HD3850 512MB Versus 2900PRO

B

Banana King

Weaksauce
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
74
Just looking around for a good midrange video card. Down to two now -

The HD3850 512MB Edition - $199.99
<http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102715>

And the 2900PRO - $164.99
<http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102706>

With a $35 price difference, I want to ensure that I am making the right decision.
 
The 512mb 3850 will spank the Pro...hard.

Thanks to some design tweaks, clock for clock the 3850 is slightly faster

But we're not comparing clock for clock because the 3850 is 67mhz faster on the core, 80mhz faster on the RAM out of the box. 10% faster clocks on average.

There's also PCIe 2.0 support, far less heat, far less noise, far less power usage, UVD onboard, DX10.1 support, all in the 3850's favour.

Not to mention the Sapphire 3850 you're looking at is single slot compared to the 2900Pro's two-slot.

If you're thinking of overclocking, consider that the speeds you'll be lucky to get out of the 2900Pro (without an XT BIOS flash) are around the stock speeds on the 3850...and that the 3850 can clock up to 730/950 with ease, higher if you're lucky.

It may not be worth $199 to upgrade an existing 2900Pro 512 to a 3850 512, but it's for sure worth $35 more if you don't own either.
 
While I don't agree that the 3850 "Spanks" the pro, I do agree on everything else and would get the 3850 over the pro. Actually I'd probably go with the 256 meg version if you want to save a little money. By the time you get to the resolutions that would use the extra 256mb of memory you are already running out of "raw fill rate" on the card. I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but that's just my thinking.
 
Grimham said:
While I don't agree that the 3850 "Spanks" the pro, I do agree on everything else and would get the 3850 over the pro. Actually I'd probably go with the 256 meg version if you want to save a little money. By the time you get to the resolutions that would use the extra 256mb of memory you are already running out of "raw fill rate" on the card. I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but that's just my thinking.
Click to expand...

From the reviews I've seen, the 512MB is definately used. The 512MB 3850 doesn't fall too far behind the 3870, while the 256MB 3850 is lackluster in comparison (the same is true for the 256MB 8800GT).
 
Grimham said:
While I don't agree that the 3850 "Spanks" the pro, I do agree on everything else and would get the 3850 over the pro. Actually I'd probably go with the 256 meg version if you want to save a little money. By the time you get to the resolutions that would use the extra 256mb of memory you are already running out of "raw fill rate" on the card. I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but that's just my thinking.
Click to expand...

It has plenty of fill rate for the 512 to be used
 
Well, I did some more investigation, and Yes, there are some games that do really make a large difference with extra 256 mb at high resolutions. I only saw 2 or 3 games that had a significant difference at 1900x1200, but if those games are ones you want to play then that's all that matters.

-1 for me
 
It's not just a matter of resolution either...enabling AA/AF uses frame buffer too, and causes a bigger performance hit at almost ANY given resolution on a 256mb card compared to an identical 512mb card.
 
The 2900PRO needs a lot more power so you'd need a big power supply, and you'd be using more electricity. So it wouldn't really save you any money in the long run.
 
Grimham said:
Well, I did some more investigation, and Yes, there are some games that do really make a large difference with extra 256 mb at high resolutions. I only saw 2 or 3 games that had a significant difference at 1900x1200, but if those games are ones you want to play then that's all that matters.

-1 for me
Click to expand...
reviews?
Which games?
 
Picked up the 2900 Pro recently, on its way.

http://ati.amd.com/products/certified/powersupplies.html

Plenty of power supplies sufficient for it. Always sounds weird when people quote power savings and whatnot. Its not as if people were going broke on electrical bills before the new(er) line of cards come out, its not that noticable. "A 3870 is the best power-wise but watch out for that 2900"...that came out in the same year.
 
maverick212 said:
Picked up the 2900 Pro recently, on its way.

http://ati.amd.com/products/certified/powersupplies.html

Plenty of power supplies sufficient for it. Always sounds weird when people quote power savings and whatnot. Its not as if people were going broke on electrical bills before the new(er) line of cards come out, its not that noticable. "A 3870 is the best power-wise but watch out for that 2900"...that came out in the same year.
Click to expand...

People also spend a lot of time and money trying to keep the inside of their case cool.

Using less power also means it produces less heat, both via the power supply being under load, and the waste heat from the GPU.

It'll also save you $20-$30 bucks in a year..which offsets the cost difference between the two if the OP is paying his own utility bills. The only thing it won't do is heat up a room as well as a 2900, which could save you some money in the winter. :)
 
I have noticed how the conversation escaladed to Heat and Power usage of the 3850.
I am looking for one, or better to say a card that will run in my ST20G5 XPC Case.
it runs a 250watt mini power supply.

To prevent this from goign out of hand and getting answers like that is not enough power etc. And throwing numbers at me that are printed on the box which are recommended numbers.

I am aware that this is not much power. But i am also aware that it was able to run 8600 GT, X800XL, X1600XT, and a X1650 Pro. But all these cards didnt require an external power source. And recommended wattage was way higher than what the XPC power supply was rated at.

Now I was wondering if i was able to get away with using this card in my project case with that power supply.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top