Nemo Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 Our reviewers take a look at a second HD 4870 video card - this one from Visiontek - http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/visiontek4870/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 Something on those Crysis benches seems waaaay off. The 260 is beating the 280!!! EDIT: At a closer look a lot of those test results seem odd... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 Something on those Crysis benches seems waaaay off. The 260 is beating the 280!!! EDIT: At a closer look a lot of those test results seem odd... Try reading the review first. Its an overclocked 260 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 I did...it just seems odd that even an overclocked 260 would be beating out the 280 so often. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 The cards are pretty close. A overclocked 4850 gives a 4870 a run. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 I guess I thought there were larger differences between them. Perhaps it's the settings used that bunches them up? I just remember seeing them a lot further apart before. :shrug: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 I guess it would depend on what you were looking at. I notice alot of other sites use High Settings for Crysis we use Med with 2XAA so that might be example of where your difference might be that you discribe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 I notice alot of other sites use High Settings for Crysis we use Med with 2XAA so that might be example of where your difference might be that you discribe. I have the feeling that's exactly what the difference is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 how come the tests aren't run witth completely maxxed out settings? even if the frame rates are unbearable, the hardware will truely get a good stressing with that. (Full AA, Ultra High Etc.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 We test at playable settings not settings that you can't play on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 We test at playable settings not settings that you can't play on. well i can understand that but it will truly gauge which card is better equipped, since the tests are purely benchmarks. I'm not trying to be mean in a anyway, i just think it would be interesting to see Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted July 18, 2008 Posted July 18, 2008 I don't understand what that would prove? You take three good video cards load up a game and get 5 frames. All three cards fail they suck! If you test at playable settings then it gives the reader somewhat of a general idea what a card will do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts