The Radeon HD 4850 & 4870: AMD Wins at $199 and $299
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on June 25, 2008 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
...and then disaster struck.
Or at least that's how it felt. The past few weeks have been incredibly tumultuous, sleepless, and beyond interesting. It is as if AMD and NVIDIA just started pulling out hardware and throwing it at eachother while we stood in the middle getting pegged with graphics cards. And we weren't just hit with new architectures and unexpected die shrinks, but new drivers left and right.
First up was GT200, which appeared in the form of the GeForce GTX 280 and GeForce GTX 260. Of course, both of those can be paired or tri-ed (if you will), but with two cards requiring at least a 1200W PSU we're a bit worried of trying three. Then came the randomness that was the accidental launch of the Radeon HD 4850 (albeit with no architectural information) and only a couple hours later we first heard about the 9800 GTX+ which is a die shrunk higher clocked 9800 GTX that is now publicly announced and will be available in July.
And now we have the other thing we've been working on since we finished GT200: RV770 in all it's glory. This includes the 4850 whose performance we have already seen and the Radeon HD 4870: the teraflop card that falls further short of hitting its theoretical performance than NVIDIA did with GT200. But theoretical performance isn't reality, and nothing can be done if every instruction is a multiply-add or combination of a multiply-add and a multiply, so while marketing loves to trot out big numbers we quite prefer real-world testing with games people will actually play on this hardware.
But before we get to performance, and as usual, we will want to take as deep a look into this architecture as possible. We won't be able to go as deep with RV770 as we could with GT200, as we had access to a lot of information both from NVIDIA and from outside NVIDIA that allowed us to learn more about their architecture. At the same time, we still know barely anything about the real design of either NVIDIA or AMD's hardware as they prefer to hold their cards very close.
This won't work long term, however. As we push toward moving compute intensive applications to the GPU, developers will not just want -- they will need low level architectural information. It is impossible to properly optimize code for an architecture when you don't know exact details about timing, latency, cache sizes, register files, resource sharing, and the like. While, this generation, we have decidedly more information from NVIDIA on how to properly program their architecture, we still need more from both AMD and NVIDIA.
And Now, the Rest of the Story
Last week was a weird teaser - we gave you the goods, without explaining what they were.
By now you know that the Radeon HD 4850 is the best buy at $199, but today we're able to tell you much about its inner workings as well as introduce its faster, more expensive sibling: the Radeon HD 4870.
ATI Radeon HD 4870 | ATI Radeon HD 4850 | ATI Radeon HD 3870 | |
Stream Processors | 800 | 800 | 320 |
Texture Units | 40 | 40 | 16 |
ROPs | 16 | 16 | 16 |
Core Clock | 750MHz | 625MHz | 775MHz+ |
Memory Clock | 900MHz (3600MHz data rate) GDDR5 | 993MHz (1986MHz data rate) GDDR3 | 1125MHz (2250MHz data rate) GDDR4 |
Memory Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit |
Frame Buffer | 512MB | 512MB | 512MB |
Transistor Count | 956M | 956M | 666M |
Manufacturing Process | TSMC 55nm | TSMC 55nm | TSMC 55nm |
Price Point | $299 | $199 | $199 |
Priced at $299 the Radeon HD 4870 is clocked 20% higher and has 81% more memory bandwidth than the Radeon HD 4850. The GPU clock speed improvement is simply due to better cooling as the 4870 ships with a two-slot cooler. The memory bandwidth improvement is due to the Radeon HD 4870 using GDDR5 memory instead of GDDR3 used on the 4850 (and GDDR4 for 3870); the result is a data rate equal to 4x the memory clock speed or 3.6Gbps. The Radeon HD 4870 and 4850 both use a 256-bit memory bus like the 3870 before it (as well as NVIDIA's competing GeForce 9800 GTX), but total memory bandwidth on the 4870 ends up being 115.2GB/s thanks to the use of GDDR5. Note that this is more memory bandwidth than the GeForce GTX 260 which has a much wider 448-bit memory bus, but uses GDDR3 devices.
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 | NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX | ATI Radeon HD 4870 | ATI Radeon HD 4850 | ATI Radeon HD 3870 | |
Memory Size | 1GB | 896MB | 512MB | 512MB | 512MB | 512MB |
Memory Technology | GDDR3 | GDDR3 | GDDR3 | GDDR5 | GDDR3 | GDDR4 |
Memory Bus Width | 512-bit | 448-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit | 256-bit |
Memory Clock | 1107MHz | 999MHz | 1100MHz | 900MHz | 993MHz | 1125MHz |
Memory Data Rate | 2.2Gbps | 2.0Gbps | 2.22Gbps | 3.6Gbps | 1.99Gbps | 2.25Gbps |
Memory Bandwidth | 141.7GB/s | 111.9GB/s | 70.4GB/s | 115.2GB/s | 63.6GB/s | 72.0GB/s |
The use of GDDR5 enabled AMD to deliver GeForce GTX 260 class memory bandwidth, but without the pin-count and expense of a 448-bit memory interface. GDDR5 actually implements a number of Rambus-like routing and signaling technologies while still remaining a parallel based memory technology, the result is something that appears to deliver tremendous bandwidth per pin in a reliable, high volume solution.
AMD most likely took a risk on bringing GDDR5 to market this early and we do expect NVIDIA to follow suit, AMD is simply enjoying the benefits of jumping on the GDDR5 bandwagon early and getting it right, at least it seems that way. It wouldn't be too far fetched to imagine a 55nm GT200 die shrink with a 256-bit GDDR5 memory interface, it should allow NVIDIA to drop the price down to the $300 level (at least for the GTX 260).
As we mentioned in our Radeon HD 4850 Preview, both the Radeon HD 4870 and 4850 now support 8-channel LPCM audio output over HDMI. AMD just sent over 8-channel LPCM drivers for the Radeon HD 4870 so we'll be testing this functionality shortly. As we mentioned in our 4850 preview:
"All of AMD's Radeon HD graphics cards have shipped with their own audio codec, but the Radeon HD 4800 series of cards finally adds support for 8-channel LPCM output over HDMI. This is a huge deal for HTPC enthusiasts because now you can output 8-channel audio over HDMI in a motherboard agnostic solution. We still don't have support for bitstreaming TrueHD/DTS-HD MA and most likely won't anytime this year from a GPU alone, but there are some other solutions in the works for 2008."
The Radeon HD 4870 is scheduled for widespread availability in early July, although AMD tells us that some cards are already in the channel. Given that the 4870 relies on a new memory technology, we aren't sure how confident we can be that it will be as widely available as the Radeon HD 4850 has been thus far. Keep an eye out but so far the 4850 has been shipping without any issues at $199 or below, so as long as AMD can get cards in retailers' hands we expect the 4870 to hit its $299 price point.
215 Comments
View All Comments
0g1 - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
In the article it says the GT200 doesn't need to do ILP. It only has 10 threads. Each of those threads needs ILP for each of the SP's. The problem with AMD's approach is each SP has 5 units and is aimed directly at processing x,y,z,w matrix style operations. Doing purely scalar operations on AMD's SP's would be only using 1 out of the 5 units. So, if you want to get the most out of AMD's shaders, you should be doing vector calculations.DerekWilson - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
The GT200 doesn't worry with ILP at all.a single thread doesn't run width wise across all execution units. instead different threads execute the exact same single scalar op on their own unique bit of data (there is only one program counter per SM for a context). this is all TLP (thread level parallelism) and not ILP.
AMD's compiler can pack multiple scalar ops into a 5-wide VLIW operation.
on purely scalar code with many independent ops in a long program, AMD can fill all their units and get close to peak performance. explicit vector instructions are not necessary.
gigahertz20 - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canu...">http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/ha...870-512m...The site above mounted an after market cooler on it and got awesome results. Either the Thermalright HR-03 GT is just that great of a GPU cooler, or the standard heatsink/fan on the 4870 is just that horrible. Going from 82C to 43C at load and 55C to 33C at idle, just from an after market cooler is crazy! I was hoping to see some overclocking scores after they mounted the Thermalright on it, but nope :(
Matt Campbell - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
The HR-03GT really is that great. Check it out: http://www.anandtech.com/casecoolingpsus/showdoc.a...">http://www.anandtech.com/casecoolingpsus/showdoc.a...Our 8800GT went from 81 deg. C to 38 deg. C at load, 52 to 32 at idle. That's also with the quietest fan on the market at low speed. And FWIW, I played through all of The Witcher (about 60 hours) with the 8800GT passively cooled in a case with only 1 120mm fan.
-Matt
Clauzii - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
I see no fan on that thing??! PASSIVE?? :O ??jeffreybt2 - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
"Please note that this is with a single Zalman 92MM fan operating at 1600RPM along with Arctic Cooling MX-2 applied to the base."magnusr - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
Does the audio part of the card support PAP? If not all blu-ray audio will be downsampled to 16/48...NullSubroutine - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
I would just like to point out that the 4870 falls behind the 3870 X2 in Oblivion while in every other game it runs circles around it. To me it appears to be a driver problem with Oblivion rather than an indication of the hardware not doing well there. Unless of course the answer lies in the ring bus of the R680?orionmgomg - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
I would love to see more benchmarks with the CPU OCed to at least 4.0All the CPUs you use can hit it NP.
Also, what about at least 2 GTX 280 Cards and their numbers. Noticed that you did have them in SLI cause the power comsumption comparisons had them, but you held back the performance numbers...
Lets see the top 4 cards from ATI and Nvidia compete in dule GPU (no punt intended)on an X48 with DDR3 1600 and a FSB of 400x10!
That would be really nice for the people hoe have performance systems, but may still be rocking out a pair of EVGA 8800Ultras, cause their waiting for real numbers and performance to come out - and their still paying off theye systems lol... :]
Ilmarin - Wednesday, June 25, 2008 - link
You're probably aware of these already, but I'll mention them just in case:* Page 10 (AA comparison) is malformed with no images
* Page 21 (Power, Heat and Noise) is missing the Heat and Noise stuff.
Heat is a big issue with these 4800 cards and their reference coolers, so it would be good to see it covered in detail. My 7800 GTX used to artifact and cause crashes when it hit 79 degrees, before I replaced it with an aftermarket cooler. Apparently the 4870 hits well over 90 degrees at load, and the 4850 isn't much better. Decent aftermarket coolers (HR-03 GT, DuOrb) aren't cheap... and if that's what it takes to prevent heat problems on these cards, some people might consider buying a slower card (like a 9800 GTX+) just because it has better cooling.
Anand, you guys should do a meltdown test... pit the 9800 GTX+ against the 4850, and the 4870 against the GTX 260, all with reference coolers, in a standard air-cooled system at a typical ambient temp. Forget timedemos/benchmarks... play an intensive game like Crysis for an hour or two, and see if you encounter glitches and crashes. If the 4800 cards can somehow remain artifact/crash free at those high temps, then I'd more seriously consider buying one. Heat damage over time may also be a concern, but is hard to test for.
Sure, DAAMIT's partners will eventually put non-reference coolers on some cards, but history tells us that the majority of the market in the first few months will be stock-cooled cards, so this has got be of concern to consumers... especially early adopters.