What about the price difference between a 4770 and a 4850?

4850
----
Asus: RM 570
Gigabyte: RM 540
Sapphire: RM 539 or RM 599
Palit: RM 480 or RM 590

If the 4770's is about RM 385 as stated above, the price difference is 20%. Is that 20% of money worth 5% of performance?

Crossfire allows you to use multiple GPUs. So in this case, he meant using more than one 4770.

I'm running a 4670 at 1920x1200 well enough.

---

Added on May 1, 2009, 6:06 pm5.1 channel requires 5 speakers and 1 bass.

This post has been edited by everling: May 1 2009, 06:06 PM

Sorry, I don't think I can help much with that. The most modern game I've played lately is Red Alert 3. Can play at max resolution, but you will need to cut back on stuff.

It's a bad counter-argument.

When you pay more for imported cars and you also get a lot more. More stable handling at high speeds, better fuel efficiency, less maintenance, greater crash safety, etc etc. All these together are a lot more than just 5% better performance. In other words, you are getting your money's worth with the more expensive imported cars.

In the 4770 vs 4850? You're paying 45% more ringgit for only 5% more performance (using RM 569 = 4850 and RM 390 = 4770) and the 4850 is only a mid-range graphic card. The 4850 does not appear to be worth the price premium. And if your games are CF-friendly, you can save money for a second 4770 that will give you more performance than a 4890 at cheaper cost.

4770 CF vs 4850 = 37% more ringgit for ~50% more performance on CF-friendly games.

This post has been edited by everling: May 2 2009, 05:02 PM

Power consumption isn't that much more and is actually less during load.


Source: http://en.expreview.com/2009/04/28/first-l...enchmark.html/5

No idea about the heat, but it shouldn't be much more because the input power isn't more. Unless the card is leaking voltage left and right, but the reviews didn't give that impression.

This post has been edited by everling: May 2 2009, 09:36 PM

It's probably a long shot since the 4770 is much cheaper than the 9800GT and it has been a few days, but did your friend try to ask if the shop will allow an exchange?

---

Added on May 3, 2009, 6:43 pmBring the card back to the shop and try to ask for an exchange. Try to offer to accept a penalty charge if the shop is reluctant.

This post has been edited by everling: May 3 2009, 06:43 PM

All should be GDDR5. The GDDR5 is the only reason the 4770 can outperform the 4830 and take pot shots at the 4850. If they drop it to GDDR3, it will perform worse than the 4830 because of the 128-bit pipeline bottleneck.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI

But the HDMI can transfer more video data than DVI.

HDMI video bandwidth
8.16 Gbit/s : 2560×1600 @ 75 Hz

DVI video bandwidth
Single Link : 3.96 Gbit/s : 1920 × 1200 @ 60 Hz
Dual Link : 7.92 Gbit/s : 2560 × 1600 @ 60 Hz

Sources: HDMI Versions and DVI Specifications

Just don't run at 2560x1600 @ 75 Hz and you should be fine.

While we're not likely to consciously notice differences at above 30 FPS, our eyes are indeed sensitive up to 60 FPS. It is this reason that constant CRT usage for hours is not recommended and CRT can cause illness to those sensitive to it.

If you look at a CRT with your peripheral vision and you can easily see the screen refreshing or 'moving', then its refresh rate is too low for long term use. You should then increase the refresh rate from the default 60 FPS to a higher value like 75 or 90 FPS, depending on what the machine supports, or get an LCD.

Now, LCD refresh rates are normally stuck at 60 FPS, but this is okay because LCDs method of refreshing is different than that of CRTs.

If you're using "2560×1600 @ 75 Hz", no. Because the DVI maximum is "2560×1600 @ 60 Hz". DVI will need to drop 15 fps, so not the same amount of data.

Yes, in this case 60 Hz = 60 fps. Most LCDs can only display 60 Hz (60 fps).

kuntawakaw, your understanding is correct.

Where are you getting your quotes?

One thing I don't understand is, why is there a 59 Hz option? It's available on a number of LCDs I've checked.

---

Added on May 30, 2009, 3:23 pmKeV, will a 4770 even fit in that cramped casing? I was lucky that my old X1950 Pro fit in my ATX, by moving a hard disk around.

This post has been edited by everling: May 30 2009, 03:23 PM

The photo clearly states that it should produce 375W in DC. So it doesn't matter if it is 80% or 50% efficient because the PSU targets to produce 375W. The only variables here for power supply are the age of the PSU and how heavily used it has been, in order to factor in capacitor aging.

At this time, it is not for the PC IGP.

You need to confirm what is the native resolution and try your best to get Windows to obey it. I haven't been able to get Windows XP with integrated Intel GC to display right on a 1366x768 - it always looks a bit blurry.

LCDs tend to look blurry at non-native resolutions.

Nice. Is the fan even spinning at all?

GPU-Z doesn't seem to be able to report 0 RPM.

The 4670 should be fine.

Sapphire or HIS Radeon 4670 were fine according to this forum thread. Do not know if the PowerColor problem mentioned there was a fluke or not.

Some models of 4670 has one DVI and one VGA output, and others have two DVI output. DVI is preferred, especially when driving large screen resolutions. Suppose to support up to two 1920x1200 monitors.

This post has been edited by everling: Aug 3 2009, 03:45 PM

It was unpegged a while back.

The 4000 series card is more worth it. The 4670 is near to the 3850's performance but uses less power and generates less heat. The 4650 is a fanless version of the 4670 and appropriately downclocked to suit.

CF is not really worth it being so near the 5000 series. Who knows, the CF HD5650 might have twice the performance of a CF 4770 and fanless to boot.