Techgage logo

Palit Radeon HD 4870 512MB

Date: September 1, 2008
Author(s): Rob Williams

If you’ve been holding off on an upgrade for a while, there’s no reason to continue if a gaming addiction is pulling at your sleeve. The selection for mid-range cards right now is ideal, and anything you pick up will deliver good performance for the money. The best card for the buck right now might be the HD 4870, and we take Palit’s version for a spin to find out why.



Introduction, Closer Look

Earlier this month, we posted a look at AMD’s latest high-end dual-GPU offering, the HD 4870 X2. To say we were impressed would really be an understatement, because AMD pulled out a weapon that made NVIDIA’s newly-launched GTX 280 look silly by comparison. It was the first time in a while we saw things play out this way, so it’s been interesting to watch.

What that review lacked, though, were some single-GPU results of the same card. We didn’t do it on purpose, but it is generally difficult to benchmark a card that isn’t in the lab. Ironically, we received one a few days after that article, so I jumped right to testing to see just how great of a choice it is in the GPU scheme of things, both with regards to performance and price.

One thing we did know, is that the HD 4870 X2 and two HD 4870 cards in Crossfire offer almost identical performance. The problem, though, is that the HD 4870 X2 costs less than two separate HD 4870’s at this point in time. That complicates the decision a little for some, but what I’d recommend is picking up a single card for now, then wait for the cards to go down in price before picking up another. The HD 4870, as we will see, is a seriously powerful card, and one year down the road, adding a second one in really shouldn’t detract from your game play experience in any notable way, even at 2560×1600.

Of course, it’s all a matter of need. If you are running a 1920×1200 display and are not entirely peeved that you can’t turn AA up all the way, then this single GPU is going to keep you happy for a while. Of course, I used that statement earlier this year with regards to, what, five different GPUs? It really is becoming increasingly difficult to predict how things will go, but it’s certainly been exciting.

Closer Look at the Palit Radeon HD 4870

The HD 4870 offers some considerable upgrades over the HD 4850, such as the core clock, which has been bumped up to 750MHz, compared to the HD 4850’s 625MHz. The memory frequency is oddly lower, but the HD 4870 features the already-faster GDDR5, improving upon bandwidth, latencies and voltage requirements. Both cards feature 800 stream processors and 512MB of memory, along with the 256-bit memory bus.

What sets Palit from the rest? Talking to the folks there, it’s quickly evident that they have a real passion for quality. They don’t have any desire to take a reference card and simply slap their sticker on it, but rather improve upon the initial design in various ways to improve the performance, overclocking-ability and durability.

One feature that Palit has implemented into many of their recent GPUs is a three-phase power solution, while the reference design only calls for two. Due to time, I was unable to haul the cooler off to check that out, but Palit assures me that it’s there. Another way they improve upon the launch design is with higher-quality capacitors. AMD and NVIDIA have been known to stick to the what will get the card by, but Palit wants to make sure their cards last a while (after all, RMA’s cost more money in the long-run) and also become the best overclockers.

Model
Core MHz
Mem MHz
Memory
Bus Width
Stream Proc.
HD 4870 X2
750
900
2x1024MB
256-bit
800
HD 4850 X2
625
993
2x1024MB
256-bit
800
HD 4870
750
900
512MB
256-bit
800
HD 4850
625
993
512MB
256-bit
800
HD 3870 X2
825
900
2x512MB
256-bit
320
HD 3850 X2
666
828
2x512MB
256-bit
320
HD 3870
775
900
512MB
256-bit
320
HD 3850
666
828
512MB
256-bit
320
HD 3650
725
800
256,512MB
128-bit
120
HD 3450
600
500
256MB
64-bit
40

As you’d expect, the HD 4850 and HD 4870 both support two cards in Crossfire mode, but as you’ll see below, it will cost you a powerful power supply, one with four separate 6-pin PCI-E connectors. Interestingly, all that’s needed to power two GPUs on the same card (HD 4870 X2) is two extra ground wires. For non-Crossfire setups, a well-built 550W should deliver more than enough power.

Palit’s offering includes two DVI ports and a TV-Out, although HDMI and VGA are both possible with included adapters. The card supports HDCP, so using the HDMI adapter should deliver excellent Blu-ray performance and quality.

Below you can see the Crossfire connector and also a warning label. It denotes a hot surface, and I for one, can verify that this warning is well-warranted. I won’t get into how I found out, however.

In way of included accessories we found an install guide, Crossfire connector, the DVI and VGA adapters, driver CD-Rom, TV-Out cable and also a dual-Molex power connector used to create an extra PCI-E 6-pin, in case your PSU only includes one.

Palit did a solid job with the presentation of the card, and the included accessories are far from lacking. Their card offers a 3-phase power solution and slightly higher-quality capacitors, so we’ll see if that makes a difference in our overclocking tests.

On the following page, we’ll review our testing methodology, which is a highly-recommended read if you haven’t read it before, or if you are new to the site.

Testing Methodology and Test System

Regardless of the operating system or product being reviewed, there are a few conditions that are met prior to testing to assure we receive accurate, repeatable results.

Below is our testbed, which remains untouched throughout all GPU-related testing, except for the graphics card. Each card that we include results for in our graphs is also listed here, along with the driver version used. Each URL in this table can be clicked to bring you to the respective review or related category.

Component
Model
Processor
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 – Quad-Core, 3.0GHz, 1.30v
Motherboard
ASUS Maximus Extreme – X38-based, 1104 BIOS (07/23/08)
Memory
OCZ 2GB Titanium DDR3-1600 – DDR3-1333. 7-7-7-20-1T, 1.90v
ATI Graphics
Palit Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB (Catalyst 8.52.2-080722a Beta Driver)
Palit HD 4870 512MB (Catalyst 8.8)
ASUS EAH4850 512MB (Catalyst 8.6 Hotfix)
ASUS EAH3870 X2 1GB (Catalyst 8.3)
ASUS EAH3850 TOP 256MB (Catalyst 8.2)
NVIDIA Graphics
Palit GTX 280 1GB (GeForce 177.41)
ASUS EN9800GTX 512MB (GeForce 174.53)
Palit 9600GSO Sonic 768MB (GeForce 174.53)
Gigabyte 9600 GT 512MB (GeForce 174.53)
ASUS EN8800GTX 768MB (GeForce 169.25)
ASUS EN8800GTS 512MB (GeForce 169.25)
Palit 8800GT Super+ 1GB (GeForce 169.25)
Audio
On-Board Audio
Storage
Seagate Barracuda 500GB 7200.11
Power Supply
Antec TruePower Quattro 1000W
Chassis
Antec P182 Mid-Tower
Display
Gateway XHD3000 30″
Cooling
Corsair Nautilus 500 Water-Cooling
Et cetera
Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit

In previous GPU reviews, we’ve used Windows XP Professional due to its stability (when compared to Vista), but as Vista becomes increasingly popular and the choice for many, it makes sense for us to make the switch as well. We choose to use the 64-Bit version of the OS due to it being the logical choice for gamers who want to use more than 2GB of RAM in their machine.

Game Benchmarks

Depending on the graphic card being reviewed, we split up models into two different categories: Low-End to Mid-Range and Mid-Range to High-End. The former will see the GPUs tested using 1280×1024 and 1680×1050 resolutions, since those are the most common resolutions for gamers looking to purchase a GPU in that price-range.

For our Mid-Range to High-End category, we test GPUs at 1680×1050, 1920×1200 and also 2560×1600 to better reflect the resolutions for those looking for a solid GPU offering.

We do not use time demos in our reviews except where necessary, and in the case of our current GPU reviews, the only game to be subject to a time demo is Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. This is due to that game disallowing greater than 60FPS without the use of a time demo. But since the game is a popular choice for multiplayer gamers, it should be included in some form or another.

Manual Benchmarks

In an attempt to deliver “real-world” results, all games except the above mentioned title are played through manually, with the average FPS recorded with the help of FRAPS 2.9.4. In our personal tests, we have found that manual benchmarks are the best way to deliver accurate results, since time demos rely heavily on the CPU.

In order to deliver the best results, each title we choose is explored to find the best possible level for our benchmarking. Once a level is chosen, we play through in order to find the best route, and then in future runs, we stick to that route as close as possible. We are not robots, so we cannot make sure that each run is identical, but they will never be far off from each other. As we see in our results, scaling is good, so we are confident that our methodology is a good one.

Crysis

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600



Call of Duty 4

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600

Half Life 2: Episode Two

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600

Call of Juarez

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600



S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600

Unreal Tournament III

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600



Need for Speed: Pro Street

1680×1050
1920×1200


Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

1680×1050
1920×1200
2560×1600



Note that Need for Speed: Pro Street is not run at 2560×1600 because the game lacks the ability to run at that resolution.

Crysis

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Crysis

It’s not often that a game comes along that truly pushes our hardware to the utmost limit. Crysis is one of those few games, and that will be the case for at least the next year. Don’t believe me? Boot up your top-end machine, max out your resolution and set the graphics to “Very High”. I guarantee tears will be shed within a few seconds of loading a level.

The level we chose here is Onslaught, also known as level five. We begin out in a tunnel, but what’s important is that we are in control of a tank. What could be more fun? Our run through consists of leaving the tunnel and hitting the other side of the battlefield, killing six or seven enemy tanks along the way.

It goes without saying that any level in Crysis would make for a great benchmark, but this one in particular is gorgeous. Using the “Medium” settings, the game looks spectacular and is playable on all of our graphic cards, so we stick with it. Throughout the level, there is much foliage and trees and also large view-distances. Explosions from the tanks is also a visual treat, making this one level I don’t mind playing over and over, and over.

Settings: Due to the intensiveness of the game, no AA is used at any resolution, and the secondary settings are all left to Medium.

Please note the lack of HD 4870 X2 results. The reasons were laid out in that review, as our particular card performed horribly in both Crysis and Half-Life 2. I’m still unsure of the reason my particular driver / card experienced issues while others had none, but I’m still looking into it.

The real power of the card proved itself in our higher resolution tests, and at 2560×1600, it dominated in the battle with NVIDIA’s 9800 GTX. The GTX 280 was impossible to catch, but that’s not surprising given the pricing differences between the two.

Call of Duty 4

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Call of Duty 4

While Crysis has the ability to bring any system to its knees with reasonable graphic settings, Call of Duty 4 is a title that looks great no matter what setting you choose, even if you have it running well! It’s also one of the few games on the market that will benefit from having more than one core in your machine, as well.

The level chosen here is The Bog, for the simple fact that it’s incredibly intensive on the system. Though it takes place at night, there is more gunfire, explosions and specular lighting than you can shake an assault rifle at.

Our run consists of proceeding through the level to a point where we are about to leave a building we entered a minute before, after killing off a slew of enemies. The entire run-through takes about four minutes on average.

Settings: High details are used overall throughout all tests, although 4x AA is used for our 1920×1200 setting. That AA is removed in our 2560×1600. As we can see in the graphs below, both of those settings are quite similar in performance.

Like our Crysis results, the HD 4870 crawled right behind the GTX 280 in each one of our tests… a very good thing. Sadly, we don’t have a GTX 260 here to compare to, but we could expect its results to be comparable to the HD 4870.

Half-Life 2: Episode Two

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Half-Life 2: Episode Two

If there is one game in our line-up that most everyone has played at some point, it would be Half-Life 2. The most recent release is Episode Two, a game that took far too long to see the light of day. But despite that, it proved to be worth the wait as it delivered more of what fans loved.

We are using the Silo level for our testing, which is a level most people who haven’t even played the game know about, thanks to Valves inclusion of it in their Episode Two trailers during the year before its release. During our gameplay, we shoot down a total of three Striders (their locations are identical with each run, since we are running a saved game file) and a barn is blown to smithereens.

Overall it’s a great level, but the Strider’s minions can prove a pain in the rear at times – most notably when they headbutt you. Nothing a little flying log won’t solve, however! This levels graphics consist mostly of open fields and trees, although there is a few explosions in the process as well, such as when you blow the Striders apart with the help of the Magnusson Device.

Settings: High graphic settings are used throughout all three resolutions, with 4x AA and 8xAF.

Our GTX 280 card almost looked like it was getting whipped, but that was until we hit the 2560×1600 resolution, where it still shined. The HD 4870 sure wasn’t lazy though, and it consistently beats out the HD 3870 X2, which was launched just earlier this year.

Call of Juarez

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Call of Juarez

Western FPS games are not common, so when one hits, people notice. Luckily for FPS fans, Call of Juarez delivered great graphics, solid gameplay and a very high difficulty. It’s a great game to benchmark due to its ability to run in DX10 mode, under Windows Vista. This mode is far more demanding than the DX9 mode, but the results are better.

We take the role of Billy Candle in the level we chose, which is rather simple in concept. We begin out at the end of a linear path that we must follow in order to reach a ravine that we must cross.

The goal of the level is to sneak through a farm and ride off with a horse in order to make the jump, but since that process takes far too long, our run through consists of following the exact same path each time, which ends up on the opposite side of the farm near an edge with water below.

Settings: Very high graphic settings are used here, although AA is never used. The fact that the game uses DX10 is enough to drag performance down.

CoJ is one particular title that really shows the benefit of the HD 4870 X2. In each of the tests, it comes extremely close to 100% the performance of our HD 4870, while also surpassing the GTX 280 by an almost hilarious amount. If only all games scaled so well.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

Post-apocalyptic FPS games have been done over and over, but S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl was unique in many ways. First was the fact that the story was loosely based off of a real-life tragedy, the Chernobyl nuclear plant explosion, with the player starting out post-disaster working to survive in the now very brutal world.

One of the areas where the game excelled was with the depth. It was an open world with non-linear gameplay. AI was not top-rate, but reacted in a mostly realistic way, so it’s pretty much impossible to just stroll through the game and not expect to die. Coupled with the ability to keep an inventory and sell artifacts you find along your journey makes this game an immersive experience.

The level we use for our testing is a “Thumb Drive” mission that occurs earlier in the game. The premise is simple… walk into a small camp that’s being inhabited by enemy Stalkers, wipe them out and go deliver a thumb drive to a lone Stalker huddled around a campfire. The entire quest takes between four and five minutes from our starting point.

Settings: Static lighting and medium quality is used for our lowest resolution here, while 1920 and 2560 use full dynamic lighting along with high quality settings.

Not one to break our rhythm, the HD 4870 once again comes up right behind the GTX 280, but the utter domination of the dual-GPU version of the card is clear as day.

Unreal Tournament III

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Unreal Tournament III

The Unreal series has always been one that’s pushed graphics to the next level. Surprisingly, though, as the graphics improve, the game still remains playable on a reasonable machine, with good FPS. How often is that the case?

“Gateway” is our level of choice for a few different reasons. The first and most notable is the fact that it’s a great level, and chock-full of eye-candy. The entire level consists of three different areas that can be accessed through portals, or “gateways”. The area we begin out in is a snow-filled wonderland, similar to Lost Planet’s winter levels, with a futuristic city and waterfall area also being accessible.

Settings: All in-game settings are maxed out, with physics and smooth frame rate disabled.

When we first took a look at the HD 3870 X2, I noted how well two GPUs scaled with this title. But here, AMD has released a card so fast, it actually surpasses that one at certain resolutions. Both come very close to one another at 2560×1600.

Need for Speed: Pro Street

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Need for Speed: Pro Street

Electronic Arts is one of the largest game publishers in the world, and because of that, they have plenty of fans and plenty of enemies. Even if you don’t like them, it’s hard to dispute the fact that many of their games are solid, one being anything from the Need for Speed series.

“Pro Street” received rather poor reviews upon launch, and for mostly good reason. It removes the freedom of being able to explore a city at your leisure, which to many, is a huge step backwards. But despite that fact, it’s still a great game if you enjoy the series and want an offering that’s a little more realistic than previous versions (in terms of money and damage).

Our run through consists of racing through two laps at the Chicago Airfield, something that takes about three and a half minutes to accomplish from the moment we begin recording frames. The beginning of each race shows an automated camera fly-by over the cars in the race – we begin recording our FPS as soon as this clip begins.

Settings: Our lowest resolution uses fully default settings, while the 1920 resolution ups the AA to 4x and enables Anisotropic texture filtering.

What can be said? The HD 4870 performs exceptionally here, even surpassing what the GTX 280 could muster. At FPS like these, it almost makes little real-world difference adding in a second GPU.

Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

Each graph for our benchmarking results are labeled with the resolution that the game was played at, while omitting secondary settings such as Anti-Aliasing, Anisotropic Filtering, texture quality, et cetera. To view all specific settings that we used, please refer to our testing methodology page, where screenshots show the exact settings used.

Enemy Territory: Quake Wars

The last game we will be using in our benchmarks is ET: Quake Wars. This is also the only game in our testing that’s executed as a time demo, as opposed to the manual play through like the rest of our games. The reason for this is twofold.

The first reason is that we like to include at least one time demo, despite its CPU-boundedness, in order to see how our cards scale when run in such a situation. The second is the fact that this game caps its FPS at 60, except during time demos.

Our time demo takes place in the Area 22 level, with the main goal to destroy the jamming generator. The actual play through took around five minutes, but the time demo goes far quicker, as is the case with most time demos.

Settings: Maxed settings are used here for the most part. Our 1680 resolution uses 2x AA while 1920 and 2560 use 4x.

Once again, the card performs well, beating out the HD 3870 in all resolutions and delivers an ideal gameplay experience (well, granted you don’t suck at the game like I do).

Futuremark 3DMark Vantage

3DMark doesn’t need to be explained to most anyone, because if you’ve been benchmarking or PC gaming for a while, you have no doubt heard of Futuremark and their tools. Vantage is the newest of the bunch, and its tests are as hardcore as they come. The benchmark properly stresses a GPU, and spits out an overall score for you to munch on.

The overall use of these scores is constantly debated, because real gameplay matters far more than canned benchmarks. However, they are still fun to use for the sake of competition. In no way should they be the sole factor of your GPU purchasing decision, however.

As far as Vantage is concerned, the differences between our HD 4870 and its little brother, the HD 4850, are rather significant. At lower resolution, the scores are not much different compared to the GTX 280 either, but that changes as the resolution increases, as we’d expect.

Overclocking Palit’s Radeon HD 4870

If you’ve read any of my processor reviews, you are probably aware that I don’t much care for an unstable overclock. As far as I’m concerned, a high overclock is only good if it’s stable, because realistically, no one purchases a new GPU for the sake of only finding the maximum overclock. That is why I focus on finding the max stable overclock, rather than an overclock that can barely pass a benchmark run.

To find a max stable overclock, I first find an overclock that I believe could be stable. Once I do that, I’ll run a single loop of 3DMark 2006 to test for stability and to look for artifacts. If that run passes successfully, I’ll jump into a game quickly to see if the same results are exhibited in real-world gameplay. If that proves successful, I then run a loop of 3DMark 2006 for 4 – 8 hours at 2560×1600 2xAA to stress the card to its limit.

If after that point, the card is deemed stable (as in, no crashes occurred and there are still no artifacts), then I will proceed with benchmarking seven of our titles again: Call of Duty 4, Call of Juarez, Crysis, Half-Life 2: Episode Two, NFS Pro Street, STALKER and also Unreal Tournament III. Please note that NFS Pro Street is run at 1920×1200, due to that being the max the game allows.

Palit Radeon HD 4870 512MB

Before tackling overclocking, I should note that all cards so far in AMD’s HD 4000-series run hot, and by hot, I mean you could use it to boil water for your morning coffee. Alright, so it’s not that hot, but I’ve already recruited this card to my Folding machine this winter, if that gives you any idea.

Because the cards run so hot, I’m of the mindset that overclocking is simply not important. There are speed demons out there who will disagree, but both the HD 4850 and 4870 GPUs are screamers, and all that overclocking does is increase your performance at most 2%, and that to me, is really, really not worth the extra stress on the card or the extra heat. But, for those who refuse to leave any piece of silicon at stock, here are the results:

Overclocking was accomplished with AMD’s Overdrive utility in their control center, and oddly enough, this card could reach the max value allowed without issue, of 790MHz Core and 950MHz Memory. As you can see, the increases are good, but not amazing. If you do insist of overclocking, it might not be a half-bad idea to consider water-cooling… or a second HD 4870 for what will make any HD 4870 overclock look entirely lackluster.

Power Consumption, Final Thoughts

In testing power consumption for our graphic cards, the system components are kept consistent to help keep accurate results. To capture wattage, a Kill-a-Watt is used. It is plugged straight into the wall and the PSU is plugged in directly to it. After the computer boots into Windows and is left idle for five minutes, the idle wattage is captured.

To capture the average, a run of 3DMark Vantage is run while keeping an eye on the voltage for the first two minutes. I record the value that the Kill-a-Watt reports the majority of the time. Sometimes the wattage might go higher, but scale right back down, and vice versa.

AMD’s latest series of cards might run super-hot, but they manage to use less power overall when compared to NVIDIA’s offerings. The HD 4870, as we’ve seen, is far superior to the 9800 GTX, but the latter uses slightly more power. Compared to the HD 4850, the HD 4870 uses just 24W more on average.

Final Thoughts

It’s certainly old news by now, but AMD’s 4000-series is a winner in all sense of the word. As mentioned in the intro, when NVIDIA released their GTX 200-series this summer, AMD wasted no time in showing them who’s boss, and I think it surprised us all. When the GTX 280 first hit, I was impressed. It was a beast, no two ways about it, but AMD came along with their HD 4870 X2 and people were in awe.

Luckily, the single-GPU HD 4870 is an equally great offering. It costs almost half of the HD 4870 X2, and outperforms NVIDIA’s previous high-end card, the 9800 GTX. Although we don’t have a GTX 260 here for comparison, I do know that other trusted editors have found the HD 4870 to be the superior card of the two. In some cases, even the HD 4850 can out-perform it. Indeed, it’s going to be a tough quarter for NVIDIA, and now they know how AMD have felt for the past two years.

The question to answer is whether or not this card is for you, and that answer is probably ‘yes’. If you have ~$300 to spend on a GPU, you simply cannot go wrong with this one. It’s more powerful than the GTX 260 in most cases and handles almost every-single one of our games like a dream, even at the ultra-high resolution of 2560×1600. It’s a mid-range card that feels like a high-end card.

What about the hardcore gamers, though? If you happen to have a nice 24″ or higher monitor and want the ultimate in performance, then a $300 card is probably only the beginning for you. You could pick up a single card now, see how it treats you, then upgrade later by picking up another. Those of you with 30″ behemoths might want to jump the gun and pick up a dual-GPU version of the card, especially if you enjoy using anti-aliasing throughout most of your games.

Palit has once again delivered a great offering here, and included all the accessories you might need. The only thing missing might be an included game, but no other company’s HD 4870 included one either. Overall, this is a truly great card, and it would undoubtedly be the first choice of mine if I were on the look-out for a new card in this price-range.


Palit Radeon HD 4870

Discuss in our forums!

If you have a comment you wish to make on this review, feel free to head on into our forums! There is no need to register in order to reply to such threads.

Copyright © 2005-2017 Techgage Networks Inc. - All Rights Reserved.