ASUS EAH6850 DirectCU Video Card Review @ [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,620
ASUS EAH6850 DirectCU Video Card Review - The ASUS EAH6850 DirectCU is brand new and sports a custom cooler with overclocked GPU frequency and Voltage Tweak technology. We test the EAH6850 DirectCU against the GeForce GTX 460 1GB in some of the latest games including Lost Planet 2 and Medal of Honor.
 
would like to see a conparison. of the 460 overclocked vs 6850 overclocked.
 
Just to note, AMD recently released another "hotfix" version 10.10e that increases performance for 6850 cards.
 
Fucking amazing... AMD / ATI STILL refuses to include the display port adapter for their various popular types. LEAST they could do is make it available for purchase on their godamn website. :(
 
eric66 said:
gtx 460 died so quickly and it supposed to be new 8800 gt lol
Click to expand...

The 8800gt was more powerful than ATi's best card, at the time. So it had staying power that ATi could not overcome in a short time

However, the GTX460 squeezed itself between Cypress (which in terms of die size/perf would smash it... and was outright faster anyhow) and Juniper, which was targeted at a much lower price bracket. It was between a rock and a hard place, and the incomming HD6800 was designed for that market, to effectively replace Cypress's lower range while costing far less than a harvested Cypress core.

So the GTX460 wasn't going to keep it's 200usd price point for very long. It's a 180usd now, though, so it's still a good buy.
 
I am glad they didn't bump up the overclocking higher then what they sell them at. This would make them just add a higher price to the card. No reason to pay more money for something anyone can do for free.
 
Wow I actually dissagree, I haven't had this happen in many reviews here at the [H] as 99.9% of the time no matter who wins I agree. In this specific review I have no idea what Hardocp's intentions were.

FACT GTX 460 overclocked cards were available since the launch of the 6000 amd cards at $179.99 after MIR and continue to be. This Asus 6850 card comes in at a hefty $199.99.

Yet I can't understand why they would bench these cards against stock GTX 460 1gb cards. Usually Hardocp throws in a overclocked card if it is in the same price class. They take heat for it and no matter what happens and what team wins I defend them.

I think this review would be totally different if they would have used one of these, several of which have been available for $169.99 or $179.99 after MIR since the release of the 6000 series so the usual excuse of "There wasn't any available at the time of review" doesn't apply here.

Gigabyte
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...5333&cm_re=GTX_460_1gb-_-14-125-333-_-Product

ECS Elite Group
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4117&cm_re=GTX_460_1gb-_-14-134-117-_-Product

EVGA
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...0570&cm_re=GTX_460_1gb-_-14-130-570-_-Product

At $199 you could even have one of these which will more than likely blow that Asus model out of the water.

Galaxy (One of Hardocp's closest partners where all it probably would have taken was a phonecall) Still cheaper BTW at $179.99 after MIR
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...2056&cm_re=GTX_460_1gb-_-14-162-056-_-Product

Again I'm shocked I disagree. I'd also note that the reviewer is someone I am not familiar with but Brent Justice Edited the article. Hopefully a trend like this doesn't continue as it looks to me like the [H] is caving in to cater to the popular readerships likes and dislikes.
 
Last edited:
First off, I'm a fan of HardOCP and appreciate the hard work of your reviews, but I'm completly baffled.
Back in the MSI N460GTX Hawk Edition Video Card Review on Sept. 20th, the stock Nvidia Reference GTX460 in Battelefield BC2 Highest Playable at 1920 x 1200 was 8x CSAA 16XAF with Highest Settings and the minimum frame rate was 24, but in this review the highest playable at same resolution is no AA 16x AF Highest settings and the minimum frame rate dipped down to 22. I realize one test system has 4GB Dual channel DDR2 versus 6GB DDR3 ram, and also one is a Penryn quad at 3.66Ghz, the other a i7-920 quad at 3.6GHz, does that explain the huge diffence seen between this same card? Is the problem that game play quality is subjective?
As far as reviews showing what the customer can expect from the same card, these two reviews would give you a very different picture as to what the reference card can do.

I wonder if it would be worth keeping a spread sheet of highest playable settings from reviews and when there is an signifigant outlier in the data, the issue could maybe be explained in a added comment in the review. I understand drivers change and games are patched, but something this major really makes me wonder why the difference.

Thanks,
Michael
 
I agree, what is the point of testing against a reference card anyways? As of right now, out of the 25 GTX 460 1GB cards Newegg is selling, only one is clocked at the reference 675Mhz!

In my opinion, I prefer a review that has comparisons where cards are overclocked close to their full potential while remaining stable (air cooled and able to finish game run throughs), and then comparisons made. Like watching drag racing, I dont want to see two stock motorcycles straight from the dealer race, I want to see the potential someone tweaked out of an engine. I'm currently running my GTX 460 with a mild 870Mhz OC.

Number of GTX460 1GB's currently at Newegg and their stock GPU speed:
675Mhz 1
715Mhz 1
700Mhz 4
720Mhz 3
725Mhz 1
760Mhz 1
763Mhz 3
765Mhz 2
775Mhz 1
780Mhz 1
790Mhz 1
800Mhz 1
810Mhz 3
815Mhz 1
850Mhz 1

Maybe it would be fair in reviews to clock the reference comparison cards (here the GTX460) at the average speed of the cards currently available.
 
lehmann said:
would like to see a conparison. of the 460 overclocked vs 6850 overclocked.
Click to expand...

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...d-6850-vs-gtx-460-1gb-overclocking-study.html is what your looking for, but it is of course all canned benchmarks. and the last two H reviews really put that into perspective. What I would like to see is one of these put on water and then see what the card will do. Interesting to see though how the 6850 lines up against the 460GTX vs the 6870 against the GTX470
 
Valset said:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...d-6850-vs-gtx-460-1gb-overclocking-study.html is what your looking for, but it is of course all canned benchmarks. and the last two H reviews really put that into perspective. What I would like to see is one of these put on water and then see what the card will do. Interesting to see though how the 6850 lines up against the 460GTX vs the 6870 against the GTX470
Click to expand...

Actually in that review you linked all the games are real world gameplay.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Wow I actually dissagree, I haven't had this happen in many reviews here at the [H] as 99.9% of the time no matter who wins I agree. In this specific review I have no idea what Hardocp's intentions were.

FACT GTX 460 overclocked cards were available since the launch of the 6000 amd cards at $179.99 after MIR and continue to be. This Asus 6850 card comes in at a hefty $199.99.
Click to expand...

chill bro. the were reviewing an ASUS EAH6850 DirectCU card. not a 460GTX. they included a stock 460GTX and a stock 6850 for REFERENCE. in fact if your read the conclusion you will see
There are three key features that make the ASUS EAH6850 DirectCU stand out from a reference Radeon HD 6850: the factory boosted GPU frequency, the cooling solution, and Voltage Tweak. Let’s start out with the weak: to us the factory boosted GPU frequency is a complete flop. It provided no gameplay experience advantages when compared with a reference Radeon HD 6850. The fact that the video card costs more than a standard HD 6850 but offers no more performance is disappointing.

To us it seems like ASUS is turning "Overclock Edition" into a marketing gimmick which offers barely any performance boost and no gameplay experience improvements. We would have much preferred to see the GPU frequency left at reference speeds than have to be charged extra for this stingy excuse for an "Overclock."
Click to expand...

this is hardly flattering. the "OC" have made no difference. They went on to clearly state that the only benefits to this card was the cooling and voltage tweak option. And the only justification for the higher price.

What your complaining about was them not dipping into the mess of a product line that is the 460GTX line up. semiconductorslave is listing 15 different models that perform differently. so why do you think H should NOT refer back to the REFERENCE cards whey they are reviewing what someone is claiming to be a NON-REFERENCE card?
 
the popular gtx 460's on the market end up being faster than this 6850, but the 6850 has a performance per watt advantage and MLAA. the 460 has the tessellation advantage and performance per $.
All things considered, you can really go either way on this one.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Actually in that review you linked all the games are real world gameplay.
Click to expand...

only in a few, most are just well picked canned benchmarks.

We only use built-in benchmarks if we have determined they are representative of an actual gameplay scenario and stand-alone benchmarks or demo versions of games are NEVER USED. This is because applications that operate outside of the actual final game engine will not have the developer-prescribed patches applied which could lead to relatively large performance shortfalls.
Click to expand...

this is of course head and shoulders above others but still far behind the H reviews
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Actually in that review you linked all the games are real world gameplay.
Click to expand...

+1 for that.
I wish people would take the time to actually read the reviews, rather then just look at the charts.

From what I've seen in the various reviews that overclock the cards, both the 460 and 6850 are great overclockers. The 460 can't quite catch the 6850 when they both are overclocked but it is close enough, that you probably wouldn't notice a difference.
 
Valset said:
chill bro. the were reviewing an ASUS EAH6850 DirectCU card. not a 460GTX. they included a stock 460GTX and a stock 6850 for REFERENCE. in fact if your read the conclusion you will see


this is hardly flattering. the "OC" have made no difference. They went on to clearly state that the only benefits to this card was the cooling and voltage tweak option. And the only justification for the higher price.

What your complaining about was them not dipping into the mess of a product line that is the 460GTX line up. semiconductorslave is listing 15 different models that perform differently. so why do you think H should NOT refer back to the REFERENCE cards whey they are reviewing what someone is claiming to be a NON-REFERENCE card?
Click to expand...

I understand everything your saying 100% to be clear. However what you need to understand is that the GTX 460 1gb and the GTX 460 1gb overclock cards are completely different beasts. In very popular opinion many agree nvidia clocked GTX 460 WAY too low at only 675. I mean you can bring that core easily to 850 or much more.

My point is when you are testing a card for $199.99 why test against a reference GTX 460 when it can be found for $149.99 and ignore the 8 other GTX 460 factory OC cards that you could pick and STILL be cheaper than the $199 factory OC card.

I'm not bitching about them using a factory OC vs a reference as I never thought this was wrong if they were in the same price class. It's like in every hardocp review they always compare cards in the same price class. Now all of the sudden they put a $199.99 factory OC card against a reference GTX 460 when there were clearly other options available. The Galaxy card for $179.99 I listed above comes with a core of 810 and as we all know Galaxy is one of the closest partners to Hardocp. I believe a simple phonecall could have gotten that card shipped to them within 2 business days.
 
Valset said:
only in a few, most are just well picked canned benchmarks.



this is of course head and shoulders above others but still far behind the H reviews
Click to expand...

I believe they are speaking in general to the way they test, not specifically in this review I read it a few weeks ago, and If I'm not mistaken every single game is real world, not a single canned.
 
We need a 6000 series Crossfire review. It seems to scale better than what people are used to with previous ATI cards.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
I understand everything your saying 100% to be clear. However what you need to understand is that the GTX 460 1gb and the GTX 460 1gb overclock cards are completely different beasts. In very popular opinion many agree nvidia clocked GTX 460 WAY too low at only 675. I mean you can bring that core easily to 850 or much more.

My point is when you are testing a card for $199.99 why test against a reference GTX 460 when it can be found for $149.99 and ignore the 8 other GTX 460 factory OC cards that you could pick and STILL be cheaper than the $199 factory OC card.

I'm not bitching about them using a factory OC vs a reference as I never thought this was wrong if they were in the same price class. It's like in every hardocp review they always compare cards in the same price class. Now all of the sudden they put a $199.99 factory OC card against a reference GTX 460 when there were clearly other options available. The Galaxy card for $179.99 I listed above comes with a core of 810 and as we all know Galaxy is one of the closest partners to Hardocp. I believe a simple phonecall could have gotten that card shipped to them within 2 business days.
Click to expand...

I do understand that. But that is Nvidia's decision to run it like that. they have from the get go crippled this lineup (maybe to preserve their GF100 based lineup?). they underclocked the card, they disabled shaders on it (no need to do that for a while), and they marketed at the midrange level. Their choice to do so. and it was a very bad choice, that is why they are having to eat money on the 470GTX to compete with the 6870. a non crippled GF104 based care (going to be rebranded as the GF114 if rumors prove true) would directly compete with a 6870/5870. as it is the 460GTX is getting stomped by the 6850. This isn't H's fault but Nvidia. They made (in my mind, note that I am not running a multimillion dollar company) and are paying for it.

but as to why they didn't get a price matched card isn't the point of these reviews to see if the non reference provides any additional value? the extra 20 bucks here provides a better cooling solution and a voltage tweak. that is what the review proved. to this end the review is awesome as it shows exactly what the card is worth. they have already done so with the galaxy.

and on that subject you should not expect them to be able to keep up with the Nvidia price drops or specials. as I type this the cheapest that I see on newegg (or don't see, Nvidia ask people to hid their prices) is 180 dollars AR or 20 dollars less the the cheapest 6850 (sell above MSRP). They were not like that a week ago (even a few days?) that is why the 5970 did not make it in the 580GTX review. yes they have ran some awesome specials and such.

If they have time I would imagine that we will see some comparisons of OCed cards. I think we will end up seeing some 850 6850 cards before long. it seems AMD has followed Nvidia suit in marketing lately.

and I am editing this to add http://www.anandtech.com/show/3987/...renewing-competition-in-the-midrange-market/7

As a matter of editorial policy we do not include overclocked cards on general reviews. As a product, reference cards will continue to be produced for quite a while, with good products continuing on for years. Overclocked cards on the other hand come and go depending on market conditions, and even worse no two overclocked cards are alike. If we did normally include overclocked cards, our charts would be full of cards that are only different by 5MHz.

However with the 6800 launch NVIDIA is pushing the overclocked GTX 460 option far harder than we’ve seen them push overclocked cards in the past –we had an EVGA GTX 460 1GB FTW on our doorstep before we were even back from Los Angeles. Given how well the GTX 460 overclocks and how many heavily overclocked cards there are on the market, we believe there is at least some merit to NVIDIA’s arguments, so in this case we went ahead and included the EVGA card in our review. As a reference point it's clocked at 850Mhz and 4GHz memory versus 675MHz core and 3.6MHz memory for a stock GTX 460, giving it a massive 26% core overclock and a much more moderate 11% memory overclock.

However with that we’ll attach the biggest disclaimer we can that while we’re including the card, we don’t believe NVIDIA is taking the right action here. If they were serious about having a higher clocked GTX 460 on the market, then they need to make a new product, such as a GTX 461. Without NVIDIA establishing guidelines, these overclocked GTX 460 cards can vary in clockspeed, cooling, and ultimately performance by a very wide margin. In primary reviews such as these we’re interested in looking at cards that will be around for a while, and without an official product from NVIDIA there’s no guarantee any of these factory overclocked cards will still be around.

If nothing else, pushing overclocked cards makes for a messy situation for buyer. An official product provides a baseline of performance that buyers can see in reviews like ours and expect in any cards they buy. With overclocked cards, this is absent. Pushing factory overclocked cards may give NVIDIA a competitive product, but it’s being done in a way we can’t approve of.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lord_Exodia said:
I understand everything your saying 100% to be clear. However what you need to understand is that the GTX 460 1gb and the GTX 460 1gb overclock cards are completely different beasts. In very popular opinion many agree nvidia clocked GTX 460 WAY too low at only 675. I mean you can bring that core easily to 850 or much more.

My point is when you are testing a card for $199.99 why test against a reference GTX 460 when it can be found for $149.99 and ignore the 8 other GTX 460 factory OC cards that you could pick and STILL be cheaper than the $199 factory OC card.

I'm not bitching about them using a factory OC vs a reference as I never thought this was wrong if they were in the same price class. It's like in every hardocp review they always compare cards in the same price class. Now all of the sudden they put a $199.99 factory OC card against a reference GTX 460 when there were clearly other options available. The Galaxy card for $179.99 I listed above comes with a core of 810 and as we all know Galaxy is one of the closest partners to Hardocp. I believe a simple phonecall could have gotten that card shipped to them within 2 business days.
Click to expand...

I think something you might not be thinking about here is that while yes, the GTX460 can generally overclock about 25%, so can the 6850. While there are not yet that many factory overclocked versions out there for the 6850, I'm sure there will be, and they can overclock just as well as the 460. This means, that where most 460s can reach 825-850 from 675, most 6850s can make 900 (haven't seen one that can't yet), and many can make it much past that to closer to 950. My gigabyte 6850 can make 950 without trouble. I haven't tested the XFX one yet, but I can easily reach 900+, both of these OCs WITHOUT ANY voltage tweaks.
 
Valset said:
as it is the 460GTX is getting stomped by the 6850. This isn't H's fault but Nvidia. They made (in my mind, note that I am not running a multimillion dollar company) and are paying for it.

but as to why they didn't get a price matched card isn't the point of these reviews to see if the non reference provides any additional value? the extra 20 bucks here provides a better cooling solution and a voltage tweak. that is what the review proved. to this end the review is awesome as it shows exactly what the card is worth. they have already done so with the galaxy.

and on that subject you should not expect them to be able to keep up with the Nvidia price drops or specials. as I type this the cheapest that I see on newegg (or don't see, Nvidia ask people to hid their prices) is 180 dollars AR or 20 dollars less the the cheapest 6850 (sell above MSRP). They were not like that a week ago (even a few days?) that is why the 5970 did not make it in the 580GTX review. yes they have ran some awesome specials and such.
Click to expand...

On newegg you can see prices by simply clicking see price in cart then you can either go to checkout or click just looking remove from cart. If you read my first post the fact is that overclocked GTX 460 cards have been available at $179.99 more or less since the release of the 6000 series and they still continue to be. Hence why I said the usual "at the time of the review they weren't priced the same" excuse doesn't apply.

Hard has recently done comparisons in price class and included overclocked cards, such as in the 5870 crossfire fiasco vs GTX 460 1gb overclocked cards. I still feel that if the overclocked card is avaialble and in the price class ESPECIALLY being less than the HD 6850 used in the review that it should be included.

Since when did we deviate from showing the people reading the review where your money could go better spent. I know for a fact that the Galaxy GTX 460 that I linked will wipe the floor with that asus 6850 I just think Hard should show you and everyone else where your money is better off spent. Or they could simply say between all the card reviewed here today the 6850 gave the best performance, However there are other factory overclocked cards available in this price class that can give you a better experience.

Flyinfinni said:
I think something you might not be thinking about here is that while yes, the GTX460 can generally overclock about 25%, so can the 6850. While there are not yet that many factory overclocked versions out there for the 6850, I'm sure there will be, and they can overclock just as well as the 460. This means, that where most 460s can reach 825-850 from 675, most 6850s can make 900 (haven't seen one that can't yet), and many can make it much past that to closer to 950. My gigabyte 6850 can make 950 without trouble. I haven't tested the XFX one yet, but I can easily reach 900+, both of these OCs WITHOUT ANY voltage tweaks.
Click to expand...

Only thing relevant should be to tell someone who has $200 in their wallet and needs a card, what will give the best real world performance with maximum image quality for their $$$ at the current time of that review when the potential buyer will buy said card. The Asus 6850 model in this review is not that card, and although the review is based off of it, they shouldn't lead you to believe that if you have the money to spend THIS is the card you should buy. Just look at the reaction of the people on page 1 in this thread. They trumpeted a victory when that's far from the truth.
 
Last edited:
Lord_Exodia said:
I believe they are speaking in general to the way they test, not specifically in this review I read it a few weeks ago, and If I'm not mistaken every single game is real world, not a single canned.
Click to expand...

Actually, they claim to use real game play when they find that benching is not fair. They don't tell what games this apply to but try to make it sound as they use real world gameplay for all games.

It's better to assume that all games are canned benching until they learn to be clear with what they do.
 
tannat said:
Actually, they claim to use real game play when they find that benching is not fair. They don't tell what games this apply to but try to make it sound as they use real world gameplay for all games.

It's better to assume that all games are canned benching until they learn to be clear with what they do.
Click to expand...


They specifically explain the way they benchmark every single game in their reviews.
Try reading the text above the charts instead of spreading misinformation.

Their guide to the Hardware Canucks GPU Benchmarking process not only tells you how they perform their benchmarks, it gives you the tools to actually run the benchmarks yourself.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ardware-canucks-gpu-benchmarking-process.html

"When we choose to add a game to our stable of benchmarkable titles, the first thing that’s done is a full play-through in order to determine what typical performance is like. With the help of FRAPS, a “worst case” scenario is derived from this playthrough which we will use for the basis of our benchmark run or to help determine if a built-in benchmark holds any foundation in reality. One important thing we should mention is that all benchmarks use at least one combat sequence if possible since it is within these where most games are the most demanding. Unfortunately, the randomness of combat means we have to repeat every benchmark three times in order to get an accurate picture of performance.

We only use built-in benchmarks if we have determined they are representative of an actual gameplay scenario and stand-alone benchmarks or demo versions of games are NEVER USED. This is because applications that operate outside of the actual final game engine will not have the developer-prescribed patches applied which could lead to relatively large performance shortfalls.

In the following pages, you will find videos of our benchmark sequences (if applicable) as well as save game files, timedemos, graphics setting screenshots and even guides to show you how to set everything up. This will also be a constantly evolving article since as new games are introduced, their benchmarking methods will be added."


HardOCP and HardwareCanucks both go to great lengths to familiarize themselves with the games before they come up with a benchmark procedure. It ticks me off when people don't read the articles and just make blanket statements, that are the exact opposite of what was in the review. These 2 sites are very methodical about their reviews and I applaud them for their efforts.
 
"18% cooler"? 0C is quite the arbitrary bottom point. 0K would be much more scientific. The real truth is that given the nature of temperature, it is just plain daft to talk in percentages. But don't let that stop you.

Thanks for the review though. The Asus coolers do seem to be nice. If I was getting one of these Radeons, it would be one of the Asus models, probably.

But if I was shopping at all (and I wish I was) The GTX 460 is just too terrific of a value and they all overclock like mad.

I'd like to see what a GTX 460 768 can do when overclocked to 850 MHz. Those things are selling for stupid low prices. I don't think I'm memory constrained at 1600x1200:D
 
Lord_Exodia said:
LOL, very well said.I may have missed the 2 or 3
...................................
The last person I expected to disagree was me. Sorry that this is the case but despite everything presented to me my opinion about this review remains
Click to expand...

The thing is, you can get the results you want anyway. If they test with reference, its a consistent starting point. You can find other reviews of OCed 460s (I think [H] even has some) to see how much difference it makes. We all know approximately how much the 460s gain from overclocking- make the extrapolation- its not like its that hard. This review gives you plenty of information to make an informed choice on which card you want to buy- you can look at prices, know approximately how much the OC improves the referece card, and already know how the reference compares.
 
Nuby1Canuby said:
They specifically explain the way they benchmark every single game in their reviews.
Try reading the text above the charts instead of spreading misinformation.

Their guide to the Hardware Canucks GPU Benchmarking process not only tells you how they perform their benchmarks, it gives you the tools to actually run the benchmarks yourself.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ardware-canucks-gpu-benchmarking-process.html

"When we choose to add a game to our stable of benchmarkable titles, the first thing that’s done is a full play-through in order to determine what typical performance is like. With the help of FRAPS, a “worst case” scenario is derived from this playthrough which we will use for the basis of our benchmark run or to help determine if a built-in benchmark holds any foundation in reality. One important thing we should mention is that all benchmarks use at least one combat sequence if possible since it is within these where most games are the most demanding. Unfortunately, the randomness of combat means we have to repeat every benchmark three times in order to get an accurate picture of performance.

We only use built-in benchmarks if we have determined they are representative of an actual gameplay scenario and stand-alone benchmarks or demo versions of games are NEVER USED. This is because applications that operate outside of the actual final game engine will not have the developer-prescribed patches applied which could lead to relatively large performance shortfalls.

In the following pages, you will find videos of our benchmark sequences (if applicable) as well as save game files, timedemos, graphics setting screenshots and even guides to show you how to set everything up. This will also be a constantly evolving article since as new games are introduced, their benchmarking methods will be added."


HardOCP and HardwareCanucks both go to great lengths to familiarize themselves with the games before they come up with a benchmark procedure. It ticks me off when people don't read the articles and just make blanket statements, that are the exact opposite of what was in the review. These 2 sites are very methodical about their reviews and I applaud them for their efforts.
Click to expand...


Actually I've read their description how they review. The intention may be all fine but when looking at the reviews it has not always been crystal clear what method they did chose for what game. And I have really tried to find it.
 
tannat said:
Actually I've read their description how they review. The intention may be all fine but when looking at the reviews it has not always been crystal clear what method they did chose for what game. And I have really tried to find it.
Click to expand...

You seem sincere but I don't see how you are missing the review method they choose for each game. It is at the very top of the page that the game is reviewed on. Right above the benchmark charts.

In the 6870 & 6850 review that was linked earlier, it's at the top of page 16 for BC2:
To benchmark BF: BC2 we used a five minute stretch of gameplay starting from the second checkpoint (after the helicopter takes off) of the second single player mission up until your battle with the tank commences. Framerates are recorded with FRAPS.

and page 19 for Lost Planet:
Lost Planet is a game that was originally released on consoles but in its port over to the PC, it gained some highly impressive DX11 features. For this benchmark, we forgo the two built-in tools and instead use a 2 minute gameplay sequence from the second level in the first chapter. The reason we use this level is because it makes use of three elements that are seen throughout the game world: jungles, water and open terrain.


It looks clear to me. They have been explaining their benchmark methods at the top of their charts for years.


Back on topic, I found it really interesting that the ASUS EAH6850 reaches a temperature of 76c under full load versus the stock cards 90c under full load.
 
eric66 said:
gtx 460 died so quickly and it supposed to be new 8800 gt lol
Click to expand...



Not even close to dying. There are numerous other reviews out there with different conditions and benchmarks in which the GTX460 beats the HD6850.


IMO the GTX460 is the better card right now because of all the good deals on the GTX460 while the HD6800 series has only gone up in prices. Performance wise these cards are close in performance but each does much better with certain games and applications.

Between a hot deal on a GTX460 and an over priced HD6850 I would get the GTX460.
 
SonDa5 said:
Not even close to dying. There are numerous other reviews out there with different conditions and benchmarks in which the GTX460 beats the HD6850.


IMO the GTX460 is the better card right now because of all the good deals on the GTX460 while the HD6800 series has only gone up in prices. Performance wise these cards are close in performance but each does much better with certain games and applications.

Between a hot deal on a GTX460 and an over priced HD6850 I would get the GTX460.
Click to expand...

there is a 20 dollar difference between the lowest price 460GTX 1gb and a 6850. given that the 6850 is faster, provided better real world game playing experience (per H), and draws less power, and OC just as well if not better, I don't that that the difference is at all unreasonable. This is in no way to say that it isn't a good value but that the 6850 is just as good if not better.

now if your talking about the 768mb model I would have to agree, at a close to hundred bucks they are awesome. get a pair of them and go SLI. people make way too much of the memory deal, if your not at 4mp it isn't going to amount to much (4xAA is fine if you can't run 8xAA). if I was in the market I would be looking very hard at this option. 228 for two of these is the best deal I have seen. that is a hell of a lot of bang for the buck.

Having said that yes the 460GTX is going to be EOL just as soon and Nvidia can do it. People seem to do this all the time. Because the 460GTX has be a great value to US we assume its good for Nvidia. In fact its an expensive card to make and they are having to drop the price to points that make the bean counters cry to compete. this is largely Nvidia's own fault though, they never should have crippled the chip the way they did. the GF104 should have been competing with the 5850 from the start. (maybe protecting the GF100 line?). we may be seeing this anyways, the GF114 is rumored to be a non crippled GF104 at full clocks.
 
Valset said:
there is a 20 dollar difference between the lowest price 460GTX 1gb and a 6850
Click to expand...
Much greater difference in price points than that.

$149.99 after MIR for this GTX460 1GB model. Priced to beat the 6850 IMO.
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/skusearc...X460SF1102 GeForce GTX 460 1024MB GDDR5 pci-e

Performance wise the GTX460 1GB seems to not clock as fast as the HD6850 but it puts out alot more performance for its speeds.

Power wise it does use more power but it appears to need it to perform better. HD6850 doesn't seem to perform as well for the clock speeds it can acheive.

I've read through many online reviews and researched synthetic benchmarks at HWbot.org where the best over clockers in the world competitively compete for video card performance.

GTX460 appears to be a better performer and better value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top