Cheat Engine

Zcythe · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:03 am Post subject: Sapphire 4830

How well does it preform for you? Like in Crysis, Call of Duty, etc.

Im also talking about the one with the removed stream processors its down to like 640 or 620. that one.

Humper · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:00 am Post subject:

Depends on:
- What CPU you got
- What you call good

Zarr · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:52 pm Post subject:

http://www.pro-clockers.com/reviews/?id=127&page=0

Zcythe · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:59 pm Post subject:

Like compared to my 8800 GTS 512 how will it perform in Crysis Warhead? Better? worse? about the same?

EDIT: I got a E8400 at 3.6 GHZ, with 4GB of ram. But since 32 bit only techinacly 3325mb of ram

superweapons · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:51 pm Post subject:

It'll probably be about a 10-20% improvement, not worth dropping $90 on a whole new graphics card though. Save your money.

Zcythe · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:15 pm Post subject:

Hassanity · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:20 pm Post subject:

A 4830 Sapphire should perform much better then the 8800, I'm not sure how strong a 4830, but I assume since it's in the 4800+ range, it must be quite strong. How much dedicated memory does the card have? If it has 1gb+, then your card improvement should be like 35%+.

Zcythe · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:16 pm Post subject:

superweapons · Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:54 pm Post subject:

NVIDIA uses far more advanced/powerful and faster unified shader processors, but they use comparably less. ATI on the other hand uses many slower shader processors. You can't cross-compare cards this different by specifications.

1GB of memory usually won't help performance wise, especially with the restricted 256-bit memory width in the HD 4830. Unless you're playing a ridiculously unoptimized game such as GTA IV on the PC, performance gains won't be that great, especially at lower resolutions with lower levels of FSAA and FSAF.

The HD 4830 charts a bit lower than the 8800GT in 3DMark06 (although it's an extremely CPU-sided benchmark). In 3DMark Vantage, it's slightly slower at a less demanding level of graphics detail, but at higher levels (extremely high resolution with 4x AA and 16x AF), it's a bit faster than the 8800GT. Assuming that the 8800GTS is about 10% faster than the 8800GT, you're older card would have probably benched better in synthetic benchmarks.
As far as real-world gaming benchmarks go, the 8800GT performs better than the HD 4830 overall. At higher resolutions, the gap closes or turns in favor of the HD 4830 just slightly.
The HD 4850 was always faster than the 8800GT, so yeah, the disabled shader processors did take a performance hit with them.

But whatever, you already got a replacement. If you had a choice between 8800GT or HD 4830 (assuming they're priced exactly the same), I'd still side with NVIDIA on this one. They can also usually squeeze a bit more performance out of their cards with new drivers and they have a 2-4 really awesome distributors/vendors that provide sweet warranties, most of which ATI cannot match.
Of course, price doesn't always compensate for their differences. You're still getting a better deal than most of the guys at Best Buy.

Zcythe · Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:29 am Post subject:

I am aware of the difference in stream processors or cores what ever you want to call them. I just didn't know that ati's were so weak compared to nvidia. Still in a sense, that the 8800 GTS was like hundreds, if I remember correctly, and compared to now to an 85 dollar card now and this card does better some times??

cheesecan · Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:33 am Post subject:

Zcythe · Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:08 am Post subject:

Yea... lately i have been having driver issues with Nvidia, But also, for me anyway, Nvidia runs hotter. And i have plenty of fans and air circulation.