I agree. When I play I do down to a lot lower res so I can run the DX9 very high hacked settings just to get all the eye candy, I would have thought most people would do that unless their card is midrange where you have to start to go down to medium etc as wel. Here we are talking about high end cards though...
AMD: R7xx Speculation
- Thread starter Unknown Soldier
- Start date
- Status
I agree. When I play I do down to a lot lower res so I can run the DX9 very high hacked settings just to get all the eye candy, I would have thought most people would do that unless their card is midrange where you have to start to go down to medium etc as wel. Here we are talking about high end cards though...
Also, we have a user's CPU limited results (very limited information in general though) using a 4850 vs 8800GT.
Yeah, but it's with AA8x.
A HD4850CF seems to do 23fps @1920x1200 AA4x in Crysis. How it can be that increasing AA to 8x you lose only 2fps?
Maybe because the HD 48x0 AA performance is very good?
Last edited by a moderator:
True, it depends on the resolution and the quality of your monitor. for me 1680x1050 is almost indistinguishable from 1920x1200. However some other resolutions do introduce an element of blurriness.
That said though, the difference between Crysis on High and Very high is night and day. Much bigger than the difference between say 1280x800 and 1920x1200 on my monitor (even though the higher res still looks much nicer).
Maybe because the HD 48x0 AA performance is very good?
It can be, but it really seems too much...
Maybe they're saving costs by making it 11 seconds.
Last edited by a moderator:
A bit late for the post
This was posted a few days back and now the thread got the picture of the die shot already
Assuming the picture is legit, it's the first time since the X800 that the memory controllers were part of the architecture block diagram (since before the ringbus).
Edit: The PCIExpress interface also used to be a ringbus stop and it doesn't really look that way anymore. Maybe this is how they saved so much space for SPs and TUs. They discarded the ringbus. If it's only 256-bit, did they really need it?
Edit: The PCIExpress interface also used to be a ringbus stop and it doesn't really look that way anymore. Maybe this is how they saved so much space for SPs and TUs. They discarded the ringbus. If it's only 256-bit, did they really need it?
Last edited by a moderator:
A bit late for the post
This was posted a few days back and now the thread got the picture of the die shot already
Is it already posted here? Well I guess it is getting more difficult to follow this thread. About the die shot, I've seen it from various sites many times though long before I found this.JasonCross
Newcomer
Basically, yeah. GDDR5 will deliver twice the data at an equivalent "core clock rate" as GDDR3.
Expect the marketing guys to call 900 MHz GDDR5 "3.6 GHz" or "3600 MHz" just as they call 900 MHz GDDR3 "1.8 GHz" or "1800 MHz". In terms of data throughput, it's an appropriate comparison.
Jawed
Legend
RV635 has a 128-bit bus to memory and has a ring bus. But no 64-bit memory bus GPU has a ring bus.
Jawed
Blazkowicz
Legend
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/724-1/preview-ati-radeon-hd-4850.html
ouch! the hd 4850 matches a 3870X2 (with AA, but who would want to play without, especially on such hardware?), and is slightly better than a 8800 Ultra, at midrange price. 159€, or even 157.90€. same price as a 9600GT 1GB or 8800GT 512. (I can see a 9800GTX at 219€ which is outrageously low too but not good enough!)
the GPU market is insane
ouch! the hd 4850 matches a 3870X2 (with AA, but who would want to play without, especially on such hardware?), and is slightly better than a 8800 Ultra, at midrange price. 159€, or even 157.90€. same price as a 9600GT 1GB or 8800GT 512. (I can see a 9800GTX at 219€ which is outrageously low too but not good enough!)
the GPU market is insane
Blazkowicz
Legend
I'm amazed that sites still bother to test Crysis at High settings on setups like these. I mean, who the hell purchases a GTX 280 or dual 4850's to play Crysis in DX9 mode?
I want to see how these cards perform at the games maximum graphics settings, anything less is an insult to these cards. If you need to drop something, drop the resolution. As if the difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 is anywhere near the difference between High and Very High in Crysis
blah! what's wrong with testing a game at nicely playable, smooth framerates? they do drop the resolution by the way to get a good framerate with 4x AA.
if that don't please you go read other benches.
Not that Crysis should be the end-it-all standard of gaming. I didn't go farther than the first level because the selecting of an ability through the "pie-menu" is extremely annoying, and it looked and ran like crap on my PC, with no AA. with low res, medium detail and no AA it looks like I'm playing soldier of fortune 2 on a outdated (by its era's standard) PC. Whereas Far Cry is a highest settings, 4x AA w/ transparency SS, smooth joyfest and actually pleasant to play.
So I don't bother and won't be updating my 7600GT (gasp) for a while.
/edit : sorry for that inflamatory and rude tone
Silent_Buddha
Legend
It's certainly shaping up to be a pretty bad summer for Nvidia. Lets hope they can transition quickly and flawlessly to 55mm so they can hopefully be more competitive price/perf.
If things stay as they are, I don't see Nvidia getting a lot of OEM design wins for the back to school season. Which gives ATI a chance to grab large chunks of marketshare.
The laptop market especially is wide open to ATI right now if they can quickly get out a chip based on Rv770 for the mobile sector.
Regards,
SB
If things stay as they are, I don't see Nvidia getting a lot of OEM design wins for the back to school season. Which gives ATI a chance to grab large chunks of marketshare.
The laptop market especially is wide open to ATI right now if they can quickly get out a chip based on Rv770 for the mobile sector.
Regards,
SB
- Status
Similar threads
