4870x2 Review. New King is here!!!

why the hell did they skip the 1920x1200 resolution in the benchmarks? it seems like that would be the most common res for the 4870x2 consumers. lol at all the idiots around here with 19-22inch monitors that are going to buy 1 or even 2 of these cards. I know we will see that because we already have people with gtx280 in tri sli at 1680x1050 around the forums. :rolleyes:
 
I'm not sure why any of the reviews (thus far) have not gone above 4x AA. With that much power, what's the point of having 4x AA with 120FPS? Why not have 16 or 24x AA at 60FPS and compare the rest of the cards with those settings?
 
Nice. Any word on microstuttering? Has it been eliminated? I don't see it referred to in the reviews thus far.
 
Guru3D has a shitty setup, IMHO, due to the sadness of 2gigs of RAM and lowly dual core processor that hasn't been overclocked to its potential (unless they had a bad CPU for this system, which I doubt).
 
somehow i am happy that at 1680X1050 the performance gain over a 4870 is not that high. i made the right choice at the time.
 
Alai said:
Guru3D has a shitty setup, IMHO, due to the sadness of 2gigs of RAM and lowly dual core processor that hasn't been overclocked to its potential (unless they had a bad CPU for this system, which I doubt).
Click to expand...

I kind of like the Guru3d setup for those that have that kind of setup. I would figure that someone who buys one of these cards would also have a OC'ed system but you never know. I think its a good down to earth review that the majority of gamers can associate with rather than the 4ghz quad setups.
 
lafarius said:
I kind of like the Guru3d setup for those that have that kind of setup. I would figure that someone who buys one of these cards would also have a OC'ed system but you never know. I think its a good down to earth review that the majority of gamers can associate with rather than the 4ghz quad setups.
Click to expand...

True, however, they should note that in their review. They don't mention at all that their setup is very underpowered and low on processing power/memory to fully utilize the potential of the 4870X2. The only way you would know is by checking their test setup. Most people just jump to certain tests for games and then conclusions.
 
Alai said:
True, however, they should note that in their review. They don't mention at all that their setup is very underpowered and low on processing power/memory to fully utilize the potential of the 4870X2. The only way you would know is by checking their test setup. Most people just jump to certain tests for games and then conclusions.
Click to expand...

I agree. On another forum we had someone who was using reviews as a retort and that was one issue. They dont look at test setups to get a real grasp. I saw alot of gains going from the stock e8400 clocks to 3.825ghz and not much more hitting 4.05ghz so settled on 3.825. From what I have seen Guru3d has been using the stock e8400 for awhile now which includes the earlier HD48xx and Preview 4870x2 articles.

On a side note I was very eager to see these and await Hardocp's review. At 1920x1200 the 4870CF setup seems to stay right there with the 4870x2. 2560x1600 is a different story but as a 4870CF owner I will admit I was worried my setup would just get hammered and ruin my "personal" glee.

Course isnt the 4870x2 2gb made for 2560x1600 w/AA anyhow?
 
Tweaktown's review is massive fail. Their are using a Q6600 at 3.0, so most of their graphs smash head first into a CPU wall.
 
Alai said:
The only way you would know is by checking their test setup. Most people just jump to certain tests for games and then conclusions.
Click to expand...
I skip to the test setup before checking graphs.
 
Wonder when the Non Reference cards come out. Wanna see what what GeCube has planned.
 
cannondale06 said:
except in the one game most people need/want more gpu power in.
Click to expand...

If your refering to Crysis, the X2 beats the GTX 280 in the majority of tests...

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/sapphire_4870x2/7.htm
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2327868,00.asp
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4870-x2-review-crossfire/12
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...deon-hd-4870-x2-2gb-video-card-review-15.html
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=607&pageid=10
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=605&type=expert&pid=7
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1541/9/sapphire_radeon_hd_4870_x2_in_crossfirex/index.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/HD_4870_X2/9.html
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-X2--AMD-Back-On-Top/?page=9
http://techreport.com/articles.x/15293/8

Yes, I counted.
X2 has higher Avg frame rates 17 times and the GTX 280 has it 16 times.
17>16 , Phew that was close.


And if you count the previews, the X2 still > GTX 280.
 
:D Using the word "rape" with 3D cards certainly gives vivid mental images!

Power consumption is huge, but what do you expect for a high end card. Looks good.
 
It is two HD4870s on one card with more RAM but it is cheaper than two HD4870s. If people are already all over the HD4870, I don't see a reason why people won't be all over this as well.
 
alg7_munif said:
It is two HD4870s on one card with more RAM but it is cheaper than two HD4870s. If people are already all over the HD4870, I don't see a reason why people won't be all over this as well.
Click to expand...
Budget would keep some away or those that already grabbed a 4870. Lets hope the supply keeps up with demand. AMD could use all the sales they can muster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top