HD4870 died. Need a new graphics card.

M

MaZa

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,581
I have no idea how this happened, but my HD4870 1GB suddenly stopped working. It just shows black screen. Cannot return it because of the Accelero S1 installed on it (properly, heat was never a problem, even VRMs were way below 100C except on furmark it was bit over) Now I'm back to my 8800GTS G92 512Mb. Not a bad card as its theoretically not much slower than my busted ATI, but it is struggling and stuttering in 1920x1200 resolutions a bit, (lack of video ram I guess.) and interpolated screens on lower resolutions really bother me...

Backbones of my rig are:

Intel E8200 @ 3,7Ghz + TRUE120E
2Gb 1066Mhz DDR2
MSI P35 Neo3-F
Corsair HX520W
LP2475w monitor


What is the best graphics card that can keep up with my rig? Im not really sure if my PSU can support graphics cards with 2 GPU chips. Is HD4870 1Gb still king of the hill of single chip cards, so should I buy another one? Or is there any interesting replacement coming up in few months? NVidia or ATI, while I lean towards ATI either brand will do in the end.

*edit* One important thing is that its cooling is inaudible on idle situations, as I use my computer for listening music. On load it doesnt matter too much as long as it isnt a hurricane that penetrates through my closed headphones.
 
Last edited:
XFX 4890. These are basically a streamlined 4870. With the 4890, people have been able over the gpu past 1ghz on the core. Right now they are selling on newegg for a little over 200 bucks.
 
Too bad I live in Finland so I doubt I would buy overseas from newegg. But Pixmania has one for 220€. Only a little bit more than HD4870 1Gt. Very interesting offer.
 
If you want to stay with ATI you can't go wrong with an XFX 4890, you could then reuse your Accelero S1. But if you go with nVidia, a GTX260 is an amazing deal for the price currently. From personal experience the stock GTX cooler is way quieter than the reference ATI design but if you reuse the Accelero that shouldn't be that big of an issue.
 
Yes, my S1 is intact so I can reuse it. I even have turbomodule somewhere, just need a controllable fanmate for it.

By the way, are the VRMs of HD4890 easier to cool than HD4870? Had to use stock coolerplate for latter enhanced with some leftover ramsinks, and even still they get quite scorching on furmark.
 
I haven't experimented with any aftermarket cooling personally yet but from what I have read I do not think they are. I think using the stock plate in combination with an aftermarket cooler seems to be a safe bet.
 
which ever way you go, pick one of teh following card makers -> eVGA, XFX or BFG. The issue that happened to you will probably not happen again. I am enjoying my first eVGA(the gtx 260 in my sig) and when I called in to register for the lifetime warranty they told me to feel free to overclock it and modify it, its all covered.
 
I never cared about makers as they are all clones of reference boards afterall, so I presumed it wont really matter in the end. Have been loyal Club3D cheap brand users and all of them have lasted my abuse, but this time my ATI was from Force3D because they were even cheaper, being newcomers and all. Still, cant really say if it whose fault it was, mine, rigs or the cards.
 
The XFX 4890 has a lifetime warrenty. I don't know if you void the warenty by using a aftermarket cooler. But with XFX, I don't think that is the case.
 
vengence said:
Under heavy load the card would go over 100C?!?!?! That's bad.... :(
Click to expand...


VRMs (mosfets that is) on HD4870 are known to be extremely hot, 100C is not alarming yet. Hell, on stock cooler some HD4870s were reported to fail and crash on furmark when VRM temperatures bounce to their failure degrees, over 115C or something, I repeat STOCK COOLER. Thats why ATI tried to cheat by making special "enhancement" to their drivers which downclocks your card when furmark is used. So when you test your ATI card, rename the furmark.exe to something else to get accurate results (and watch your VRMs melt. :p You need GPU-z to see VRM temps.)

Luckily in real life situation VRMs rarely go above 80C or so I remember, Furmark is just so insane GPU stress program. But it doesnt matter if its insane, it still proved that VRMs are (or were? does non-reference board versions fix this?) HD4870s weak spot. And I'm wondering if HD4890 fixed it. It would make installing 3rd party cooling bit less nerving...
 
Last edited:
I have been reading around and slowly leaning towards GTX275. Why I should choose HD4890 over GTX275? In almost all reviews I have seen it has been faster than ATI in 1920x1200 resolution, apart from couple of games, even though it has less ram which is surprising. It is bit costlier than ATI though.

*edit* except on anandtech comparison, ATI had a slight edge. So which one is truly faster?
 
Last edited:
MaZa said:
I have been reading around and slowly leaning towards GTX275. Why I should choose HD4890 over GTX275? In almost all reviews I have seen it has been faster than ATI in 1920x1200 resolution, apart from couple of games, even though it has less ram which is surprising. It is bit costlier than ATI though.
Click to expand...

its not bad but the 4890 is just a better value (at least in the states) in terms of playability it is well matched by the GTX280 (everything being stock) but for considerably less.) in other words you get the same game play as the GTX275 for less. if they drop the price it would be more competitive. right now in the states you can get a 4890 for under 200, 230 dollars for an XFX card. so running 60 to 70 dollars less then the GTX275


http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYzNiwxMSwsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=

to your edit: it depends on how you test it. its close enough to a GTX280/275 to say they are even.
 
Just to check, by black screen is that including post screens or just before windows loads?
 
I'd snag one of the 260 Core 216 which would be just slightly faster than your 4870 (by 5% at most) and you can get one of those for 165$ AR in the states, or less.
 
MaZa said:
Black screen completely right from the start. Doesnt show post or anything.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what happened to my original GTX260, sadly it was the only one that didn't have coil whine. Tech support chalked it up to a failure of the int controls, whatever that means. Considering the slight price difference between the 4890 and 275 I would have to say go with the ATI as it will be a better performer but then again I might be a bit biased...
 
MaZa said:
I have been reading around and slowly leaning towards GTX275. Why I should choose HD4890 over GTX275? In almost all reviews I have seen it has been faster than ATI in 1920x1200 resolution, apart from couple of games, even though it has less ram which is surprising. It is bit costlier than ATI though.

*edit* except on anandtech comparison, ATI had a slight edge. So which one is truly faster?
Click to expand...

They are neck and neck up to 1920x1200. At 4 MPixels (2560x1600), the GTX 275 takes the lead. If you play @ 1920x1200, definitely go for a GTX 275 or HD 4890, but you won't see much difference from your previous HD 4870, so if you want to save money, either go with a(nother) HD 4870 1 GB or get a GTX 260 216, which is slightly faster than the HD 4870 1 GB and not too far off a GTX 275 or HD 4890.
 
Silus said:
They are neck and neck up to 1920x1200. At 4 MPixels (2560x1600), the GTX 275 takes the lead. If you play @ 1920x1200, definitely go for a GTX 275 or HD 4890, but you won't see much difference from your previous HD 4870, so if you want to save money, either go with a(nother) HD 4870 1 GB or get a GTX 260 216, which is slightly faster than the HD 4870 1 GB and not too far off a GTX 275 or HD 4890.
Click to expand...


Seems like we have a a winner. THat GTX 260 216 really looks like something. Cheap, yet noticeably better performer than HD48701GB.
http://techgage.com/article/ati_hd_4870_1gb_vs_nvidia_gtx_260216_896mb/1

EVGA GTX260 216 Superclocked in 209€ is very tempting option indeed.

Now I have to search around how well it overclocks and possible 3rd party coolers.
 
Something that seems to have faded into the background is the HD4870's apt abillity to run AA. Remember when this card debuted people were calling it "free 8X AA" because the performance impact is so minimal. Any review not mentioning this isn't doing their job.

--this isn't to say the GTX 260 is by any means a bad card (or the weaker of the two). Nvidia's contender is the GTX 260 216, and it contends very well. My only point is that they trade blows, and the 4870 will outrun the 260 in games that were part of the ATI hardware relations program and/or AA is turned up to 8X. The 260 216 will outrun the HD4870 when no AA is enabled.

edit: I like X-bit labs because they always seem to gather mountians of data, and leave it to the reader to sort out, which I really enjoy:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd4890_8.html#sect1
also that article is only a few days old.
 
Last edited:
I rarely use AA, and if I use, I use either 2x or 4x. Dunno why, but I never cared for the AA effect, I just like crispy and sharp picture. I bump up the anisotropic filtering instead. But I will look for more comparisons that take AA into consideration aswell.
 
MaZa said:
I rarely use AA, and if I use, I use either 2x or 4x. Dunno why, but I never cared for the AA effect, I just like crispy and sharp picture. I bump up the anisotropic filtering instead. But I will look for more comparisons that take AA into consideration aswell.
Click to expand...

Then the 260 is probably the better choice. AFAIK one of XFX's best reputations is for their international support, so I'd look into them if I were you.

And please post links to the e-tailers you look around in, I really like to keep track of just how bad everyone else gets it in comparison to these yanks buying from newegg XD.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
Something that seems to have faded into the background is the HD4870's apt abillity to run AA. Remember when this card debuted people were calling it "free 8X AA" because the performance impact is so minimal. Any review not mentioning this isn't doing their job.

--this isn't to say the GTX 260 is by any means a bad card (or the weaker of the two). Nvidia's contender is the GTX 260 216, and it contends very well. My only point is that they trade blows, and the 4870 will outrun the 260 in games that were part of the ATI hardware relations program and/or AA is turned up to 8X. The 260 216 will outrun the HD4870 when no AA is enabled.

edit: I like X-bit labs because they always seem to gather mountians of data, and leave it to the reader to sort out, which I really enjoy:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd4890_8.html#sect1
also that article is only a few days old.
Click to expand...

This is not true at all: "The 260 216 will outrun the HD4870 when no AA is enabled."

The GTX 260 216 outruns the HD 4870 WITH AA on (as seen in most 4xAA benchmarks). It is true that with 8xAA, the HD 4870 usually takes less of a hit (but it also depends on the game), when compared to the GTX 260, but it's definitely not the case that the GTX 260 only outperforms the HD 4870 with no AA on...

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16681/6
 
I would say just buy whichever one you can find cheaper, GTX 260 or 4870 1GB. They are both close enough in performance to suit your needs.
 
Silus said:
The GTX 260 216 outruns the HD 4870 WITH AA on (as seen in most 4xAA benchmarks). It is true that with 8xAA, the HD 4870 usually takes less of a hit (but it also depends on the game), when compared to the GTX 260, but it's definitely not the case that the GTX 260 only outperforms the HD 4870 with no AA on...
Click to expand...

I think that's pretty much exactly what he said.
 
Silus said:
This is not true at all: "The 260 216 will outrun the HD4870 when no AA is enabled."

The GTX 260 216 outruns the HD 4870 WITH AA on (as seen in most 4xAA benchmarks). It is true that with 8xAA, the HD 4870 usually takes less of a hit (but it also depends on the game), when compared to the GTX 260, but it's definitely not the case that the GTX 260 only outperforms the HD 4870 with no AA on...

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16681/6
Click to expand...

no the issue your linking us to is an unrelated one; at 2500X2000 the render backends start to get pushed harder than normal. These are the guys which take the rendered 3D image and pixelize it ("Z-cull"). Nvidia has 28 (down from 32) and ATI has 16. Normally these these things are a non issue since post Geforce5 era 16 ROPs at 500MHz has been enough to push however many pixels you need, but in the case of 2500X2000, seems to me the HD4870 takes a bit of a hit because of it.

I've read my fair share of reviews, and, as I said erlier, my conclusion is that 4X or 8X AA (at 1920 X 1200 or 1680X1050) the HD4870 will tend to edge out the GTX 260. With it off the GTX 260 will tend to edge out the HD4870. Since the OP has stated he doesn't like AA, we agree the GTX 260 is the better choice.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
no the issue your linking us to is an unrelated one; at 2500X2000 the render backends start to get pushed harder than normal. These are the guys which take the rendered 3D image and pixelize it ("Z-cull"). Nvidia has 28 (down from 32) and ATI has 16. Normally these these things are a non issue since post Geforce5 era 16 ROPs at 500MHz has been enough to push however many pixels you need, but in the case of 2500X2000, seems to me the HD4870 takes a bit of a hit because of it.

I've read my fair share of reviews, and, as I said erlier, my conclusion is that 4X or 8X AA (at 1920 X 1200 or 1680X1050) the HD4870 will tend to edge out the GTX 260. With it off the GTX 260 will tend to edge out the HD4870. Since the OP has stated he doesn't like AA, we agree the GTX 260 is the better choice.
Click to expand...

I have decided that I buy HD4890, a quality brand one. I can get a cheapo Sapphire for same price (only from pixmania, but that is a bit shoddy etailer I heard) as quality brand GTX260, but I guess its worth to spend few euros more on XFX or EVGA product, and I get a better graphics card too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top