AMD RV770 refresh -> RV790

I should of kept the window open, but the most interesting aspect was 990mhz on the core with stock cooling.

EDIT: and was about 30% faster than the HD 4870 when at 990mhz.
 
Also posted Powercolor box art and card pictures. And gave CrossFire performance results.

I expect it was just the latest episode of viral marketing, courtesy of Gibbo, who used to work for overclockers.co.uk and did similar antics there.

Jawed
 
I saved the results from NovaTech. ;)

System 1 Specification
Intel Kentsfield Quad Core at 3.20GHz (8x400FSB)
Abit IP35 Pro Mainboard
3GB 800MHz DDR2 Memory (5-5-5-15)
4x Samsung SSD 32GB SLC (RAID 0)
Windows 7 64-Bit BETA (Catalyst 9.3 Drivers) / Windows Vista Ultimate 64-Bit (Supplied Drivers)

ATi Radeon 4870 512MB @ 750MHz / 3600MHz (Windows 7 - Catalyst 9.3)
3DM06
HD4870 512: 15550
HD4890: 16098
HD4890 OC 990/1150: 16898

Vantage
HD4870 512: P9358
HD4890: P10211
HD4890 OC: P11413

System 2: Core I7 System Specification
Intel Core I7 920 @ 3800MHz
Asus Rampage 2 Extreme Mainboard
Corsair Dominator 1600MHz 6GB Triple Channel Kit
PowerColor ATI Radeon 4890 1024MB / Asus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285 1024MB
Windows Vista 64-Bit Ultimate
Both cards using supplied drivers

3DM06
GTX 285: 20275
HD4890: 19321
HD4890 @ 990/1150: 21203
HD4890 OC CFX: 24538

Vantage with PhysX
GTX 285: P14699 (CPU - 50551, GPU - 11889)
HD4890: P11160 (CPU - 17378, GPU - 9960)
HD4890 OC: P12645 (CPU - 17405, GPU - 11574)
HD4890 OC CFX: P17874 (CPU - 17358, GPU - 18053)
 
No game benchies? If the OC is coming that close in Nvidia lovin' Vantage it should rough up the 285 in actual games.
 
I'll have to wait for some reliable game benchmarks. But so far if this is any indication, it's not looking like a terribly compelling upgrade for my 4870 w/512 megs. Even though I'd love to move up to 1 gig.

Then again, if idle power consumption is significantly lower with similar load consumption it would be compelling, but all indications point to it using more than 4870.

Regards,
SB
 
Did anyone else notice the latest version of GPU-Z (which supports RV740 and RV790) report the HD4890 to be 282mm2 compared to the HD4870 being 256mm2?
 
Did anyone else notice the latest version of GPU-Z (which supports RV740 and RV790) report the HD4890 to be 282mm2 compared to the HD4870 being 256mm2?

Well it has been rather obvious from the shots that the core is slightly larger, what everyone wants to know is what are the changes made, or is it just "fillin material" in there
 
Back
Top