Kudos for the power consumption (you removed your "other" 5970? I'm jealous!), but what intrigued me the most was the bezel-compensating pixel removal. I always wondered why those large multi-monitor systems looked blocky. It may not be all that and a bag of chips, though, for displays which chow a lot of text-- losing a letter or two could be disastrous if you're showing stock prices or flight information.
What I think is goung to happen is that monitor manufacturers will minimize the frame width. I remember the early LCDs-- there was about 2" of black plastic at the edges. My beloved Dell SP2008WFP has precisely 3/4", but it does have USB ports on the bottom and left sides. I haven't taken it apart, but I have to wonder what the minimum bezel size would be-- and whether manufacturers can move the support electronics from the edges to the backs of the panels without impacting performance?
"I didn't cry when Bambi's mother was shot... but I cried when HAL was turned off."
I thought there were edgeless HDTV's. So it would only make sense to do it for monitors as well. I don't know though now with HDTV's prices coming down and refresh rates going up why get 2 or3 20 inch high res fast refresh flat screens and have to deal with the edges. Why not just grab a 40" 120hz lcd for less than a grand and display it as one 40" screen rather than 2 20" screens with an inch of black border between it. As far as it goes and ATI card will connect to an HDTV in multiple ways and have been able to do that for quite some time.
I also heard AMD was pledging to have updates more frequently (bi-monthly), and as far as energy profile it has been a focus of theirs since the 3870 from what I have experienced Vs. the competition anyway.
>> What I think is goung to happen is that monitor manufacturers will minimize the frame width.
I certainly hope so. If they did, I'd be seriously tempted to go back to a multi-monitor setup.
I also had concerns with the bezel compensation. It would be great for a racing game, but in FPS style games it actually helps that there's no compensation.
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
I want to see RA1D's setup with the 10.3 drivers!
Yeah 2 5970's in crossfire has to be just mind blowing!
I'm downloading installing 10.2's now, but could not get 10.3's yet.
Two links to check. First is HH's own review of the 4890:
Second is Tech Report's (which has a larger number of cards included):
Power consumption tests can be finicky as Marco noted back when he reviewed the 4890. Keep in mind, we're strictly talking about idle power consumption, not load. Also note that these comparisons took place 18 months after the 3870 was introduced.
NVIDIA holds all the lower spots; the GTX 275 idles below the 4850 while being significantly more powerful than that card. The 4870s are particularly shabby--ATI did a good job with the 4890 by keeping its idle power consumption equal to the 4870 while cranking up the clock, but consider the GTX 295 or the 285 SLI. Either configuration would smush (technical term) the 4890, but NVIDIA managed to keep idle power consumption on two GPUs just 5W higher than the 4890's single GPU.
This is all history now; ATI's 5xxx series looks quite attractive in terms of power consumption, but for the past few years its been NVIDIA, not ATI, with the overall edge in this area.
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2014 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms