worth waiting for 4870 1GB?

[Sarman]

The amount of times Ive nearly bought a 512MB one, it's unbearable especially with the week offer.

So I wanna know, with a 24" screen, will it be worth it waiting for the 1GB version???

 

[Gustov]

If i played on a 24" monitor, I'd wait. I'd even wait with a 22" screen for the 1gig version

 

[Alexrose1uk]

I have a 24" screen, given ATIs better texture compression and I was only on a 512 card (so this should be similar to a 700ish meg NV card) before, I decided to jump and go for it earlier The 4850 1GB didnt seem to gain a huge boost from the 1GB so the 4870 likely wont be much faster (I hope)

 

[eyetrip]

I have a 24" screen, given ATIs better texture compression and I was only on a 512 card (so this should be similar to a 700ish meg NV card) before, I decided to jump and go for it earlier The 4850 1GB didnt seem to gain a huge boost from the 1GB so the 4870 likely wont be much faster (I hope)

Where have you seen benches of the 1GB 4850?

 

[Paradiso]

I'm waiting for the 1gb version for my 24" monitor. Are they supposed to be out around next week ?

 

[TheMorningStar]

arnt ATI supposed to be working on crossfire sharing card memory father than efectivly using just half the total memory amount? if thats the case couldnt you just buy a 4870 and crossfire a second one at some point if needed?

I beleive the memory tweaking will be through drivers rather than hardware too so it should work? this is something i have only heard bits about so i dont know how right i am on this.

 

[BubbySoup]

Personally I don't think we will see much of a difference @ 1920x1200 between the 512Mb and 1Gb versions.

 

[Alexrose1uk]

Where have you seen benches of the 1GB 4850?

Can't remember exactly, was floating around a week or two ago when I was looking through loads of reviews and threads, sorry

 

[marscay]

Personally I don't think we will see much of a difference @ 1920x1200 between the 512Mb and 1Gb versions.

i think the 1gb cards will have a bit better minimum framerates - this is the biggest advantage with the 280 right now apart from being slightly faster overall anyway.

 

[Skyboat]

The 4870 will see a much bigger improvement over the 512Mb at very high resolutions with 1Gb of memory, since GDDR5 has the bandwidth to cope. The 4850 1Gb cards, however, do not.

 

[eyetrip]

The 4870 will see a much bigger improvement over the 512Mb at very high resolutions with 1Gb of memory, since GDDR5 has the bandwidth to cope. The 4850 1Gb cards, however, do not.

Got a review of the 1GB 4850 to back that up?

You are the 2nd person to say so in this thread. Sure, you both may turn out to be right, but would like to see benches to prove it

 

[Misiowiec]

Got a review of the 1GB 4850 to back that up?

You are the 2nd person to say so in this thread. Sure, you both may turn out to be right, but would like to see benches to prove it

While there are no benchmarks, it makes sense to me The 4850 has DDR3 whereas the 4870 has DDR5; both have a 256 bit interface. Naturally the 4870 will faster at read/write operations to any memory size, but the effect will be more pronounced with larger sizes such as 1Gb.

Since I game at 1920x1200 and want to use AA/AF in the future, I'm waiting for the 1Gb version and the first reviews. I think the additional memory will make a positive difference to the minimum frame rates at high settings, but I'm not sure the premium price will be worth it over the 512Mb version. Still, if nVidia keeps dropping the price of the 260- and 280GTX we should have a 1Gb 4870 for £200 inc of VAT pretty soon, and that's good enough for me. Can't wait to move on from this 7900GT, Crysis at 1024x768 medium settings with =<25 fps just isn't fun Might try the CCC tool, but at the end of the day a new GPU is needed.

 

[Scougar]

Put simply, by the time 512mb becomes any real problem, "at the least" the next round of cards will be out.

HD4870 512mb - Get it, play with it, enjoy it

Matthew

 

[james.miller]

wait for the benchmarks before buying anything. it might be faster enough to warrant buying the 1gb. if it isnt, the 512mb card will only be cheaper. you cant loose then. just wait it out

 

[Happy]

wait for the benchmarks before buying anything. it might be faster enough to warrant buying the 1gb. if it isnt, the 512mb card will only be cheaper. you cant loose then. just wait it out

The truth tbh

 

[LoadsaMoney]

wait for the benchmarks before buying anything. it might be faster enough to warrant buying the 1gb. if it isnt, the 512mb card will only be cheaper. you cant loose then. just wait it out

Agreed, wait.

 

[Misiowiec]

Put simply, by the time 512mb becomes any real problem, "at the least" the next round of cards will be out.

HD4870 512mb - Get it, play with it, enjoy it

Matthew

True, but I don't upgrade too often... just look how much use I've had from my 7900GT (which I got when it first hit the market). 1Gb of memory should be more future proof; just 8x AA can use up 300Mb of VRAM at 1920x1200. Will see if it's worth it after the benchmarks though

wait for the benchmarks before buying anything. it might be faster enough to warrant buying the 1gb. if it isnt, the 512mb card will only be cheaper. you cant loose then. just wait it out

Exactly

 

[FrankJH]

There is also another benefit to ATI theoretically in that they use a much more effective compression (probably not the right terminology i grant you) so that where a 1GB nv card may be necessary at x resolution - a 512mb ATI card maybe all thats required

(Im not stating that it would use half, only that the nv card would require significantly more than the 512mb and ATI significantly less)

Its only a theory as Ive only read it here and havent seen anything to back it up - but it will be interesting to find out

The official (unbiased / well constructed ) reviews will be a very interesting read - at the moment Im still hoping for 2*512mb 4870's for a 30" panel

 

[Misiowiec]

There is also another benefit to ATI theoretically in that they use a much more effective compression (probably not the right terminology i grant you) so that where a 1GB nv card may be necessary at x resolution - a 512mb ATI card maybe all thats required

(Im not stating that it would use half, only that the nv card would require significantly more than the 512mb and ATI significantly less)

Its only a theory as Ive only read it here and havent seen anything to back it up - but it will be interesting to find out

The official (unbiased / well constructed ) reviews will be a very interesting read - at the moment Im still hoping for 2*512mb 4870's for a 30" panel

Yes, it's correct that ATI has more efficient texture compression in the current generation technology, but if it's "significantly" better I don't know. Not matter how good it's not substitute for the current 4870 incarnation having half the VRAM of the GTX280 however, so I think the 1Gb version may be something to reckon with. I won't speculate though, reviews are no more than 2-3 weeks away.

And for a 30" panel 2 x 512Mb 4870 should do just fine, or an X2 which has improved performance over CF in some instances. Admittedly it's slower than CF in other instances, but they say that's a driver issue...

 

[Final8y]

Yes, it's correct that ATI has more efficient texture compression in the current generation technology, but if it's "significantly" better I don't know. Not matter how good it's not substitute for the current 4870 incarnation having half the VRAM of the GTX280 however, so I think the 1Gb version may be something to reckon with. I won't speculate though, reviews are no more than 2-3 weeks away.

And for a 30" panel 2 x 512Mb 4870 should do just fine, or an X2 which has improved performance over CF in some instances. Admittedly it's slower than CF in other instances, but they say that's a driver issue...

GRID with 4870CF 512Mb on 30" has already sown that the 512 VRAM is not enough.