backtop


Print 58 comment(s) - last by ToeCutter.. on Mar 26 at 4:30 PM

ATI Radeon 4890 shows its face

DailyTech has been able to "acquire" an ATI Radeon HD 4890 video card from one of our sources. Although we don't disclose names in order to protect our sources, we are able to say that the card arrived from Taiwan.

The Radeon HD 4890 features the RV790 core, which we are able to confirm runs at a core clock of 850MHz. We have heard that it is capable of more, but that will be up to individual board partners. The chip is not just an overclocked RV770, as there are a few tweaks and modifications that we are still investigating.

The card also features 1GB of memory via eight GDDR5 chips from Qimonda, which declared insolvency in January. The reference card we have is set to 3900 MHz effective, and we expect most of ATI's board partners to do the same. This provides 124.8 GB/s of bandwidth.

Samsung could emerge as a source for GDDR5 chips if Qimonda is forced to halt production. It recently announced 50nm production of GDDR5 chips, which it claimed was capable of 7 Gb/s.

Pricing and launch dates are still being adjusted at this time. AMD recently tried to lower prices on its Radeon 4870 and 4850 cards, but its board partners believe that the performance of the Radeon 4870 is too good  to lower prices further.

The Radeon 4890 will probably be priced moderately above the 4870, but still far below NVIDIA's GTX 280. The GTX 280 should not be confused with the mobile GTX 280M part, which is actually a rebadged GTS 250/9800 GTX+.

There are new drivers coming out next week that will have increased performance for the Radeon 4890 cards, which will invalidate all current benchmarks that have leaked out

More details will be unveiled next week at the Game Developers Conference. DailyTech will be testing the card this weekend.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Please, please, please
By Chocobollz on 3/20/2009 3:45:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
performance in synthetic benchmarks is only indicative of performance in the same synthetic benchmark

I found that your statement is contradicting with your own thoughts. I mean, you're saying that synthetic benchmark is only indicative of performance in the same benchmark, so what do you think about a real game benchmark? IMO, it is just the same concept, it just using a different engine, that's all. You can't just compare performance between different game because every game made different, just as the case with 3DMark. You can't compare its score with another game because it's using a different engine.

quote:
Besides, you say game engines have their quirks, havent you realized that synthetic benchmarks such as 3DMark themselves have rendering engines which would themselves have quirks?

Ok, so what's the point then? If both have the same quirks, then both can't be used as benchmarks, is that what you mean?

I myself prefer 3DMarks to quickly measure performance between different graphics cards than using some games I don't even play. If you play Crysis for example, do you expect everyone else to play it too? Not everyone play Crysis but anyone could just download 3DMarks to measure their card's performance against other cards.

I found this debates of whether using synthetics or real world benchmarks as a useless debate. IMO, 3DMark itself is a game, it just it can't be controlled/played by the user, so it just as the same as running a game. It may not reflect real world performance because it is not a real world benchmark, it is synthetic , for God's sake.


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki