at the low, low price of what? 130$ ? 145$ > multiply that number x2 and that's what i got to pay. NEXT.sampo wrote:Could you tone it down a bit? We all get your message... Non reference models are coming in a couple of weeks. The low max consumption would make this card ideal for passive cooling.silo wrote:WOW NICE CARD AND COOLER > goes to newegg and stares in disbelieve .... so 4770 flopped. NEXT!
ATI HD 4770: 40 nm, RV740 -- SPCR reviewed
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
I think that's the point - he lives in a place where prices are high.
FWIW, the Sapphire 4770 appeared on some Croatian retailers and is listed at around $160; nobody has the cards yet, but past experiences tell me that this amount will go up once the cards arrive, probably to around $180-190 or so.
FWIW, the Sapphire 4770 appeared on some Croatian retailers and is listed at around $160; nobody has the cards yet, but past experiences tell me that this amount will go up once the cards arrive, probably to around $180-190 or so.
This is really bizarre for power consumption values on each website. Xbitlabs seems WAY too low for idle consumption. Anandtech has results that seem more in line with spcr. Generally every website seems to agree that it consumes between 50-60w on load. I wish there was a specific methodology for video card power consumption data because most websites aren't matching at all. I'm highly inclined to trust that spcr's 30w idle is the real truth though.Vicotnik wrote:17.4W idle is still far too much. I'm very disappointed with ATi, why will they not take idle power consumption seriously? I mean in this day of all sorts of "green" products.. After the 4670 I thought we were on the right track.
I was really, really hoping that ATI would get the idle consumption fixed, but sadly, this does not seem to be the case. The 17.4W from XBitlabs would be okay with me, but 30W? While it just sits there, doing nothing?
I will probably get one anyway. It's still the best card in its price range. But I just hate to seed good things that could have been much better
I will probably get one anyway. It's still the best card in its price range. But I just hate to seed good things that could have been much better
Just do a separate 2D profile with reduced mem speeds for the card . I don't game much, so manually changing between modes wouldn't be a big issue.K.Murx wrote:I was really, really hoping that ATI would get the idle consumption fixed, but sadly, this does not seem to be the case. The 17.4W from XBitlabs would be okay with me, but 30W? While it just sits there, doing nothing?(
I just want to remind people that the GPU sits closer to the rear of the card compared to most other cards, and that the distance between the mounting holes are different to the 4800 cards.
The underside of the HD 4770 512MB doesn’t really hold anything of interest other than the retention bracket for the heatsink. It should be noted that the spacing between the retention bracket’s holes is 45 mm. This means that while some older heatsinks will fit (any heatsink compatible with the X1650 or 8600GT), newer ones compatible with the HD 4800-series and even the HD 4600-series will not fit.
-
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 1439
- Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:06 pm
- Location: New Hampshire, US
- Contact:
Well, someone needs to do some power tests with custom 2d clocks and post it here. Otherwise, I'll be hanging on to my 3870 for a while.sampo wrote:Just do a separate 2D profile with reduced mem speeds for the card . I don't game much, so manually changing between modes wouldn't be a big issue.K.Murx wrote:I was really, really hoping that ATI would get the idle consumption fixed, but sadly, this does not seem to be the case. The 17.4W from XBitlabs would be okay with me, but 30W? While it just sits there, doing nothing?(
-
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 1439
- Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:06 pm
- Location: New Hampshire, US
- Contact:
i dont understand your statement, can you elaborate on your reasoning?Mats wrote:Xbitlabs used to measure the power consumption directly at the power connectors and the slot. dunno if they do that anymore.
Their old method will of course show a lower power consumption than what a Kill-a-watt would tell.
Last edited by ryboto on Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ya I'm just confused why their numbers are generally so low. It seems like somehow this measurement may not be capturing all the power usage because in general, most websites show the 4770 having higher idle than the 4830.Mats wrote:Xbitlabs used to measure the power consumption directly at the power connectors and the slot. dunno if they do that anymore.
Their old method will of course show a lower power consumption than what a Kill-a-watt would tell.
-
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 1439
- Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:06 pm
- Location: New Hampshire, US
- Contact:
I can understand how they measure power at the pcie power connector, but how do they measure the socket?merlin wrote:
Ya I'm just confused why their numbers are generally so low. It seems like somehow this measurement may not be capturing all the power usage because in general, most websites show the 4770 having higher idle than the 4830.
That's surely wrong. The 4770, as the 46xx, has to have mounting holes 43 mm apart.Mats wrote:I just want to remind people that the GPU sits closer to the rear of the card compared to most other cards, and that the distance between the mounting holes are different to the 4800 cards.The underside of the HD 4770 512MB doesn’t really hold anything of interest other than the retention bracket for the heatsink. It should be noted that the spacing between the retention bracket’s holes is 45 mm. This means that while some older heatsinks will fit (any heatsink compatible with the X1650 or 8600GT), newer ones compatible with the HD 4800-series and even the HD 4600-series will not fit.
Now you're adding even more assumptions. The reviewer have already concluded that one HR-03 fits, and another one doesn't.Matija wrote:Why would ATI decide to space the holes further and eliminate absolutely all 3rd-party (and existing) coolers?
IDK why he says the 4600 uses a different hole pattern, but at least I've followed his work with trying to get a cooler that fits.
-
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: New York City zzzz
- Contact:
I hear the reference editions have very poorly designed power systems.K.Murx wrote:I was really, really hoping that ATI would get the idle consumption fixed, but sadly, this does not seem to be the case. The 17.4W from XBitlabs would be okay with me, but 30W? While it just sits there, doing nothing?
I will probably get one anyway. It's still the best card in its price range. But I just hate to seed good things that could have been much better
If MSI makes an OC version of this card like it has for the 4830, the idle and upper will be noticably lower.
Some cheap parts.
Also, the 4830 that SPCR has has been always showing lower idle numbers than other sites. I think it was cherry picked.
-
- Friend of SPCR
- Posts: 2887
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
- Location: New York City zzzz
- Contact:
and here it is
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?optio ... 9&Itemid=1
that looks rocking. No stats so far as I can see. I wish spcr had this one instead of reference.
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?optio ... 9&Itemid=1
that looks rocking. No stats so far as I can see. I wish spcr had this one instead of reference.
The thing is that MSI doesn't mention anything about those unique features. The PCB looks like a reference part to me.~El~Jefe~ wrote:and here it is
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?optio ... 9&Itemid=1
that looks rocking. No stats so far as I can see. I wish spcr had this one instead of reference.
-
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 11:20 am
- Location: TN, USA
It looks the same but the marketing page does mention:Mats wrote:The thing is that MSI doesn't mention anything about those unique features. The PCB looks like a reference part to me.~El~Jefe~ wrote:and here it is
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?optio ... 9&Itemid=1
that looks rocking. No stats so far as I can see. I wish spcr had this one instead of reference.
and the model number matches the one mentioned in the fudzilla piece.Dynamic Power Management with ATI PowerPlay Technology
* ATI Radeon HD 4770 GPUs deliver high performance when needed and conserve power when the demand on the graphics processor is low.
I won't rely on it until a trusted source tests it but the claims are there.
If I could see a confirmed part with a fanless heatsink and 18W idle even when fanless I'd probably buy one this year.
Last edited by dhanson865 on Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Doesn't all 4770's have PowerPlay? XFX cards does, at least.dhanson865 wrote:It looks the same but the marketing page does mention:
and the model number matches the one mentioned in the fudzilla piece.Dynamic Power Management with ATI PowerPlay Technology
* ATI Radeon HD 4770 GPUs deliver high performance when needed and conserve power when the demand on the graphics processor is low.
I won't rely on it until a trusted source tests it but the claims are there.
If I could see a confirmed part with a fanless heatsink and 18W idle even when fanless I'd probably buy one this year.
Edit: I guess all 4770 cards have PowerPlay, according to AMD.
Last edited by Mats on Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.
http://www.msi.eu/news/press/2009/PR_R4 ... R4770.htmlMats wrote:MSI doesn't mention anything about those unique features. The PCB looks like a reference part to me.
Those pictures still shows a reference card, I don't get it. Compare with the one on thread page 2. As long as it doesn't underclock the RAM there's not much of a difference.