ATI Radeon HD 3870 X2 - Fastest Yet!
Posted by EL1TE on 28 January 2008 - 12:10 · 20 comments & 10952 views
The R680 designates, in reality, the Radeon HD 3870 X2, which is based on two RV670 GPUs. As we've seen, the history of multi GPU cards is pretty diverse and if this HD 3870 X2 represents a departure from the concepts behind the Voodoo 5500 (the VSA 100 having been conceived to be grouped at least in twos, from the beginning, to produce an efficient card), its goal is reminiscent of the Rage Fury MAXX in 1999; to offer a product to place in front of the high end models of its Californian competitor.
AMD has decided to integrate two RV670s on the same PCB (for more information on the chip refer to the Radeon HD 3850 and 3870 review). This is, without a doubt, to allow the installation of a imposing cooling system and to facilitate the interconnections between the two graphical sub systems. The result is a monster of 26.7 cm in length (longer than the width of a motherboard). This value is identical to what we have on a GeForce 8800 GTX and Ultra, which holds only one chip.

System Configuration Used:
    Test Setup
  • Power Supply: Coolermaster RealPower Pro 850W
  • Motherboard: Asus P5E3 Deluxe (X38)
  • Processor: Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 (Quad-core 3 GHz)
  • Video: ATI Radeon HD3870X2, ATI Radeon HD3870, ATI Radeon HD2900XT, NVIDIA GeForce 8800GTS, NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra, ATI Radeon HD3870 Crossfire
  • Memory: Crucial 2 x 1 GB DDR3 1333 MHz 9-9-9

    Software Configuration
  • Video Driver: ATI Catalyst 8.1 beta (8-451-2-080108a), NVIDIA ForceWare 169.28 beta
Software Used:
  • Test Drive Unlimited
  • Supreme Commander
  • Age of Empires 3
  • Oblivion
  • STALKER
  • World in Conflict
  • Unreal Tournament 3
  • Crysis
  • Call of Duty 4
View: Full Story @ Toms Hardware


There are 20 additional comments
Advertisement
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #1 Posted by Unwonted on 28 Jan 2008 - 12:55
Good to see some fight in ATI. Down, but not out.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #2 Posted by ajua on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:06
all we need is a core-2-duo-like equivalent architecture from nvidia or ati to see more performance gains, price drops and far less power consumption.
(2 replies) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #3 Posted by The2 on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:06
links don't work
Quote this comment #3.1 Posted by nonick on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:55
(The2 said @ #3)
links don't work


tom's server disallows linking to images, they need to change it to link to the pages instead.

Quote this comment #3.2 Posted by EL1TE on 28 Jan 2008 - 14:31
(nonick said @ #3.1)
(The2 said @ #3)
links don't work

tom's server disallows linking to images, they need to change it to link to the pages instead.

Weird, on my PC it works (maybe because i have seen the pages already (?))

Link modified to Toms Hardware Home Page.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #4 Posted by DKAngel on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:08
the graphics gpu is far more complex than the core2duo as it is so why would u want that or they would put them on graphics cards instead
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #5 Posted by BBinder on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:20
what nice is that its a single pcb card not like nvidia's when they use 2 pcb boards for each chip
(2 replies) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #6 Posted by Oxuyoska on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:30
And what happens next month when the 9 series gets released and Nvidia wipes the floor with this card?
Quote this comment #6.1 Posted by Eis on 28 Jan 2008 - 15:34
(Oxuyoska said @ #6)
And what happens next month when the 9 series gets released and Nvidia wipes the floor with this card?

Sort of answered your own question there, but thanks for showing your colors. We were all dying to know what they were.
Quote this comment #6.2 Posted by Mike Frett on 28 Jan 2008 - 19:17
(Eis said @ #6.1)
(Oxuyoska said @ #6)
And what happens next month when the 9 series gets released and Nvidia wipes the floor with this card?

Sort of answered your own question there, but thanks for showing your colors. We were all dying to know what they were.


I think the question posed Eis, was rhetorical. Ergo, he knew the answer.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #7 Posted by Amano on 28 Jan 2008 - 13:31
I'm glad to see that. NVIDIA shouldn't take the lead for long, consumers need real competition.
(1 reply) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #8 Posted by TruckWEB on 28 Jan 2008 - 15:53
This card is HOT and Quick if you look the benchmark on Anandtech.

But it's not that hot if you look on HardOCP.

So.... Who is doing it the right way?
Quote this comment #8.1 Posted by ir0nw0lf on 28 Jan 2008 - 18:08
That's the problem: there is *no* industry accepted "right" way. AT and Tom's paint the card in a very positive way (from what I have glanced at on the net) and HardOCP paints the card in less rosy colors.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #9 Posted by Crysis Addict on 28 Jan 2008 - 16:41
gave me the most laughs of any review ive seen on a gfx card so far....latest ati technology barely gives over a year old nvidia gfx technology some competition. ati still has a long way to go. strike 2 for them. just wait till nvidia releases the 9800x2....that should catch them up for another 2 years...and to think that have had it ready for several months now and have just been waiting...ROFL!!!
(1 reply) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #10 Posted by +gigapixels on 28 Jan 2008 - 18:32
AMD FTL. They totally screwed up my favorite graphics company.
Quote this comment #10.1 Posted by +Dakkaroth on 28 Jan 2008 - 22:51
How?

I'm back aboard the ATI wagon these days. Maybe they're not doing so well vs. Nvidia, but it wasn't long ago when Nvidia was in the same boat. Version 8.1 of their drivers (with the hotfix ) has fixed the problem us AGP users have been having for a while now, and my HD 2600PRO that came in this morning rocks!

I was all set and ready to jump on an Intel computer with an Nvidia 88XX card, but my girlfriend's computer I bought her is just outstanding, even with a 7600GT. (Spinning around in Oblivion with 0 lag is awesome) I dunno. When I sit here and read the forums, it's very easy to get all psyched up for high-end stuff. However, when I look at my bank account, it's quite the opposite reaction.

Both AMD and Intel are good, just as ATI and Nvidia. It's all a matter of how much you want to spend and if that cost justifies the performance gain is all.
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #11 Posted by buletov on 28 Jan 2008 - 19:07
They are ruling the mid marked... where all the money lies.
(1 reply) Quote this comment Reply to this comment #12 Posted by sider on 28 Jan 2008 - 23:30
I remember the time when nVidia tried to cheat on 3DMark results just to beat ATI in their Radeon scores

I am glad now to see that ATI didn't walk on that same road and instead brought something new to the market with the first multicore VGA card

I wish 3dfx was still alive to see some more competition in the market
Quote this comment #12.1 Posted by Slugbait on 29 Jan 2008 - 05:51
(sider said @ #12)
I remember the time when nVidia tried to cheat on 3DMark results just to beat ATI in their Radeon scores

I am glad now to see that ATI didn't walk on that same road...


I remember the time when ATI tried to cheat on Quake III results just to beat nVidia in their GeForce scores.

I am glad now to see that ATI didn't walk that road alone...
Quote this comment Reply to this comment #13 Posted by Atlonite on 29 Jan 2008 - 01:55
Still i'd prefer to see an actual multicore ( 1 die and 2 cores) scenario maybe if they can do that they'd be able to cut off half of that behemoth. when i read 26.7cm i got my ruler out and had a quick measure just to see if it'd fit but alas it does not im 4cm short ohwell crossfire x 2 HD2600xt's will have to do for now
[1]

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.


Scroll to the Top
....
My Preferences
....
Communicating with server
Loading
Please Wait...
....
Loading
 X 
....