4670 Crossfire - The secret to budget gaming?
GRID & Unreal Tournament 3 Results
Published: 17th January 2009 | Source: Overclock3D |
Race Driver: Grid is a visually taxing game that presents a challenge to any graphics system. Results were recorded using FRAPS to log the average FPS over a 2 minute race. To ensure consistency, the same track, car and general path of travel was used in each of the 5 benchmark runs for each graphics card, with an average FPS being calculated from the median three results.
Unreal Tournament 3 the latest game in the long running Unreal series from Epic Games and Midway. The game uses the latest UE3, which combines fast gameplay along with high quality textures and lighting effects. All benchmarks were performed using UTbench with a fly-by of the DM-BioHazard map. As usual, all benchmarks were performed 5 times, with the highest and lowest results being removed and an average calculated from the remaining three.
Result Discussion
Finishing up with GRID and Unreal Tournament III, the 4670 Crossfire configuration just can't keep up with the other cards in the test even at lower resolutions. However, while UT3 was certainly playable at 1900x1200 with an average FPS of 113.65, GRID on the other hand was not. This may sound strange considering the 4670 Crossfire setup was pushing out close to 60FPS average, but with a minimum FPS of just over 20FPS, the with the fast paced racing style and debris from other cars was clearly taking its toll on the Crossfire configuration making gameplay quite awkward.
In terms of cost per frame (CPF) the 4670 Crossfire configuration comes in just a little more expensive than the 4850, but still better value for money than the 4870 or GTX260.
Most Recent Comments
Nice article, for me personaly ATI still the best in budget gamming, no one can compete (and now entering high end also :worship: ), the only problem about two low end cards are that if the guy thinks like me it will be better get a good one and with some more time another one to Xfire / sli, better than buy two low ends that cost a little more than they bigger brother, also as i saw in the review the performance in high resolution (probably because of smaller memory)
but if the dude is not planning to upgrade, all i should say (after seeing this review) is go for it its a Xfire at the price one of card :D
but if the dude is not planning to upgrade, all i should say (after seeing this review) is go for it its a Xfire at the price one of card :D
It's a great study in raw fps output of the 2 in xfire.
xfire has had the luxury of being attached to many great Intel 3/4 series mobos. Something that could/should have been exploited more, and used as a twisted dagger.
Whilst the artificial benching of some markers approaching 4 years of age, it would be with reluctance perhaps, that I would immediately dismiss anything benched prior to 3dmark06. Indeed 3dmark06 is living on extremely thin ice. However, this is ofc dependent on what type of gaming u entertain. Being as there has been a lull in great advancements in gaming imagination, yet alone releases, apart from a fist-full of recycled titles, the number of really-new released games - a user can be forgiven for sticking with a game that could be years old.
Be that as it may, if your on a budget, it could be recognized that you could play such games. If u don't subscribe to buying each game as it's released, u would similarly not be on quite a budget perhaps. 3 or 4 new games and u could be in 4xfire. Similarly, u won't be immediately looking at the 64xQQxAA++ capabilities that ur system would take advantage of. Here then u may not be looking at the 4870 or 260 in the same light - ur after raw fps for ur own personal gaming reasons.
Taking a sideways glance at the PhysX aspect, it would probably be a good run to have taken the driver away from the 260 whilst doing the benching. The effect isn't something that will make a tremendous difference, but using the 260 with a PhysX benefit over cards that don't entertain it, and graphing the results as fps or mark related, means we allow the 260 to do the work the others can't but similarly allow them to be compared, has the 260 doing work unnecessarily. Being as a purchasing decision could be made without PhysX in mind, the card is held back - if u like. A few fps ? Purchasers and forum users use those fps and marks as a religion to condemn each others camps.
As a suggestion to a purchasing user, I couldn't really suggest that they shun the quality aspects, but if the enthusiast themselves is on such a budget and is a massive fan of a single type fps game, it could be a pursuit for them. Still not something I could recommend with a clear head over a single card with some quality aspects. If they were an ATI fan, I would urge a 4870, and equally be happier that they not have so much a chance to be calling me cos the driver aspect has done "something".
Good read.
xfire has had the luxury of being attached to many great Intel 3/4 series mobos. Something that could/should have been exploited more, and used as a twisted dagger.
Whilst the artificial benching of some markers approaching 4 years of age, it would be with reluctance perhaps, that I would immediately dismiss anything benched prior to 3dmark06. Indeed 3dmark06 is living on extremely thin ice. However, this is ofc dependent on what type of gaming u entertain. Being as there has been a lull in great advancements in gaming imagination, yet alone releases, apart from a fist-full of recycled titles, the number of really-new released games - a user can be forgiven for sticking with a game that could be years old.
Be that as it may, if your on a budget, it could be recognized that you could play such games. If u don't subscribe to buying each game as it's released, u would similarly not be on quite a budget perhaps. 3 or 4 new games and u could be in 4xfire. Similarly, u won't be immediately looking at the 64xQQxAA++ capabilities that ur system would take advantage of. Here then u may not be looking at the 4870 or 260 in the same light - ur after raw fps for ur own personal gaming reasons.
Taking a sideways glance at the PhysX aspect, it would probably be a good run to have taken the driver away from the 260 whilst doing the benching. The effect isn't something that will make a tremendous difference, but using the 260 with a PhysX benefit over cards that don't entertain it, and graphing the results as fps or mark related, means we allow the 260 to do the work the others can't but similarly allow them to be compared, has the 260 doing work unnecessarily. Being as a purchasing decision could be made without PhysX in mind, the card is held back - if u like. A few fps ? Purchasers and forum users use those fps and marks as a religion to condemn each others camps.
As a suggestion to a purchasing user, I couldn't really suggest that they shun the quality aspects, but if the enthusiast themselves is on such a budget and is a massive fan of a single type fps game, it could be a pursuit for them. Still not something I could recommend with a clear head over a single card with some quality aspects. If they were an ATI fan, I would urge a 4870, and equally be happier that they not have so much a chance to be calling me cos the driver aspect has done "something".
Good read.
Budget Gaming = Xbox 360 :D
May I ask why the CPF was worked out with $$?
Ah, if I am allowed to link to another review website, here it presents a 512mb GDDR4 variant of the 4670. Perhaps with 2 of these in crossfire, the higher end benchmarks would be different? Go to Hexus.net and add this rubbish onto the end: /content/item.php?item=16894 (I can't post URLs yet).
Says in the article you can get one for £55, done a fair amount of searching and it seems the cheapest is nearer to £65
CSS Valid
[IMG]http://www.overclock3d.net/gfx/articles/2009/01/16195445748l.png[/IMG]
[B][B]4670 Crossfire - The secret to budget gaming?[/B][/B]