Gainward HD4870 1GB GS
7. Benchmarks - Crysis Warhead Comparison
Review Pages
2. Test PC setup
3. Testbed DirectX9, DirectX10
4. Benchmarks - FutureMark Hall Of Fame
5. Benchmarks - Crysis (DirectX10)
6. Benchmarks - Crysis Warhead (DirectX9, DirectX10)
7. Benchmarks - Crysis Warhead Comparison
8. Benchmarks - Company Of Heroes v1.71 (DirectX 10)
9. Benchmarks - Far Cry 2 (DirectX 9/10)
10. Overclocking
11. Conclusion
12. Benchmarks - Half Life 2 Episode 2 (DirectX 9)
Here we summarize the performance of three main competitors in the market of graphics cards today when they render the Crysis WarHead v1.00 game. Comparing the HD4870 vs HD4850 and 260GTX should give you the best choice for this game.
Starting from the DirectX 9 and 1280x1024 we see that at all graphics cards gave alost the same performance at the "performance" and "mainstream" quality settings. The differences differences start to appear after the "Gamer" level.
Again, the "Enthusiast " level is very demanding and all three tested cards did not have an major differences in their performance.
At the 1680x1050, the performance differences between the three tested graphics cards are obvious. The Gainard HD4870 and the 260GTX gave the same results in the "Performance" and "Enthousiast" levels, while the 260GTX was faster at the "Mainstream" and "Gamer" settings .
At 1920x1200, the XFX 260GTX XXX is faster in all visual quality modes.
The DirectX10 rendering mode seems to be tougher for all the graphics cards. At the 1280x1024, both ATI graphics cards were slower than the 260GTX in the "Gamer" and "Mainstream" settings. Pushing the quality settings more resulted to an equal performance from both the the HD4870 and the 260GTX XXX.
Similar behavior at 1680x1050, with the the ATI-based cards to be slower than the Nvidia 260GTX until the "Gamer" level.
Finally at 1920x1200, the XFX 260GTX XXX was faster until "Mainstream" level, with both the HD4870 to catch up in the "Gamer" level and higher.