4870 512MB GDDR5: Enough for 2560x1200 or 1920x1200+AA?

GoldenTiger

GoldenTiger

Fully [H]
Joined
Dec 2, 2004
Messages
29,852
I somehow doubt it, but I figure I may as well ask... I already ordered a 512MB 4870, and am considering a 30" LCD (2560x1600) or 24" LCD (1920x1200). I'd like AA on both but doubt it has enough memory for that on the 30", but will it even run well at all at that res.? What about the 24" with 2-4x AA? I should have waited for the 1GB probably but I didn't want to risk how long it might be until I caught one for sale non-price-gouged. Any thoughts?
 
It'll run fine at those resolutions. Until someone benches a 1gb 4870, though, no one can tell you if it'll give you a performance increase.
 
So it won't literally run out of VRAM and choke to death :p ? Is it likely it would pale in comparison to the 1GB due to lack of VRAM?
 
GoldenTiger said:
I somehow doubt it, but I figure I may as well ask... I already ordered a 512MB 4870, and am considering a 30" LCD (2560x1600) or 24" LCD (1920x1200). I'd like AA on both but doubt it has enough memory for that on the 30", but will it even run well at all at that res.? What about the 24" with 2-4x AA? I should have waited for the 1GB probably but I didn't want to risk how long it might be until I caught one for sale non-price-gouged. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Cancel your 512mb 4870 and get the 1gb version and stick with the 30+ LCD. Once you've tried anything 30' you never wanna try any 24-20' monitors.:D
 
Turdpike said:
Cancel your 512mb 4870 and get the 1gb version and stick with the 30+ LCD. Once you've tried anything 30' you never wanna try any 24-20' monitors.:D
Click to expand...

I can't cancel it, I'd have to re-sell it since it's from a Hong Kong seller. Really I'm trying to tell if there would be a giant performance hit between the two versions on a 24" or 30", because if there is I'll probably be ordering 1 GB as soon as they're available and then flipping the 512MB right back out. While I want a 30", I might not have the funds right away at the moment, so this will basically decide if I keep the 512MB to use with my 20" until I can, or just go ahead for the 30" when I can afford it and then keep the 512MB or know I'll *have* to switch to the 1GB for it. I currently own a very nice S-IPS panel 20" and want a somewhat bigger size...
 
30" with no AA will be fine. 1920*1200 with 4x aa or even 8x in some games will also be fine.
 
It's pretty likely that 512mb will be a insufficient for running a 30incher with high AA.


z3r0- said:
30" with no AA will be fine. 1920*1200 with 4x aa or even 8x in some games will also be fine.
Click to expand...

False. AA is about how big the pixels look to you. If you sit far away from a 720p monitor, you don't really need AA, but if your nose is pressed up against a QWUXGA screen, you'll still want AA.
 
I'd argue even in those cases, AA still has value for stuff like thin edges. You don't need a lot but even 2xAA is noticeable.
 
ChronoReverse said:
I'd argue even in those cases, AA still has value for stuff like thin edges. You don't need a lot but even 2xAA is noticeable.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I think he meant performance-wise, not in terms of if it would look good :).

Is 2560x1600 2x AA probably able to be run on this card? I'm still deciding whether to upgrade at all, a 24" seems too small a jump from my 20" (or am I wrong here?), but a 30" is a little outside what I wanted to spend.
 
GoldenTiger said:
I agree, but I think he meant performance-wise, not in terms of if it would look good :).

Is 2560x1600 2x AA probably able to be run on this card? I'm still deciding whether to upgrade at all, a 24" seems too small a jump from my 20" (or am I wrong here?), but a 30" is a little outside what I wanted to spend.
Click to expand...

You could get a 26" or even a 28" for a price somewhere in between. It'd still be 1920x1200, but a bit bigger.
 
turumbar said:
You could get a 26" or even a 28" for a price somewhere in between. It'd still be 1920x1200, but a bit bigger.
Click to expand...

Aye, I did think of that, but then the dot pitch is higher/larger pixels :(. A 26" might work, though... hmmm... (wanders off). Anyone know of a model offhand that is an MVA or better? I definitely don't want a TN.
 
At that high of a resolution even the 4870 might need more VRAM.

I'd aim for the 1GB version of the 4870.
 
I use a 30" at work and wouldn't be able to stand it at home for most things. I like my 24" just fine for gaming and light photography.

2 3870s run 1920x1200 although I have not pushed up the AA. If they have improved AA like claimed and are faster cards I do not think 24" would be too big of a problem.
 
TheGardenTool said:
I use a 30" at work and wouldn't be able to stand it at home for most things. I like my 24" just fine for gaming and light photography.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was kind of thinking a 30" might be a BIT big to be right in my face. I'm seriously considering a 24" or 26", but am still wondering if the difference will be noticeable from my 20" size-wise. I wish I could find my ruler :p!
 
turumbar said:
False. AA is about how big the pixels look to you. If you sit far away from a 720p monitor, you don't really need AA, but if your nose is pressed up against a QWUXGA screen, you'll still want AA.
Click to expand...

Hey genius, the thread was about performance, not "do I need AA at 2560*1600?"
 
At 1920 x 1200 AA should be fine for most applications. Problems can occur if all of your vram is taken by textures.

At 2560 x 1600 with 512mb vram don't count on it. In older games you will be able to, but in newer games you will likely run out of VRAM (doing AA at 2560 x 2600 requires a very large amount of vram).

RAM is the main reason the 9800 GX2 is behind the 260 and 280 when it comes to AA at 2560 x 1600 (I realize this is an ATI thread, but wanted to give an example of when memory trumps raw speed).

My advice would be to get the 1gb version when it comes out. At 2560 x 1600 and gaming your going to need everything you can get.
 
aa is possible for 1920, but 2560 u can forget about it, but pixel is so high u won't notice too much jaggies expecially when the LCD blurs
 
turumbar said:
It's pretty likely that 512mb will be a insufficient for running a 30incher with high AA.




False. AA is about how big the pixels look to you. If you sit far away from a 720p monitor, you don't really need AA, but if your nose is pressed up against a QWUXGA screen, you'll still want AA.
Click to expand...

man sometimes some of the shit is so funny, I love threads. by the way for 1920x1200 even with 4xAA or 8xAA it should be fine, after today I found out that rv770 is a really good example of what R600 was not, this architecture proved to be the most memory bandwidth hungry and ati knew it that is why they were able to give the hd 4850 same specs just lower clocks because they knew that more memory bandwidth would make a big difference across the board with this architecture.
 
Are the 1gb 4850's supposed to launch along side the 512mb version? Or are those being released at a later date?
 
Don't get 30" 2560x1600 monitor to play game. The performance hit is too great even for GTX280.

If you really want a big monitor to play game with, get those HDTV >37" 1920x1080.
 
RB30 said:
Don't get 30" 2560x1600 monitor to play game. The performance hit is too great even for GTX280.

If you really want a big monitor to play game with, get those HDTV >37" 1920x1080.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. I can play a lot of games at full 2560x1600 with my 8800gtx.

But dont take my word for it. All you have to do is read all the upset people here complaining about how the [H] reviews show 2560x1600. It does because it is playable at that res ;)

EDIT: while I disagree that you cant play at 2560x1600 with current GPUs, make no mistake, there is a huge difference between the performance of those 2 resolutions.

But on the other hand there is a hit, because it does look, so so much better, like from 2 to 4 Megapixels!!! That is a huge quality difference. And yes there is a $$$ diff for that quality, Only you know if it is worth it for you.
 
I would wait for results of the 1 gig version and buy that one if results look promising. With promising I mean it would be better on average than the GTX 280 (512 megs is nearly on par).
 
I have moved from 26" Acer 2616w (THE S-MVA panel you are looking for: the smaller input lag from all S-MVA this size + high color gamut) to an apple 30" and my 8800GT just cant keep the pace: every AA mode above 4x crashes the game in a insufficient memory error, most games demand lower settings, but you can get over 30fps by just disabling grass and AA on every game but Crysis. Fear not : if you can get a 30" for less than $1200 go fo it: the gaming experience at 2560x1600/30fps noAA is far above 1920x1200/60fps 8xAA.PERIOD.:)

The Benchmarks of 3850x3870 showed little gains to justifie the price difference, but the 4870 is really ahead of the 4850, and the gap gets more significant at 25x16 resolutions when you go from 24fps to 30 fps, AKA from slide show to playable resolutions:cool:. I look with great care to minimum FPSs numbers that tend to show better relation with gaming experience: any minimum below 15fps is really annoying:mad:

Another thing in favor of the 4870 is that there are more crosfire capable motherboards than SLI ones: my P5WDH is over 2years old and wont need a replacement should i aim for a MultiGP solution for my 25x16 issues.
 
RB30 said:
Don't get 30" 2560x1600 monitor to play game. The performance hit is too great even for GTX280.

If you really want a big monitor to play game with, get those HDTV >37" 1920x1080.
Click to expand...

Boo, hiss!

Killjoy :p

I've been playing most of my games @ 2560x1600 with my 8800GTX most games are pretty reasonable at this res, even newer ones like CoD I could get away with max settings at that res, and Im about to put in 2 4870's which can get like 120fps in CoD at that res with 4xaa and 16xaf :)
 
What I would like to know is, will the 4870 be able to take advantage of 1gb of VRAM since it only has 256-bit interface? If it were GDDR3 then 1gb would be a waste when using 256-bit, but do the rules change since it is GDDR5?
 
leh18621 said:
What I would like to know is, will the 4870 be able to take advantage of 1gb of VRAM since it only has 256-bit interface? If it were GDDR3 then 1gb would be a waste when using 256-bit, but do the rules change since it is GDDR5?
Click to expand...

Yes, GDDR5 operates very quickly, so the 256-bit bus isn't much of a bottleneck. It runs at 3.6ghz DDR 256-bit, while the GTX 280 for instance runs around 2.2ghz DDR on a 512-bit interface. The overall bandwidth isn't very different. Additionally, the bandwidth isn't directly correlated to whether or not a card can use 1GB well, really it's more of an issue of if the core is fast enough for it to matter where 1GB matters (high-res or high AA).
 
Thanks for the response. Now I just have to wait and see when the 1gb version is going to come out, how much more will it cost, and just how much better does it perform. I have been waiting to upgrade and I have pretty much decided on the 4870 since based on what I have seen/read it is the best bang for the buck card as far as I am concerned (and I don't want to upgrade for at least 18 months). Hopefully I won't have to wait to long to find out about the 1gb version to see which 4870 is better for me.
 
I game at 1680x1050 so I don't know how much the 1gb would benefit me at this resolution over the next 18 months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top