Any One else Noticed ?

[pugheaven]

Well I've just seen rumours that the 4850 is 40% faster than the 8800GT....so imagine when overclocked...

BUT we shouldn't be looking at overclocked, we should be getting 2x performance straight out of the box surely? And until then... well... just don't see the point! Infact I'll post what I posted in that thread..

"
WOW... with the 9800GTX running Crysis at 1920x1200 with 4xAA at what, 8fps, we can now be looking upwards of 14fps... jesus christ, woopy do for the new cards...

The fact remains, people WON'T get excited over these cards (and even if you don't rate the game or not), IF THEY DON'T run Crysis, top resolution at 40fps+ with at least 4xAA and 8xAF... if they don't then sorry, what's the point? New Gen cards that can't even run a 6 months old game for petes sake! What happens when the NEW GEN Games come out? We'll still be playing catchup with what are basically still underpowered cards... if every 3d'er used the Crytek engine, we'd be screwed rofl

or am I being pesimistic?

Cheers Pug
"

 

[Greebo]

Well I've just seen rumours that the 4850 is 40% faster than the 8800GT....so imagine when overclocked...

So 30% faster than mine.......hmmm.

The crunch will be how well they overclock. So with my overclock on my gts, I still won't be much behind the 4850 so overclocking potential is going to be the crunch (and the fact your statement is true) - the last benchmarks I saw up on the internet for the 4850 showed it to be slightly slower than a 9800GTX in Crysis at 1920 x 1200 so unless they reckon a 9800GTX is 40% quicker than a GT (which it isn't) then it might not be as the rumours state.

If it is 40% quicker than a GT and £130 and overclocks by 20% then I might start and a get a little more interested.

 

[Greebo]

BUT we shouldn't be looking at overclocked, we should be getting 2x performance straight out of the box surely? And until then... well... just don't see the point! Infact I'll post what I posted in that thread..

"
WOW... with the 9800GTX running Crysis at 1920x1200 with 4xAA at what, 8fps, we can now be looking upwards of 14fps... jesus christ, woopy do for the new cards...

The fact remains, people WON'T get excited over these cards (and even if you don't rate the game or not), IF THEY DON'T run Crysis, top resolution at 40fps+ with at least 4xAA and 8xAF... if they don't then sorry, what's the point? New Gen cards that can't even run a 6 months old game for petes sake! What happens when the NEW GEN Games come out? We'll still be playing catchup with what are basically still underpowered cards... if every 3d'er used the Crytek engine, we'd be screwed rofl

or am I being pesimistic?

Cheers Pug
"

Well Said! I have thrown that one around as well. 50% quicker than a 9800GTX still means unplayable framerates.

We needed cards that were at least 100% quicker but we won't see them until next "next gen"

 

[Dark_Angel]

So 30% faster than mine.......hmmm.

The crunch will be how well they overclock. So with my overclock on my gts, I still won't be much behind the 4850 so overclocking potential is going to be the crunch (and the fact your statement is true) - the last benchmarks I saw up on the internet for the 4850 showed it to be slightly slower than a 9800GTX in Crysis at 1920 x 1200 so unless they reckon a 9800GTX is 40% quicker than a GT (which it isn't) then it might not be as they rumours state.

If it is 40% quicker than a GT and £130 and overclocks by 20% then I might start and a get a little more interested.

Might be worth you looking at the link in this thread (no proof it is real though).

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17885383

 

[james.miller]

percentages are great arent they?

 

[pugheaven]

percentages are great arent they?

Only when it's linked to my wage increase and it's 100% Now being as this has never happened...

I personally think this thread is 35.8% biased toward bullsheet, 33.3% dominated by me making percentage claims and 90% based on internet figures that are probably 100% crap

Cheers Pug

 

[Greebo]

lies, damned lies and statistics.....

Yeah, we all now why AMD changed their charts to show percentage and not framerates.

1. Stops anybody saying "I get 50 fps with my 9800GTX on that game yet your chart shows 35 fps and the 4870 shows 49 fps so is it really going to be 40% quicker than mine cause I'm using the latest driver etc, etc"

2. Stops the chart showing the 9800GTX getting 10 fps in a game and the 4870 getting 14 fps.

This stops people thinking, no way am I going to buy a £350 gfx card which only gives me 14 fps in that game etc...

 

[james.miller]

Only when it's linked to my wage increase and it's 100% Now being as this has never happened...

I personally think this thread is 35.8% biased toward bullsheet, 33.3% dominated by me making percentage claims and 90% based on internet figures that are probably 100% crap

Cheers Pug

i would 105% agree with that!

lies, damned lies and statistics.....

Yeah, we all now why AMD changed their charts to show percentage and not framerates.

1. Stops anybody saying "I get 50 fps with my 9800GTX on that game yet your chart shows 35 fps and the 4870 shows 49 fps so is it really going to be 40% quicker than mine cause I'm using the latest driver etc, etc"

2. Stops the chart showing the 9800GTX getting 10 fps in a game and the 4870 getting 14 fps.

This stops people thinking, no way am I going to buy a £350 gfx card which only gives me 14 fps in that game etc...

and that!

 

[FrenchTart]

i would 105% agree with that!

Dean Learner: "..and I'm behind him 110 percent. That means I could back up 10 percent and *still* be fully behind him"

Badly quoted, but I do love Gath Marenghi's Darkplace

 

[amkan13]

lies, damned lies and statistics.....

Yeah, we all now why AMD changed their charts to show percentage and not framerates.

1. Stops anybody saying "I get 50 fps with my 9800GTX on that game yet your chart shows 35 fps and the 4870 shows 49 fps so is it really going to be 40% quicker than mine cause I'm using the latest driver etc, etc"

2. Stops the chart showing the 9800GTX getting 10 fps in a game and the 4870 getting 14 fps.

This stops people thinking, no way am I going to buy a £350 gfx card which only gives me 14 fps in that game etc...

well initial nvidia graphs were based on %age points as well, but they skewed the graphs by not starting at 0%, making it seem they whupped ati.

at the end of the day everyone lies using statistics

 

[Greebo]

well initial nvidia graphs were based on %age points as well, but they skewed the graphs by not starting at 0%, making it seem they whupped ati.

at the end of the day everyone lies using statistics

Sorry, wasn't just picking on AMD, everybody does it Nvidia and Intel included.

I saw a fantastic round up of cpu watercooler blocks and the difference between the best and the worse looked massive on the graph and between each one until you saw the y axis went from 40 to 44 degrees and what looked like an inch difference between some cards equated to less than 0.5 degrees!

Same thing with mobo performance figures. Cause the difference between manufacturers boards are maybe less than 1% they show the bar charts like there is a massive difference and award the win to the fastest when in reality, it won't matter at stock which board you buy, just buy the one with all the features you want for the best price.

 

[Jakus]

That's the very best bit, the wonderful scaling on comparison graphs

When people resort to percentages I always worry...they don't even work the same up as down

 

[Greebo]

That's the very best bit, the wonderful scaling on comparison graphs

When people resort to percentages I always worry...they don't even work the same up as down

I know - one card been 40% faster means the other card is only 29% slower

 

[Tom|Nbk]

It has been nice round here recently. Let's hope it can stay this way. Although when the cards are actually released and reviews start to go up I can see things heating up a little. This, afterall is tradition.

Makes a change from one year ago where it was like a battleground

 

[Greebo]

It has been nice round here recently. Let's hope it can stay this way. Although when the cards are actually released and reviews start to go up I can see things heating up a little

Makes a change from one year ago where it was like a battleground

I miss those days though sometimes......but only sometimes

The "ATI vs Nvidia is best no matter what the reviews say but dependant on which card the poster bought" does get a bit tiresome after a while.

Nowadays there does seem to be more of a strutured unbias discussion going on.

Group hug anybody?

 

[pugheaven]

I do love a good rumble though, it's ace, and when they're both released, man, whoever buys them, will protect them like fruit of their over actitive (or under active) loins rofl

Cheers Pug

 

[Scougar]

I'm quite excited about the 48xx series, how can you not be?

At present the manufacturers don't seem excited about figures the cards are producing, and to be honest they don't seem that much of an improvement for £400+ (nvidia). Ati is producing cards that barely seem to beat the existing market

You weren't in a recent documentary on channel 5 by any chance were you?

ARGHHH... caught on CCTV.... again

I see Scougar's point. The 8800GT was rumoured to be almost as quick as a GTX (resolution not too high) but was going to be sold for £130 which was a third of the price of a 8800GTX..... .. .

Glad someone thought I was making a little sense.. cos it seemed fairly straight forward to me. If I'm considering getting a 4850/70, then I should also then consider current GT/GTS/GTX equipment, which then makes me wonder what the point is, and stick with a 3870.

Don't get me wrong guys, I'll be checking out the charts and reviews and looking at your experiences, but I'm not expecting miracles. If the Nvidia stuff was 100% increase for £400+ then it might be worth it, but it the current economical climate (generally speaking AND the PC graphics market), I can't see there being such demand for such expensive cards.

For some reason, I am a little more interested in what the 4850's and the 260 will do and how they might overclock.

Matthew

 

[gurusan]

Well tbh I was never interested in the GTX 260 and 280 because:

A) Ridiculous Price
B) Little overclocking headroom

The 4870 is probably what I'll be getting as ddr5 is attractive as are 800 shaders and hopefully some pencil modding

 

[psychas]

well it going to be same again ati will make 4870x2 to maybe challenge gt260/280 but then nvidia will make gt200x2 to take take crown back

 

[gurusan]

then nvidia will make gt200x2 to take take crown back

not with a 236w....a 200x2 would take at least 400ish watts