AMD RV770 refresh -> RV790

A.L.M. said:
They will have to be very overclocked, then... Maybe liquid cooled too... :LOL:
Because usually oc parts sport only 50-100MHz more on the core, and that seems to be completely manageable by a simple HD4890 (judging from the safe oc figures of CCC). ;)
Click to expand...

Maybe it is possible the OC versions could have a voltage bump for allowing higher frequencies, so power consumption is not increasing linearly.
 
imo their crysis benchmark somehow defaulted to same resolution for all different resolutions leading to similar scores across the board and they ran the benchmark only for a single loop,in which case it becomes more of a HDD/RAM bandwidth benchmark.plus the 8x mode they use is 8xCSAA so it generally gives a better fps than even 4x mode.
 
neliz said:
Crysis benchmarks do not make sense.
Click to expand...

Well, they using BETA driver so everything is possible.
FC2 performance improved with BETA, or Crysis optimization broken:?:

We need to wait one more week for someone to leak new press driver for HD4890 and look at the results then.

BTW has anyone noticed that the tests were done using HD4890 850/2200?
 
Lightman said:
Well, they using BETA driver so everything is possible.
FC2 performance improved with BETA, or Crysis optimization broken:?:

We need to wait one more week for someone to leak new press driver for HD4890 and look at the results then.

BTW has anyone noticed that the tests were done using HD4890 850/2200?
Click to expand...

If the numbers don't make sense, and the pictures don't make sense, then the whole preview probably doesn't make sense.

Everyone should have their review cards in about now so why would AMD ship the cards to reviewers with "broken" drivers. although not the first time, we're not talking about an architectural overhaul that completely invalidates previous drivers.IN a worst case, performance should be equal.
 
The Far Cry 2 tests go from 15%, to 20%, to 35% improvement 4890>4870 as resolution improves and presumably it becomes less CPU limited. Impressive, if these benchmarks mean anything (which they probably dont).
 
gamervivek said:
plus the 8x mode they use is 8xCSAA so it generally gives a better fps than even 4x mode.
Click to expand...
No, it's not. And you can't use CSAA on AMD hardware anyway.

This preview got me thinking: what if this "faster on the same clocks" thing is just (or at least mostly because of) new drivers?
 
DegustatoR said:
This preview got me thinking: what if this "faster on the same clocks" thing is just (or at least mostly because of) new drivers?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't be unheard of. I remember GF8800 GT being quite a bit accelerated through it's launch drivers, which had no support for other GF-8-cards without some INF-hacking. :)
 
DegustatoR said:
No, it's not. And you can't use CSAA on AMD hardware anyway.
Click to expand...

there is a 8xQ setting in the benchmark thats is supposed to be true 8xMSAA,and since you can't run 8xCSAA on ati hardware,the 8x setting tends to be as good as 4x and even the 16x/16xQ yield similar results.

Run #1- DX9 1024x768 AA=8xQ, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 39.50
Run #2- DX9 1024x768 AA=8x, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 42.19
Run #3- DX9 1024x768 AA=4x, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 41.34
Run #4- DX9 1024x768 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Last Average FPS: 47.76

from cfg file of the benchmark-
8x-
r_FSAA=1
r_FSAA_samples=4
r_FSAA_quality=2

8xQ-
r_FSAA=1
r_FSAA_samples=8
r_FSAA_quality=0
 
Arty said:
http://www.techpowerup.com/88973/ASUS_Preparing_High-End_Non-Reference_HD_4890_Accelerator.html

Return of the 8 pin among other things. >900mhz clock almost confirmed too, will anybody hit the ghz mark? :runaway:
Click to expand...

Not from a AIB if 900 mhz is the OC'ed version..

I still dont understand why factory OC's are still so rare on ATI products versus Nvidia were theyre extremely common..

I'm sure a lot of consumer hardcore overclockers will love to brag about their 1 ghz 4890's in their rig sigs and such though..nice round number.., heretofore unheard of in mainstream GPU OCing AFAIK..
 
The meaning of that text is "AMD’s product warranty does not cover damages caused by overclocking."

How you overclock is irrelevant.

Jawed
 
semantics?

http://game.amd.com/us-en/drivers_overdrive.aspx?p=1

AMD and ATI processors are intended to be operated only within their associated specifications and factory settings. Operating your AMD or ATI processor outside of specification or in excess of factory settings, including but not limited to overclocking, may damage your processor and/or lead to other problems, including but not limited to, damage to your system components (including your motherboard and components thereon (e.g. memory)), system instabilities (e.g. data loss and corrupted images), shortened processor, system component and/or system life and in extreme cases, total system failure. AMD does not provide support or service for issues or damages related to use of an AMD or ATI processor outside of processor specifications or in excess of factory settings. You may also not receive support or service from your system manufacturer.
DAMAGES CAUSED BY USE OF YOUR AMD OR ATI PROCESSOR OUTSIDE OF SPECIFICATION OR IN EXCESS OF FACTORY SETTINGS ARE NOT COVERED UNDER YOUR AMD PRODUCT WARRANTY AND MAY NOT BE COVERED BY YOUR SYSTEM MANUFACTURER’S WARRANTY.
Click to expand...

I don't know what they mean with "factory settings" but to me it reads as any support (including warranty calls) is void when you overclock (i.e. run outside of factory specifications)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top