Radeon HD 4000 series specs

bindip1 · 16 Feb 2008 at 12:43

found this on a site:

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7356.html

probbly not true but its worth a read

gareth170 · 16 Feb 2008 at 12:50

looks good if it's true. not sure about the ddr5 because ddr4 isn't used fully but i guess it's to early to say

HighlandeR · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:38

4870 sounds good

Will see come Summer/Fall

jaykay · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:45

Well gddr5 Is surpose to be much better than gddr4. Though i agree with others it may be a bit early. Depends on how the core depends on bandwidth.

Tute · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:46

4870 or 4870X2 for me!

Hyper · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:50

DDR5, what on earth, a lot of people still use DDR1 memory in their computers.

Tom|Nbk · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:52

Another Radeon series? :confused:

, talk about flooding the market. Good tactic all the same I guess.

sargatanas · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:54

Hyper said:
DDR5, what on earth, a lot of people still use DDR1 memory in their computers.

this is GDDR5, and DDR1 hasn't been used in Graphics circuits for a fair while now. DDR2 is barely used now too.

RaiderX · 16 Feb 2008 at 13:58

i doubt those memory frequencies are correct as ddr4 should be 2300MHz+ and DDR5 2600MHz+

willhub · 16 Feb 2008 at 14:01

Too early to say anything really, but at the moment the specs dont look impressive to me, I would have expected them to have more than 16rop's too..

Lightnix · 16 Feb 2008 at 15:49

On the other hand, with a 1GHz core that pushes more floating point power than the entire PS3, who cares? These things are cheap super computers on PCBs. Surely there's a market for that.

titaniumx3 · 16 Feb 2008 at 15:55

According to the website, it seems they're still using the R600 architecture, just a beefed up version; not good imho.

jaykay · 16 Feb 2008 at 15:56

It maybe third time lucky.

Lightnix · 16 Feb 2008 at 16:08

Eh, really I'd call it second time, they didn't really do much with RV670 except lower the power consumption.

Gerard · 16 Feb 2008 at 16:20

Specs really don't mean crap on paper, if they did then the r600 would have smacked around the geforce 8 series with ease. As for rops, ever since the 7800 nvidia cards have had more rops. Didn't stop the x1900 being somewhat faster than the 7900 so that really makes no difference either.

Arthalen · 16 Feb 2008 at 17:14

Specs look very interesting if true.

480 Shaders / 32 TMUs / 16 ROPs is a fair amount of ol' Horsepower.

The TMU count increase is the most significant in my eyes, that should definitly add some edge to the 4870 Card. Although the 4870 X2 should certainly be interesting, close to a Thousand shaders on just one PCB!

willhub · 16 Feb 2008 at 17:26

I noticed the core, well if its 1Ghz and if it has some overclocking potential thats good, at least they the core is being pushed further.

Tom|Nbk · 16 Feb 2008 at 17:34

titaniumx3 said:
According to the website, it seems they're still using the R600 architecture, just a beefed up version; not good imho.

I wish they'd get off the R600 architecture.

jaykay · 16 Feb 2008 at 17:37

Tom|Nbk said:
I wish they'd get off the R600 architecture.

Yer thats gona be smart. Go off an architecture that probably taken 2-3 years to design and a lot of money. Give it time they will find out its flaws and fix them.

willhub · 16 Feb 2008 at 17:38

jaykay said:
Yer thats gona be smart. Go off an architecture that probably taken 2-3 years to design and a lot of money. Give it time they will find out its flaws and fix them.

It proberbly would be smart, somehow I think AMD/ATi are quite capable of designing a better architecture.