4890 1gbPost Date: 2009-04-02 |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author | |
<8) slunK parade 
Senior Member 
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: 4890 1gbPosted: 02 Apr 2009 at 2:52am |
|
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/16365-sapphire-radeon-hd-4890-1gb-review.html
looks like a solid card for a good price |
|
 |
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 02 Apr 2009 at 11:54pm |
|
That card looks pretty nice. Seems hard to justify buying a 285 when the 4890, almost as good, is so much cheaper.
Speaking of nvidia, it seems as though the 275 isn't really worse than the 280... or is it?
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE 
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 03 Apr 2009 at 1:07am |
|
depends on the game really, Far Cry 2:
 Edited by DST4ME - 03 Apr 2009 at 1:07am |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 03 Apr 2009 at 1:18am |
|
not sure wat site u get your comparisons from but the HW canucks review shows the 4890 beating the 260 in performance and closely matched to the 275
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/skymtl/GPU/SAPPHIRE-HD4890/HD4890-39.jpg |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 03 Apr 2009 at 2:23am |
|
I was showing the difference between 285, 275 and the 4890, I'm not sure who told you that HWc is the best site for reviews but its not, guru is much more reliable place, I take their review over anybody else any day.
my chart is with 8x AA and 16xAF. HWc is using 4x AA, thats not the highest settings Edited by DST4ME - 03 Apr 2009 at 2:37am |
|
|
|
|
PatrickB
DS Veteran 
Joined: 19 Oct 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 544 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 12:35am |
|
Dual 4890's in CF beat's at GTX295.
Check this out: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ATI/HD_4890_CrossFire/1.html Edited by PatrickB - 04 Apr 2009 at 12:36am |
|
|
Q9550 @ 3.4Ghz for now
Xigmatek Thor's Hammer MSI P45 Neo2-fr 6gig 1066 Corsair Dominator XFX Radeon HD 4890 PC Power&Cooling 750W Seagate Barracuda 500Gb Antec 900 Vista 64bit |
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 12:56am |
|
Hmm, I've looked at a bunch of reviews and it's hard for me to really know what to think vs. the 275.
They all seem to agree the card is extremely noisy though. Edited by hotcakes22 - 04 Apr 2009 at 12:57am |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 1:04am |
|
not in all games, in some games the 295 is beating the 4890 cf or the the difference is little.
that article also speaks of how loud just one 4890 is let along 2, it consumes more power. In some games it is faster but my problem is that who cares if you are getting 121fps or 140fps, over 80fps, who can really tell the difference? OverKill here is a big difference tho everybody missed, a person with a 295 GTX can OC their cards and gain around 10 to 20 fps depending on the game, for example lets look at far cry 2 with the GTX 295 stock and oced: 
now lets look at far cry 2 with the 4890 stock and oced: 
as everybody can clearly see, a 295 oced kills an oced 4890, when it comes to gaining performance from an OC, this results in 2 x 4890 oced to get beaten by or matched by 1 x 295 GTX OCed, so at the end, with the 4890 CF, you get lot more noise, more heat. I will leave the rest to you good readers. Edited by DST4ME - 04 Apr 2009 at 1:38am |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 6:59am |
|
its a better deal price wise as well
4890s are going for 250 a piece , while most 295s cost 520+ depeding on which model you get so better performance and price ;) Edited by <8) slunK parade - 04 Apr 2009 at 7:00am |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 1:04pm |
|
I just showed you how it does not have better performance at 8x AA and 16x AF, it will take up 2 pci slot and I quote:
if you guys want to go with sites that only give 4x aa and 4x af then go ahead but if you want to know how the cards do in real high settings, 8x aa, 16x af, etc., and see how the cards do in real high settings then here you go, it can barely hang with the 260+ and 275. far cry 2 at 8x aa and 16x af:
Call of Duty 5: World at War 4x aa 16 af: 
Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway with Texture Quality HIGH, Shadow Texture Quality HIGH, Shadow Detail HIGH: 
Tom Clancy's HAWX at 4x aa, 16x af: 
crysis: 
now if you guys just want to ignore the resluts then go ahead, at 8x aa and 16x af it no match for even the 275 let along 295. not to mention that the above charts are done with a 896MB 275 GTX, the 1792MB 275 GTX, would probably eat the 4890 for only $50 more and when OCed its game over.  Edited by DST4ME - 04 Apr 2009 at 4:05pm |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 6:46pm |
|
4xaa is fine for just about everyone,most ppl dont use any at all and i know very few ppl who would even use 8x
i think you are just an nvidia fan boy that doesnt like the fact that ati put out a card that performs better for a cheaper price +who cares that it would take up two pci-e slots? Edited by <8) slunK parade - 04 Apr 2009 at 6:48pm |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 7:43pm |
fanboy? first off lets not get personal, second I'm not fanboy, third you get to decide what people want to do now? fact remains, on highest settings it can't even hang with the 275, now who ever wants to spend $250 to play at 4x can get the 4890 and enjoy the noise along with it, or they can pay $250 and play at 8x and highest settings with a 275 GTX. if one card is better then the other at highest settings then correct me if I'm wrong, but that card is the best not the one that can't hang at highest settings. I'm just providing the facts. I'm not the one saying that it can't hang at highest settings, the carts are showing the facts, the reader can decide if they want to spend $250 on a noisy card to play at 4x AA or pay $250 (same exact amount) and play at 8x AA. why would anybody pay $250 to play at 4x aa when they can pay $250 and play at 8x aa and 16x af. Edited by DST4ME - 04 Apr 2009 at 7:55pm |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 8:14pm |
|
since when did i decide what ppl do? im just stating that most people could care less about using AA on any setting, only fools who care about "having the most uber gaming experience" care about that sh*t
2nd, ur a fanboy |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 9:06pm |
|
Well lets see, you are saying that the card that can't do as well as the other at highest setting, and is a lot more noisier, is the better card, and I'm the fanboy?
OK sure, what ever you say
The readers have enough brains to know if they want less performance at highest settings and more noise for $250 or if they want less noise and more performance at high settings for $250, I will leave it to their discretion. come to think of it you would be better off with a 4870 then the 4890, the difference is very little. Far Cry 2 8x aa: 
Crysis WARHEAD: 
Fallout 3 8x aa:  Edited by DST4ME - 04 Apr 2009 at 9:22pm |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 10:21pm |
|
you admitted yourself that the 4890 is better without or with Low amounts of AA right? so what i said was valid , very few pppl use AA or any type of filtering, meaning the 4890 would run the game faster would it not?
If a site is giong to review a card they use what other people are most likely to use so you can see some real time Frames and what you would get from the card, everyone i know looks at the 0x AA or 4x to see how well it would run for them 4890> |
|
|
|
|
bullseyehk
Groupie 
Joined: 08 Dec 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 212 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 10:24pm |
|
i've had both ati and nvidia cards in my life time so i'm not a big fan either way as i want the most out of my video for the money. i do however hate noisy stuff in my rig. i can barely handle the rig i have now because of the noise from the 6 fans. so if i've got my choice between cards with the graphs presented...and i'm assuming since i've had no input in the research show...i would have to go with nvidia in this case...although i'll be using the 295
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 04 Apr 2009 at 10:48pm |
|
thats right bullseyehk, the better card is 275 or even the 4870.
@<8) slunK parade, I never said that 4890 was better at lower aa settings: far cry 2 4x aa settings: 
Tom Clancy’s Hawx DX10, 0x aa settings: 
Tom Clancy’s Hawx DX9, 0x aa settings: 
Crysis Warhead: 
Edited by DST4ME - 04 Apr 2009 at 10:52pm |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 1:36am |
|
im pretty sure we're comparing crossfire 4890s , since patrick has his nice link to the article, thats only a single 4890
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 1:38am |
|
sli 275 will beat 4890 in crossfire also
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 1:51am |
|
sli 275 will beat 4890 in crossfire also. so again much less noise and more performance.
as for 2 x 4890 vs 1 x 295 from Patric's link, they are even in some games, and in games that fps numbers are low the difference between them is like 3fps, and in some games the 1 x 295 is better then 2 x 4890: 
most of the games in Patric's link have over 200fps with 2 x 4890 or 1 x 295 GTX, how do you say overkill, specially for users who don't care about AA and AF  Edited by DST4ME - 05 Apr 2009 at 2:09am |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 3:34am |
|
i never said the 4890 could beat the 275 in sli, the discussion was on cf 4890 vs 295, betr price and performance
+"overkill" has nothign to do with it, we were discussing how the 4890 would be the best choice for some one who uses regular settings |
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 3:39am |
|
Well I am saying that 275 sli is better price and performance then 4890 cf and much less noise. in high setting or regular settings, and the 4870 keeps up very well with the 4890 at regular settings also, the charts clearly show that.
as far as 2 x 4890 vs 1 x 295, as I mentioned the 4890 is not faster or better in all games, the charts show it. also it is very interesting that you don't want to count AA or AF, where there is an actual noticeable difference in the game but you want to count the difference between 331fps and 335fps where there is no noticeable difference, so in other words you are insinuating that performance has nothing to do with high AA and AF instead its pointless fps at 200 fps and above like mentioned above or 225fps vs 231fps, very interesting point of view. Edited by DST4ME - 05 Apr 2009 at 3:47am |
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 1:21pm |
|
Has nVidia made a "mistake" in releasing a card that is almost on par with the 285 but is quite a bit cheaper? Or is the 285 in fact significantly better than the 275?
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 2:16pm |
|
well if you look at it, what they have done is pretty much the same as what ATI themselves have done with the 4870 and 4890, they are not much of a difference either.
I think its more matching what the other will put out, the 285 is some games is much better then 275 but not in most games, so I'm thinking its more competition then anything else. |
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 8:39pm |
|
the gtx 275 is still a paper launch
we'll have to see what the public thinks of them + wondering why BFG already has a OC version of the card and no stock and why does EVGAs card have OpenGL 3 when the rest have 2.1 |
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 8:44pm |
|
What is a "paper launch"? Just sort of a launch to compete with something else? A launch when the product is not technically available yet? What type of 285 do you have , skunk?
|
|
|
|
|
<8) slunK parade
Senior Member
Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 798 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 9:18pm |
|
no, the card isnt actully out, so nobody has tested the card except for reviewers that ask for a card,and they are sent one before they go for retail sale so people will be more likely to buy it
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05 Apr 2009 at 11:57pm |
|
the site which I have posted charts from tested the actuall card.
the public will think the same thing they thougt about the 285 and 295 when I posted stuff about them from the same site. the 275 should be out within a couple of weeks, evga has annoneced and listed both the 896MB version and 1792MB version. Edited by DST4ME - 06 Apr 2009 at 12:02am |
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 3:52am |
|
Do you have any more info on the 1792 MB version?
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 4:46am |
|
as far as benchmarks no, all I know is that the 896 is going to go for $249 and the 1792MB will go for $299
|
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 4:52am |
|
Will the two 275s be identical besides the larger RAM of the one?
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 5:19am |
|
yes they will be identical and no besides the ram there is no difference.
|
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 6:06pm |
|
Would the larger ram improve performance over a normal 275 in the short and medium term, or would it just somewhat "future-proof" the card?
|
|
|
|
|
DST4ME
DS ELITE
Joined: 14 Apr 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 36758 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 6:11pm |
|
It will make a difference
|
|
|
|
|
hotcakes22
Senior Member
Joined: 07 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 106 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Apr 2009 at 6:38pm |
|
Hmmm, so perhaps it will be the #2 card, behind the 295?
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
About Digital Storm
Contact Information
Facility Tour
Financing
Buy Now, Pay Later
Downloads
GSA Schedule
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Request Help
Call: 1-866-817-8676
(Hours 9AM-5PM PST)
Topic Options