ATI Radeon HD 3800 Series @ [H]

pandora's box said:
Brent, quick question about the pricing part of the review:

I wondered why you compared the street price of the 8800GT to the MSRP of the 3870? Who knows if the 3870 is going to sell for its MSRP and not an inflated street price. I would saying compare MSRP to MSRP and street price to street price when possible.
Click to expand...

We have been assured directly from ATI it will be around MSRP at launch. I suggest we all keep a close eye on prices in the next couple of days.
 
TechBoy said:
Hmm As I recall there are plenty of people out there still with a 6600gt, and 7600gt cards which I doubt will run crysis that well at all. I am using the statistics from steam evaluations, and also since most of the gamers out there dont have a high end card like the 2900,8000 series because they cant afford them. What makes you think they can buy a 20"+ screen that cost most likely more than their graphics card? For example me I have a x1800gto but have a 22" widescreen. When I bought the GTO it was more expensive than my widescreen.
Click to expand...

This site does not even come close to matching up with the demographic you mentioned. 6800 dual cores at 2.93 ghz is a tad exclusive and a miniscule % of the population. I only comment in order to get things standardized and realistic. IF you add this 3850 card to your system, you will not ever know until the day you void the refund policy (opening it) if it is worthwhile to you. Those that have pimped out comps either are planning on it, or have already a 1920x1200 screen (its only 1080p tv with a slight bump, kind of standard). Those that didnt spend 1000 dollars on their systems probably have at best a 2.2ghz dual core amd, morelikely though a 3.0ghz northwood. Playable resolutions is meaningless when specs are not paralleling the reader base. That is why I mention what I mention. At least a standardized forum allows for a reader to visually make a proper judgement.

I see that this has been a sore spot for a long time! well, thats ok I can drop it, but it wasnt an argument just something I noticed.

If something could be done, maybe a test on a much more common system. no raptor, no near 3ghz dual core intel, etc.
 
m3ta1head said:
Do you think HD3870 scores will improve with matured drivers?

Also, any chance at all of a HD38xx crossfire evaluation? I'm seriously considering getting two of these cards for my rig, and I'm sure many others with Intel chipsets are doing the same.
Click to expand...

The architecture is the same as the 2900 XT, so I really can't see any massive improvements coming that aren't already underway for this architecture. However, I could be completely wrong and perhaps they can squeeze a lot more out of it. I wouldn't put money on it, but it is always a possibility, Cat 7.10 was a big improvement.

In the conclusion we specifically stated we will do a followup CrossFire eval.
 
~El~Jefe~ said:
This site does not even come close to matching up with the demographic you mentioned. 6800 dual cores at 2.93 ghz is a tad exclusive and a miniscule % of the population. I only comment in order to get things standardized and realistic. IF you add this 3850 card to your system, you will not ever know until the day you void the refund policy (opening it) if it is worthwhile to you. Those that have pimped out comps either are planning on it, or have already a 1920x1200 screen (its only 1080p tv with a slight bump, kind of standard). Those that didnt spend 1000 dollars on their systems probably have at best a 2.2ghz dual core amd, morelikely though a 3.0ghz northwood. Playable resolutions is meaningless when specs are not paralleling the reader base. That is why I mention what I mention. At least a standardized forum allows for a reader to visually make a proper judgement.

I see that this has been a sore spot for a long time! well, thats ok I can drop it, but it wasnt an argument just something I noticed.

If something could be done, maybe a test on a much more common system. no raptor, no near 3ghz dual core intel, etc.
Click to expand...

True, I dont have all the money in the world to spec out my comp, thats why I dont actually use the review as a comparison since my cpu falls way behind the review system's. I expect though to get somewhat decent performance on mine.
 
Awesome performance for price, which is IMO still a bit sad. Hopefully AMD can become competitive again in the next gen.
 
Kyle, I've been reading the best playable setting benchmark reviews ever since they started, and I have to say the following feedback, which I hope you'll consider: (This isn't specific to this card, but to the benchmarks overall, but I shall use this card as an example!)

When you list the gameplay differences, the 3850 card reads
"higher resolution than the 8600 GT", whereas the 8800 gt reads
"higher resolution". I think wording could be better. I agree your wording isn't false. The 8800 has higher resolution than all cards listed, but I simply find the wording confusing, higher resolution than what? The base card? The 3850? The text is not clear enough (maybe your adjectives are meant to be taken in order, maybe you feel higher resolution implies higher than all other cards)


Secondly, I found it very confusing how the 3870 had the exact same text as the 8800, but with the additional line, "High post processing ....". I assume that the 8800 has this as well, perhaps not, but if it does, I find it confusing that they have the same gameplay advantages, but different descriptions of said advantages.

To summarize, I feel like the "gameplay advantages" line of best playable setting reviews are currently confusing. I suggest fixing the ideas above, and I offer these solutions, but do not guarantee they are the best solutions (I'm not a professional reviewer after all!):

1) First, If two cards have the same tested gameplay advantages, the listed "advantages" should not only be logically equivalent, but read the same, in order to maximize understanding.
2) Second, consider the scenario:
Let a,b, and c, be items you're reviewing,
If "a" is the basis for gameplay advantages,
and "b" has advantages over "a" in a given feature,
and "c" has advantage over "b" in a given feature,

use wording that implicitly states
"c" has an advantage over "b" in said advantage.

I define "feature having advantage" as a graphical benefit significant enough in the reviewer's opinion, the end user will notice it.

This can be done by different adjectives (very much higher resolution), rank (highest resolution of cards tested), statements (higher resolution than 3850 and the 8600). Text needs to be clearer though, in my opinion.

Edit: made a few edits to make sure wording is clear
 
kaddar said:
Kyle, I've been reading the best playable setting benchmark reviews for asince they started, and I have to say the following feedback, which I hope you'll consider:

When you list the gameplay differences, the 3850 card reads
"higher resolution than the 8600 GT", whereas the 8800 gt reads
"higher resolution". I think wording could be better. I agree your wording isn't false. The 8800 has higher resolution than all cards listed, but I simply find the wording confusing, higher resolution than what? The base card? The 3850? The text is not clear enough (maybe your adjectives are meant to be taken in order, maybe you feel higher resolution implies higher than all other cards)


Secondly, I found it very confusing how the 3870 had the exact same text as the 8800, but with the additional line, "High post processing ....". I assume that the 8800 has this as well, perhaps not, but if it does, I find it confusing that they have the same gameplay advantages, but different descriptions of said advantages.

To summarize, I feel like the "gameplay advantages" line of best playable setting reviews are currently confusing. I suggest fixing the ideas above, and I offer these solutions, but do not guarantee they are the best solutions (I'm not a professional reviewer after all!):

1) If two cards have the same tested gameplay advantages, the listed "advantages" should not only be logically equivalent, but read the same, in order to maximize understanding.
2) If b is the basis for gameplay advantages, and a has advantages over b in a given advantage, and c has advantage over b in a given advantage, use wording that implicitly states c has an advantage over b in said advantage, this can be done by different adjectives (very much higher resolution), rank (highest resolution of cards tested), statements (higher resolution than 3850 and the 8600). Text needs to be clearer though, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Completely agree on all points!
 
Great review. Thanks HardOCP!

On the pricepoint issue. The 8800GT's are starting to creep into stock in a couple days, a new wave of them will be arriving (Friday I think). If you use Froogle.com and search for the 8800GT you can find many respectable (but less well known than newegg and clubIT) sites that sell the 8800GT for $230...roughly $10-20 more than the 3870. Just cause everyone flocks to newegg at the moment doesn't mean [H]ardies need to. We're smarter than that right? ;)

By the way after tax, my MSI 8800GT OC came to $254 shipped, that was 8.25% sales tax on there and 2 day air shipping ($13). Sweet deal. I was told it will arrive Nov. 20th.
 
I would have liked to have seen an 8800 gts 320mb in there. There is a BFG rebate in Canada right now that make these 2 cards worth about the same (give or take $20 bucks) and they are still very easy to come buy.
 
winston856 said:
Dugg :D

The card looks good, the price too. Sadly it just doesn't have the punch I need to drive my 24" dell in Crysis :(

Good job AMD, much better try than the 2900XT :)
Click to expand...

Looks like you have a mobo with Intel chipset, so if one is not enough, why don't you get 2 :D
 
For the first time I'm very interested in an ATI card. I've got a 7900GS, and been thinking about upgrading early next year (along with a new QC penryn-based proc).

One other thing I liked that I saw was not only the power numbers but the temperature numbers too - it might actually be possible to actually stick four of these cards in a case. It would be very warm, but great case design and ventilation would make it work.
 
kaddar said:
Kyle, I've been reading the best playable setting benchmark reviews ever since they started, and I have to say the following feedback, which I hope you'll consider: (This isn't specific to this card, but to the benchmarks overall, but I shall use this card as an example!)

When you list the gameplay differences, the 3850 card reads
"higher resolution than the 8600 GT", whereas the 8800 gt reads
"higher resolution". I think wording could be better. I agree your wording isn't false. The 8800 has higher resolution than all cards listed, but I simply find the wording confusing, higher resolution than what? The base card? The 3850? The text is not clear enough (maybe your adjectives are meant to be taken in order, maybe you feel higher resolution implies higher than all other cards)


Secondly, I found it very confusing how the 3870 had the exact same text as the 8800, but with the additional line, "High post processing ....". I assume that the 8800 has this as well, perhaps not, but if it does, I find it confusing that they have the same gameplay advantages, but different descriptions of said advantages.

To summarize, I feel like the "gameplay advantages" line of best playable setting reviews are currently confusing. I suggest fixing the ideas above, and I offer these solutions, but do not guarantee they are the best solutions (I'm not a professional reviewer after all!):

1) First, If two cards have the same tested gameplay advantages, the listed "advantages" should not only be logically equivalent, but read the same, in order to maximize understanding.
2) Second, consider the scenario:
Let a,b, and c, be items you're reviewing,
If "a" is the basis for gameplay advantages,
and "b" has advantages over "a" in a given feature,
and "c" has advantage over "b" in a given feature,

use wording that implicitly states
"c" has an advantage over "b" in said advantage.

I define "feature having advantage" as a graphical benefit significant enough in the reviewer's opinion, the end user will notice it.

This can be done by different adjectives (very much higher resolution), rank (highest resolution of cards tested), statements (higher resolution than 3850 and the 8600). Text needs to be clearer though, in my opinion.

Edit: made a few edits to make sure wording is clear
Click to expand...

Thank you for the detailed feedback
 
The basic conclusion I get from this is while these cards are a better offering than ATI's last,they still fall short of the 8800GT.The pricing may be better,but the demand for the 8800GT has inflated it's price,once the initial frenzy subsides,that difference should lessen.It's going to take a better effort than this for ATI to get back in the race.
 
michael.pa2 said:
The basic conclusion I get from this is while these cards are a better offering than ATI's last,they still fall short of the 8800GT.The pricing may be better,but the demand for the 8800GT has inflated it's price,once the initial frenzy subsides,that difference should lessen.It's going to take a better effort than this for ATI to get back in the race.
Click to expand...

Well the 3850's price point does let it trounce the 8600GTS pretty handily, and it seems like clocks can get it close to the 3870.

Will be interesting to see how well CrossFire scales as well as the new CrossFireX setups. There were some impressive results with 2 x 3850's I saw that got it to GTX levels at a cheaper price.

Anywho, a couple of my friends need upgrades to video cards in the $100-200 range and that 3850 jsut fits the bill!
 
Maybe I missed it but there really is no comparison about the noise levels of these cards?

I read another review where they stated that 8800GT has a terribly loud reference cooler while 3870 has nearly silent cooler. Any comment on that one?

Iam especially intrested in the noise levels as Iam tired of changing the reference cooler with every card I buy. Then again I have Zalman VF900 on my 1900xtx, atleast I can slap that one on 3870, if I decide to get one and the reference cooler turns out to be another dust buster.
 
Damn, bravo ATI! (AMD) About time you got your act together.;)

I was planning on buying the 8800gt for my next build, but if they are still hard to find a month from now the 3800 series will definitely be on my short list of options.

I've been spending a lot of my time PC gaming playing TF:2 and this card looks to be very competitive on the source engine to the 8800gt.

Nice review btw, as usual.
 
Anyone else notice that [H] and Anand seem to be the only reviews around that uses the 7.10 cat's? Did they use some sort of magic to get that working or were other sites too lazy to go beyond the CD that came with the cards? The 7.10s were AMD's "performance" drivers so I'm not really sure how comparable some of these benches are. The CD drivers are reported as 7.9s but I'm not sure what that other version really relates to (the 8.43 number), maybe that's got some of the 7.10 tweaks in it? Wish they could stick to one numbering convention, it's really all over the place with AMD: I've got the 7.9 and 7.10 packages from AMD's site that also have ANOTHER version number at the end, 52443 and 53250.

I know there's the argument that what comes with the card should be the ones tested, but honestly who doesn't upgrade drivers these days? Especially when you're plopping down upwards of $500 on a video card or two. I know if I buy a product online I'll download the newest drivers for them as soon as I hit complete transaction so that when it gets to me I'll be ready, that driver CD is just a coaster.
 
Good review as always guys...and also fast :)

Pretty much revealed what the rumors pointed out. The HD 3870 can't beat the 8800 GT, but it's of good value, considering the price.
 
This is the part where I become really fucking annoyed that I'm running an Nvidia motherboard.

ATI's dual card implementation is superior (no need to disable in 2d with multiple monitors), the part is on the whole superior (available, cheaper, better cooling), and I'm stuck with an inability to run Crossfire, ugh.

One big downside though is an inability to force AA in the U3 engine. That especially hurts Crossfire appeal if SLI is any indication, where you see maximum benefit when AA is turned on.
 
Some kind of widescreen tests would be nice.
If you look at the forums most peoples are either into 19" 1280x1024 LCDs or 22" 1680x1050 widescreens while market for 20" 1600x1200 is minimal.

But oh wow i really regret being cheap on the mobo and getting 965 S3 with only one PCI-ex slot.
Now if amd can offer 100$ quad fire mobo i'm ready to go full AMD rig.
 
Their follow up testings of multi-card configurations usually contain all the popular widescreen testings. These are normally done apples to apples, those who come here wanting them to run cookie-cutter reviews can be quiet on that respect at least.

Excellent cards, excellent reviews, probably a good thing ATI kept the same GPU on the new process instead of trying to come out hitting hard with a radically changed GPU.
 
Why would you compare the MSRP of the 3870 to the "average" cost of an 8800gt? What the hell does average cost have to do with anything? The reference clocked version sells for $269 at newegg...that's a $40 price difference at maximum...the use of an "average" figure is just plain misleading.

Also, since when do we blindly trust that cards will be delivered at MSRP? Since when does ATi control the street prices of their video cards? Especially on a card that, as of 2 weeks ago, was supposed to cost $249.
 
I suppose we need to start a thread about pricing and availabilty at our favorite vendors. Newegg is my norm but I know that there are other great vendors out there.

I'd also like to start hearing about motherboard support for crossfire. I have a 580 crossfire board some I'm assuming two 3800 cards will work in it.

I'm an AMD stockholder and I'm a bit upset that they are back to the pre-athlon days when they can only offer a value part. However, the new mobos look to be awesome. And these video cards look to be quite good at the price.

I'm thinking of two 3870s myself....
 
^eMpTy^ said:
Why would you compare the MSRP of the 3870 to the "average" cost of an 8800gt? What the hell does average cost have to do with anything? The reference clocked version sells for $269 at newegg...that's a $40 price difference at maximum...the use of an "average" figure is just plain misleading.

Also, since when do we blindly trust that cards will be delivered at MSRP? Since when does ATi control the street prices of their video cards? Especially on a card that, as of 2 weeks ago, was supposed to cost $249.
Click to expand...

Remember that even a $40 price difference is 15% here, that's quite a big difference if they can manage to get these parts out at MSRP. Actually it probably just about covers the performance disparity seen in the two parts.

I feel like AMD had more breathing room with the pricing of these parts due to the lower manufacturing costs, that's why you saw the "sudden" change (remember there was no real official announcement, just a price range) in price down to $229. This definitely helps them stay price competitive, something AMD has relied on (a little too much lately imo) since..well since their inception. I also remember hearing that the 3870 was supposed to be an 800MHz part. Perhaps AMD saw it better to increase the number of chips that could be binned as 3870's at 777 MHz and have the pricing card in their hand rather than to have fewer 3870s available that could make it to 800MHz at a higher price. I'm thinking the 800MHz parts still couldn't trump the 8800GT so the price point was lowered as was the performance. Might as well have at least SOME sort of advantage, no?

Overall the results of these reviews is what I expected. I do really dislike the opinions posted on the earliest of them that seem to paint a pretty bad picture for AMD based purely on performance. We have now seen not one but TWO extremely competitive product launches in the past month that bring to mind the price/performance ratios not seen since the 9800Pro. Both camps have some pretty awesome hardware compared to what they were/are selling. To get equal performance from parts that are costing $100-150 less...well shit who can honestly say either is a bad deal??
 
I hope crossfire patch for Crysis will arrive soon.

Do you think it is worth going for 2 x 3870 Crossfire instead of buying 8800GTX or.. endless wait?

My current rig as follows: GA-X38-DQ6, 4Gb Kingstone ddr2 paired 800Mhz, Q6600 at stock speed.

I am looking forward to play Crysis on Vista 64, with all the "glory" of dx 10 enabled in 1280x1024.
 
*QUAD CF HERE I CUME!.


hmm, i reccon i would not see much performance increasement from the 3870 in quad, due to lower pci-x lane speed per card,

Whilest the 3850 is cheaper, i will get a gigabyte of texture memory, its okey to have 1gb, instead of 2 gb ?:p

well, Any1 know if the cooling solution is quite simular for the cards, cause i got a r600 waterblock, wanna still be able to use it.

got my amd790fx board, kicking ass, and a 5000 + BE waiting in the post system, soon ready for some OC. =)
 
^eMpTy^ said:
Why would you compare the MSRP of the 3870 to the "average" cost of an 8800gt? What the hell does average cost have to do with anything? The reference clocked version sells for $269 at newegg...that's a $40 price difference at maximum...the use of an "average" figure is just plain misleading.

Also, since when do we blindly trust that cards will be delivered at MSRP? Since when does ATi control the street prices of their video cards? Especially on a card that, as of 2 weeks ago, was supposed to cost $249.
Click to expand...

MSRP is supposed to be $219 according to Tom's Hardware. That means that ATI is sending these cards out for a cost price to vendors close to this price. I know that cost on an 8800GT is close to the originally quoted MSRP for that card from posts from workers @ Best Buy who can see cost on their computers.

The inflated prices are due to the demand for 8800GTs and that carried over to some hype for the initial release of the 3800 series. I think both will drop down with time.
 
How come there didn't seem to be any comments aobut he noise the HSF put out? (unless i missed it)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top