Faster Graphics For Lower Prices: ATI Radeon HD 4770
by Derek Wilson on April 28, 2009 5:15 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
And there you have it: 40nm has arrived, and it looks pretty good. The Radeon HD 4770 always outperforms the older 4830 and sometimes gives the 4850 a run for its money.
As for the competition, the 4770 comes out on top in the games we tested. The more expensive GTS 250 leads in Call of Duty World at War, while the 4770 blows the doors off everything in Age of Conan. As for the other benchmarks, they come out pretty close with the 4770 generally ahead. But the clincher is Far Cry 2 performance which shows the Radeon HD 4770 leading the GTS 250 fairly well in a heavy hitting graphics engine.
Our expectations for the hardware were a little higher while our idea of price was also a little lower, but from our perspective, the extra $10 isn't out in left field as this card generally leads a competitive part that costs even more and sometimes pushes up toward the Radeon HD 4850. At the same time, you can spend a little bit less and get some very good performance if you are into the value option.
We still don't like the fact that the AMD decided to name this the 4770 despite the fact that it consistently outperforms the 4830. Unfortunately, we can't do any more about it than we are already doing. So we'll have to make do in the meantime.
NVIDIA should have 40nm parts out this year as well, and both camps have their own way of rolling out new process technology. AMD continues to be a little bit more aggressive on that front, seemingly making the move on the earliest viable hardware whether it's low or high end. NVIDIA looks to play it a little more cautiously. It's all about cost benefit. Certainly it's a benefit to have smaller GPUs as they cost less to make. But early on in the life of a manufacturing process, yields can suffer driving price up. Timing the move well can have its advantages, and NVIDIA is counting on that this time around.
It isn't clear when NVIDIA will have a part in this generation of their architecture that competes in the near $100 market. For now, the best option is clear: the Radeon HD 4770 is the way to go.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
88 Comments
View All Comments
balancedthinking - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,682645/Test-Ati-...">http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,68264...force-98...Zstream - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
It is because Derek wrote the article. As long as he is benchmarking and testing the AMD bashing will continue. Just get used to it.Jamahl - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
The important thing here is there is no attempt by ATI to deceive the public.All the 48xx cards have 256-bit buses, and they also have higher bandwith than the 4770. However, the 4770 has much more in common with a 4870 than it does a 4830 or 4850, namely clock speeds and DDR5. It just so happens that its peformance level drops in at the 4850 mark due to the smaller 128 bit bus and a few less shaders.
If you look at it logically, it's a cut down 4870. 4770 is the best name that could have been chosen for it taking everything into consideration.
coldpower27 - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link
I think it kinda makes sense.The first digit explains the generation of technology.
4 = RV7xx Series with DX10.1 Technology. (Current)
3 = RV6xx Series with DX10.0 Refresh Line
2 = R600 Series with DX10 Original Line
The second digit explains where the product Series slots in with regard to everything else...
8 = Performance
7 = Mainstream Refresh
6 = Mainstream
5-3 = Budget...(this should be consolidated)
The Third digit is an isolated variable and explains where it slots within this particular series..
7 = Top Card.
5 = Middle Card.
3 = Low Card.
The Last digit current serves no purpose...
it's a bit more simple I will admit then Nvidia's nomentclature.
With ATI having 7,5,3 for defining top, middle and low of a particular range.
I will try to insert an analgous numbering concept for Nvidia.
Nvidia has GTX+ = 8 GTX = 7 GTS = 6, GT = 5, GS = 3, GSO = 2
I think... very complicated conmpared to 3 SKU's for ATi. At least Nvidia is trying to make some headway into making a unified product line with the GTS 250, GTX 260, GTX 275, GTX 285...
GTX 260 Core 216, should have been GTX 265 for simplicity sake...
flipmode - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
I agree with the author in his criticism of the name chosen for the product.4845 if you want to end odd
4840 if you do not care
Naming these products should not be this hard. What AMD and Nvidia need to be passionate about is helping the buyer make sense of it all.
Also - like the author said - why the hell bother with the 4th digit if it is just going to be -0- all the time. Put that son of a bizzle to work.
flipmode - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
Um yeah, the author seems to think the dual slot cooler is an inconvenience, but I'd LOVE to have a dual slot cooler that pumps the hotness outside of the case for me. Most mobo makers are careful enough about the slot below the PCIe16 slot because, believe it or not, they've thought about the fact that a dual slot graphics card might be put in there.JimmiG - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
Many who buy these lower-end cards have more compact systems, sometimes with m-ATX boards.When I got my 4850 last year I had such a board, meaning a dual slot card would have blocked one of the two PCI slots, and made the last one nearly useless since the PCI card would sit right against the videocard, possibly blocking the fan.
Even though I've got a full ATX board now, the lack of hot air exhaust doesn't bother me. The two 80mm fan+PSU fan take care of getting the hot air out of the case. In fact they move much more hot air than the small GPU fan.
There will probably be variations just like with all other cards so those who want single slot will be able to find one. Prices will also go below $100 in a matter of weeks, IMO.
Griswold - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link
This isnt a lower-end card. Its a mid-range card. Low-end is often passive cooled. The single slot cooler on the 3850 and 4850 are misserable for this type of GPU. But i'm sure there will be single slot models of the 4770 as well...flipmode - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
I've got mATX too. AMD needs to focus on providing the best possible cooling and not make compromises for mATX. And when these cards arrive with bad ass coolers that keep the chips cool, the noise down, and the case temps down, it is too bad they get looked on with scorn. The consumer made his/her bed when choosing a motherboard and case. And even still, this card, dual slot and all, will fit in an mATX setup.That's just my feeling. I am thrilled to see high quality coolers attached to a $100 card. That's wonderful!
PrinceGaz - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 - link
I agree. Far from not liking a dual-slot cooler, I love them. Not only do they keep the GPU itself cooler, but they also improve the overall system airflow. Given the choice, I'd always pick a dual-slot cooler over a same priced card with a single-slot cooler.The only possible reason for choosing a single-slot cooler would be if you wanted to use the slot right next to the gfx-card, which means the already inferior single-slot cooler is made even worse because there is now another card sitting millimetres from the GPU fan.