DH Review: Sapphire Atomic HD 3870

***Zardon*** · Jan 2, 2008, 09:30 AM

Read The Review Here
____________________________________

A few weeks ago Sapphire launched the Atomic homepage with content aimed at the enthusiast market.

Driver Heaven now have the first of their enhanced products, the Atomic HD 3870. With this card Sapphire have done all they can to improve on the reference design and in addition to this the overall package has also been enhanced. Let us take a look at what makes this particular 3870 so special.

***temeteus82*** · Jan 2, 2008, 11:36 AM

Time to start saving some money again

that card could be replacing my X1950Pro

Thanks Stu for good review!

Erroneus · Jan 2, 2008, 12:05 PM

Thats truly a really nice card, but we all now it's properly not faster then 8800gt 512, so I guess it really depends on how it's priced.

**kris23** · Jan 2, 2008, 01:55 PM

i gotta get me some of those.....

swimtech · Jan 2, 2008, 02:24 PM

Another very nice review Veridian3, thank you! I especially noted the 16:9 resolution you chose to run the bench of Crysis at...

That particular resolution is not only more typical of what a widescreen gamer should choose to run at, but is a nice change from what we've all seen other sites benchmark the game at - typically 1280x1024 - which no widescreen gamer would choose anyway! That resolution should also be somewhat easier for a card to render, being fewer overall pixels...

Sapphire has outdone themselves on the bundle and the unique single slot cooling solution - nice.

Erroneus · Jan 2, 2008, 02:24 PM

I read on another page that the price of this card will only be 15$ above the normal 3870 card from Sapphire...

If thats true, it's a pretty good buy.

Chaos · Jan 2, 2008, 02:34 PM

looks like a decent card. I would like to see how it does against an 8800GT or 8800GTS(G92)

mkk · Jan 2, 2008, 02:43 PM

Looks great for a HTPC gaming/multimedia box. 3870's are also quite energy efficient at lower loads.

deekey777 · Jan 2, 2008, 06:57 PM

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/...testsystem.php

Quote:

Sapphire Atomic Radeon HD 3870 512Mb
...
Catalyst 7.12
DirectX 9.0c/DirextX10
DiRT
...
PowerDVD Ultra

Now the question: http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/...atomic/hl2.php
Look at min. fps: 25 - 26 - 31?
How is this possible?

LukeK · Jan 2, 2008, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deekey777

OMG I see an X instead of a C!

Wow, this is a good example of how to look smug. pick a character out of a review to comment on. incidentally it looks like it is spelt fine here, not that it would matter. we all know what direct X is.

Quote:

Now the question: http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/...atomic/hl2.php
Look at min. fps: 25 - 26 - 31?
How is this possible?

Its possible because the three cards are all different speeds and performance levels, as a card gets faster the frame rates increase. I can't believe you would ask such a stupid question.

Are you on drugs or something man?

deekey777 · Jan 2, 2008, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LukeK

Wow, this is a good example of how to look smug. pick a character out of a review to comment on. incidentally it looks like it is spelt fine here, not that it would matter. we all know what direct X is.

Its possible because the three cards are all different speeds and performance levels, as a card gets faster the frame rates increase. I can't believe you would ask such a stupid question.

Are you on drugs or something man?

Ok, it's late in Germany and I stay friendly.
Good for you, if you know it's DirectX. But for me it's a small typo.

HD3870: 775/1125 MHz
Atomic: 825/1200 MHz
Difference: 50/75 MHz or in %: 6,45/6,67.
Min fps: 26 vs. 31.
Difference: 5 fps or 24 %.
Can you explain it?

brutusmaximus · Jan 2, 2008, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deekey777

Ok, it's late in Germany and I stay friendly.
Good for you, if you know it's DirectX. But for me it's a small typo.

There is no typo. its spelt right. so stop blabbering on about one character in a review. Quite amusing this is coming from a guy who self proclaims his english skills are bad in his own signature.

Quote:

HD3870: 775/1125 MHz
Atomic: 825/1200 MHz
Difference: 50/75 MHz or in %: 6,45/6,67.
Min fps: 26 vs. 31.
Difference: 5 fps or 24 %.
Can you explain it?

it is very feasible that 5fps is gained from a core clock increase and a memory increase like this - depends entirely on the game, I have no idea what the big deal is here, apart from you trying to make a big deal out of very small things.

***Veridian3*** · Jan 2, 2008, 07:53 PM

There are a few explanations for possible reasons. One would be that the system is being limited by a 3870 and 2900 XT in that particular test/setting. So when you overclock the 3870 (or add an Atomic card) the increase is not only from the GPU it is from the CPU and possibly other components too. Also, the Source Engine is greatly affected by available bandwidth. Just try running a low res bench with various memory speeds and you will see quite large differences in performance.

Erroneus · Jan 2, 2008, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deekey777

HD3870: 775/1125 MHz
Atomic: 825/1200 MHz
Difference: 50/75 MHz or in %: 6,45/6,67.
Min fps: 26 vs. 31.
Difference: 5 fps or 24 %.
Can you explain it?

Other sites which has tested the atomic card are getting the same results.

bug77 · Jan 14, 2008, 04:09 PM

That reference, red PCB surely doen't go with the rest of the package.

I was actually considering a 3870 because at launch 8800GT was as rare as hen's teeth. Reviews at the time placed the 3870 right next to the 8800GT. Yet now that time has passed and 3870 is no longer the focus of reviews, the difference in benchmarks seems to have gotten wider. Anyway, the 3870 is cheaper and has its advantages. But I want ATI to go against Nvidia's #1, not #2. Then again, who doesn't?