bit-tech.net

HIS ATI Radeon HD 4670 IceQ

Comments 1 to 24 of 24

Reply
FatMikel 2nd February 2009, 08:01 Quote
The problem with all those other cards that are much more for £30 more, are that they require aux power connections. For people like me, looking to upgrade my Dell, it's a no brainer. The cost of upgrading the PSU, plus the cost of the card, is not equal to the performance gained. In cases such as this, the HIS ATI Radeon 4670 IceQ (or the Turbo model which I got for £65) is a clear winner.
DarkFear 2nd February 2009, 09:48 Quote
Quote:
However, it is able to better the 9600 GSO, although it's worth remembering we tested a stock 9600 GSO, and many of these cars...

Vrooom!

A worthy card for a budget system
popcornuk1983 2nd February 2009, 09:52 Quote
I bought a ASUS 4670 a short while back and was impressed with the performance it gave me. I don't play on a resolution any higher than 1280x1024 and the card can handle most games on high settings at that resolution. It may no be able to compete with the cards that were on the test, but I stand by my choice and am very happy with this cheap little number
Tim S 2nd February 2009, 10:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by popcornuk1983
I bought a ASUS 4670 a short while back and was impressed with the performance it gave me. I don't play on a resolution any higher than 1280x1024 and the card can handle most games on high settings at that resolution. It may no be able to compete with the cards that were on the test, but I stand by my choice and am very happy with this cheap little number

I don't disagree... the 4670 isn't a bad card if you don't have an aux connector - it's the fact you can get so much more for not that much extra in terms of cost. The 4830/4850 will last a lot longer... but of course, they're more expensive. We'd recommend going for a cheaper 4670 if you need a card without an aux connector - otherwise get the 9600 GT, as it looks like the current sweetspot at this price point.
Xtrafresh 2nd February 2009, 10:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by overclocking section
As a quick reminder, the 4870 512MB IceQ comes clocked at 750MHz core and 2,000MHz (effective) on the memory.
A bit optimistic there :)

Anyway, Isn't it a better idea to do these kind of cards in a roundup, instead of an article? I really don't see the point of this review, brilliantly written as it is :p
FatMikel 2nd February 2009, 11:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S
Quote:
Originally Posted by popcornuk1983
I bought a ASUS 4670 a short while back and was impressed with the performance it gave me. I don't play on a resolution any higher than 1280x1024 and the card can handle most games on high settings at that resolution. It may no be able to compete with the cards that were on the test, but I stand by my choice and am very happy with this cheap little number

I don't disagree... the 4670 isn't a bad card if you don't have an aux connector - it's the fact you can get so much more for not that much extra in terms of cost. The 4830/4850 will last a lot longer... but of course, they're more expensive. We'd recommend going for a cheaper 4670 if you need a card without an aux connector - otherwise get the 9600 GT, as it looks like the current sweetspot at this price point.

Plus £60 for a good PSU. So that's £90 extra. Do you get £90 worth more performance? Doubt it.
[PUNK] crompers 2nd February 2009, 11:29 Quote
i'm really impressed with the 8800GT performance here, was good to see it alongside the 4850 holding its own. mine cost me £160 a year ago and its proved to be one of the best hardware choices i have ever made.

what also strikes me is how much performance you can get at this end of the market for what is really a very small amount of cash. its great to see the hardware end of the market becoming more accessible to more people, just seems a shame that usability on the software side of things seems to be nosediving fairly spectacularly as Joe pointed out yesterday
[PUNK] crompers 2nd February 2009, 11:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatMikel
Plus £60 for a good PSU. So that's £90 extra. Do you get £90 worth more performance? Doubt it.

read tim's post properly mate :)
Hustler 2nd February 2009, 11:46 Quote
"otherwise get the 9600 GT, as it looks like the current sweetspot at this price point."

Spot on, i think its the most underrated card out there for the price.....

I play COD4 at 1280x1024, 4xAA, and pretty much all the other settings maxed out and get a constant 50-60fps.
SBS 2nd February 2009, 12:30 Quote
Really don't like to slate your reviews as they are generally excellent but this one seems to have missed the point of this card slightly.

Not sure how you can slate this thing as poor 'Bang for your Buck' without seriously considering power consumption. This thing takes as little as 3 watts (three!) when idling and uses considerably less power at load than the 9600GT or GSO. Even with modest use for a year this thing will work out cheaper than either of NVidia's offerings.

Then in the conclusion we hear that the 4670's main problem against it's competitors is it's poor performance at 1,680 x 1,050 and higher - you don't say? Really, who expects to game at those sort of resolutions for £55-£60 (GIYF). The low money market this is targeted at aren't magically going to have £150+ high res monitors to use with it and potentially not even a PSU with a 6pin adapter (another £50+ upgrade). At 1280x1024 and 1024x768 this thing is more than adequate for current games (hell, it got me through GTA IV with an E7400) and really having used 9600GT's and 4830 in numerous recent builds, when you factor in the IceQ's silent running as well I don't see any great advantages to either in low end builds.

I appreciate that coming from a gaming standpoint this thing does generally drop 2-4fps against the 9600GT but is this worth an extra £15 (for a solution with a similar customised cooling, cheaper 4670's are available)? Think about it as an extra 20-25% in a budget, erm, budget and it's hard to justify. If you're throwing together a machine for £350-£500 there are so many other places that cash would be useful.

Hightech do also offer a (modestly) overclocked version of this card branded as the Turbo which also be found for under the £69 Novatech are selling this for.
FatMikel 2nd February 2009, 12:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by crompers
read tim's post properly mate :)

Eh? You'd need a new PSU for the 9600GT as well. For the market it's aimed at (silent PCs, quick upgrade to IGPs), the HD4670 is the best card. Even better overclocked.
[PUNK] crompers 2nd February 2009, 12:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatMikel
Eh? You'd need a new PSU for the 9600GT as well. For the market it's aimed at (silent PCs, quick upgrade to IGPs), the HD4670 is the best card. Even better overclocked.

first off:

"I don't disagree... the 4670 isn't a bad card if you don't have an aux connector"

secondly:

"We'd recommend going for a cheaper 4670 if you need a card without an aux connector - otherwise get the 9600 GT, as it looks like the current sweetspot at this price point"

He agrees with you, get a 4670 if you dont have an aux connector, BUT if you're power supply is good enough the best price to performance ratio is a 9600GT. Get it?
FatMikel 2nd February 2009, 13:53 Quote
I never said that the 9600GT wasn't the best card price/performance wise, but that's aimed at a different market.

No need for the attitude.
[PUNK] crompers 2nd February 2009, 14:47 Quote
not sure what you mean about attitude, it just seems you were so quick to defend your graphics card that you didnt read the post and missed that Tim was actually agreeing with you. i was merely clarifying.
FatMikel 2nd February 2009, 14:53 Quote
And you seem so quick to defend Tim that you didn't read my posts and immediately assumed that I was disagreeing with Tim's thoughts on the 9600GT. I was merely clarifying.

And when I say attitude, I mean the "Read Tims post properly, mate" and the "Get it?".
[PUNK] crompers 2nd February 2009, 15:01 Quote
hmm i think you may be backtracking a little there.....

in any case im sorry if i came across rude that was never the intention (note the smiley face). thread hijack over.
Gremlin 2nd February 2009, 15:06 Quote
So glad i didnt buy this! it was only $30 AUD before shipping cheaper than the Sapphire 4830 i picked up and id have to say thats money well worth it

after seeing this it makes me really glad i didnt get it i dodged a bullet there!!
popcornuk1983 2nd February 2009, 15:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S
I don't disagree... the 4670 isn't a bad card if you don't have an aux connector - it's the fact you can get so much more for not that much extra in terms of cost. The 4830/4850 will last a lot longer... but of course, they're more expensive. We'd recommend going for a cheaper 4670 if you need a card without an aux connector - otherwise get the 9600 GT, as it looks like the current sweetspot at this price point.

Completely agree that there is better value cards out there for a few extra pennies.

Sigh......just wish I wasn't a skint student with a cheapo PSU :o

Still, can play fallout3 and bioshock on me gorgeous samsung telly so im happy as :D
Mongoose132 3rd February 2009, 11:58 Quote
Page 5 - Fallout
We know from experiance that Fallout 3 is a very memory bandwidth hungry title, but even here the slight increase in >>memroy<< clock of the HIS Radeon 4670 IceQ

What is this memroy you speak of!? where can I get it? :p
Cupboard 3rd February 2009, 13:09 Quote
I have no idea how they have managed to get slower performance than the stock one in some circumstances with a 200MHz RAM overclock. At the very least it should give the same performance.
Tokukachi 3rd February 2009, 13:28 Quote
You missed a very important point in regards to the IceQ cooler. It's quiet, very quiet compared with the other coolers I've had on GFX cards, and that, IMO, is worth £5.
Tokukachi 3rd February 2009, 17:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim S
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neat69
You missed a very important point in regards to the IceQ cooler. It's quiet, very quiet compared with the other coolers I've had on GFX cards, and that, IMO, is worth £5.

The stock cooler on our 4670 reference card is also quiet and is far from intrusive at load.

Ahh ok, my apologies, still, the IceQ cooler is probably one of the best you can get on a GFX card as standard.
Tim S 3rd February 2009, 17:40 Quote
It is and I don't disagree with that. Its benefit in a card like this though is fairly limited in our opinion, but there will still be a market for it.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums