ATI Radeon HD 4850 Preview: AMD Delivers Performance for the Masses
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on June 19, 2008 5:00 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
There's an unexpected amount of concluding we can do already based on these early results.
For starters, the Radeon HD 4850 looks to be the best buy at $199, even better than NVIDIA's price-dropped GeForce 9800 GTX. What's also unbelievable is that compared to the 4850, our beloved GeForce 8800 GT seems downright slow in a number of benchmarks - and the 8800 GT is only 8 months old. It's also very refreshing to see this sort of competitive pressure at such a reasonable price point, while it's fun to write about 1.4 billion transistor GPUs it's a dream come true to be able to write about this type of performance at under $200.
Take two 4850s, put them together and now you've got something even faster than NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 280 in most cases. It shouldn't be too surprising since 8800 GT SLI and 9800 GX2 both outperform the GTX 280 as well.
Our CrossFire investigation illustrated a very good point: AMD's multi-GPU solutions still don't behave as well as their single-GPU products, there are still cases where performance doesn't improve at all and that's where these large monolithic GPU designs hold their value. Hopefully with continued effort in the multi-GPU space AMD can get us to a point where there is no perceivable difference between single and multi-GPU solutions. Until then, NVIDIA's strategy will continue to have a great deal of merit - although the GTX 280 isn't the best example of that, at least from a gamer's perspective. On the CUDA side however...
We'll have much more information on the Radeon HD 4850 and its faster brother next week when we can completely unveil AMD's RV770, until then sit tight and be content with the knowledge that the days of the 8800 GT vs. 3870 weren't a fluke, the new mainstream wars are upon us thanks to AMD's Radeon HD 4850.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
114 Comments
View All Comments
docmilo - Thursday, June 19, 2008 - link
I browsed on over to the Egg and did a search on 4850. A whole bunch of cards popped up at $199.99 and one even has a rebate! I wonder how long until it stops saying "Buy Now" and goes to "Autonotify".chizow - Thursday, June 19, 2008 - link
You guys did a nice job of covering both the pros and cons of the 4850 and CF, showing some of the pitfalls of relying on multi-GPU solutions for performance. You also made mention that similar performance gains were seen long ago with the 8800GT.That said the 4850 is certainly a good part from AMD and there's definitely some very interesting things they've done with this card. You hinted at a lot of them with the architectural changes but there's a few other sites that hinted at some of the changes. Its clear ATI has drastically improved their memory controllers and cache design along with their render back ends for AA performance.
I think the real thing to keep an eye on though is how AMD managed to get near 100% scaling with CF. Extremetech hinted at improved memory controllers and a gpu communications "Hub" here http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2320865...">http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2320865... for improved performance between GPUs. I'm sure you guys will cover these improvements in detail in your complete review, but it looks like that hyper transport mechanism you alluded to.
MadBoris - Thursday, June 19, 2008 - link
Nice to see AMD staying competitive, plus keeping prices down.I think the days of me spending $400+ on a video card are behind me, atleast for the foreseeable future. You have to provide alot more than 10% performance increases for an extra $250 NVIDIA.
I'm rather surprised NVIDIA has not really capitalized on taking a huge performance lead and crown with all the AMD post merger dust settling.
I'm pleasantly surprised that AMD is continuing to excel with HW. If only they would bring back an AIW card, I'd buy one, but my current 8800GTS is not so outmatched that it is worth upgrading to anything this generation.
Good article Anand.
fungmak - Thursday, June 19, 2008 - link
Looking at the CF perfomance of other sites who used cat 8.6, IIRC were a lot better than the current AT results.Just wondering if there is an intention to update using cat 8.6?
derek85 - Friday, June 20, 2008 - link
I second this, I'm sure 8.6 came with some nice optimizations on 770s.DerekWilson - Friday, June 20, 2008 - link
we did not use catalyst 8.5 drivers.we used the very latest beta drivers ATI could get us.
Wirmish - Friday, June 20, 2008 - link
And did you use the Radeon HD 4800 Series Hotfix (6/20/2008) ?http://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?dep...">http://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?dep...
;)
Nighteye2 - Thursday, June 19, 2008 - link
The big question for the comparison between this card in CF and the GT200 will not be the classic framerates here - but the performance of games that use the GPU for part of the physics processing. The GT200 has lots of compute power to spare for physics, can 2 4850's in CF match that?FITCamaro - Friday, June 20, 2008 - link
With 800 shaders it wouldn't surprise me.Wirmish - Friday, June 20, 2008 - link
He talk about CF...So it's 1600 shaders !