALY cold in hell right now. AMD producing good products again?! :eek:

Seriously though, this is where ATI has always excelled: excellent performing parts right at or below the $200 point. It's why I'm using the card I am. ;)
 
This is an excellent direction for ATI to go. I'd be happy to buy a video card from them. More performance per watt, please!
 
meh, I think I'll stick with my x1900xtx a little while longer. I'm not going to upgrade until I'm sure I can play dx10 at high settings, and my x1900xtx still plays at dx9 just fine at 1280x1024.

We're essentially still on first-gen dx10 hardware a full year later, and it's downright frustrating.
 
I think it's dumb to assume the ATI card will not follow the 8800GT's footsteps with super high demand driving up the street price. To compare the average streetprice to an MSRP of another product is premature.

With the spillover demand, coupled with the pretty dang performance of the ATI card, you don't think it'll sell out immediately and then have high street prices as well?
 
Tempting... But I swore off ATI cards. My last two cards were ATI, and each died after about a year of use. No O/C or anything... they were well treated. Probably just bad luck, but still...

I'll wait for an affordable 8800GT.
 
Sadly, I will be waiting for the 8800GT to come down in price.

Ya still can't play SimCity4 on ATI cards (well, you can, but it sucks balls).

EDIT: I got really pissed and went and hunted. There's a fix. Retracted.
 
Why would anyone consider a 256mb 8800GT?

Go back to the numerous DX10 tests [H] has done and you will see the 2900XT absolutely killing the 8800GTS 320mb...simply because 320mb just isn't enough ram to run DX10. 256mb will be even worse.

A 8800GT 256mb is not a DX10 card..it is a really fast DX9 card. It will be great for the CS1.6 gamers.

I would not even put a 256mb 8800GT and a 512mb 3870 in the same market segment.
 
I wish I had apples-to-apples performance numbers to compare this against my SLI'ed 7900GSes, to know how much I'd be losing but... If anyone is interested, I am willing to trade my TWO Leadtek 7900GS / 256MB cards straight-up for a new Radeon HD 3850.

The 7900s are great (single-slot, but have the larger copper heatsink to cool the memory as well as core), but I need to do multi-monitor in Vista while gaming, and it's been a nightmare. I don' have an elegant or cheap solution to get it done and maintain SLI in games and Aero on the desktop. (I'm looking at gameplay on one monitor, IM/Ventrilo/TS on second monitor). I need to trade down to one card, and straight-up would be a lot faster easier than trying to sell then buy.

PM me if interested? :)
 
SorienOR said:
Why would anyone consider a 256mb 8800GT?

Go back to the numerous DX10 tests [H] has done and you will see the 2900XT absolutely killing the 8800GTS 320mb...simply because 320mb just isn't enough ram to run DX10. 256mb will be even worse.

A 8800GT 256mb is not a DX10 card..it is a really fast DX9 card. It will be great for the CS1.6 gamers.

I would not even put a 256mb 8800GT and a 512mb 3870 in the same market segment.
Click to expand...

I would if the 256mb 8800Gt performs equally or better.

Jbirney said:
Anyways rumor has it that AMD has lined up about 250,000 of these cards (compared to nvs 40,000 or so GTs they had ready for launch) and should have another 150,000 out before the end of the year. So you should have better availability.
Click to expand...

Do you have any sources for these numbers or did you just pull them out....?
 
It still doesn't make it worth it. They still have a LONG way to go, especially their crappy software. A lower price doesn't make these better cards, not by a long shot.

I really don't see what everyone is getting so worked up about. The GT beat the 3870 in everything and everyone is like ooohhhh ahhhh over the 3870. So what if it's a lower price, that just means is cheap, in more ways than one.

ATi comes out with the 3870 and thinks they have done something great. It should have been out last year if they wanted to really compete. It just proves they have failed as a company.
 
cooltown831 said:
Great review. Thanks HardOCP!

On the pricepoint issue. The 8800GT's are starting to creep into stock in a couple days, a new wave of them will be arriving (Friday I think). If you use Froogle.com and search for the 8800GT you can find many respectable (but less well known than newegg and clubIT) sites that sell the 8800GT for $230...roughly $10-20 more than the 3870. Just cause everyone flocks to newegg at the moment doesn't mean [H]ardies need to. We're smarter than that right? ;)

By the way after tax, my MSI 8800GT OC came to $254 shipped, that was 8.25% sales tax on there and 2 day air shipping ($13). Sweet deal. I was told it will arrive Nov. 20th.
Click to expand...

What sites?
 
Cinge said:
It still doesn't make it worth it. They still have a LONG way to go, especially their crappy software. A lower price doesn't make these better cards, not by a long shot.

I really don't see what everyone is getting so worked up about. The GT beat the 3870 in everything and everyone is like ooohhhh ahhhh over the 3870. So what if it's a lower price, that just means is cheap, in more ways than one.

ATi comes out with the 3870 and thinks they have done something great. It should have been out last year if they wanted to really compete. It just proves they have failed as a company.
Click to expand...

Well, you gotta look at it this way.

ATI beats nVidia... at $219.

Unless retailers start gouging pricing like they did with 8800GT, nothing nVidia has can beat ATI at $219.
 
SorienOR said:
Why would anyone consider a 256mb 8800GT?

Go back to the numerous DX10 tests [H] has done and you will see the 2900XT absolutely killing the 8800GTS 320mb...simply because 320mb just isn't enough ram to run DX10. 256mb will be even worse.

A 8800GT 256mb is not a DX10 card..it is a really fast DX9 card. It will be great for the CS1.6 gamers.

I would not even put a 256mb 8800GT and a 512mb 3870 in the same market segment.
Click to expand...

They will be in the same market segment as far as price. I wouldn't expect the 256mb 8800gt to outperform the 3870 at higher resolutions anyway.

And why wouldn't it be a dx10 card? At lower resolutions I would expect it to perform admirably in dx10. Why would you even need a dx9 card for 1.6 anyway? dx7 cards can handle that. Your attempt at a "sweet burn" falls short.
 
SorienOR said:
Why would anyone consider a 256mb 8800GT?

...<snip>...
Click to expand...

Well it's simple really. I run two displays on my main system. On the primary display I play my games. And on the secondary display I run TeamSpeak, browse the web, and play Winamp. Currently I have both displays hooked up to an 8800GTS/640. And I've found that games suffer very slightly because the one card is also handling things for the second display. Technically, what I want is to buy two GTs and move the GTS/640 to my secondary system. An important reason is that Nvidia's drivers have one feature that ATI's drivers have always lacked. They can scale output vertically without stretching it horizontally. This is a feature that is required for using Widescreen displays with many older games.

When I heard (in this review) that ATI was going to make Dual Display work with CrossFire, it piqued my interest. But then it didn't take long to realize that I couldn't count on this to work, just because some marketing type said it would!! In fact, I have grave doubts that ATI's drivers will be as good as they were before. Simply put, I suspect that AMD will be so strapped for funds in the near future that they'll cut development for Everything. And like I said in the past, this "launch" seems to be a clear indication that they will never again be anything but second rate. That applies to both their hardware and drivers.

Please note!: I don't want to see AMD / ATI go belly up! But they simply can't compete on anything but price (or as some might say "value"). Until things change fairly drastically, I think I'll opt for a pair of GTs and there isn't any reason why a 256MB version shouldn't be able to handle Aero on that second display.
 
I would imagine there is more money to be made in the mainstream segment than the enthusiast segment as their is a ton more volume being done at that evel due to the more affordable prices. I'm just glad that new cards aren't going for the 5 or 600 bucks they used to.
 
imo what would hurt ati, is if nVidia came out with a 8800 512, Right under the 8800gt for about 190 to 200 bucks.

That would really put a dent in ati's 3870
 
BoogerBomb said:
I would imagine there is more money to be made in the mainstream segment than the enthusiast segment as their is a ton more volume being done at that evel due to the more affordable prices. I'm just glad that new cards aren't going for the 5 or 600 bucks they used to.
Click to expand...



the next-gen models that i'm interested in will be in that range, i'm sure. 4x3870 would be a nice chunk of change too... we'll see how those benchmarks end up.


now, to do something about those damn finacial priorities....
 
~El~Jefe~ said:
I am not sure who is both A into computing/gaming and B still plays on a 20" crt at 1600x1200.

not I. i have 21" mitsu awaiting someone eager enough to come get it.

1280x1024? 1920x1200?

widescreen? I love the reviews here, but please, switch resolutions to something 2006+ ?

I can tell its your way of keeping it subjectively playable resolutions. I like that idea, but standardizing them would make it much clearer (as well as ditching obscure resolutions)
Click to expand...

I thnik they do a fine job as is.


A Shiny Demon said:
666 million transistors? Satan's video card!
Click to expand...


LOL !! :D


AeriaGloris said:
I agree, what's the point of looking at overclocking if you don't show how much difference it makes?
Click to expand...


That would likely involove retesting all configs... asking a bit much aren't we ??


Silent.Sin said:
Remember that even a $40 price difference is 15% here, that's quite a big difference if they can manage to get these parts out at MSRP. Actually it probably just about covers the performance disparity seen in the two parts.

I feel like AMD had more breathing room with the pricing of these parts due to the lower manufacturing costs, that's why you saw the "sudden" change (remember there was no real official announcement, just a price range) in price down to $229. This definitely helps them stay price competitive, something AMD has relied on (a little too much lately imo) since..well since their inception. I also remember hearing that the 3870 was supposed to be an 800MHz part. Perhaps AMD saw it better to increase the number of chips that could be binned as 3870's at 777 MHz and have the pricing card in their hand rather than to have fewer 3870s available that could make it to 800MHz at a higher price. I'm thinking the 800MHz parts still couldn't trump the 8800GT so the price point was lowered as was the performance. Might as well have at least SOME sort of advantage, no?

Overall the results of these reviews is what I expected. I do really dislike the opinions posted on the earliest of them that seem to paint a pretty bad picture for AMD based purely on performance. We have now seen not one but TWO extremely competitive product launches in the past month that bring to mind the price/performance ratios not seen since the 9800Pro. Both camps have some pretty awesome hardware compared to what they were/are selling. To get equal performance from parts that are costing $100-150 less...well shit who can honestly say either is a bad deal??
Click to expand...



Agreed except for the 40 dollar part.Given what I am ready to spend on a video card,if the performance is there,40 dollars isnt much these days.I am happy that the majority of our members here,can now get great performance on the cheap.

Some of us though,want something a hell of alot faster,and are willing to spring for the extra cash.
 
Overall I think it's a nice card. It's worth its value, so that's what matters.

Obviousely the mid-range cards will sell much more than high-end cards, so the high-end segment is mainly for bragging rights...that's not where the profits are. For that reason, I think AMD's lucky they don't have high-end cards right now, since it won'y change much for them...though I suppose they'd have more advertisement if they had some Ultra beater.

I also agree with the person who mentionned that we're here comparing the 8800 GT's price with the 3870's MSRP...where as if we compared both MSRP they'd be about the same, in which case the 8800 GT would be the card to get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top