| ASUS EAH4890 TOP Radeon HD 4890 RV790 |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Video Cards | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Written by Olin Coles | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sunday, 05 April 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ASUS EAH4890 TOPFaced by an economy in recession, it could be smarter to refine the products you have than to design and produce new ones. This is the basis for my introduction, and the concept behind AMD/ATI's business strategy for the discrete graphics market. Which raises the question: should a video card manufacturer improve and perfect their current products, or should they spend money they can't spare on a new design? AMD has decided to hone the RV770 GPU and offer the RV790 as a result, while the competition is pledging itself to expensive and unnecessary ultra high-end products for a shrinking market. ASUS has a reputation for bringing cream-of-the-crop products to the marketplace, and branding them with the TOP badge. The Radeon HD 4800-series has been a real success for AMD, and combined with Phenom II Processors they create a synergistic effect called the Dragon platform. The new Radeon RV790 GPU is the next well-bred concept from the ATI labs, and in this article Benchmark Reviews tests the performance of the new ASUS Radeon HD 4890 GDDR5 EAH4890TOP video card against the rest of the high-end segment. Overclocked to 900MHz this Radeon 4890 is the most-powerful single GPU video card produced by AMD, it's going to be a tough fight to beat out NVIDIA.
The video card industry is hurting as bad as anyone during this economic recession, and nobody is walking around happy about PC graphics these days. They can't, really, not when many of the latest video game titles for the personal computer are released only after console versions have been made available first. Even once you get past that burn, you're greeted by yet another. In 2008 there were dozens of great video games released on the PC platform, but very few of them demanded any more graphical processing power than most games demanded back in 2006. Of the recent PC video games released, Far Cry 2 is one of the very few which demand modern graphics to enjoy decent performance, which older games such as Crysis and Battlefield 2 are also guilty of. Yet, somehow the need for better PC graphics hasn't become a prerequisite for new games, because when Battlefield 2042 and Crysis 2 came out they both required less graphical processing power than the former versions. Because of the various factors working against desktop graphics, I'd say that now is the time for manufacturers to stop building a bigger mousetrap, and instead build it better. About ASUSTek Computer, Inc.ASUS, a technology-oriented company blessed with one of the world's top R&D teams, is well known for high-quality and innovative technology. As a leading provider of 3C (computers, communications and consumer electronics) total solutions, ASUS offers a complete product portfolio to compete in the new millennium.
ASUS products' top quality stems from product development. It's like learning Chinese Kung-Fu; one must begin with cultivating the "Chi" and inner strength. Besides innovating cutting-edge features, ASUS engineers also pay special attention to EMI (electromagnetic interference), thermal, acoustics and details that usually go unnoticed to achieve complete customer satisfaction. ASUS notebooks are the first TCO'99-certified notebooks worldwide. The requirements for this honor include radiation emission control, energy (battery consumption), ecology (environment friendly) and ergonomics. To succeed in this ultra-competitive industry, great products need to be complimented by speed-to-market, cost and service. That's why all 100,000 over employees of ASUS strive for the "ASUS Way of Total Quality Management" to offer the best quality without compromising cost and time-to-market while providing maximum value to all customers through world-class services. With unyielding commitment to innovation and quality, ASUS won 2,168 awards in 2006, meaning on average, the company received over 5 awards everyday last year. BusinessWeek ranked ASUS amongst its "InfoTech 100" for the 9th straight year. The readers of Tom's Hardware Guide, the world's largest IT website, selected ASUS as the best maker of motherboards and graphics cards. Furthermore, the company is ranked as No.1 in quality products and services by the Wall Street Journal. Radeon HD 4890 FeaturesAll Radeon HD graphics cards in the HD 4800 series incorporate the latest ATI AvivoTM HD Technology for enhanced Video display and feature a new generation built in hardware UVD (Unified Video decoder) considerably reducing CPU load and delivering smooth decoding of Blu-rayTM and HD DVD content for both VC-1 and H.264 codecs, as well as Mpeg files. In addition to two, dual-link DVI outputs, and TV-Out, a dedicated HDMI adaptor delivers both audio and video output on a single cable for direct connection to an HDMI ready display. Unified Video Decoder 2 (UVD 2) UVD 2 frees up your CPU for other tasks so you get The Ultimate Visual ExperienceTM for even the most processing-intensive content, including VC-1, H.264 and now MPEG-2. Also, take full advantage of Blu-ray functionality with dual-stream, picture in picture (PIP) capabilities1,2. Accelerated Video Transcoding (AVT) With ATI Stream technology, owners of ATI RadeonTM HD 4800 series graphics cards can help accelerate the conversion of standard and HD video into multiple formats for use on differing consumer electronics devices. The ATI Video Converter, designed to enable GPU transcoding of HD video streams, is currently available.
Redefine HD Gaming The ATI Radeon HD 4890 Series GPUs deliver a cinematic gaming experience with unprecedented performance. The powerful new TeraScale graphics will propel you deep into your gameplay with seamless frame rates and high resolutions. Enhanced anti-aliasing (AA) and anisotropic filtering create striking graphics with unparalleled realism so you can max out the settings of the most demanding next-generation games or revitalize your favorite titles. Play today while preparing for tomorrow with tessellation, support for DirectX 10.1 and scalable ATI CrossFireX technology.
Go Beyond HD Video Add an ATI Radeon HD 4890 Series GPU to your PC and watch the latest Blu-ray and HD movies play with incredible fidelity -upscale to nearly twice the display resolution of HD content. Take full advantage of Blu-ray functionality with dual-stream, picture in picture (PIP) capabilities. Sophisticated new features within ATI AvivoTM HD technology provide a truly responsive experience. Support for the latest audio visual interconnects ensures you can take advantage of the latest display technology.
Break-through Efficiency Like its predecessors, the ATI Radeon HD 4890 Series GPUs offer optimal performance and break-through efficiency with platform-independent intelligent power management. ATI PowerPlay delivers the power needed to blaze through even the most intense games while intuitively conserving energy at idle or when demand is low.
RV790 GPU Specifications
Display Output: Dual DL-DVI-I+HDTV
RV790 Core Clock: 900 MHz
Memory Clock: 975 MHz (1950 MHz DDR)
PCI Express 2.0 x16 bus interface
1GB /256bit GDDR5 memory interface
Dual-Slot Active Cooler
HDMI compliant via dongle
7.1 Audio Channel Support
Microsoft DirectX 10.1 support
Shader Model 4.1 support
1.36 TFLOPs Computer Power
124.8 GBps Memory Bandwidth
Radeon 4890 Closer LookSo what are you expecting the Radeon HD 4890 to look like? If you didn't have any high-hopes for a new design, you'll be fine. The reinvented RV770 GPU found in the Radeon HD 4850/4870 video cards is now calling itself the RV790 and lives in the Radeon HD 4890. If you weren't given more details about the new Radeon 4890, the video card could be mistaken for a polished-up 4870; but mistakes aren't allowed at this level so we'll have to put our faith into AMD and presume there's more to it for now. But is there really difference?
The ASUS Radeon HD 4890 cannot be denied its roots, because when you compare it against the Radeon HD 4870 the outward differences are negligible. ATI originally designed the Radeon HD 4870 with a balanced blend of value and performance, and the HD4890 rebuffs the performance while keeping an eye on value. The third generation 55nm RV790 chip uses the industry's most energy efficient manufacturing process and adds an additional three-million transistors, which allows ATI's latest and greatest single-chip graphics card to achieve top-level gaming performance while being more energy efficient at idle. Featuring the industries only major implementation of GDDR5 video frame buffer memory, the RV790 graphics processor is allowed to operate under stress without the worry of burning-up video RAM.
All ASUS Radeon graphics cards in the HD 4000-series incorporate the latest ATI Avivo HD Technology for enhanced video display and feature a second generation built in UVD (Unified Video decoder) for the hardware accelerated decoding of Blu-ray and HD DVD content for both VC-1 and H.264 CODEC's, as well as *.mpeg files, considerably reducing CPU loading. The dedicated HDMI adaptor connects through the S-Video port and has 7.1 surround sound support and delivers audio and video output on a single cable for direct connection to an HDMI ready display. Unfortunately, there is no support for the up-and-coming DisplayPort interface on the Radeon HD 48xx series.
The ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series GPUs can all upscale video up to 2560x1600 resolution on capable dual-link monitors, which is almost twice the display resolution of 1080p HDTV displays. This bodes well for all Radeon HD 48xx owners wanting more from Blue-ray movies, but this isn't a centerpiece feature of the Radeon HD 4890 we're reviewing for this article. While I am a huge fan of externally-exhausting VGA coolers such as the one used again on the Radeon HD 4890, I wasn't at all pleased with the exposed electronics that were inherent of the stock cooling package. On the other hand, I am also less enthusiastic about internally exhausting coolers which heat internal hardware, even if they do protect the components. Considering the compromise, it seems that ATI has designed an economical thermal solution which is nearly identical to the one featured on their Radeon HD 4870 series product line.
The cooling unit on the ATI Radeon HD 4890 video card is held tight to the RV790 55nm GPU with the use of a four-corner reinforcing bracket and nine screws. With a die size of 282 mm2, the RV790 GPU offers a greater contact footprint with the cooling unit, compared to the 256 mm2 footprint on the RV770 GPU. The double-height cooler does a very good job of cooling the 4890, but there is still a tremendous amount of heat that builds up on backside of the PCB. If you're an overclocker, there isn't much that can be done to help cool the unit from the reverse side of the circuit board, especially since there are no surface-mounted GDDR5 modules on this side of the video card.
The RV790 operates at 850 MHz by default, and ATI offers top-bin GPUs for factory-overclocked models which run at 900 MHz. Unfortunately, the increase in heat output is directly obvious. At idle, the Sapphire Radeon HD 4890 reference build recorded a warm 57°C, and under load that number raised to 84°C with an ambient room temperature of 18°C. These are the temperatures we experienced on overclocked Radeon HD 4870's a few months back, which brings up the question of how much has really changed. In our next section we detail our methodology for testing video cards. Following this we offer a cadre of benchmarks to show where the ASUS EAH4890TOP Radeon HD 4890 stands against the top-end market of GeForce and Radeon graphics products... so please read on! VGA Testing Methodology
At the start of all tests, the previous display adapter driver is uninstalled and trace components are removed using Driver Cleaner Pro. We then restart the computer system to establish our display settings and define the monitor. Once the hardware is prepared, we begin our testing. The synthetic benchmark tests in 3DMark06 will utilize shader models 2.0 and 3.0, while the video games will use their own proprietary game engine. For lower-end VGA products we test at 1024x768 (15-17" standard LCD), 1280x1024 (17-19" standard LCD), and 1680x1050 (22-24" widescreen LCD). In our higher-end VGA product tests we conduct add the 1920x1200 (24-28" widescreen LCD) resolution. In some tests we utilized widescreen monitor resolutions, since more users are beginning to feature these products for their own computing. Each benchmark test program begins after a system restart, and the very first result for every test will be ignored since it often only caches the test. This process proved extremely important in the World in Conflict and Supreme Commander benchmarks, as the first run served to cache maps allowing subsequent tests to perform much better than the first. Each test is completed five times, with the average results displayed in our article. Our site polls and statistics indicate that the vast majority of visitors use their PC for playing video games, and practically every one of you are using a screen resolutions mentioned above. Since all of the benchmarks we use for testing represent different game engine technology and graphic rendering processes, I feel that this battery of tests will provide a diverse range of results for you to gauge performance on your own computer system. Since most gamers and enthusiasts are still using Windows XP, it was decided that DirectX 9 would be used for all tests until Microsoft offers Windows 7 to replace the Vista. Test System
Benchmark Applications
Video Card Test Products
Now we're ready to begin testing video game performance these video cards, so please continue to the next page as we start with the 3DMark06 results. 3DMark06 Test Results3DMark is a computer benchmark by Futuremark (formerly named Mad Onion) to determine the DirectX 9 performance of 3D game performance with graphics cards. 3DMark06 uses advanced real-time 3D game workloads to measure PC performance using a suite of DirectX 9 3D graphics tests, CPU tests, and 3D feature tests. 3DMark06 tests include all new HDR/SM3.0 graphics tests, SM2.0 graphics tests, AI and physics driven single and multiple cores or processor CPU tests and a collection of comprehensive feature tests to reliably measure next generation gaming performance today. Some enthusiasts may note that Benchmark Reviews does not include CPU-bound tests in our benchmark battery, and that only graphic-bound tests are included. Here at Benchmark Reviews, we believe that synthetic benchmark tools are just as valuable as video games, but only so long as you're comparing apples to apples. Since the same test is applied in the same controlled method with each test run, I believe 3DMark is a very reliable tool for comparing graphic cards against one-another. Shader Model 2.0Our first series of synthetic tests are performed at 1680x1050, and demands only 1.764 megapixels from the graphics card. Beginning with Shader Model 2.0 tests, Return to Proxycon and Firefly Forest are two fast-paced fast-moving scenes that put strain on the GPU's efficiency by calling for large amounts of low-demand graphics in need of high-speed output. Shader Model 2.0 tests have historically performed at slower frame rates when compared to Shader Model 3.0; at least this is the case on newer, more complex, video cards with larger overhead.
Shader Model 3.0 / HDRThe Shader Model 3.0 and HDR (High Dynamic Range) test series in 3dMark06 includes the Canyon Flight and Deep Freeze. Both of these test scenes demand intense graphical computations from the GPU, and when paired with newer (AMD Phenom or Intel Nehalem) processors can actually produce better frame rates than Shader Model 2.0 scenes with the same hardware (and overhead). At 1920x1200 the graphics card is called-on to produce 2.3 megapixels, which is enough to separate the weak from the strong.
While these results we've charted can speak for themselves, allow me to add a bit of commentary. The GeForce 8800 GT, while excellent for low-resolution 1024x768 gaming and fine for 1280x1024, still falls beneath the 30 FPS range at 1650x1200 and drops down into the teens at 1920x1200. The Radeon HD 4850 is the most affordable video card to handle 3DMark06 graphics within acceptable range, with the reference GeForce GTX 260 performing a few frames better at each scene. The Radeon HD 4870 trails right behind the ASUS EAH4890 TOP. The GeForce GTX 285 comes in both above and below the Radeon HD 4890, depending on the test, but the EAH4890 TOP beats it in the torturous Deep Freeze test. At the top of the charts is the Radeon HD 4870 X2, topping the GeForce GTX 295 by a very large margin.
Take the 3DMark06 tests at face value (as you should any synthetic benchmark), because in our next section we begin real-world testing on a cadre of popular video games known for taxing the graphics processor, and the performance curve is expected change. Our first up is Call of Duty 4, so please continue on... Call of Duty 4 BenchmarksCall of Duty 4: Modern Warfare runs on a proprietary game engine that Infinity Ward based off of the tried-and-true Q3 structure. This engine offers features such as true world-dynamic lighting, HDR lighting effects, dynamic shadows and depth of field. "Bullet Penetration" is calculated by the Infinity Ward COD4 game engine, taking into account things such as surface type and entity thickness. Certain objects, such as cars, and some buildings are destructible. This makes distinguishing cover from concealment important, as the meager protection provided by things such as wooden fences and thin walls does not fully shield players from harm as it does in many other games released during the same time period. Bullet speed and stopping power are decreased after penetrating an object, and this decrease is calculated realistically depending on the thickness and surface of the object penetrated. This version of the game also makes use of a dynamic physics engine, a feature which was not implemented in previous Call of Duty titles for Windows PC's. The new in-game death animations are a combination of pre-set static animations combined with ragdoll physics. Infinity Ward's use of the well-debugged Quake 3 engine along with new dynamic physics implementation allows Call of Duty 4 to be playable by a wide range of computer hardware systems. The performance may be scaled for low-end graphic cards up to 4x Anti-Aliasing and 16x Tri-linear anisotropic texture filtering. Before I discuss the results, I would like to take a moment to mention my general opinion on Fraps software when it comes to game performance benchmarking. If you're not familiar with the software, Fraps (derived from Frames per second) is a benchmarking, screen capture, and real-time video capture utility for DirectX and OpenGL applications. Some reviewers use this software to measure video game performance on their Windows system, as well as record gaming footage. My opinion is that it offers a valid third-party non-bias alternative to in-game benchmarking tools; but there is one caveat: it's not perfect. Because the user must manually begin the test, the starting point may vary from position to position and therefore skew the results. In my testing with Fraps v2.9.8 build 7777, I used the cut-scene intro to the coup d'etat scene when Al Asad takes over control. First I allowed the level to load and let the scene begin for a few moments, then I would use the escape key to bring up the menu and choose the restart level option, I would immediately press F11 to begin recording the benchmark data. This scene is nearly four minutes long, but I configured Fraps to record the first 180 seconds of it to remain consistent. Once the scene would end, I would repeat the restart process for a total of five tests. So within a 2 millisecond starting point margin, all benchmark results are comparable which is probably as accurate as it can possibly get with this tool.
In our frame rate results, all five of the collected test scores were within 0.5 FPS of one-another and then averaged for the chart you see above. Because the products we are testing compete for the high-end segment of discrete graphics, the frame rates in Call of Duty 4 all share similar results with only small degrees of difference between 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 resolutions. The GeForce 8800 GT plays Call of Duty 4 with moderately acceptable frame rates, scoring 48 FPS at 1920x1200 and making up the bottom end of our charted results. The Radeon HD 4850 renders at 68 FPS, followed by the reference GTX 260216 with 80 FPS. Moving the Radeon HD 4870 yields 85 frames per second at 1920x1200, and is out-performed by the Radeon HD 4890 with 95 FPS. Even the GeForce GTX 285 with all of its new muscle, can only outpace the others by a small margin with 99 FPS rendered. At the ultra-high end of video cards we have the Radeon HD 4870 X2 with 130 FPS, and GeForce GTX 295 which managed 120 FPS. Essentially, almost all of the graphics products tested produced frame rates between 80-99 FPS at 1920x1200. The Atomic 4870 X2 on the other hand, burned through 130 FPS without breaking a sweat (it's water-cooled, after all). Because of the shear muscle the Sapphire Atomic packs, the video cards we've tested on CoD4 fall into one of two categories: those that aren't the Radeon 4870 X2 Atomic, and those that are. The Radeon HD 4890 and GTX 285 matched performance and did extremely well for being the best single-GPU products available, but the difference between single GPU and the dual RV770's on the Atomic or GT200's on the GTX 295 are considerably noticeable.
In our next section, we shall see if the performance-demanding video game Crysis will help strengthen this position among our collection of video cards. Crysis Benchmark ResultsCrysis uses a new graphics engine: the CryENGINE2, which is the successor to Far Cry's CryENGINE. CryENGINE2 is among the first engines to use the Direct3D 10 (DirectX10) framework of Windows Vista, but can also run using DirectX9, both on Vista and Windows XP. Roy Taylor, Vice President of Content Relations at NVIDIA, has spoken on the subject of the engine's complexity, stating that Crysis has over a million lines of code, 1GB of texture data, and 85,000 shaders. To get the most out of modern multicore processor architectures, CPU intensive subsystems of CryENGINE 2 such as physics, networking and sound, have been re-written to support multi-threading. Crysis offers an in-game benchmark tool, which is similar to World in Conflict. This short test does place some high amounts of stress on a graphics card, since there are so many landscape features rendered. For benchmarking purposes, Crysis can mean trouble as it places a high demand on both GPU and CPU resources. Benchmark Reviews uses the Crysis Benchmark Tool by Mad Boris to test frame rates in batches, which allows the results of many tests to be averaged. The very first thing we discovered during our 1680x1050 resolution tests was how well NVIDIA products performed compared to the Radeon product line. Test results like these begin to raise the question of how unbiased games like Crysis are when they proudly proclaim "NVIDIA: The way it was meant to be played". I don't consider this to be coincidence, but at the same time it's probably also not coincidence that Crysis demands more GPU power than any other product, which was perfect for a time when AMD/ATI couldn't build a decent VGA product to save their lives (literally). Analyzing the chart below illustrates two distinct trends. The first is that the Radeon HD 4870 and GeForce GTX 260 are virtually identical in terms of Crysis gaming performance. The second trend tries to convince us that the Radeon HD 4890 and a overclocked GeForce GTX 285 can beat or match the performance of an outrageously overclocked (and liquid-cooled) 4870 X2. I suppose that some of readers, those famous for skipping to this (Crysis) test and the conclusion, will fall for the punch line. The rest of us have seen the test results from the previous two sections, and already know the joke.
With only a small dose of anti-aliasing added to Crysis, there are very few products that would make for playable frame rates. Our Island time-demo mixes a some beach and water views, so it's going to be on the high side of frame rates when compared to actual game play. The results shown in the chart below illustrate (more distinctly) how well NVIDIA products scale with anti-aliasing enabled. It would be easy to accuse NVIDIA of some level of driver code favoring, but there is one glaring piece of evidence in their defense: AMD/ATI graphic cards stop at 8x AA, while modern GeForce products reach 16x Q AA before calling it quits. So with this being an undisputed fact among our test products, it makes more sense to see the GTX 285 outperform the Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 Atomic ST-6026, but it still appears Crysis does not treat Radeon dual-GPU products the same as NVIDIA products. The Radeon HD 4890 actually approaches identical performance with a single RV790 GPU compared to dual-RV770's in the Radeon HD 4870 X2, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 roars ahead of the others despite the results we've seen in every other test.
At the end of our Crysis testing, it was apparent that heavy post-processing effects are still an obstacle that Radeon HD video cards have yet to clear. NVIDIA probably isn't surprised to see the GTX 285 and GeForce GTX 295 make the top of our charts for performance with 4x AA enabled. It's worth noting that most products used in this review have been used in past articles and tested at-length on our X48 benchmark system, with the results being comparable all throughout to these X58 results.
In our next section, Benchmark Reviews tests with Devil May Cry 4 Benchmark. Read on to see how a blended high-demand GPU test with low video frame buffer demand will impact our test products. Devil May Cry 4 BenchmarkDevil May Cry 4 was released on PC in early 2007 as the fourth installment to the Devil May Cry video game series. DMC4 is a direct port from the PC platform to console versions, which operate at the native 720P game resolution with no other platform restrictions. Devil May Cry 4 uses the refined MT Framework game engine, which has been used for many popular Capcom game titles over the past several years. MT Framework is an exclusive seventh generation game engine built to be used with games developed for the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, and PC ports. MT stands for "Multi-Thread", "Meta Tools" and "Multi-Target". Originally meant to be an outside engine, but none matched their specific requirements in performance and flexibility. Games using the MT Framework are originally developed on the PC and then ported to the other two console platforms. On the PC version a special bonus called Turbo Mode is featured, giving the game a slightly faster speed, and a new difficulty called Legendary Dark Knight Mode is implemented. The PC version also has both DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 mode for Microsoft Windows XP and Vista Operating Systems. It's always nice to be able to compare the results we receive here at Benchmark Reviews with the results you test for on your own computer system. Usually this isn't possible, since settings and configurations make it nearly difficult to match one system to the next; plus you have to own the game or benchmark tool we used. Devil May Cry 4 fixes this, and offers a free benchmark tool available for download. Because the DMC4 MT Framework game engine is rather low-demand for today's cutting edge multi-GPU video cards, Benchmark Reviews uses the 1920x1200 resolution to test with 8x AA (highest AA setting available to Radeon HD video cards) and 16x AF. The benchmark runs through four test scenes, but scene #2 and #4 are the ones that usually offer a challenge. Displayed below is our result for the test.
Judging from the results charted above, it appears that the Capcom MT Framework game engine isn't particular about which brand of video card you use for gaming. The other obvious result is how much more powerful the Sapphire Radeon HD 4870 X2 Atomic ST-6026 is when compared to everything else. Please keep in mind that the reference GeForce 8800 GT and overclocked 4870 X2 are included to add contrast between the low-end and high-end of graphic cards. In these test scenes, the factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 285 offers the best single-GPU performance in scene #2, but only slightly ahead of the ASUS EAH4890 TOP. Into scene #4 the Radeon HD 4890 and GTX 285 render exactly the same performance. While the GeForce 8800 GT can still play DMC4, it does so around the 40 FPS range. The Radeon HD 4850 kicks this up to around 60 FPS, while the other take off from there. The reference-design GeForce GTX 260 produced 72 FPS on average, and the Radeon HD 4870 narrowly out-paces it with 83 FPS. The ATI Radeon HD 4890 pushes 94 FPS, while an overclocked GeForce GTX 285 matches the performance. On the other side of the fence is Sapphire's Atomic Radeon HD 4870 X2 which scores 154 FPS, which comes well ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295. DMC4 was intended to replace our UT3 test, which commonly offered results as high as 180 FPS, but the search for high-demand graphics tests is getting tough as the newest games seem to be happy with old hardware. Feel free to write us with your suggestions.
Our toughest benchmark of the series is coming next, which puts our collection of video cards against some very demanding graphics with Far Cry 2. Far Cry 2 BenchmarkUbisoft has developed Far Cry 2 as a sequel to the original, but with a very different approach to game play and story line. Far Cry 2 features a vast world built on Ubisoft's new game engine called Dunia, meaning "world", "earth" or "living" in Farci. The setting in Far Cry 2 takes place on a fictional Central African landscape, set to a modern day timeline. The Dunia engine was built specifically for Far Cry 2, by Ubisoft Montreal development team. It delivers realistic semi-destructible environments, special effects such as dynamic fire propagation and storms, real-time night-and-day sun light and moon light cycles, dynamic music system, and non-scripted enemy A.I actions. The Dunia game engine takes advantage of multi-core processors as well as multiple processors and supports DirectX 9 as well as DirectX 10. Only 2 or 3 percent of the original CryEngine code is re-used, according to Michiel Verheijdt, Senior Product Manager for Ubisoft Netherlands. Additionally, the engine is less hardware-demanding than CryEngine 2, the engine used in Crysis. However, it should be noted that Crysis delivers greater character and object texture detail, as well as more destructible elements within the environment. For example; trees breaking into many smaller pieces and buildings breaking down to their component panels. Far Cry 2 also supports the amBX technology from Philips. With the proper hardware, this adds effects like vibrations, ambient colored lights, and fans that generate wind effects. There is a benchmark tool in the PC version of Far Cry 2, which offers an excellent array of settings for performance testing. Benchmark Reviews used the maximum settings allowed for our tests, with the resolution set to 1920x1200. The performance settings were all set to 'Very High', DirectX 9 Render Quality was set to 'Ultra High' overall quality, 8x anti-aliasing was applied, and HDR and Bloom were enabled.
Although the Dunia engine in Far Cry 2 is slightly less demanding than CryEngine 2 engine in Crysis, the strain appears to be extremely close. In Crysis we didn't dare to test AA above 4x, whereas we used 8x AA and 'Ultra High' settings in Far Cry 2. The end effect was a separation between what is capable of maximum settings, and what is not. Using the short 'Ranch Small' time demo (which yields the lowest FPS of the three tests available), we noticed that there are very few products capable of producing playable frame rates with the settings all turned up. At 1680x1050 the ASUS EAH4890 TOP performs at 31.8 FPS while the factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 285 scores 32.8, presenting the argument that a reference-speed GTX 285 might possibly match performance of a Radeon HD 4890. The point is driven home when the 1920x1200 resolution pegs the Radeon HD 4890 slightly ahead of the GTX 285. Everything else beneath these products seems incapable of producing the required performance to keep motion fluid and lifelike. When there's a strain on the graphics, like Benchmark Reviews has created in these Far Cry 2 tests, the RV790 and GT200 GPU's appear to be the ideal graphics solution.
Our last benchmark of the series is coming next, which puts our collection of video cards against some very demanding graphics with World in Conflict. World in Conflict ResultsThe latest version of Massive's proprietary Masstech engine utilizes DX10 technology and features advanced lighting and physics effects, and allows for a full 360 degree range of camera control. Massive's MassTech engine scales down to accommodate a wide range of PC specifications, if you've played a modern PC game within the last two years, you'll be able to play World in Conflict. World in Conflict's FPS-like control scheme and 360-degree camera make its action-strategy game play accessible to strategy fans and fans of other genres... if you love strategy, you'll love World in Conflict. If you've never played strategy, World in Conflict is the strategy game to try. World in Conflict offers an in-game benchmark; which records the minimum, average, and maximum frame rates during the test. Very recently another hardware review website made the assertion that these tests are worthless, but we couldn't disagree more. When used to compare video cards which are dependant on the same driver and use the same GPU architecture, the in-game benchmark works very well and comparisons are apples-to-apples.
World in Conflict plays well on most modern graphics cards, as evidenced by the close proximity of frame rate performance between everything from the GeForce 8800 GT to the GTX 285 (which matched the GTX 295). With a balanced demand for CPU and GPU power, World in Conflict just begins to place demands on the graphics processor at the 1920x1280 resolution. I was expecting more results along the same line I've seen so far, and that is pretty much exactly what I got, only in much smaller differences. There were a few interesting turn-arounds though. For the first time in our testing, the GeForce 8800 GT performed better than the Radeon HD 4850. Rather odd, I will admit, but WiC isn't particular to GPU; although it does feature NVIDIA's TWIMTBP slogan. The GTX 260 series has gone neck-and-neck with the HD 4850 for most of our tests, but now it seems to be beating out the Radeon HD 4870 for which it was intended to directly compete against. Even the ASUS Radeon HD 4890 EAH4890TOP matched the Atomic 4870 X2. The factory-overclocked ASUS ENGTX285 TOP GeForce GTX 285 tops our chart with an average 63 FPS performance at 1920x1200, which matches the dual-GT200 GeForce GTX 295. This is another game that proves that what you plan on playing might determine what you plan on buying.
In our next section, we discuss electrical power consumption and learn how well (or poorly) each video card will impact your utility bill... Radeon HD 4890 TemperaturesThis section is probably the most popular for me, not so much as a reviewer but more for my enthusiast side. Benchmark tests are always nice, so long as you care about comparing one product to another. But when you're an overclocker, or merely a hardware enthusiast who likes to tweak things on occasion, there's no substitute for good information. Benchmark Reviews has a very popular guide written on Overclocking the NVIDIA GeForce Video Card, which gives detailed instruction on how to tweak a GeForce graphics card for better performance. Of course, not every video card has the head room. Some products run so hot that they can't suffer any higher temperatures than they already do. This is why we measure the operating temperature of the video card products we test. To begin my testing, I use GPU-Z to measure the temperature at idle as reported by the GPU. Next I use FurMark 1.6.0 to generate maximum thermal load and record GPU temperatures at high-power 3D mode. The ambient room temperature remains stable at 18.0°C throughout testing, while the inner-case temperature hovered around 32°C. The ATI Radeon HD 4890 video card recorded 57°C in idle 2D mode, and increased to 84°C in full 3D mode. FurMark is an OpenGL benchmark that heavily stresses and overheats the graphics card with fur rendering. The benchmark offers several options allowing the user to tweak the rendering: fullscreen / windowed mode, MSAA selection, window size, duration. The benchmark also includes a GPU Burner mode (stability test). FurMark requires an OpenGL 2.0 compliant graphics card with lot of GPU power! As a oZone3D.net partner, Benchmark Reviews offers a free download of FurMark to our visitors.
FurMark does do two things extremely well: drive the thermal output of any graphics processor higher than any other application of video game, and it does so with consistency every time. While I have proved that Furmark is not a true benchmark tool for comparing video cards, it would still work very well to compare one product against itself at different stages. FurMark would be very useful for comparing the same GPU against itself using different drivers or clock speeds, of testing the stability of a GPU as it raises the temperatures higher than any program. But in the end, it's a rather limited tool. Considering the results, I will admit that 84°C is not the kind of temperature expected from the RV790 GPU. Even with a slightly-larger contact footprint from the new 959-million transistor GPU matched to a double-height cooler, the temperatures at idle and load are practically identical to an overclocked Radeon HD 4870 under full load. For gamers who like to keep it cool, the surprisingly silent fan under load can be dialed up using free tools such as RivaTuner. The most favored feature of past upper-level GeForce designs has been the focused exhaust design. Heated air recirculating around inside the computer case is could reduce stability for your sensitively overclocked computer system. While 84°C is considerably hot under maximum load, it's almost twenty degrees cooler than a reference-design Radeon HD 4870. This is what sets the RV790 apart from the RV770: three-million more transistors to improve chip stability, efficiency, and yield lower idle temperatures. In the end, this makes the ATI Radeon HD 4890 a more flexible graphics solution for multiple SKUs among card partners. VGA Power ConsumptionLife is not as affordable as it used to be, and items such as gasoline, natural gas, and electricity all top the list of resources which have exploded in price over the past few years. Add to this the limit of non-renewable resources compared to current demands, and you can see that the prices are only going to get worse. Planet Earth is needs our help, and needs it badly. With forests becoming barren of vegetation and snow capped poles quickly turning brown, the technology industry has a new attitude towards suddenly becoming "green". I'll spare you the powerful marketing hype that I get from various manufacturers every day, and get right to the point: your computer hasn't been doing much to help save energy... at least up until now.
To measure isolated video card power consumption, Benchmark Reviews uses the Kill-A-Watt EZ (model P4460) power meter made by P3 International. A baseline test is taken without a video card installed inside our computer system, which is allowed to boot into Windows and rest idle at the login screen before power consumption is recorded. Once the baseline reading has been taken, the graphics card is installed and the system is again booted into Windows and left idle at the login screen. Our final loaded power consumption reading is taken with the video card running a stress test using FurMark. Below is a chart with the isolated video card power consumption (not system total) displayed in Watts for each specified test product:
* Results are accurate to within +/- 5W.
At 70W of power consumption at idle, our resultant reading of the EAH4890TOP is above ATI's stated 60W idle power. Still, energy demand is on par with the dual-GPU NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 and Sapphire Radeon HD 4850 X2. Full output power consumption doesn't make the Radeon HD 4890 look very much better. Under full load, the ASUS Radeon HD 4890 video card consumed 280W of electricity. This is slightly more than the factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 280 and 285, and slightly lower than a reference NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295. ATI claims a maximum board power of 190W, and although our results seem well above that figure, the Radeon HD 4890 requires only two six-pin PCI-Express power connections. Radeon 4800 Final ThoughtsThere's a lot to like about the new Radeon HD 4800 series of products. To begin with, 800 cores is nothing to scoff at; even if they aren't nearly as efficient as they sound. CrossFireX scales performance very well, and for the first time actually makes multi-card setups worth the money. The most likable part is pricing: As of April 2009 the Radeon HD 4850 currently sells for $99 after rebate, which forces NVIDIA to drop the price of their GeForce GTS 250 (re-labeled 9800 GTX+) to meet with the competition. When ATI launched the Radeon HD 4870 at $300, NVIDIA had to answer back by dropping the GTX 260 to a more affordable price. The Radeon HD 4870 now sells for as low as $134.99 after rebate, making it difficult for the GTX 285. But that's where everything becomes unclear, and the value of ATI's latest product comes into question. Here's why clarifying how the value has become so tricky is difficult to define. The initial interest in a product like the Radeon HD 4850 lies in the fact that it competes head-on with the GeForce GTS 250 (9800 GTX). But now that they are both priced roughly the same, value takes on a new dimension. In each and every test I conducted, the Radeon HD 4850 kept up with the GeForce 9800 GTX but never outperformed it (until 4x AA was added to Crysis). This would be the main reason why I see value becoming more of an issue outside of video game performance. The GeForce 9800 GTX+ offers HDMI, and so does the Radeon HD 4850. Both offer essentially the same exact sub-features down the line, except for when it comes to multi-card configurations; which is where the CrossFireX configuration really comes to shine.
I am very much aware that NVIDIA offers SLI just like ATI offers CrossFireX, but what I'm talking about is multi-card compatibility with motherboards. AMD Didn't exactly impress the world with Phenom, and thus the world hasn't jumped onboard to use their processors. Instead, Intel scooped up a large share of the consumer base with their P35/X38/P45/X48 chipsets (all launched within about ten minutes from each other). But here's my point: ATI still wins. All of these Intel motherboards, along with all of the AMD motherboards, offer CrossFire support exclusively. NVIDIA is left holding their own hand, because only select few Intel X58-based motherboards are expected to combine AMD's CrossFire technology with NVIDIA's SLI. I'm not entirely sold on everything that the chipmakers would like for us to believe. I think it's sometimes worth questioning the wisdom, and in this regard I find that AMD is trying to pull one over on consumers by describing their RV770 to have 800 scalar processors. The reality is that ATI's 800 stream processor cores do not compare 1:1 against the competition, especially since the GeForce 9800 GTX can outperform the Radeon HF 4850 with only 128 shader cores. So despite what ATI would like to market, scalar processors they are not as they function exactly like vector processors would. With 800 processor cores residing in five bank location, each series of 5 processor cores process only one vector unit at a time - even if that vector doesn't need to use all five processor cores. 800 Cores are there, but they are far from the efficiency level seen by the competition. My final thoughts on the 4800-series is where the Radeon 4850 and 4870 come up short. They're both great products just so that we're clear, but for a 55 nm process there's a lot missing from the RV770's arsenal that really should be there. I consider efficiency at the very start of this list, and even though my first lesson on the relationship between die process size and energy efficiency came from Mr. Jen-Hsun Huang, President of NVIDIA, I later researched this through my own testing and discoved that he was correct: reduced die process does not equal increased energy efficiency. Obviously this phenomenon holds up very well against the power consumption results I've tested for this review. ATI's memory bus architecture also has me questioning their efforts. NVIDIA can produce a 512-bit memory bus making a 1:1 ratio of memory to interface (512MB @ 512-bit), so it's just a little disappointing that ATI did not do the same for their Radeon HD 4870/4890 (which both use GDDR5). Perhaps if I lower my expectations on improvements towards technology, I could accept a 256-bit Radeon HD 4850, but if you're going to make GDDR5 your marketing headline then perhaps you should also do something to match the technical achievements found in competing products. Notwithstanding, memory bandwidth is far from being saturated by today's gaming software (and hardware interface limits), and so my complaint is really more of a moot point, but it still stands to reason that AMD missed an opportunity here. Radeon HD 4890 ConclusionBenchmark Reviews offers a summary rating for each product we test. Although our rating and final score are made to be as objective as possible at the time of publication, please be advised that every author perceives these factors differently at different points in time. While we do our best to ensure that all aspects of the product are considered, there are often times unforeseen market conditions and manufacturer changes which occur after publication that would render our rating obsolete. Beginning with the performance rating, our expectations for the ASUS Radeon HD 4890 during gaming operation were thoroughly exceeded. While the EAH4890TOP could be considered the most powerful single-GPU video card on the planet, that claim will depend on variables like factory-overclocked speeds. Given our benchmark test results, the factory-overclocked EAH4890TOP often times exceeded frame rate performance of our factory-overclocked ASUS ENGTX285TOP GTX 285. If both operated at stock speed, the results would be very similar. The ASUS Radeon HD 4890 beat an overclocked GTX 285 in the Deep Freeze tests of 3dMark06, and nearly matched it in the Canyon flight tests as well. The EAH4890TOP matched performance again in CoD4 at 1680x1050, and trailed behind the overclocked GTX 285 by only four frames in all of the Crysis tests. In Devil May Cry 4 the EAH4890TOP was even with the ENGTX285 TOP, and beat it in FarCry 2. Judging the product appearance is a very subjective matter. Lately, almost everything has been encased in plastic housings with a contoured finish. This doesn't mean that you can't look sharp without the extra plastic body work, but there's a level of protection all of that stuff provides which goes missing on the Radeon HD 4890. Still, AMD/ATI has done a very good job mixing red hues with optional decal placement. Construction is solid, but not without some concerns. I absolutely appreciate ATI for not placing memory module IC's on the back side of the PCB, but at the same time I am no fan of exposed electronic components such as the surface mounted capacitors found on the 4890. These are well known for being easily knocked off of the PCB, resulting in a dead product that could have been protected with an extra ten cents worth of plastic. Aside from these details, the ATI Radeon HD 4890 is a solid-built graphics card. The RV790 GPU isn't very much different than the RV770 chip it replaces. Adding decoupling capacitors (DeCaps) to the outer edge bulks the die footprint from 256 mm2 to 282 mm2, but it also reduces signal noise which in-turn allows for higher overall chip timing (and better overclock headroom). The functionality improvements are transparent to the Radeon HD 4890, and performance enthusiasts will benefit from the added tweakability. As of April 2nd 2009, the launch date for the Radeon HD 4890, NewEgg sells the ASUS EAH4890 TOP for $259. This is extremely close to the prices for Radeon HD 4870's and GTX 260's at NewEgg, which I expect will be reduced very soon in response. Considering the voltage-tweak enhancements, and the highly-overclocked performance, the EAH4890 really earns its pricetag. In conclusion, the ATI Radeon HD 4890 is exactly what consumers have wanted for more than a year: ultra-high performance graphics that costs less than the competition. AMD did it to Intel back when they launched the Athlon processor, seriously beating the Pentium 4 in both performance and price. Now AMD/ATI returns to put NVIDIA back in line, and offers the HD4890 to compete against the GTX 285... but at a much lower price. Benchmark Reviews has completed testing on the HD4890, and on paper it looks to perform exactly like a heavily-overclocked 4870 might, but there's a lot more value in this product than first meets the eye. ASUS adds special voltage-tweaking to overclock the RV790 up to 900MHz (from 850), and believe it or not there's still headroom for more. Pros:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In 2006, the company shipped 55 million motherboards, which means one in three desktop PCs sold last year was powered by an ASUS motherboard. Our 2006 revenues reached US$16.5 billion, and is expected to garner US$23 billion in 2007.
