Zian5377

Well with the new 4770 hitting the market I'm completely lost.

You got the 4770 at 99 USD, the 4830 at 75 USD, and the 4850 certain models at 99 USD but which one is the fastest? I know the new 4770 is on the 40nm and has massive clock speeds and GDDR5 but it's also on that 128bit bus. Pretty much I'm just asking which one is the fastest?

__________________
_____________

"Good, Bad, I'm the one with the gun.." -Ash

Gotta Love Wireless Internet!!

Judas

not sure ... i haven't gotten to touch them so i couldn't tell you.. wait and find out what the reviews are saying

__________________

defearian

I'm not sure either, but honestly I doubt there is much difference in speed

OldBuzzard

From a couple of reviews I've see, the 4770 falls right between the 4830 and 4850 performance wise. So the 4850 is the fastest, but the 4770 really isn't all that far behind it.

The big thing the 4770 would have going for it over the 4850 is that it's a cooler running card.

__________________
When looking for a reason as to why things go wrong, never rule out sheer STUPIDITY

Judas

and can overclock well beyond what the 4850 could ever diliver in standard performance and overclocking performance... making it a good card for the general person, and making it a steal for the overclocker...

__________________

Meaker

I've run a crossfire HD4850 and HD4770 setup. The 4770 when OCed is faster and far more easily becomes part of a quiet system.

__________________
Home:
Core 2 DUO @ 2.4ghz | 2048mb GSKILL 5400 @ 450mhz 5-5-5-12 | ASROCK P945 A2 based mobo | ATI Radeon x1650pro | 17" LCD widescreen |
Hiper Type R 480W PSU | 250gb seagate HDD |

Uni:
Core i7 920 C0 @ 3.8ghz HT on (1.325v) | 6 Gigs Corsair XMS 3 1333DDR @ 1600DDR 8-8-8-20 1.5v | Asus P6T-SE @ 200mhz BCLK |2x Gigabyte HD 4770 Crossfire + Accelero S1s |
21.6" widescreen LCD | Sharkoon Rebel 7 + 600W Coolermaster silent PRO | 2x320GB WD raid edition III Raid 0 | Razor diamondback G3

procupine14

Well, I haven't touched a 4770 but I do have a 4850 and I have to say I do love that card. In any case This DH Review might provide you with a more informative perspective. It includes a 4770 or two in there and a good comparison.

The graphics card comparison is a couple pages in and highlights a 4770 and a 4850 back to back along with some nVidia references

__________________
Laptop: HP dv6000 - Vista Ultimate (32-bit) - AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-60(2.0GHz) - NVIDIA GeForce Go 7200 256MB - 4GB Kingston DDR2 667 - 160GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive

HTPC: Vista Ultimate 64-bit - AMD Athlon 5200+ x2 - 4GB OCZ DDR2 800 - 250GB Seagate Barracuda - Samsung EcoGreen 1TB - Hauppauge single tuner HD - ASUS Radeon HD4550 512MB - ECS RS485M-M mobo - Creative X-fi soundcard

Other PC: Vista Ultimate 64-bit - AMD Athlon 4200+ X2 - 4GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 - 250GB Seagate Barracuda - XFX 8600GT XXX - DFI Infinity NF570 SLI-M2/G

Jejking

With less power consumption (around the same @ idle, about 50w less under load which is quite a lot) it is very tempty for ''green guys''.

By the way: if you plan to go crossfire a couple of HD4770's, remember that they will eventually drop away a bit at extreme resolutions like 1920x1200+. Then even the GDDR5 modules can't keep the 128-bit bus above water.

__________________
Strike back with Team MAD against disease, it's worth the try

Judas

this is why i think a HD4770 with 1gb DDR5 i think would royally TRASH the hd4850 and win the 1920x1200/2560x1600 battles..

4 HD4770's in crossfire would present a direct competition to the HD4850x2 in quad crossfire and produce FAR less head and consume probably close to half the power overall...

That's not even considering the overclocking potential..

Better yet .. if they can pack 1.5gb of DDR5 on those cards... that would really make them a suitable powerhouse for a relatively small dollar.

__________________

anonemus

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but at stock speed the 4850 is fastest among the three, right? If both are OCd, would the 4850 still beat the 4770?

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

Judas

stock yes.. the 4850 is faster.. but the 4770 has far more overclocking potential making it in this case..... faster then the 4850 sometimes... with less heat output and power draw to boot. The 4850 already runs far warmer and doesn't have as much room to breath...

__________________

tanka12345

In short, I'd just take a 4770, and pick up another one for CF in the future if I needed more power. After all it is the first mainstream 40nm card

__________________
*My New Rig* - Windows 7 RC Build 7100

Intel Core i7 920 OCed to 3.2GHz | CoolerMaster V8 | Patriot Viper 3x2GB DDR3-1333MHz | MSI Eclipse X58 | LG W2261V 22" 16:9 | Western Digital Caviar Black 640GB | MSI ATI 4870 1GB | Enermax Revolution 85+ 1050W PSU | CoolerMaster HAF 932 | ASUS DRW-22B1LT Lightscribe | Creative SB X-Fi Xtreme | Logitech X-540 | Razer Carcharias | Razer Lachesis | Razer Destructor/ Razer Goliathus Speed/ Fnatic SteelSeries Qck+ XL | OCZ Alchemy Elixir

anonemus

Yeah, that 40nm GPU really seems to have great OC potential. I'm just a bit worried about the reference cooler (the cheaper version common in retail) available now, will these hold up to higher OCing?

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

DJ BIG T

that 4770 is a sweet card and for the price you cant go wrong...

__________________

dodobv

From 4830 it doesn`t worth passing to 4770, otherwise 4770 is going to be a "best-seller"

anonemus

Being a 40nm, how durable will this be when always OCd?

Same with OCd Intel 45nm CPU, I've read somewhere that these are not as durable long-term when OCd unlike the 65nm procs...

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

Judas

i've never heard of such a thing...

one being more durrable then the other? I mean there are things in which a specific type of CPU is already clocked at it's peak.. but usually every time a die shrink has occured, the capabilities have been extended .. including it's durability in terms of running on the same technologies simply because it uses less power, and produces far less heat.... even overclocked it's less of an issue then the larger counterpart.

Reguardless, peaking any video cards overclocking capabilities will deteriorate the lifespan considerably....

__________________

anonemus

I maybe (most likely) misinterpreting what I've read here:

AnandTech: Overclocking Intel's New 45nm QX9650: The Rules Have Changed

My impression is that 45nm CPUs are less durable than previous generations when it comes to OCing...

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

anonemus

Wrong link! Here the correct one:

AnandTech: Intel's 45nm Dual-Core E8500: The Best Just Got Better

These processors are built on a new 45nm High-K process that invariably makes them predisposed to accelerated degradation when subjected to the same voltages used with last-generation's 65nm offerings. Although we certainly support overclocking as an easy and inexpensive means of improving overall system performance, we also advocate the appropriate use of self-restraint when it comes to choosing a final CPU voltage. Pushing 0.1V more Vcore through a processor for that last 50MHz does not make a lot of sense when you think about it.

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

Judas

to scale..

This is like saying when there was the 320nm cpu cores running 3v that pushing then to 3.3v would result in the same major degredation.

It's not a fallasy of the shrinking of the size, but the scaling down of the voltages required as well, meaning that the bumping of voltage to that core has to scale as well.

If a 65nm cpu core stock is 1.45v and a .15v jump was acceptable, a 45nm 1.35v with a jump of .125v would be acceptable in comparison.

Scaling, the way they word that paragraph sounds very much like shrinking the die sizes seems counter productive.. which is absurd since it's highly productive, reducing costs, power consumption, and increasing the speeds not to mention overclocking potential on the same core design typically, or providing FAR more processing power with a new core design that fits the die.

__________________

anonemus

Judas-- does it also apply to GPUs? Especially since they're also shrinking and getting OCd more as standard?

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

Judas

yes they draw less power and get frequency increases as well to, however, remember, gpus and cpu are very very different, while from a die shrink, voltage decrease, frequency increase as well as heat generation gets reduced with die shrinks just like a cpu, they are usually designed far larger then any cpu is, and is far more complicated from what i've seen and read.

__________________

Jejking

When a GPU gets smaller, it needs less voltage to run through the smaller circuits (and so develops less heat). If you want to OC the crap out of the card, you need to crank up the juice and the heat per mm2 will increase significantly.

Works with CPUs and also with GPUs.

By the way, I hear about poor availability of HD4770. Anyone about this and shops that can deliver?

__________________
Strike back with Team MAD against disease, it's worth the try

Judas

i have yet to see my supplier list it....(4770)

__________________

anonemus

There are abundant 4770s here in my country from MSI, Powercolor mainly.

Thanks for the clarification!

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

Sound_Card

HD 4770 all around is better card of the three. This is taking in cooling, silence, OC'ing, technology, price, and performance.

anonemus

I wonder when will AMD release a 40nm 256-bit GDDR5 card?

__________________
write a book. plant a tree. raise a child. build a rig.

Odinarius

5XXX series is planned towards the end of the year, coincide with W7.

ATI is probably offering all these different models (4870 has dropped dramatically in price also) to get rid of the stocked 770/790 chips and prepare for 8XX series. No other explanation.

anonemus

Has TSMC improved their 40nm yields already?