We like how you're thinking,
AMD, and we don't say that everyday -- or ever, really. During a time when even hardcore gamers are having to rethink whether or not that next-gen GPU is a necessity, AMD has pushed out a remarkably potent new graphics card for under a Benjamin, and the whole world has joined in to review it. The ATI Radeon HD 4770, which was
outed just over a week ago, has been officially introduced for the low, low price of just $99 (including rebates, which should surface soon). Aside from being the company's first mainstream desktop GPU manufactured using a 40nm process, this little gem was a real powerhouse when put to the test. In fact, critics at
HotHardware exclaimed that this card "offers performance in the same range as cards that were launched at the $299 to $349 price point only a year ago." The bottom line? It's "one of the best buys" out in its price range, and even with all that belt tightening you've been doing, surely you can spare a C-note, yeah?
Read - HotHardware ("Recommended; one of the best buys at its price point")
Read - XBit Labs ("the best budget graphics accelerator [out there]")
Read - LegitReviews ("great performance, low power consumption and low noise")
Read - PCStats ("strikes a balance between performance and price")
Read - TechSpot ("an outstanding choice in the $100 graphics market")
Read - NeoSeeker ("a good value")
Read - PCPerspective ("impressive")
posted April 28th 2009 2:02PM
You can't really compare benchmarks of articles to your own unless you grab the FPS at the exact same scene in the game as they do. Many reviewers also use an average.. meaning they can get 100fps just standing around, and drop to 30fps in heavy action, and average it out to 65fps, where many users will just post the highest FPS they can get. (not saying that is what you did MK, just making a point)
Also, I've used a heavily stripped down version of XP, and also played games in 64-bit vista, and only had maybe a frame or two difference in performance between the two. As long as nothing is actively running (taking up CPU cycles), and you have enough RAM, the OS doesn't have a huge impact on gaming performance.
I have a Shuttle with a 250W power supply. I saw in one of the reviews that the max power usage with this guy under load was 245W. Would I need to upgrade my power supply to use this card?
Yes
Depends on the other components in your system, as well as how old your PSU is.
If you want to check, and you know all the components you have in your system, use a good online wattage calculator. Also make sure your PSU has a 6pin PCIe connector.
Here is a link to a good PSU calc:
http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp
As proprietor of the Northern New Jersey Home for Abused and Battered Tech, I have experimented with nearly every OS. Bottom line is that nVIDIA still has the drivers that work for virtually all of them regardless of age. I can stick a GeForce 2 card from the 90's in just about any PC and get it to work with any distro. On the other hand, ATI hardware of virtually every ilk still represesents one of my biggest challenges with alternate OSs and millions of people around the world are also struggling with the ATI chipset in their lappies. I'm no fanboy--all I know is that nVIDIA graphic system work with little or no drama irregardless of age.
Would I buy one of these $99 cards that look great on paper? Probably not, considering the above. Penny wise and pound foolish.
Don't forget Bit-tech's review as well:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/04/28/amd-ati-radeon-hd-4770-512mb/1
Hey MK, perhaps you should READ the review you linked to. They listed 51 FPS for the GTS 250.. problem is you linked to a review that says NO AA was on.
It also doesn't mention other settings in FC2. That same review states 40FPS with only 2x AA on, and again, no other mention of settings.
Meanwhile:
http://hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4770-40nm-GPU/?page=6
32 FPS for your card
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd4770_8.html#sect0
22 FPS for your card
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2392&page=10
18 FPS with 8x AA on...
I'm not going to continue.. you claimed with everything maxed (and you said, I mean EVERYTHING and mentioned AA and AF) you were getting in the "high 50's" with FC2/Crysis..
The reviews, including the one you linked to directly contradict that statement...
So relax and enjoy your games.. but don't BS.
Oh and just in case you didn't get the point:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/04/28/amd-ati-radeon-hd-4770-512mb/5
ZERO AA and 25FPS with Crysis....
And just in case you were wondering.. "Intel Core i7 940 processor (operating at 3,709MHz – 22x168.6MHz);"
They have a better proc then you probably OC'd higher than you for their test.. and again... ZERO AA.
This will be a weird question and a weird place to actually ask.
But, I currently have a 7800gt and AMD athlon 3700+ would it be worthwhile to upgrade my card to a 4770 or 9800? Or am I looking at a significant bottleneck somewhere here?
I'd say it would be a good upgrade for you. Your new bottleneck will be your processor if you get this or a 9800, and you'll have a good card for when/if you upgrade that. I just bought one of these and I'm currently using an 8600 gt. A year ago a card that performs like this would have cost two to three times as much. You'll definitely see an improvement over your 7800gt.
Will it works on a mac?
I really wish I had spend my 2000$ on a PC sometime... my mac is fine for skype and internet but any games I try just stutter until I give up. It really piss me off that we cant update with bargain like this. Why the hell cant we just install what we want?!