Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Cruachan

Radeon HD 4870 512MB - quick question

Recommended Posts

Hi,Just curious, but can anyone tell me how long this card is compared to an X1950 Pro 512MB? I've done some research, but none of the reviews I've read quote the actual physical length of the card. Would have thought this would be quite important to know along with the card's power requirements/consumption.I have an Antec P150 case which I continue to be very happy with and it accomodates the X1950 Pro (which I am also very happy with) quite comfortably.I suspect if I was in the market for a 4870 it might prove to be just too long and will likely foul the drive bays.Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Here you go Mike. I found this on the ATI site.ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB GDDR5 XOC Black EditionForm Factor (Profile) : Standard Profile Full-Height Product Dimension : 4 7/8 X 6/8 X 8 1/4 Package Dimension : 11.75 X 9.5 X 3 Product Weight : 2.75 Lbs Best Regards,Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not quite as big as the 1950 Pro. I have them both and if you can fit a 1950 pro in your box, the 4870 will slide in no problem.BTW, I love my 4870 on my FS9 rig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jeff and Chuck,Now, that does sound promising ;)Does it matter that the Interface: PCI Express 2.0? Mine is 1.0aBest regards to you both,Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should fit -- whether it works or not will depend on your mother board. In relatively rare cases a PCI 2.0 card won't work in a PCI 1.0a, but you won't know for sure until you try it.There are others here far more knowledgeable about such things who might be able to tell you, but frankly I think it will work. Of course, PCI 2.0 is a faster interface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ordered one of these for a Dell Precision 690 to see whether it would work better than an 8800 Ultra. The slot in the Dell was PCI Express 1.0A. The 4870 did NOT work: at all, nip, zada, nothing.Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess thats bad luck for you, send it back.. mine works perfectRob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Thanks Jeff and Chuck,>>Now, that does sound promising ;)>>Does it matter that the Interface: PCI Express 2.0? Mine is>1.0a>>Best regards to you both,>>Mikeas posted by someone else, I can confirm you need a 2.0 slot so don't botherEven the Nvidia 'help' selector system will not show you the 2.0 cards unless you specify that is what you have on the motherboard when filling in the blanks about your system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using a 4870 in a Asus P5W motherboard, which is only PCIE 1.0 compliant - so it definitely works, the only question is does the PCIE speed hold the card back? Without a PCIE 2.0 system to compare it with, I can't help directly but if you look at http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pci-ex...s-2-0,1915.html, you'll find a review on Toms Hardware in which they taped over an increasing number of connectors on cards to simulate the effect of reduced PCIE slot banwidth. Good news is that for most games and benchmarks it makes stuff all difference - bad news is that FSX is the one game that was affected noticably (18% drop after halving the bandwidth).BTW - To partially compensate, I'm overclocking the PCI bus (raised it by 10% from 100 to 110). Must admit, its made no visible difference, but at least makes me feel I'm getter more value from the card. Since it made no apparent difference, is anyone able to advice whether it should theoretically be helpful? (I run FSX at 1680 * 1050 resolution - with unlimited frame rates).Bob,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to persist, but - as I found out after the event - there is a difference between PCI Express 1.0 and 1.0A. PCI Express 2.0 cards are backwards compatible with 1.0. But not always with 1.0a.Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so everyone understands why I said to not bother1.The slot itself increases the power to the card, therefore higher functions which require that support will not work. With x2 cards this can include the ability to use the 2nd core and it will definitely cancel out any quad use.2. If the card will work in the slot its hit and miss on PCIe 1.0a3. There have been many reports of older boards with 1.0 which display strange issues depending on the age of the motherboard and the BIOS. 4. 1.1 slots tend to show no issuesLast, not everyone will see problems or care about the loss in higher ability. Many early issues have been fixed with 2nd releases products under the 2.0 standard which have better compatibility in sensing the motherboard slot however there are certain functions you will not get even if the card works so if you intend to try one do read the fine print about that at the card manufacture. To me it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for contributing. Very helpful info and advice.I think on balance I'll probably stick with my good old Sapphire X1950 Pro 512MB - has proved to be very reliable, reasonably quiet, produces a great image with the now outdated Catalyst 7.10 WHQL drivers along with ATT and, most important of all, the performance in FSX is generally not bad at all. Why tempt fate?Cheers!Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites