Early Fermi Benchmarks

[GoldenTiger]

that was a big mistake eh?

Not really... I had done it with 25% Bing Cashback so it ended up nicely in the end even after they reduced the MSRP.

 

[geekusa]

Has there been any Fermi benchmarks for BC2, TF2, SC2, yet?

 

[GoldenTiger]

Has there been any Fermi benchmarks for BC2, TF2, SC2, yet?

NDA... so, nothing you can see .

 

[phinix]

So as far as I understand new cards won't be faster than GTX295?
480 may be better in some games, bu apart fo that 470 is definitely slower?

 

[hafiqb]

Golden Tiger, you mention that you "had to use" an 5870, that sounds pretty cynical. Doesn't the recent slew of not so favourable news regarding the Fermi bother you at least a bit? I mean you seem still hellbend on buying one no matter what. Others are realizing that something is not right and not all of them are bound to be ATI fanboys.

I mean its hot, consumes a lot of power and the ratio of performance per watt does not look so good going by the current set of information.

I have used Nvidia for years, but this round I will wait and I have no problems with my 5870s. Sure I can't enable AA in Bioshock2 (yet), but Mass Effect2 with super-sampling enabled does look sweet.

 

[reaper12]

To the people saying that price will make or break Fermi and not performance, please answer the following question: If Fermi outperforms a 5870, why in your opinion should it be priced LESS than a 5870? That seems to be what many of the ATI people are saying on these boards .

ATI released the 4870 at a much cheaper price point than it's Nvidia counterpart and had way better performance.

The 5870 was released at a price roughly the same as the GTX 285 and again performed better. And in a lot of situations it matched the GTX 295 which is a dual card and cost roughly $120 more than the 5870 when the 5870 launched.

 

[XMAN245]

ATI released the 4870 at a much cheaper price point than it's Nvidia counterpart and had way better performance.

The 5870 was released at a price roughly the same as the GTX 285 and again performed better. And in a lot of situations it matched the GTX 295 which is a dual card and cost roughly $120 more than the 5870 when the 5870 launched.

At launch the 4870 was almost on par with the GTX260, was much slower than the 280, so I'm not exactly sure where you are getting the idea it performaned better from.

 

[tannat]

At launch the 4870 was almost on par with the GTX260, was much slower than the 280, so I'm not exactly sure where you are getting the idea it performaned better from.

It was aimed to compete with 9800GTX.

1GB was aimed towards GTX260

 

[XMAN245]

It was aimed to compete with 9800GTX.

1GB was aimed towards GTX260

How do you figure concidering it launched a few weeks after the GTX260. Had you said the 4850, I'd more inclined to believe, but not the 4870s, either the 512 or 1GB version.

 

[tannat]

Launch dates aside, you don't counter specs in a few weeks, the HD4870 was aimed to beat 9800GTX in price and performance. That it performed as good in comparision with GTX260 was a nice surprice, even for ATI. This is nothing new.

 

[hafiqb]

A German website has an article on the rumoured refresh and they claim it is unlikely that there will be a 5890 or 5990 very soon, instead they will give more free reign to the AIBs on the clockspeeds. Seems that they are not very afraid of the upcoming competition. As stated in other threads the 5870 overclocks good, will be waiting for those benchmarks.

I still remember that the overclocking headroom for my vanilla gtx280 was pretty limited for the shaders.

 

[Michaelius]

http://forum.purepc.pl/findpost-t289403-p3481423.html

Some very interesting performance numbers

 

[hafiqb]

These charts have been shown in another thread by dontbeevil. When requesting for source and testbed no further info. Waiting for end of march...

 

[heatlesssun]

http://forum.purepc.pl/findpost-t289403-p3481423.html

Some very interesting performance numbers

Intresting indeed.

 

[reaper12]

At launch the 4870 was almost on par with the GTX260, was much slower than the 280, so I'm not exactly sure where you are getting the idea it performaned better from.

as tannat says, the 4870/4850 were released to compete in the mid range market. They were competing against the 9800GTX. But, the 4870 was so good that at launch it outperformed the GTX260 and wasn't all that far behind the GTX280. It also cost $150 less than the GTX260.

To use your words, I am not sure where you are getting the idea that the 4870 performed worse than the GTx 260?

 

[rUmX]

But, the 4870 was so good that at launch it outperformed the GTX260 and wasn't all that far behind the GTX280.

The 4870 did slightly out perform the original GTX260 192sp. Hence why the 216 shader version was released. When people talk about the GTX260, they should mention which version.

So as far as I understand new cards won't be faster than GTX295?
480 may be better in some games, bu apart fo that 470 is definitely slower?

Does it really matter? The GTX295 was a dual GPU card. 10 months (HD5870) or 16 months (GTX480) later a single gpu can match/beat/trade blows with a dual GPU card from the last generation all while using less power and heat -- isn't that a good thing?

 

[XMAN245]

as tannat says, the 4870/4850 were released to compete in the mid range market. They were competing against the 9800GTX. But, the 4870 was so good that at launch it outperformed the GTX260 and wasn't all that far behind the GTX280. It also cost $150 less than the GTX260.

To use your words, I am not sure where you are getting the idea that the 4870 performed worse than the GTx 260?

You guys really need to do you research before posting about launch facts:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2321638,00.asp
1 win for the 4870 out of 10

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4870-review--asus/9
roughly even split

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2008/06/25/amd_radeon_hd_4800_series/4
Again, LAUNCH, not months later when drivers improved, at launch.

It is as I said, about on par with the GTX260 of then, and the GTX260 of today.

The 4870 did slightly out perform the original GTX260 192sp. Hence why the 216 shader version was released. When people talk about the GTX260, they should mention which version.



Does it really matter? The GTX295 was a dual GPU card. 10 months (HD5870) or 16 months (GTX480) later a single gpu can match/beat/trade blows with a dual GPU card from the last generation all while using less power and heat -- isn't that a good thing?

The fanATIcs are out rewriting history.

 

[Infaustium]

http://forum.purepc.pl/findpost-t289403-p3481423.html

Some very interesting performance numbers

Interesting... think those numbers are legit? If so, and it's any indication of what Fermi can actually do, then I suppose all the "nay-saying" about Fermi's performance increases over the 5870 are about to be shot-down.

Of course, it might not pan-out the same in [H]'s review, which I'd trust most, so eagerly awaiting it...

 

[Wag]

Interesting... think those numbers are legit? If so, and it's any indication of what Fermi can actually do, then I suppose all the "nay-saying" about Fermi's performance increases over the 5870 are about to be shot-down.

Of course, it might not pan-out the same in [H]'s review, which I'd trust most, so eagerly awaiting it...

But that says nothing. What machine was it benchmarked on? What details were on? etc, etc. We have absolutely no way of knowing if that's legit or not.

I'd rather just wait for the legit websites to review it instead of going on what could be complete rumor and PR BS.

That said I do hope it comes it performs at least as well as a single GTX 295 does- if so I'm up for a 480.

 

[tannat]

You guys really need to do you research before posting about launch facts:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2321638,00.asp
1 win for the 4870 out of 10

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4870-review--asus/9
roughly even split

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2008/06/25/amd_radeon_hd_4800_series/4
Again, LAUNCH, not months later when drivers improved, at launch.

It is as I said, about on par with the GTX260 of then, and the GTX260 of today.



The fanATIcs are out rewriting history.

The HD4870 beat GTX260 hands down in price performance. The people that claim it to have been generally faster is of course wrong.

You need to tag down however, you just claimed that HD4870 was aimed to beat GTX260, not 9800GTX. It may have been ignorance though.

Calling out people when you're one of the worst offenders yourself just don't cut for credibility.

And how was it? You've been quite aggressive claiming that a 480 shader Geforce 480 will not be launched. Are you both rewriting history and present time at a whim or should you be believed on this?

 

[XMAN245]

The HD4870 beat GTX260 hands down in price performance. The people that claim it to have been generally faster is of course wrong.

You need to tag down however, you just claimed that HD4870 was aimed to beat GTX260, not 9800GTX. It may have been ignorance though.

Calling out people when you're one of the worst offenders yourself just don't cut for credibility.

And how was it? You've been quite aggressive claiming that a 480 shader Geforce 480 will not be launched. Are you both rewriting history and present time at a whim or should you be believed on this?

As to the 480Shader, I stand by my posts of saying 512 and Friday the world will know.

And price/performance DOES NOT mean it is faster which you and others have claimed it was at launch.

 

[DarkLegacy]

The HD4870 beat GTX260 hands down in price performance. The people that claim it to have been generally faster is of course wrong.

You need to tag down however, you just claimed that HD4870 was aimed to beat GTX260, not 9800GTX. It may have been ignorance though.

Calling out people when you're one of the worst offenders yourself just don't cut for credibility.

And how was it? You've been quite aggressive claiming that a 480 shader Geforce 480 will not be launched. Are you both rewriting history and present time at a whim or should you be believed on this?

To bad people still chose the GTX 280/GTX285 over it Sometimes performance means a whole lot more than just the price.

 

[tannat]

As to the 480Shader, I stand by my posts of saying 512 and Friday the world will know.

And price/performance DOES NOT mean it is faster which you and others have claimed it was at launch.

Please wipe the foam from your mouth and stop spreading BS. Where did I claim that HD4870 was faster than GTX260 at launch?

 

[XMAN245]

Please wipe the foam from your mouth and stop spreading BS. Where did I claim that HD4870 was faster than GTX260 at launch?

1. Who is foaming at the mouth here?
2. I appologize as it wasn't you who said it.
3. You did say it was aimed at the 9800GTX+ and Dave Bauman would greatly like to disagree with you. Incase you dont know who he is, he works for ATI and has said there target for the 4870 was the GTX2xx line and the 4850(his doing) was aimed at the 9800GTX+.

 

[tannat]

1. Who is foaming at the mouth here?

Do you honestly think so? I only came in with some facts here. Then I suddenly was drawn in to this infinite argumentation.

2. I appologize as it wasn't you who said it.

Apology accepted.

3. You did say it was aimed at the 9800GTX+ and Dave Bauman would greatly like to disagree with you. Incase you dont know who he is, he works for ATI and has said there target for the 4870 was the GTX2xx line and the 4850(his doing) was aimed at the 9800GTX+.

Lay off the sarcasm. I know very well who Dave Bauman. Of course they were aware of the GTX2xx series coming. Did they know the specs and performance when they designed the HD4870? No. They could just try to make a good card, 9800GTX being the known baseline. That's were we started this tedious discussion.

And what did he actually say? You must have forgot to post the link.

Or,
What is the end-goal of this conversation? I get the feeling it's on autopilot.

 

[reaper12]

You guys really need to do you research before posting about launch facts:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2321638,00.asp
1 win for the 4870 out of 10

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-4870-review--asus/9
roughly even split

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2008/06/25/amd_radeon_hd_4800_series/4
Again, LAUNCH, not months later when drivers improved, at launch.

It is as I said, about on par with the GTX260 of then, and the GTX260 of today.



The fanATIcs are out rewriting history.

The performance difference was of my own personel testing in my shop, and yes, at launch of the 4870. But, if you want reviews, here are two reviews showing the 4870 winning all the tests again at launch.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4870,1964-18.html

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=15

So lets just agree to say that the 4870 was at least on par with a card $150 more at launch

What is the end-goal of this conversation? I get the feeling it's on autopilot.

LOL, sorry my fault, I was using the examples at launch of the 4870 and the 5870 to counter the guy who said this

"To the people saying that price will make or break Fermi and not performance, please answer the following question: If Fermi outperforms a 5870, why in your opinion should it be priced LESS than a 5870? That seems to be what many of the ATI people are saying on these boards"

And it was nothing to do with been an ATI fanatic, just making the point that just because it's faster doesn't mean it has to be more expensive. The price/performance ratio is the main reason why the 4800 and 5800 cards have been so successfull.

 

[Michaelius]

Or you know you could use counter example when Ati cut the supply of 48x0 series card artificialy driving their prices up to release 57x0 series at inflated prices.
Or 5830 which replaces 4890 for much higher price at similar performance level.

 

[XMAN245]

The performance difference was of my own personel testing in my shop, and yes, at launch of the 4870. But, if you want reviews, here are two reviews showing the 4870 winning all the tests again at launch.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4870,1964-18.html

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=15

Canned benches, good picks. Be nice when sites stop using them for reviews.

So lets just agree to say that the 4870 was at least on par with a card $150 more at launch

And that is what I said.

 

[GoldenTiger]

Canned benches, good picks. Be nice when sites stop using them for reviews.



And that is what I said.

Timedemos are fine, it's canned stock benchmarks that are embedded in games that aren't, as those sequences are often heavily optimized for by the drivers. Take a segment of gameplay wiht a timedemo and it's going to be pretty darn accurate. 4870 was a bit slower than the 192sp GTX 260 at its launch across most reviews, and is on-par with a 216-core GTX 260 today. I agree with XMAN245 saying that people are out re-writing history .

 

[shansoft]

Timedemos are fine, it's canned stock benchmarks that are embedded in games that aren't, as those sequences are often heavily optimized for by the drivers. Take a segment of gameplay wiht a timedemo and it's going to be pretty darn accurate. 4870 was a bit slower than the 192sp GTX 260 at its launch across most reviews, and is on-par with a 216-core GTX 260 today. I agree with XMAN245 saying that people are out re-writing history .

its not rewriting history when they have no clue about it...

just mistaken by the current.

 

[Wolfkin]

Yeah um...at the release the ATI HD4870 512mb beat the GTX260 192sp in almost all games.
Guess why Nvidia lowered their prices and released the GTX260 216sp.

 

[reaper12]

Canned benches, good picks. Be nice when sites stop using them for reviews.

sorry, but, you didn't read my post right, I don't use benchmarks from sites on the web, they are interesting to read, but I prefer to compare the cards directly myself. I only posted the links to show that you can post site benchmarks that prove both things.

At launch, I tested both the 4870 and the gtx260 by actually playing games on them on a variety of different hardware. According to me and my staff the 4870 was a better performer, and felt much smoother in games. It was also welll over $100 less. Because of the better performance and the way better price, the 4870 was the card I recommended to any customer that asked.

A few months later Nvidia released the GTX260 with 216 cores. And ATI released the 1gb version of the 4870. This time the Nvidia card was the better performer and not only that it was also cheaper than the 4870. So any customer that asked I would recommend the Nvidia card.

This is also an example of a graphic card manufacturer releasing a card(gtx260-216) that was 10% faster than a previously released card(4870-512mb) and cheaper too.

Which is the point I was trying to make by using the ATI cards as examples, but, that makes me a fanby apparantly. So there is an example using a Nvidia card, happy now? The price/preformance ratio is so much more important these days.

If Fermi isn't priced very aggressively then it is going only going to be the diehard Nvidia owners or the serious ethusiasts who will buy them. ATI in the last two years have spoilt customers with their pricing model, it also forced Nvidia to lower their prices, like the gtx260 above. And now people, even people I know who are tech mad, want much more performance for their money.

Timedemos are fine, it's canned stock benchmarks that are embedded in games that aren't, as those sequences are often heavily optimized for by the drivers. Take a segment of gameplay wiht a timedemo and it's going to be pretty darn accurate. 4870 was a bit slower than the 192sp GTX 260 at its launch across most reviews, and is on-par with a 216-core GTX 260 today. I agree with XMAN245 saying that people are out re-writing history .

Oh, yes, ok you are the expert, and I am just a fool re-writing history. Sorry, so We will just post a link to the review that you recommended, so It must be a good one since it came from you.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...radeon-hd4870-512mb-graphics-card-review.html

Ah, wow, well what do you know, it competes very well against the GTX 280!! Even beats it in one test. Pretty amazing for a card $300 less.

As for re-writing history, weren't you the one who sold your gtx 280 because in your words

"The 4870 matches or beats it in everything I've tested/played, GRID especially is faster, TF2 is a little faster as far as minimum framerate goes, and the other games are pretty much the same (Crysis, WIC, etc.). I'm very glad I made a hundred off the resale of the 280, and then saved another two hundred off the price I'd paid for the 280... because in reality, I'm finding no negative gaming difference that's tangible, if any exists."

Those are your words and you say I am re-writing history!! lol, right.

its not rewriting history when they have no clue about it...

just mistaken by the current.

You still think I am mistaken?

 

[GoldenTiger]

As for re-writing history, weren't you the one who sold your gtx 280 because in your words

"The 4870 matches or beats it in everything I've tested/played, GRID especially is faster, TF2 is a little faster as far as minimum framerate goes, and the other games are pretty much the same (Crysis, WIC, etc.). I'm very glad I made a hundred off the resale of the 280, and then saved another two hundred off the price I'd paid for the 280... because in reality, I'm finding no negative gaming difference that's tangible, if any exists."

Those are your words and you say I am re-writing history!! lol, right.

You still think I am mistaken?

Yes, I do think you're mistaken. That quote from me is comparing a heavily-overclocked 4870 to a stock GTX 280 (I ran the 280 oc'd occasionally) at the time. Also you might want to note that the 4870 died and had driver issues I stated in the thread at the time. You can take many things people say out of context and twist them to your ends: it doesn't mean it's the truth or representative of the circumstances under which such words were said . You're really reaching to try to take out-of-context quotes from someone who in your own words has no idea what they're talking about, from years ago, to try to "prove" your point.

Note that I ended up selling the 4870 and switching back to a GTX 280 shortly thereafter. There's a reason for that .

 

[reaper12]

Yes, I do think you're mistaken. That quote from me is comparing a heavily-overclocked 4870 to a stock GTX 280 (I ran the 280 oc'd occasionally) at the time. Also you might want to note that the 4870 died and had driver issues I stated in the thread at the time. You can take many things people say out of context and twist them to your ends: it doesn't mean it's the truth or representative of the circumstances under which such words were said . You're really reaching to try to take out-of-context quotes from someone who in your own words has no idea what they're talking about, from years ago, to try to "prove" your point.

Note that I ended up selling the 4870 and switching back to a GTX 280 shortly thereafter. There's a reason for that .

lol, goldentiger, you even stated in the sentence that it was overclocked 280. The 4870 had issues because you used a voltmod to overclock it way past safe values. That's hardly the cards fault.

Yes, I had a GTX 280 before this card that was overclocked pretty heavily as well. The 4870 matches or beats it in everything I've tested/played, GRID especially is faster, TF2 is a little faster as far as minimum framerate goes, and the other games are pretty much the same (Crysis, WIC, etc.). I'm very glad I made a hundred off the resale of the 280, and then saved another two hundred off the price I'd paid for the 280... because in reality, I'm finding no negative gaming difference that's tangible, if any exists.

Taken out of context? I don't think so.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

lol, goldentiger, you even stated in the sentence that it was overclocked 280. The 4870 had issues because you used a voltmod to overclock it way past safe values. That's hardly the cards fault.



Taken out of context? I don't think so.

didn't he later sell this NV card and get a 5870? Oh my anyway
a few more days to go !!!

 

[ebeattie]

omg, you guys sound like your 5 years old. lol, come back and read this stuff in 6 months....

@topic, if the 480 performs well enough and [H] gives it a blessing, I'll trade up up my current card......thats on the way from newegg right now. Hell, It may not even com out of the packaging once it gets here today.

Ok its going in, but might just be a short visit if reviews are good.

 

[GoldenTiger]

omg, you guys sound like your 5 years old. lol, come back and read this stuff in 6 months....

@topic, if the 480 performs well enough and [H] gives it a blessing, I'll trade up up my current card......thats on the way from newegg right now. Hell, It may not even com out of the packaging once it gets here today.

Ok its going in, but might just be a short visit if reviews are good.

Haha I know the feeling... and yeah, I'm done playing in the mud with them, after one last clarification here. I wouldn't normally have even entertained their attacks, but real life has left me in a mood not to put up with it even from forum denizens. Is it Friday yet by the way ? I'm hoping to get one ordered then or Monday depending on which day the etailers put them up for sale...

lol, goldentiger, you even stated in the sentence that it was overclocked 280. The 4870 had issues because you used a voltmod to overclock it way past safe values. That's hardly the cards fault.


Taken out of context? I don't think so.

I, the poster of the quote you are making, am telling you that I only ran the GTX 280 overclocked occasionally, as I said above. The statement you are pulling out of context is clarified by the statement I just made here. So, you can say it till you're blue in the face, but it's not what was meant or done at the time.

 

[DrDoU]

Has anyone seen the small benchmark review at HEXUS?

Edit:from yesterday,forget it.

 

[reaper12]

I, the poster of the quote you are making, am telling you that I only ran the GTX 280 overclocked occasionally, as I said above. The statement you are pulling out of context is clarified by the statement I just made here. So, you can say it till you're blue in the face, but it's not what was meant or done at the time.

Goldentiger, seriously you expect me to believe that you, who seriously overclock every card you get, only occasionally overclocked the GTX280? lol, not a hope.

 

[psychoticdream]

this is weird as hell look at temps