The Radeon HD 4870 1GB: The Card to Get
by Derek Wilson on September 25, 2008 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The Test and Performance Improvement
Here's our test setup:
| Test Setup | |
| CPU | Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 3.20GHz |
| Motherboard | EVGA nForce 790i SLI |
| Video Cards | ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 ATI Radeon HD 4870 ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 SLI NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 |
| Video Drivers | Catalyst 8.7 ForceWare 177.34 |
| Hard Drive | Seagate 7200.9 120GB 8MB 7200RPM |
| RAM | 4 x 1GB Corsair DDR3-1333 7-7-7-20 |
| Operating System | Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit SP1 |
| PSU | PC Power & Cooling Turbo Cool 1200W |
Performance Improvement
So we'll spoil it right up front and give away the answer to the question on everyone's mind: how does performance improve with the addition of the extra 512MB of RAM to the 4870? And since we got a nice little surprise last week with the GTX 260 Core 216, we can even compare performance improvement of the slightly upgraded models of both the NVIDIA and AMD parts.
These comparisons are taken from the highest playable resolution in each game we tested, which is either 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 depending on the game. This class of card is able to handle the highest resolutions, but sometimes not with all the features cranked up (as our tests are designed). These high resolutions do the best job at stressing both memory and processing power, as processing more pixels every frame has an impact on both.
Another factor to consider is that we can't really tell you the maximum potential theoretical performance gain from adding more memory to a system. With the NVIDIA GTX 260 core 216, we know the maximum theoretical improvement is something like 12.5 percent. This is because we added 12.5 more compute resources. But doubling the amount of RAM, we aren't really doing anything directly to performance: we're just increasing the availability to resources to the hardware which may or may not improve utilization. Adding more RAM decreases the chance that something will need to be pulled in from system memory.
Both routes have the potential to improve performance, but both also speak to the balance of the initial design. We really don't want more memory on a board than we need to adequately feed the GPU, and, at the same time, we don't want so many compute/texture resources on the GPU that we can't possibly feed it enough data to crunch. From our perspective, it looks like the Radeon 4870 with 512MB was targeted at 1920x1200 or lower resolutions. More RAM has a lessened impact on lower resolutions, and the price point of the 4870 is generally in line with what a gamer would love to have paired with a high end 1920x1200 panel. People that buy 30" panels for gaming are more likely to go after more expensive solutions.
Some games also show a benefit from more RAM regardless of resolution, meaning they are very resource intensive games. While you can't make purchasing decisions based on future-proofing (there's really no way to accurately predict what card will do better in the future), the trend has generally been that newer games use larger and more textures and pile on more effects which take up more space in local memory. While the games that benefit across the board now are few, it is possible we could see that number increase down the line.
Oblivion and Assassin's Creed are the only two tests we see that don't see better improvement on AMD hardware. Perhaps not-so-coincidently, Oblivion is also one of two tests we ran where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 leads the AMD Radeon HD 4870 1GB (and the only test we ran where the original GTX 260 leads the 4870 1GB) - the other being The Witcher. This does change things up again, but it also highlights that the GTX 260 and 4870 are fairly well matched in general. With minor tweaks to performance they we are seeing a back and forth on whose part leads in our benchmark suite. It's like we have NVIDIA and AMD playing that game where each one grabs slightly higher on a stick.
Unlike the core 216, we've known this 1GB 4870 was coming down the pipe for a long time, and we've honestly expected some performance gain at high resolution. But we really didn't expect this much of a difference. The differentiation between the products is better with 4870 1GB than on NVIDIA hardware.
Let's drill down and look at individual game performance to get the rest of the picture.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
78 Comments
View All Comments
poohbear - Sunday, September 28, 2008 - link
"The best example of this is the 8800GTS which I assume many of us still own. We don't care how the 4870 runs on the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 @ 3.20GHz used in the review, we care if the card will boost our FPS enough to warrant purchasing for our computer. It's a different type of comparison than the GPU-limited and CPU-limited tests they currently run, but very useful to the majority of us."QFT
please anandtech show us graphs that tell us if its worth it to upgrade from an 8800gt or similar hardware, that's what the majority of us own and are interested in knowing. This 1gb 4870 is interesting and all, but why would you do an article like this before addressing the aforementioned question that is pertinent to 90% of the rest of us?
PrinceGaz - Friday, September 26, 2008 - link
I must concur with this guy.Whilst I am more than capable of internally extrapolating other test results to these latest ones, I have an 8800GTS (640MB) so with all reviews on AT have to go through a double compare of the closest in the review to what I have.
Please Anand & co, include at least high-end cards from nVidia and AMD from two generations ago in all graphics-card reviews, and mid-range cards from ther previous-generation where relevant. We don't all buy a new card every few months, most people will buy a new graphics card every two years or less often, even quite a few of us who visit this site every day.
When I only see comparisons to other current cards as in this review, I invariably abort reading it and find a review on another site which includes a wider range of cards, which is a shame as I enjoy the technical info here- but if the only comparison provided is between current generation competitors, neither of which I have, then all the graphs are pointless as I (and most other people) have previous generation cards.
SiliconDoc - Friday, October 3, 2008 - link
That would be imformative and then we'd be informed. In tihs case, you must be a $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4 loaded supergame monster - and so it doesn't matter.Just crank up another 4 or 5 hundred on the collegiate mastercard if you blow the first couple of choices...you know that can be the geekfest lan machine or whatever.
saiku - Wednesday, October 1, 2008 - link
I must also agree to the two posters above me. I too have a 8800 GTS and would like to know if this card makes sense for an upgrade. Can AT please keep 1-2 year old tech around when they talk about new parts?formulav8 - Saturday, September 27, 2008 - link
Anandtech finally game AMD the props they deserved along time ago instead of kissing up to nvidia who had no care in the world about charging almost a literal arm and leg. Not that AMD/ATI cares all that much but at least they didn't milk us for all we're worth like nVidia did the past couple years. Just my opinion of course :)Decent review by the way. I do agree though that reviews should be more real world in the sense that they be reviewed with more reasonable, mainstream components like a Phenom, Higher End X2, and Low-Mid end Core2, memory configs like 2GB at 667/800 mhz, ect... Since that is where most gamers will be at. Again, just my opinion :)
Jason
SiliconDoc - Saturday, December 27, 2008 - link
How about mainstream monitor resolutions ?Oh that's right , the highend cards blow away mainstream monitor resolutions now.
Well, I guess they had better start including the 2 grand required for proper monitor upgrades to run the resolutions they post all their reviews in now.
Somehow that giant 30 inch Dell DWP (or two or three) 2560x1600 sitting in the test lab isn't magically appearing attached to their readers gaming rigs.
Jorgisven - Monday, September 29, 2008 - link
The trouble with using mid-range components is that they can unneccessarily bottleneck the performance in ways that can affect different GPU's differently, in different situations. If you scale back your components and then put a $500 GPU in, the results would be skewed, especially at higher details. Since this is a higher end GPU, one would expect that you would have components relative in price as well.SiliconDoc - Friday, October 3, 2008 - link
That's not the worst of it Jordan ...How often do you run a 2550x 1900 or whatever supermegga massive giganto resolution ?
I guess I'll have to take a rtip to Taiwan for my 37" super rezz megoo mighty mouse monitor... that's only $2,567.98 plus tax and overseas shipping to even run the ding dang rezzzzzzzzzzzzzes they test in nowadyas.
Yeah, gee, we've all got these monitors that run this extraordinary resolution that you CANNOT EVEN FIND in the retail store market - and barely online when you try.
CRIPES.
( A friend of mine can't stop cranking up his rezzz - he just got 2 more monitors last night - so he cranks the thing up till the monitors are buzzing and hissing LOL - then I send him a pic or a screenshot or something - and say blah blah - and he can't read the thing - the lettering is the size of the ding dang microdot.
rofl
.000000035 um lettering. lol
He doesn't READ much. rofl.
Patrick Wolf - Thursday, September 25, 2008 - link
While you can go back to previous articles which have basically the same Test Setup with the same games, it would be very convenient if they would include cards from the 9 series in their newer articles.Hxx - Thursday, September 25, 2008 - link
Why should they be compared? 9800s are old tech, not in high demand anymore.Thats whyAbout the article, the writer did a very good job. I'm surprised to see the 4870 coming up in front of the gtx280 in some games. The 4870 1gb is the best card from a price/performance perspective.
Looks like Nvidia is due for another price drop, lol. Good job ATI.