that's fair enough then claave, just would have been nice and easier on all of us if this was clarified in the review, especially if the reason for a statement being made on a product isn't obvious to anyone who hasn't worked with the product under review. though we wouldn't have had all this fun now would we ;-)
I and many others keep hearing rumblings about Sapphire bringing out a 4890 with their Vapour-X cooler... this is surely a given right? or are we hoping too much? And speaking of Sapphire, as they're the only ones with a 4850x2 out, how likely is a 4890x2 going to be from them? i mean, the 4890 board is basically the same as the 4870 board (i might be simplifying this?) just with beefier power regs, so the 4890x2 compared to the 4870x2 should be mostly the same deal? (coupled with a decent cooler of course)
and a question to the forum members themselves - how many will be going for the 4890, and how many are hanging out for AMD's 5000 series? with Windows 7 not too far away, and thus DX11, surely its only about 6 months away
Yep, Sapphire Vapor-X HD 4890 is imminent (2 weeks or so).
The HD 4890 is bigger than the HD 4870, so creating a HD 4890 X2 design is not just a case of upping the VRMs and dropping the new chip in. X2 card designs come from ATI anyway, and I doubt it'll let anyone make a HD 4890 X2 without consent. That pretty much means that if it happens, it'll be an official ATI SKU for all board partners to use and sell.
And yes, reading the review back, we could have made the language regarding the temperatures clearer. In fact, let's add that to the review now.
Originally Posted by azrael- Sorry to be so anal about it, but given that you received 4 HD4890s to test, which one did you test? And were they all equally hot?
The two stock cards we had are identical to every other reference card. In fact, ALL the cards are built by ATI and rebranded with a sticker - the only difference is the BIOS increasing the speeds on the overclocked ones.
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi The two stock cards we had are identical to every other reference card. In fact, ALL the cards are built by ATI and rebranded with a sticker - the only difference is the BIOS increasing the speeds on the overclocked ones.
I know they're *supposed* to be identical, and I also know they're (probably) all built by PC Partner (Sapphire). The reason I'm asking is that perhaps you were just unlucky to pick the worst card of the lot to test. It *can* happen... :)
It would be interesting to see how they both faired with X3:Terran Conflict. In CPC tests it looks like ATi cards perform better on X3 so it would be interesting to see both of the cards performance on that game as a counterbalance to Crysis, which nvidia continually outperforms ATi, in order to get a fully rounded overview.
Hm.
As my 9800GX2 seemingly died mysteriously and without warning yesterday (and as I because of this is now running on my embedded Radeon 3300) I am in the market for a new graphics card.
I have been considering the idea of going with ATI (a couple of 4890's or possibly 4870X2's), though personal experience urges me to stick with Nvidia. So I'm not sure what card to go for at the moment.
I really liked that 9800GX2, and thus I am tempted to go for the 295, but the fact that it seems to loose out on memory and such I don't know. The 275 seems nice, but so does the 285. Choices choices...
Originally Posted by azrael- Would that be the temperature issue where the HD4890 runs 26C cooler than the GTX 275 under load? Or the 2C it runs hotter when idling?
The ATI runs cooler at load because they turned the fan speed way up, maybe it would have been better to lower fan speed, to create a quieter card. However people automatically assume higher temps with problems, even if the card is well within its designed temperature range.
I'm well aware of these facts. I was posing a somewhat rethorical question.
The fact is, though, that according to bit-tech the fan on the HD4890 ran at 36% at load while the fan on the GTX 275 "only" ran at 55%. So, by and large, it's not really correct to say the fan speed was turned "way up" on the HD4890. You could, however, state, that the specific HD4890 tested by bit-tech might have benefitted from a more quiet fan. :)
why is it the 4890 from ATI (the leading innovators) with GDDR5 & DX10.1 has been rated 7 for features yet the GTX275 which is still using GDDR3 & DX10 has been rated 8? am i smelling a biased review?
Originally Posted by yourma2000 why is it the 4890 from ATI (the leading innovators) with GDDR5 & DX10.1 has been rated 7 for features yet the GTX275 which is still using GDDR3 & DX10 has been rated 8? am i smelling a biased review?
GDDR5 is a great technology, and so is DX10.1... but our score for "features" is not just about the technology, but also the hardware implementation. If it was just about the technologies implemented, it'd just become a marketing checkbox and wouldn't actually make any sense to include in a review. At that point, we'd have to factor in PhysX and Nvidia's better success in GPU Computing thus far (through CUDA), even though we think both have serious limitations to the extent that we don't consider them 'features'. Both ATI and Nvidia support OpenCL and even current hardware will support some slices of DX11 Compute - that's where we want GPU Computing to be, where it's no longer about CUDA and Stream (or whatever ATI's strategy happens to be these days since it's changed so many times over the last few years) and it's about the developers instead, but that's going to take some time.
The cooling solution, for example, is quite an important feature and that's somewhere we feel Nvidia is in a much better position. While the GPU on the Radeon may be 'cooler', that's down to the fact it's considerably louder. I'm sure if the GTX 275's fan was spinning at the same speed and noise level as the 4890's, we could easily make the GTX 275 look amazingly cool, but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't need to spin itself up.
I think the authors of this article seriously need to re-read the article, if you don't see the obvious bias in the comments, you never will. I have read about 15 reviews from sites all around the world and NONE of them reached a conclusion similar to bit-tech. Universally they say the GTX275 is very slightly faster, but that it is a tossup between picking a better card and that most consumers will go for the card that offers the best deal (ie final price).
Originally Posted by dklingen I have read about 15 reviews from sites all around the world and NONE of them reached a conclusion similar to bit-tech. Universally they say the GTX275 is very slightly faster, but that it is a tossup between picking a better card and that most consumers will go for the card that offers the best deal (ie final price).
But that is what bit-techs conclusion was! The price of the cards were exactly the same in the UK, so with the universal conclusion that the GTX275 is very slightly faster, it is the logical choice! All this was clearly outlined more than once in the review, I'm guessing you just read the last couple of lines and then called obvious bias? Pathetic. /rant
As a side note, how's that review of Palits custom GTX275 coming along?
Originally Posted by dklingen I think the authors of this article seriously need to re-read the article, if you don't see the obvious bias in the comments, you never will. I have read about 15 reviews from sites all around the world and NONE of them reached a conclusion similar to bit-tech. Universally they say the GTX275 is very slightly faster, but that it is a tossup between picking a better card and that most consumers will go for the card that offers the best deal (ie final price).
At the time of review, both were the same price at £220 in the UK, even after we disregarded the £199 Palit card because it was a custom board design/cooling solution - there's a review to follow on that. Nvidia continually quoted £199 to us, but because the Palit uses a custom cooling solution/board design, we weren't happy running with that price, so we went with the typical price of a 'reference' GTX 275.
Everything else you say actually matches what we said in the review on multiple occasions... as the two are priced similarly (at the time of review), buy the 275 because it's a faster card. Maybe we should stop presenting all the data over 18 pages and sum the review up with just bulletpoints to get the message across.
Originally Posted by dklingen I think the authors of this article seriously need to re-read the article, if you don't see the obvious bias in the comments, you never will. I have read about 15 reviews from sites all around the world and NONE of them reached a conclusion similar to bit-tech. Universally they say the GTX275 is very slightly faster, but that it is a tossup between picking a better card and that most consumers will go for the card that offers the best deal (ie final price).
At the time of review, both were the same price at £220 in the UK, even after we disregarded the £199 Palit card because it was a custom board design/cooling solution - there's a review to follow on that. Nvidia continually quoted £199 to us, but because the Palit uses a custom cooling solution/board design, we weren't happy running with that price, so we went with the typical price of a 'reference' GTX 275.
Everything else you say actually matches what we said in the review on multiple occasions... as the two are priced similarly (at the time of review), buy the 275 because it's a faster card. Maybe we should stop presenting all the data over 18 pages and sum the review up with just bulletpoints to get the message across.
I'd just like to add that the review essentially concludes that the two cards are the same price, that the GTX 275 is on balance a touch faster, and that the GTX 275 is quieter and easier to live with. Therefore it's hardly a surprise that we recommend the GTX 275 if you're looking to spend £220 on a new graphics card.
If you can find a HD 4890 that's cheaper than £220 then we've given you the data to make your own mind up as to whether the money saving is worth the extra noise and slight drop in performance.
i picked up a 4890 yesterday and the temps are lower than my 4870 and as for fan noise it no louder than the 4870 so i cant see what all the fuss is about the fane being to loud
Originally Posted by wuyanxu nVidia is trying very hard to NOT loose this round, they've priced this too aggressively, surely there's some cooperate law on this?
very nice card, that gtx275. anyone interested in a gtx260 maxcore? ;)
Good LORD ! ATI has been losing a billion bucks a year for some time now, whilt Nvidia has made a profit EVERY QUARTER except the very last in the downturn, the whole time along - so "very aggressive pricing" which is LAW BREAKING according to you falls SQUARELY ON ATI, AND IT TO THE TUNE OF A 33% LOSS IN THE RED FOR EVERY CARD THEY SELL!
--
Hello, red price dumping lawbreakers, anyone out there ? Hello Biff, anyone home upstairs?!?
--
MY GAWD !!!!! THE YEARS LONG ACTUAL SIN OF ATI BLAMED ON NVIDIA when they "win a review" for once at bit-tech.
Someone HELLLPPPPPPPPPP MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
I have a Asus GTX275 and I think they are a great card. If you are not gaming at ultra high resolutions they can handle almost any game with ease. They can run a little hot so remember to adjust the fan speed on the card. Its only at 40% out of the box
Originally Posted by Horizon kudos to you, for giving him a response, I pegged him for a retard. The card runs 2 degrees warmer idle and 26 degrees cooler under load, BUT since it eats more power on a smaller die, how much of that power is transferred to heat is my concern and why I'm going to pass.
Horizon, don't call someone a retard for not having the same level of understanding as you. Especially when you've come to the same conclusion - the card is not for you. Bit Tech and it's forum members should be tolerant of all knowledge and skill levels. How is anyone meant to learn without the help of their peers? Attitudes like yours scare people away from the tech world. Maybe he has a life?
Comments 76 to 99 of 99
ReplyI and many others keep hearing rumblings about Sapphire bringing out a 4890 with their Vapour-X cooler... this is surely a given right? or are we hoping too much? And speaking of Sapphire, as they're the only ones with a 4850x2 out, how likely is a 4890x2 going to be from them? i mean, the 4890 board is basically the same as the 4870 board (i might be simplifying this?) just with beefier power regs, so the 4890x2 compared to the 4870x2 should be mostly the same deal? (coupled with a decent cooler of course)
and a question to the forum members themselves - how many will be going for the 4890, and how many are hanging out for AMD's 5000 series? with Windows 7 not too far away, and thus DX11, surely its only about 6 months away
The HD 4890 is bigger than the HD 4870, so creating a HD 4890 X2 design is not just a case of upping the VRMs and dropping the new chip in. X2 card designs come from ATI anyway, and I doubt it'll let anyone make a HD 4890 X2 without consent. That pretty much means that if it happens, it'll be an official ATI SKU for all board partners to use and sell.
And yes, reading the review back, we could have made the language regarding the temperatures clearer. In fact, let's add that to the review now.
The two stock cards we had are identical to every other reference card. In fact, ALL the cards are built by ATI and rebranded with a sticker - the only difference is the BIOS increasing the speeds on the overclocked ones.
As my 9800GX2 seemingly died mysteriously and without warning yesterday (and as I because of this is now running on my embedded Radeon 3300) I am in the market for a new graphics card.
I have been considering the idea of going with ATI (a couple of 4890's or possibly 4870X2's), though personal experience urges me to stick with Nvidia. So I'm not sure what card to go for at the moment.
I really liked that 9800GX2, and thus I am tempted to go for the 295, but the fact that it seems to loose out on memory and such I don't know. The 275 seems nice, but so does the 285. Choices choices...
makes u wonder when will ATI do somethin bout that temperature issue.... eeek.....
The ATI runs cooler at load because they turned the fan speed way up, maybe it would have been better to lower fan speed, to create a quieter card. However people automatically assume higher temps with problems, even if the card is well within its designed temperature range.
The fact is, though, that according to bit-tech the fan on the HD4890 ran at 36% at load while the fan on the GTX 275 "only" ran at 55%. So, by and large, it's not really correct to say the fan speed was turned "way up" on the HD4890. You could, however, state, that the specific HD4890 tested by bit-tech might have benefitted from a more quiet fan. :)
GDDR5 is a great technology, and so is DX10.1... but our score for "features" is not just about the technology, but also the hardware implementation. If it was just about the technologies implemented, it'd just become a marketing checkbox and wouldn't actually make any sense to include in a review. At that point, we'd have to factor in PhysX and Nvidia's better success in GPU Computing thus far (through CUDA), even though we think both have serious limitations to the extent that we don't consider them 'features'. Both ATI and Nvidia support OpenCL and even current hardware will support some slices of DX11 Compute - that's where we want GPU Computing to be, where it's no longer about CUDA and Stream (or whatever ATI's strategy happens to be these days since it's changed so many times over the last few years) and it's about the developers instead, but that's going to take some time.
The cooling solution, for example, is quite an important feature and that's somewhere we feel Nvidia is in a much better position. While the GPU on the Radeon may be 'cooler', that's down to the fact it's considerably louder. I'm sure if the GTX 275's fan was spinning at the same speed and noise level as the 4890's, we could easily make the GTX 275 look amazingly cool, but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't need to spin itself up.
Am I smelling a fanboy? :)
As for the power, noise, temperature apparent contradictions, look here for clarification:
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/16681/11
I'll probably wait for the DX11 cards unless some great game comes out that deems an upgrade...
But that is what bit-techs conclusion was! The price of the cards were exactly the same in the UK, so with the universal conclusion that the GTX275 is very slightly faster, it is the logical choice! All this was clearly outlined more than once in the review, I'm guessing you just read the last couple of lines and then called obvious bias? Pathetic. /rant
As a side note, how's that review of Palits custom GTX275 coming along?
It's not far away now...
At the time of review, both were the same price at £220 in the UK, even after we disregarded the £199 Palit card because it was a custom board design/cooling solution - there's a review to follow on that. Nvidia continually quoted £199 to us, but because the Palit uses a custom cooling solution/board design, we weren't happy running with that price, so we went with the typical price of a 'reference' GTX 275.
Everything else you say actually matches what we said in the review on multiple occasions... as the two are priced similarly (at the time of review), buy the 275 because it's a faster card. Maybe we should stop presenting all the data over 18 pages and sum the review up with just bulletpoints to get the message across.
I'd just like to add that the review essentially concludes that the two cards are the same price, that the GTX 275 is on balance a touch faster, and that the GTX 275 is quieter and easier to live with. Therefore it's hardly a surprise that we recommend the GTX 275 if you're looking to spend £220 on a new graphics card.
If you can find a HD 4890 that's cheaper than £220 then we've given you the data to make your own mind up as to whether the money saving is worth the extra noise and slight drop in performance.
Good LORD ! ATI has been losing a billion bucks a year for some time now, whilt Nvidia has made a profit EVERY QUARTER except the very last in the downturn, the whole time along - so "very aggressive pricing" which is LAW BREAKING according to you falls SQUARELY ON ATI, AND IT TO THE TUNE OF A 33% LOSS IN THE RED FOR EVERY CARD THEY SELL!
--
Hello, red price dumping lawbreakers, anyone out there ? Hello Biff, anyone home upstairs?!?
--
MY GAWD !!!!! THE YEARS LONG ACTUAL SIN OF ATI BLAMED ON NVIDIA when they "win a review" for once at bit-tech.
Someone HELLLPPPPPPPPPP MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
I'm leaving all your posts here for evidence that you're a complete lunatic, but I'm glad you realise that you do need help. It's the first step.
I recommend checking out Nvidia forums and posting there - you'll feel more at home.
Horizon, don't call someone a retard for not having the same level of understanding as you. Especially when you've come to the same conclusion - the card is not for you. Bit Tech and it's forum members should be tolerant of all knowledge and skill levels. How is anyone meant to learn without the help of their peers? Attitudes like yours scare people away from the tech world. Maybe he has a life?
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums