|
|
Rumour control – ATI Radeon HD 4850 and 4870 specs leaked
Specs of Radeon HD 4000-series GPUs are apparently leaked by German tech site, showing the GPUs' shaders clocked higher than the core clocks
It’s been a long time since ATI / AMD launched a brand new GPU architecture. The Radeon HD 3000 cards were better than the 2900-series cards in terms of bangs per buck and power consumption, but they didn’t add anything new in terms of the number of stream processors and basic architecture. This could soon change, though, if the latest rumours about the Radeon HD 4000 GPUs are to be believed.
The German tech site Hardware-Infos has apparently got hold of the specs for the Radeon HD 4870 (codenamed RV770XT), 4850 (codenamed RV770Pro) and 4850 GDDR3, and has published them online. If the specs are to be believed, then the new 55nm chips will feature 480 stream processors, rather than the 320 found in the 3850 and 3870.
One of the most interesting claims on the site is that the GPUs’ stream processors will apparently be clocked at a higher frequency than the core clock, much like Nvidia’s DirectX 10 GPUs. Hardware-Infos claims that the 4870 will be clocked at 850MHz, with a stream processor clock of 1,050MHz and a GDDR5 memory clock of 1,935MHz. Meanwhile, the 4850 will have a core clock of 650MHz, a stream processor clock of 850MHz and a GDDR5 memory clock of 1,728MHz. At the bottom of the pile, a GDDR3 version of the 4850 is also claimed to be in the works, with a memory clock of 571.5MHz (1,143MHz effective).
If the table is to be believed then the 4870 will come with 1GB of memory as standard, while the 4850 will come in 512MB GDDR5 and GDDR3 versions, with a further 256MB GDDR3 flavour at the cheaper end of the scale. Interestingly, Hardware-Infos says that all three GPUs will feature a 256-bit memory interface, just like the interface found in Nvidia’s new GeFOrce 9-series GPUs. All the GPUs will also have 16 ROPs and 32 texture units, according to the site.
Hardware-Infos claims that a 4870 card will have a TDP of 150W, while 4850 cards will have a TDP of 110W. If the table is correct, then the GPUs are scheduled to be announced next month.
Of course, as with any Web rumours, this could all be a load of fluff to rack up a few hits, but the specifications look pretty plausible to us. The only bit that sticks out is the GDDR5 memory, just because we haven’t seen a GDDR5 graphics card yet. However, ATI also surprised us by being the first company to introduce us to GDDR4 memory with the Radeon X1950XTX back in 2006, and it may have similar plans for GDDR5.
VR-Zone
Reddit | Technorati
Of course Mircroshaft is going to say "LOOK LOOK the Nvidia drivers are the REAL cause of the crashes and bugs in VIsta" LOL whatever man I havent had a single prob yet with Nvidia drivers in Vista maybe x64 but hey that sucks for everyone lol. I also went from a 7600 GS to a 9850 pro "very disapointed" to a 8800 GTS 320 which i am quite comfortable with. Im not like all the fanboys and Ubergeeks that play game in 745000x645000 res.
Comment by whheezzzz at 5:08pm 16th May 2008
i got an 8800 ultra £390 what a waste of effing money ! they have no realesed a gx92 which tbh is only sligtly better ! ati next time for me ! although on my brothers pc the radeon 2400 agp drivers disnt work on x64 vista
Comment by higson92 at 2:41pm 30th April 2008
This might be the first 2nd gen dx10 card we see released. nvidia have just been updating the g80 and ati the 2000 series. lets see what this gets us.
Comment by TBallS at 11:35pm 28th April 2008
BET on a loser YOU LOSE . ON a trend thing AMD R now SH;T . lets hope this trend is about tooo change . probably not tho .
Comment by kingjohn721 at 2:52pm 28th April 2008
After having gone from nvidia's 7600GT to 8800GTS 640 I was extremely disappointed in a card that cost £250. Until a single card can play modern games at decent resolutions then I don't see the point in changing. I certainly won't be taken in by hype again!
Comment by andreinuk at 9:58am 28th April 2008
After having gone from nvidia's 7600GT to 8800GTS 640 I was extremely disappointed in a card that cost £250. Until a single card can play modern games at decent resolutions then I don't see the point in changing. I certainly won't be taken in by hype again!
Comment by andreinuk at 9:58am 28th April 2008
Nvidia have taken the pee so flagrantly over the past year that I'm determined to give ATI the benefit of any doubt in future. And that means Nvidia will have to offer a lot more in the price/performance stakes if they want my dosh. If it wasn't for the fact that the best deal around is 2X8800GT's in SLI (if you've got a SLI board), I'd be back with ATI already.
Comment by Cybersciver at 1:24pm 25th April 2008
Since the 3870x2... Im not even a little bit enthusiastic at all... ''Ohh Ati 4000, whos Ati?''
Comment by Lightning_Pete at 5:01pm 24th April 2008
oh well, now that just is pure fanboyism, seriously, look at how bad the Nvidia drivers were for Vista, and even now there is still loads of bugs, and look at the post that microsoft made the other week, where they had said that, most of the Vista crashes were due to Nvidia drivers. maybe you'll think of a better way to slag off your rivals next time, try a comment like, AMD is due for bankruptcy soon anyway, which would meen no more drivers, at all, that one might work.
Comment by NikoBellic at 12:10am 24th April 2008
Best thing ATI have done recently is rationalise their naming structure... and now it appears they are sticking to it... good on them. Nvidia should take note of this, especially as we now have 9 series cards that use the same architecture as the 8 series, whilst a new 9 series has been announced with different architecture.... goddamn them, it seems like they have the work experience kid looking after the product naming, either that or they just have no records of what cards they have named what, and just go for a randomly higher number each time.
Comment by NewParadigm at 10:24pm 23rd April 2008
i dont plan on upgrading atm because theres no significant improvement, if this can offer that. i will part with my hard earned cash.
Comment by TBallS at 8:35pm 23rd April 2008
If Radeon's performance was ever 'as good as the specs would suggest', Nvidia would have gone out of business long ago. A 2900XT makes the entire 8800 family look bad on paper, but does that mean anything? Anything at all? I'll leave it to you to answer that yourself...
Comment by Ziggy at 5:56pm 23rd April 2008
Your slow CPC I posted this in the forum's one day ago.
Comment by CPC_RedDawn at 5:20pm 23rd April 2008
The hardware specs may look ok but the driver support from ATi/AMD of recent years suck... I bet these cards will be expensive for what they do and they won't do anything very good... NVidia all the way for me at the mo. Its a shame that all the best motherboards are intel/crossfire based... oh well.
Comment by PokerMuppet at 4:20pm 23rd April 2008
If its true,and if the performance is as good as the specs would suggest, it could make Nvidias marketing blunder with the 9800GTX look even dumber...
Comment by jjs113 at 4:02pm 23rd April 2008
Make a Comment
- BFG unveils hand built Phobos gaming PCs
- UPDATED: LiveJournal announces mass layoffs
- Top 10 PC games chart
- Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 gets 500GB on single platter
- Creative reveals new Zii processor
- Happy Christmas from Custom PC
- Intel might buy Imagination Technologies
- First Blu-Ray and DVD hybrid disc announced
- Abit denies closure rumours
- Download ‘AAA’ games in a few minutes with AWOMO
These are the most popular news articles over the past seven days.
- Phenom II overclocked to 6GHz
- GeIL unveils Cyclone RAM cooler
- Rumour control: GeForce GTX 260 GX2 in January
- Nvidia cuts price of 216 SP GeForce GTX 260
- VIDEO: PC version of Mirror’s Edge features hardware PhysX
- Get Half-Life for less than a dollar on Steam
- IBM plans to build virtual human brain
- RivaTuner 2.20 adds SLI and CrossFire support
- VIDEO: ArmA II trailer released
Mobile Broadband
Fastest, cheapest 3G mobile broadband dongles from 3, Vodafone, T-Mobile and Orange
from just £10/month
