Radeon HD 3870 /w QX9650 Preliminary Test

The Asgard · 10 Nov 2007 at 08:12

Some early testing on the 3870 and 3870 + 3850 in Xfire.

While only 3D Mark 06 results it doesn't look too bad. Idle temp of 30'c!

Looking forward to the release

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=202510

Scougar · 10 Nov 2007 at 08:15

Cool

Good spot Asgard

Reading now.....hmm.. i know it wasn't expected to change, but a real shame they didn't up the rop's from 16, or the texture thingies...

Only question here is... 416 unified pixel shaders?

Matthew

The Asgard · 10 Nov 2007 at 08:21

Scougar said:
Cool Good spot Asgard

Reading now.....hmm.. i know it wasn't expected to change, but a real shame they didn't up the rop's from 16, or the texture thingies...

Only question here is... 416 unified pixel shaders?

Matthew

Yes I noticed that with the shaders. I can only assume gpuid is broken.

It might be gpuid uses a lookup table based on the card id for its info rather than querying the hardware directly.

Looking forward to some real game results.

Might be tempted to buy one for a play.

Scougar · 10 Nov 2007 at 08:31

Yeah might be tempted for a 3870 (purely because of price -if cheap- though, not because I think it is comparable to an 8800GT before someone jumps in).

The x-fire tests run at 725 core speed. Not that impressive results of just over 15k though. You can get that on an o/c'd gt with a quad core. Obviously bearing in mind that using a 3850 and a 3870 at 725 mhz (lower than stock speed) for the x-fire run. Still.. seems pretty low to me. Hopefully this is another case of (but i doubt it), of either bad drivers or 3dmk being a bad indication of game performance?

Matthew

PrinzEugen · 10 Nov 2007 at 09:35

Interesting though - meant to be quicker than the 2900xt and seemingly uses a LOT less power.

http://www.madboxpc.com/contenido.php?id=5430

Sorry for the spanish but apparently uses slides from the AMD powerpoint presentation which is interesting...

Gibbo · 10 Nov 2007 at 09:59

PrinzEugen said:
Interesting though - meant to be quicker than the 2900xt and seemingly uses a LOT less power.

http://www.madboxpc.com/contenido.php?id=5430

Sorry for the spanish but apparently uses slides from the AMD powerpoint presentation which is interesting...

HI there

I already stated a few days ago that HD 3870 is gonna be slightly quicker than 2900 XT.

It should be on par performance wise with the 1GB 2900 XT GDDR4. Considering these will be half the price and consume half the power they are a bargain.

I believe HD3870 is a very good product as is HD 3850 they both represent incredible value for money.

yeti · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:06

WOW it draws only 34watts in 2D mode. Very impressive- I'll see what the actual game benches & price are then I'll decide

Jabbs · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:17

Will they still have the terrible aa performance though

Gibbo · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:28

yeti said:
WOW it draws only 34watts in 2D mode. Very impressive- I'll see what the actual game benches & price are then I'll decide

HI there

Yes the RV670 uses a new method where it can adjust its power requirements, even when under load. So if your gaming but not maxing the card out it will say only consume 50W.

Technology wise the HD3800 series is very impressive, very low power in comparison to other cards, cool running, even though the coolers could be improved but that makes them ideal for overclockers. They do run cool and I'd not be surprised is we saw passive cooled HD3850's come out or ones with at least noiseless fan solutions.

willhub · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:45

3DMark score on it seems abit dissapointing since its with a Quad Core and card overclocked, is the Q9650 a Penryn too? They seem to be making out the 8800GT is loud on that forums whats that all about?

Seems fishy how 3DM06 detects 3Ghz whilst CPU-Z shows 2Ghz, best wait for some real results.

SS-89 · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:54

HD3870

My HD2900xt for comparison:

The texture and pixel fillrates are less than half the 2900's however it has 416 shaders which im guessing is a mistake.

SS-89 · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:54

willhub said:
3DMark score on it seems abit dissapointing since its with a Quad Core and card overclocked, is the Q9650 a Penryn too? They seem to be making out the 8800GT is loud on that forums whats that all about?

Seems fishy how 3DM06 detects 3Ghz whilst CPU-Z shows 2Ghz, best wait for some real results.

Its not fishy at all, its called intel speedstep.

The Asgard · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:55

willhub said:
Seems fishy how 3DM06 detects 3Ghz whilst CPU-Z shows 2Ghz, best wait for some real results.

Its new kit and doesn't suprise me in the least

willhub · 10 Nov 2007 at 10:59

The Asgard said:
Its new kit and doesn't suprise me in the least

So it was a Quad at 3Ghz (Penryn??), and the GPU was overclocked, does that score not seem abit low?

The Asgard · 10 Nov 2007 at 11:01

Gibbo said:
Technology wise the HD3800 series is very impressive, very low power in comparison to other cards, cool running, even though the coolers could be improved but that makes them ideal for overclockers. They do run cool and I'd not be surprised is we saw passive cooled HD3850's come out or ones with at least noiseless fan solutions.

This bit I really find interesting. Its about time somebody started to look this. No more wasted FPS. I always remember looking at the FPS on EVE, it was something daft like 500FPS. What a waste of power!

jaykay · 10 Nov 2007 at 11:01

The die size is sooo much smaller. :eek:

drak3 · 10 Nov 2007 at 11:08

My 1900XT-X:

The Asgard · 10 Nov 2007 at 11:08

willhub said:
So it was a Quad at 3Ghz (Penryn??), and the GPU was overclocked, does that score not seem abit low?

Compared to an overclocked GT?

I'm not expecting micracle with the Penryn tbh. I think in certain situation it will shine but for most people with current kit they will be far better investing in a Q6600 G0 with a decent multiplier. The next chip is the one to lookout for.

Lets see how it performs with games. I personally think it's got the potential to be a good card if its got improved AA.

willhub · 10 Nov 2007 at 11:10

The Asgard said:
Compared to an overclocked GT?

I'm not expecting micracle with the Penryn tbh. I think in certain situation it will shine but for most people with current kit they will be far better investing in a Q6600 G0 with a decent multiplier. The next chip is the one to lookout for.

Lets see how it performs with games. I personally think it's got the potential to be a good card if its got improved AA.

It dont look like its going to be beating the 8800GT anytime soon so no point me switching to it, I'm thinking of buying it if its like £100 but not selling my 8800GT and comparing them. I'll probs just be dissapointed like I was with 8800GTS - 2900XT, dont want a scenario like that again.

No the ATi card was overclocked with a 3Ghz Penryn by the looks of it and scored lower than an 8800GT overclocked with a 3.4Ghz C2D in which I got 13030 something.

RavenXXX2 · 10 Nov 2007 at 11:12

Gibbo said:
It should be on par performance wise with the 1GB 2900 XT GDDR4.

This does not sound good then, 1GBXT has the same performance as the 512MBXT, how can ATI expect people to purchase these new cards with no decent increase in performance, me thinks the 8800GT is going to have a very merry XMAS.