HD 4850 not too impressive in 3DMark Vantage

[wolf2009]

http://sg.vr-zone.com/articles/Radeon_HD_4850_%28RV770PRO%29_Tested/5829.html

Scored only P6500 marks in 3DMark Vantage , 8800GTS 512 MB can score near about 5500.

With the 8800GTS 512 MB coming in at $160 after rebate , and HD4850 at $230 , i wonder if nvidia offering will be the right choice once again unless HD 4870 can come in with some drastic performance increase.

[Disruptor4]

So much for the 48xx series using GDDR5. :laugh:
Or am I thinking of a different card/series?

[JrRacinFan]

Can't really scoff at that. It scores almost as good as a 3870X2, almost meaning within 750 points.

[Megasty]

That sweet & all, but WTF is the test system. Typical VR-Zone :rolleyes:

[CrackerJack]

that's a pretty good score considering the clocks speeds, but what are the full systems specs?!?

[Shurakai]

I don't know much about early tests but that seems great for unoptimized drivers, wish VR-Zone posted the test system specs like Megasty mentioned :(

[wolf2009]

whatever the test system , a better processor may improve 3dmark score but its not gonna improve gaming performance by much.

@shurakai - as far as unoptimized drivers r concerned, i dont think ati makes really good drivers. there latest catalyst releases r slower than their previous catalysts.

[Temps_Riising]

Wonder how these things will overclock though, if not very well then probably little or no gap between scores for the 8800GTS because once you overclock the GTS from 650 to 825mhz or so then it is significantly faster.

[Megasty]

whatever the test system , a better processor may improve 3dmark score but its not gonna improve gaming performance by much.

Who cares about that. 1000 pts is huge in vantage. In my sys with a 3.0ghz quad, a 8800gts can get p5200 while a 9800gtx can get p5700. The cpu still determines the overall score so them not telling us atleast that makes that p6500 meaningless. Nevertheless, it is a pretty good score for a midrange card.

[JrRacinFan]

Also, can't forget that ATi gets better with driver releases. :)

[cdawall]

umm that card looks dead exactly the same as my 3850...bogus?

like even the capacitors are in the same spot...

[Megasty]

umm that card looks dead exactly the same as my 3850...bogus?

like even the capacitors are in the same spot...

They are suppose to look exactly the same. The 4850 will have the same pcb design as well as the cooler :rolleyes:

[Disruptor4]

Can't really scoff at that. It scores almost as good as a 3870X2, almost meaning within 750 points.

I wasn't scoffing at the score or nothing. It was at the fact I could swear they said they were going to use GDD5, when quite clearly in that picture, it shows GDDR3....

[cdawall]

They are suppose to look exactly the same. The 4850 will have the same pcb design as well as the cooler :rolleyes:

ahh ok damn why couldn't they have gotten a good cooler for it that one is a POS

[tkpenalty]

ahh ok damn why couldn't they have gotten a good cooler for it that one is a POS

They've improved it a tiny bit... notice how many more fan blades it has? :laugh:

The PCB is identical, except now there are less unsoldered components; more capacitors have been installed. Anyway the card will be very cheap, compared to Nvidia's offerings...

[Megasty]

I wasn't scoffing at the score or nothing. It was at the fact I could swear they said they were going to use GDD5, when quite clearly in that picture, it shows GDDR3....

The 4870 & x2 will use GDDR5. How much more of a difference it will make is still up in the air.

ahh ok damn why couldn't they have gotten a good cooler for it that one is a POS

:laugh: It is a POS, I hate that card idling at 60C all the time, that's why I don't use the thing. I like my stuff at 40-50C, especially in the summer months, which is why I modded the hell out of my 3870x2s.

[cdawall]

great so no its going to be even noisier and just as inefficient

not 60C idle but load is just crazy high

http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/08/06/03/ahr.png

[tkpenalty]

great so no its going to be even noisier and just as inefficient

not 60C idle but load is just crazy high

http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/08/06/03/ahr.png

huh?

Make sense please?

More fan blades = More airflow with less noise.

[niko084]

Can't really scoff at that. It scores almost as good as a 3870X2, almost meaning within 750 points.

Also remember these are very early drivers once again...

[Megasty]

great so no its going to be even noisier and just as inefficient

not 60C idle but load is just crazy high

http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/08/06/03/ahr.png

Yeah, I had to turn the damn fan up to 90% to get it to go down to 40C. That 25% mess just didn't cut it. More blades does help a little but the noise will still be retarted.

[cdawall]

huh?

Make sense please?

More fan blades = More airflow with less noise.

lol not really cause they make more noise cause there is more blades spinning at the same speed and to many blades will not increase performance...hence why most fans have 5 or so

[JrRacinFan]

Also, can't forget that ATi gets better with driver releases. :)

Also remember these are very early drivers once again...

Exactly man. I think this will be a killer card!

[niko084]

lol not really cause they make more noise cause there is more blades spinning at the same speed and to many blades will not increase performance...hence why most fans have 5 or so

Air movement makes noise, so yes more fan blades doesn't always equal less noise..

Sound is caused by displacement of air....

[Megasty]

Exactly man. I think this will be a killer card!

Even w/o the sys specs, its right on the mark. The 4870 should eat the 3870x2 while the 4850 should be within the range of the 3870x2. Very nice :toast:

[CrackerJack]

Even w/o the sys specs, its right on the mark. The 4870 should eat the 3870x2 while the 4850 should be within the range of the 3870x2. Very nice :toast:

4850 being in the range of a 3870x2.... right!?!? higher doesn't mean better

[erocker]

The clock speeds don't make any sense to me. At only 500mhz that score is pretty damn amazing. I would call it pretty impressive considering it's not even in the same bracket as the 8800GTS.

[Edito]

I think ATI need to redesign the way they Catalist look and they way it performs but i think the score is just fine i was expecting for more but its just fine...

[CrackerJack]

The clock speeds don't make any sense to me. At only 500mhz that score is pretty damn amazing. I would call it pretty impressive considering it's not even in the same bracket as the 8800GTS.

that's what i was thinking too, i'm kinda thinking it's fake.

[erocker]

No, it's not fake, but if 700mhz is considered OC'd, it's a little ridiculous. It's time to see some 4870 GDDR5 stuff...

[flashstar]

Do you believe that ATI will finally be competitive with Nvidia now?

[yogurt_21]

I need some real benchies and a system specs listed, I getting tired of these "leaked" 3dmark tests. I mean shouldn't the card have shipped to oems yesterday? so wheres the benches?

[cdawall]

yea lets see some crysis and bioshock benches this 3dmark stuff changes every 10 minutes

[erocker]

Do you believe that ATI will finally be competitive with Nvidia now?

I think they are right now. No, they can't match Nvidia's high-end products, but what they do have is a good price/performance value. The 4870 won't be able to compete with the 280GTX, but the 4870x2 or two 4870's will. Really though, it all comes down to price/performance when they are actually released. There is just too much speculation and PR spin going on right now. I'm thinking next week we should see more solid proof of what all these cards can do.

[petepete]

had an interesting talk with an AMD guy at work.. he said the GDDR5 versions will come out in less than 6 months so wait for that card.. they are coming though

also, the AMD guy told me AMD is having many internal problems and nvidia uses sort of blackmail to other game companies stating that nvidia will cut their fundings if they don't make games more optimized for nvidia cards.. you dont have to believe me..
and the AMD guy also said that they will always have a high end video card product to compete against nvidia

[erocker]

They will be released in July at the latest. That's whay MY AMD guy told me.:p

[HTC]

What was the speed of the 6466: stock or OCed?

It's a heck of a boost over my previous OCed Sapphire HD3870, with 4935 (i have an AsusHD 3870, now): in here, post #133 (http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=58927&page=6)).

That's slightly over 31% increase, and it's not even the 4870 version.

That said, however, i have my doubts about the veracity of this (i know that erocker said it was real): why didn't they include a screenie of the Vantage score?

[erocker]

Multiple sources who are at Computex are reporting the same thing. It's real, at least what they want to show the public at this time. 6466 is OC'd at or just under 700mhz core speed.

[HTC]

Multiple sources who are at Computex are reporting the same thing. It's real, at least what they want to show the public at this time. 6466 is OC'd at or just under 700mhz core speed.

OK, dude!

It's just that, if they took upon themselves to take all those photos, why not include a Vantage screenie as well?

Seems idiotic, to me, really!

[CrackerJack]

OK, dude!

It's just that, if they took upon themselves to take all those photos, why not include a Vantage screenie as well?

Seems idiotic, to me, really!

that, and block the card info. :shadedshu

[erocker]

They take what they are given. Sometimes, they can take a little more if they're sneeky.:D

[magibeg]

The 4850 scoring that high seems pretty good to me. Would make it pretty comparable to say the 9800gtx in head to head. Will make the 4870 look that much better because i believe ati made the claim they wanted a bigger performance gap between the 4850 and the 4870 than the 3850 and 3870 had.

[WarEagleAU]

That they did Magibeg and I believe they will get it. Im quite impressed with the numbers and the oc myself. With better cooling, I wonder how high you can go and what the score would be?`

[cdawall]

The 4850 scoring that high seems pretty good to me. Would make it pretty comparable to say the 9800gtx in head to head. Will make the 4870 look that much better because i believe ati made the claim they wanted a bigger performance gap between the 4850 and the 4870 than the 3850 and 3870 had.

considering you could oc the 3850 to run head to head with a 2870 with a simple BIOS mod lol


hey anyone think we will be able to crank the volts of the 4850 to match the 4870 like we could with the 3850s?

[sneekypeet]

They take what they are given. Sometimes, they can take a little more if they're sneeky.:D

Hey you let out my secret....lol sneeky...in english its sneaky....thanks tho.:laugh:

[ghost101]

At $229 it was always going to be around this level of performance. I mentioned this several times in other threads but some people just refused to listen. This isnt a poor showing but exactly what people who actually looked at the specs expected.

It was never going to be close to nvidia's $450 and $650 dollar parts.

[KainXS]

considering you could oc the 3850 to run head to head with a 2870 with a simple BIOS mod lol


hey anyone think we will be able to crank the volts of the 4850 to match the 4870 like we could with the 3850s?

from what I have seen the 4850 only will have gddr3 while the 4870 will have the gddr5

still, seeing as those are beta drivers, thats a pretty good score, better than alot of the 9800gtx's i have seen

and if these cards overclock like the 3850's which can overclock to near 1ghz(and over) on the gpu from their stock 668, then we are going to see some very good scores from these little buggers

[cdawall]

from what I have seen the 4850 only will have gddr3 while the 4870 will have the gddr5

still, seeing as those are beta drivers, thats a pretty good score, better than alot of the 9800gtx's i have seen

and if these cards overclock like the 3850's which can overclock to near 1ghz(and over) on the gpu from their stock 668, then we are going to see some very good scores from these little buggers

GDDR3 vs 5 is anything like 3/4 it offered a negligible difference in everything but power

[ghost101]

from what I have seen the 4850 only will have gddr3 while the 4870 will have the gddr5

still, seeing as those are beta drivers, thats a pretty good score, better than alot of the 9800gtx's i have seen

and if these cards overclock like the 3850's which can overclock to near 1ghz(and over) on the gpu from their stock 668, then we are going to see some very good scores from these little buggers

Yep, a 4850 which can be vmodded to 900mhz or so, should be a great buy. Should be better than any overclocked 9800gtx. Especially if the above score only uses a stock qx9650 or something.

As for the 4870, im not sure if the gddr5 is worth the extra $100. The overclocking potential wouldnt be that much better than the 4850 is the current series is anything to go by. I just hope amd can bring out the 4870x2 in time to put some form of pressure on the 260/280 gtx.

Also, i doubt nvidia will surrender the mid range by just hoping that the 9800gtx will beat ati's cards. I'm sure theyve got something up there sleeves. A 160 shader part perhaps?

[InnocentCriminal]

:drool:

Again, it seems like ATi are hitting the nail on the head with the price:performance malarkey. If the 4850 OC's as well or if not better than my 3850 that'd be freaking great! According to a Custom PC's recent review of 3DMark Vantage a test set up of a QX6700, on a DFI Infinity 975X/G mobo with 4GB PC2-6400 with Vista32 SP1 with a 3870X2 scored P7537. With a 9800GX2 it scored P9051. A single 9800GTX scored P5685 and the 8800GTS scored P5538.

I can add more, such as the 3850 and 3870 scores as well as the High and Extreme (as well as Entry) if people want. All this came from the July 2008 issue of Custom PC (UK).

[ChromeDome]

so this new card...other then test scores and what not, it will play games, right? :confused:

[magibeg]

so this new card...other then test scores and what not, it will play games, right? :confused:

In theory though none of us have seen it happen yet :D

[farlex85]

I think that's pretty good. Remember, this is the mid-range card. The 3870 doesn't really compare to the gts 512, for this to do better than the gts is about right. I can get about p6k, but that takes my max oc w/o vmod. For this to score 5 hundred more w/ a regular oc, thats pretty good, or at least about what should be expected. Although, I can't tell what cpu they are using, is it a quad?
Plus, its the gddr3 version. A solid bargain buy.

[Edito]

Take a look at this i think its fake but i want to share it

http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-5083-view-HD-4870-vs-9800-GX2-benchmark.html

[DarkMatter]

No, it's not fake, but if 700mhz is considered OC'd, it's a little ridiculous. It's time to see some 4870 GDDR5 stuff...

Erm that's a 12% overclock. I would easily call anything above 5% an OC. Once we extract* the 12% overclock the card would do more or less 5800, or a bit more than 8800GTS/9800GTX levels, which is what I was expecting. Also some early reports said 25% faster than 8800/9800 GT and I think these scores fit.
With this same method at 850 Mhz (HD4870) the card would score about 7700, a bit more than HD3870 X2 and 25% faster than 9800GTX, as reported earlier, once again.

*By estimation I have extracted 600 CPU points, is more or less the points of a Quad according to what I've seen around. Then divided the result by 1,12 and added 600 points again.

[yogurt_21]

Erm that's a 12% overclock. I would easily call anything above 5% an OC. Once we extract* the 12% overclock the card would do more or less 5800, or a bit more than 8800GTS/9800GTX levels, which is what I was expecting. Also some early reports said 25% faster than 8800/9800 GT and I think these scores fit.
With this same method at 850 Mhz (HD4870) the card would score about 7700, a bit more than HD3870 X2 and 25% faster than 9800GTX, as reported earlier, once again.

*By estimation I have extracted 600 CPU points, is more or less the points of a Quad according to what I've seen around. Then divided the result by 1,12 and added 600 points again.


the 480 also has a 1050 shader clock vs the 850 shader clock on the 4850, so being that shader clock is a current ati weak point I think the 4870 will be higher than 7700.

[erocker]

Erm that's a 12% overclock. I would easily call anything above 5% an OC. Once we extract* the 12% overclock the card would do more or less 5800, or a bit more than 8800GTS/9800GTX levels, which is what I was expecting. Also some early reports said 25% faster than 8800/9800 GT and I think these scores fit.
With this same method at 850 Mhz (HD4870) the card would score about 7700, a bit more than HD3870 X2 and 25% faster than 9800GTX, as reported earlier, once again.

*By estimation I have extracted 600 CPU points, is more or less the points of a Quad according to what I've seen around. Then divided the result by 1,12 and added 600 points again.

I thought stock clocks were around 700mhz. I guess I was wrong.

[ShadowFold]

so this new card...other then test scores and what not, it will play games, right? :confused:

Surprisingly yes :p I wanna see some damn game performance not 3dmark scores, they mean nothing to me.

[DarkMatter]

the 480 also has a 1050 shader clock vs the 850 shader clock on the 4850, so being that shader clock is a current ati weak point I think the 4870 will be higher than 7700.

The difference between 1050 and 850 (23%) on shaders is smaller than the one between 850 and 625 on the core (36%). So in any case that won't make the difference any bigger than what I calculated. In fact if shaders are the weak point 770XT would be much slower. Around 7000 points. Interesting though, since another rumors said it would performaround these numbers.

I thought stock clocks were around 700mhz. I guess I was wrong.

625 Mhz on the core acording to latest leaked specs. Was lowered from 650 to let more room to the HD4870, which IMO is not really good news.

[Urbklr]

Take a look at this i think its fake but i want to share it

http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-5083-view-HD-4870-vs-9800-GX2-benchmark.html

Wow, i hope thats true....18k on a 3.2GHz AMD:eek:

....Throw in an E8400 4GHz or a 3.5GHz+ Quad:D

[imperialreign]

wow, the low end of the 4000 series ain't lookin too bad so far, and I take it these scores must've been done with the earl CAT 8.6 releases, so we're still looking at underdeveloped drivers as well.

IDK about y'all, but I see a lot of headroom for the whole series still - I'm defi looking forward to some real game benches, and the release of the 4870.

The way it's looking right now, though, if all goes well with this series - 4870x2 is going to be a monster.

[Disruptor4]

The 4870 & x2 will use GDDR5. How much more of a difference it will make is still up in the air.
Ah, my bad. I thought they were going to make the whole 48xx series GDDR5. Thanks for clarifying. :)
I don't personally think it'll make much of a difference, but I just thought they were failing with their promise.

[ShadowFold]

The 4870 also has more stream processor things and faster clocks afaik

[imperialreign]

Ah, my bad. I thought they were going to make the whole 48xx series GDDR5. Thanks for clarifying. :)
I don't personally think it'll make much of a difference, but I just thought they were failing with their promise.

the GDDR5 won't make any real noticeable performance difference - at least, I really don't think it will or could.

The only benefit I've seen from having the higher bandwidth memory, is it reduces texture loading time in-game, which will equate to less stuttering and quicker graphics load-ups. It doesn't affect FPS at all, really.

[FR@NK]

At $229 it was always going to be around this level of performance. I mentioned this several times in other threads but some people just refused to listen. This isnt a poor showing but exactly what people who actually looked at the specs expected.

It was never going to be close to nvidia's $450 and $650 dollar parts.

I found some interesting info at bestbuy today....Looks like the HD4800 series might be cheaper then expected:

http://img.techpowerup.org/080604/img006.jpg

http://img.techpowerup.org/080604/img007.jpg

http://img.techpowerup.org/080604/img008.jpg

http://img.techpowerup.org/080604/img009.jpg

http://img.techpowerup.org/080604/img010.jpg

These were taken with a camera phone :/

Notice the instock date on June 22nd, but you might see them abit earlier. The first week or so these cards should be these prices until bestbuy jacks the prices up(Just like what happened with the 9600GT afew months ago). When on sale I expect prices to be $150 and $250. I'm unsure if the 4870 is the GDDR5 version tho :(

[anticlutch]

whatever the test system , a better processor may improve 3dmark score but its not gonna improve gaming performance by much.

@shurakai - as far as unoptimized drivers r concerned, i dont think ati makes really good drivers. there latest catalyst releases r slower than their previous catalysts.

Well nVidia doesn't do too well in terms of drivers too you know :laugh:

This is only the 4850 so hopefully the higher-end models perform much better than this.

[hayder.master]

So much for the 48xx series using GDDR5. :laugh:
Or am I thinking of a different card/series?


if you see there is somthing rong , a picture of catalyst control center it read a momory size 512 and ander it memory type gddr3

[tkpenalty]

GDDR5 4850's = To be released later.

Honestly, AMD are doing it right by targeting value for performance. The card will be a lower power usage card, that outdoes the GTX260/280 in bang for buck-the 280 is 2x more expensive than the 4850.

Now one thing that Nvidia CANNOT counter is the fact that one HD4870X2 will be a threat to their GTX260/280s. The way that nvidia designed the 260/280, I don't see a dual cored 260 or 280 anytime soon; even die shrinking before they taped it out didnt really decrease the TDP.

According to some somewhat reliable sources, the HD4870X2 will be seen by the drivers/system as ONE card; i.e. it will be equivalent to a dual core CPU in its design, moreover sharing memory. This should easily kill off the crossfire scaling problems that AMD are subject to due to the apparent business deals that Nvidia does with game companies. Also AMD should be able to cut back on R&D again as I'd expect them to use the same PCB naturally.

Take a look at this i think its fake but i want to share it

http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-5083-view-HD-4870-vs-9800-GX2-benchmark.html

Well apparently the 4870 uses a different PCB to the 4850. Afaik the 4870's PCB looks like a revised R600 PCB... So Hopefully the 4870 uses a 512bit bus and a core with more stuff.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7626&Itemid=65
^Apparently the HD4870 has 7.1 Audio through HDMI
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7625&Itemid=65
^HD4850/4870 doesnt do FSAA through shaders anymore

[erocker]

I'm unsure if the 4870 is the GDDR5 version tho :(

GDDR5 is the only memory used on 4870's.


Well apparently the 4870 uses a different PCB to the 4850. Afaik the 4870's PCB looks like a revised R600 PCB... So Hopefully the 4870 uses a 512bit bus and a core with more stuff.
It's confirmed that it's a 256bit bus.

[CrackerJack]

Radeon 4850 scores 5K in 3Dmark Vantage
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7674&Itemid=1

[ghost101]

Radeon 4850 scores 5K in 3Dmark Vantage
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7674&Itemid=1

Thats interesting. The CPU doesnt play that big of a part in the overall 3dmark score in vantage. This suggests cpu limitations in the game tests, but from my testing the graphics tests are very good in vantage at removing cpu limitations.

[yogurt_21]

The difference between 1050 and 850 (23%) on shaders is smaller than the one between 850 and 625 on the core (36%). So in any case that won't make the difference any bigger than what I calculated. In fact if shaders are the weak point 770XT would be much slower. Around 7000 points. Interesting though, since another rumors said it would performaround these numbers.



625 Mhz on the core acording to latest leaked specs. Was lowered from 650 to let more room to the HD4870, which IMO is not really good news.

that doesn't make an sense I said the shader clcok was a weak point o0n the current ati cards and you dropped the target performance of the 770xt because it has a higher shader clock:wtf::wtf:

wow you're about through and through green today lol.

no I mean the shaders are currently bottlenecked by a low shader clock on the 2900/3800's meaning that the 770xt will be less bottlenecked in that area likely pushing the score into the 8500 range. not that it matters any. ati cards have always done well with 3dmark. it's gaming I care about.

[farlex85]

Radeon 4850 scores 5K in 3Dmark Vantage
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7674&Itemid=1

Thats not so hot. Cpu does not make as big of a difference in vantage, but it does make a difference, and a phenom is no slouch in vantage. A gts 512 should score higher than that. Still all preliminary though.

[DarkMatter]

that doesn't make an sense I said the shader clcok was a weak point o0n the current ati cards and you dropped the target performance of the 770xt because it has a higher shader clock:wtf::wtf:

wow you're about through and through green today lol.

no I mean the shaders are currently bottlenecked by a low shader clock on the 2900/3800's meaning that the 770xt will be less bottlenecked in that area likely pushing the score into the 8500 range. not that it matters any. ati cards have always done well with 3dmark. it's gaming I care about.

This doesn't work like you are suggesting. You seem to think that since shaders run 23% faster and the core 36% it's like this:

Performance of 770pro x 1,36 x 1,25 = performance of 770XT

It doesn't work like that. It's the lowest common denominator (in each situation) which marks the performance of the card. That's why the XT would only be 23% faster than the Pro on shader bottlenecked situations and 36% on pixel heavy situations.

And once again someone suggests I am "green" just because I say something that isn't as favorable as they want for Ati. It gets boring. Just because the new Ati cards are not the Holy Grail that many of you thought it would be, and because I state it with logic, it doesn't mean I am a Nvidia fanboi. But to be honest with all the attacking by Ati fanbois that I suffer I'm starting to thinking about chosing a side, and guess which is going to be... :shadedshu

[magibeg]

Radeon 4850 scores 5K in 3Dmark Vantage
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7674&Itemid=1

I kinda don't trust those numbers at all. My 3870 is currently scoring around 5K in 3dmark vantage. The 4850 has many more stream processors, twice as many shaders, its running at 850mhz at the shaders. Doesn't make sense.

[warhammer]

ATI Radeon 4800-series tech demo from Computex 2008

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/Fudzilla.com/ATI4800SeriesTechDemo/photo#5208079896638449394

[DarkMatter]

I kinda don't trust those numbers at all. My 3870 is currently scoring around 5K in 3dmark vantage. The 4850 has many more stream processors, twice as many shaders, its running at 850mhz at the shaders. Doesn't make sense.

Vantage does a lot of a greater job than 3dm06 in isolating the CPU out of the score, but it's still very important. I guess Intel Quad 3,6 Ghz makes a substantial difference compared to Phenom 2.5 Ghz. And you have the card overclocked too.

How much near 5000 are you? And what's your CPU/GPU score?

[farlex85]

I kinda don't trust those numbers at all. My 3870 is currently scoring around 5K in 3dmark vantage. The 4850 has many more stream processors, twice as many shaders, its running at 850mhz at the shaders. Doesn't make sense.

You've got yours ocd though, plus mature drivers. Seems low, but maybe right considering those factors.

[magibeg]

Vantage does a lot of a greater job than 3dm06 in isolating the CPU out of the score, but it's still very important. I guess Intel Quad 3,6 Ghz makes a substantial difference compared to Phenom 2.5 Ghz. And you have the card overclocked too.

How much near 5000 are you? And what's your CPU/GPU score?

I'm able to reach a high of 5200. Although i think i only ever showed 5100 or so on the benchmark list here at tpu.

[farlex85]

Vantage does a lot of a greater job than 3dm06 in isolating the CPU out of the score, but it's still very important. I guess Intel Quad 3,6 Ghz makes a substantial difference compared to Phenom 2.5 Ghz. And you have the card overclocked too.

How much near 5000 are you? And what's your CPU/GPU score?

Check out the vantage (http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58927&highlight=alcpone%27s+official) thread here. From what I've seen most Phenom's still score 10k+, a big boost over dualies. But yeah, Intel still has the upper hand clock for clock, plus you won't get a phenom to 3600.......

[farlex85]

I'm able to reach a high of 5200. Although i think i only ever showed 5100 or so on the benchmark list here at tpu.

It probably would be a few hundred lower if you had a 2.3 phenom running though.

[DarkMatter]

I'm able to reach a high of 5200. Although i think i only ever showed 5100 or so on the benchmark list here at tpu.

It probably would be a few hundred lower if you had a 2.3 phenom running though.

If you look at the list jbunch does 300 points less than magibeg on a 2700 Mhz Phenom. It's a lot IMO, enough to make a difference in the 770pro. Take in mind that a faster card will always be more influenced (bottlenecked) by the CPU than the slower ones. If you have read my posts above I calculated 5800 points for the card at stock. I definately think 800 points difference between both CPUs are possible.

[Smygel]

When i see the scores im REALLY impressed, considering this is a mid range card standing up to 9800GTX and 3870x2. This is gonna be my new card considering Price and performance. I dont want the BEST card in performance, i just want the best card in price/performance and i think that goes for alot of you out there. When i buy i card i buy one that can handle my games on FPS lvl 50-80 on game default high settings, This card looks like it will handle Crysis high 1280x1024 on around 50? same goes for Age of conan with all the eye candy.

and btw, its a 6pin, that means i dont need to buy i high uber 19374759 watts PSU :P

Agree ? or disagree?

[Gam'ster]

and btw, its a 6pin, that means i dont need to buy i high uber 19374759 watts PSU :P

Agree ? or disagree?

Ive never heard of qtek, but the corsair 450w vx is relativity cheap and will handle your system with no probs HD4850/70 included.

Gam

[Smygel]

I know, the Qtek PSU in like one of a kind, got it from work from a Media Center, anyways, Corsair Powersupply 450W is like 90$ here in norway, but i will be trying my 420 on the 4850, i reckon it wont be any problem at all.

[tigger]

Qtek psu's are rubbish,they sell them were i live.Its about £20 for a 400 watter.I would seriously dump that psu smygel or it will kill your pc.

[Smygel]

Qtek psu's are rubbish,they sell them were i live.Its about £20 for a 400 watter.I would seriously dump that psu smygel or it will kill your pc.

What my creditcard thinks about this: :cry:

Guess corsair 450 then =)

[tigger]

Better a new psu bud than a new board,chip or ram.

[Gam'ster]

What my creditcard thinks about this: :cry:

Guess corsair 450 then =)

:), Its all good smygel you'll love it in the end :D plus a 5 year warranty win/win :toast:

Gam

[tigger]

And throw the crappy qtek in the bin. :p

[Smygel]

:), Its all good smygel you'll love it in the end :D plus a 5 year warranty win/win :toast:

Gam

OOooo look at that, 5 year warranty, nice!

Corsair - Qtek
:nutkick: