MSI Radeon HD 4890 Review

Ever since ATI introduced the Radeon HD48xx cards in the summer of 2008, users have scrambled to choose sides in the graphics card debate. What really shook things up was the price at which ATI introduced the newest cards, offering the performance of rival NVIDIA's top GPUs at much lower price points. Up until now the HD4870 has been ATI's most powerful single GPU solution. ATI has retooled the RV770 GPU found in the 4870 and 4850 cards and reintroduced it in the all-new HD4890. With a reported increase in stability and reduced signal noise, is the HD4890 a sufficient competitor to the GeForce GTX 275? Read on for our full review.

Specifications

• GPU: 55nm RV790
• Core clock: 850MHz
• Memory: 1024MB GDDR5 @ 975MHz
• Digital output: 2 x DVI-I
• Analog output: 1 x S-video
• Power: 2 x 6-pin PCI Express
• Interface: PCI Express 2.0 x16
• Warranty: one year limited parts and labor warranty

The overclocked MSI R4890-T2D1G-OC has a GPU clocked at 880MHz and carries a suggested retail price of $259.99. The R4890-T2D1G reference version in this review, tuned to 850MHz, comes in slightly cheaper.

Build and Design
Lately, MSI has been jumping on the netbook and nettop bandwagon, introducing model after model. It's easy to forget that they produce a lot of motherboards and video cards for all sides of the market. In this case, it's the HD4890, ATI's newest high-end graphics card. The card itself is sturdy and well designed, though heavier than it looks. I didn't get a chance to directly measure the weights but it actually feels heavier than the GTX 275, despite the fact that it's over an inch shorter. Like most MSI products, the circuit board is a brilliant red color, as is the bottom of the heatsink assembly and fan.

The cooler is painted black on top with a picture of a menacing ogre or troll on top. Similar to the EVGA GeForce GTX 275, the fan here is a cylindrical multi-blade model that helps cool the unit without getting too loud. This 4890 is the first card to use ATI's new GPU, the RV790. The new GPU microarchitecture is essentially a tweaked version of its predecessor, the RV770 found in the 4870 and 4850 cards. While the basic components of the chip and card are the same, there are a few differences. Among the changes are an improved layout that allows for better power distribution as well as a significant clock speed increase. To counter the increased signal noise resulting from higher clock speeds, ATI added decoupling capacitors, which account somewhat for the increased transistor count and die size.

As mentioned in the specifications, the reference design for this card calls for a clock speed of 850MHz and a memory clock of 975MHz. Board partners will also be releasing overclocked variants, ranging anywhere from 880MHz to 900MHz and above. The RV790 reportedly lends itself very well to overclocking, with some users reporting overclocks of well over 100MHz on the card. Rumors are already flying that at least one manufacturer is planning an HD4890X2 with memory ranges of 2 - 4GB GDDR5, though it is certainly still up in the air.

The card itself is pretty large, physically, though not as large as the HD4870X2 or even the GeForce GTX 275. MSI's HD4890 measures up to just a hair under ten inches, which may cause some users a few issues especially in small cases. A bigger issue, however, is the placement of the power adapters on the end of the card. Even though the card may not be as long as some, having to connect the PCI-E power cables can be problematic, with hard drives and SATA cords in the way.

Performance
So what do nearly a billion transistors do in terms of performance? The price point of this card looks to pit it squarely against NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 275, and fortunately we just took a look at an example from EVGA. Our test system includes an AMD Phenom II 955 CPU, an ASUS M4A79T Deluxe motherboard, 4 GB of Corsair XMS3 DDR3 RAM, an OCZ Vertex SSD and of course the Radeon HD4890 video card.

Granted, the EVGA GeForce GTX 275 card that we got in is an overclocked version, though not by much. The MSI Radeon HD4890 wasn't overclocked for any of the benchmarks, though users looking for some extra oomph shouldn't have any difficulty in upping the card's clock speeds.

3DMark Vantage results:

Category	3DMark Vantage score		3DMark06 score
	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890
Overall score	P11705	P10584	15226 3DMarks	16966 3DMarks
GPU subscore	11496	10041	--	--
CPU subscore	12381	12636	--	--

The 3DMark tests foreshadow how the rest of the benchmarks seem to be going: the two cards trade blows back and forth, with no clear victor. PPU tests are disabled during 3DMark Vantage since otherwise it skews the CPU score results and weights the overall score incorrectly.

Bioshock results:

Settings	Minimum framerate		Maximum framerate		Average framerate
	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890
1680x1050, settings maxed	82 fps	90 fps	265 fps	198 fps	146.5 fps	126.8 fps
1920x1200, settings maxed	73 fps	76 fps	188 fps	209 fps	123.9 fps	116.6 fps

Despite the age of the game, it still scales well and therefore can be used to benchmark even new systems. The cards are fairly neck and neck here, except for the significantly higher maximum framerate found in the GTX 275 on WXGA settings. It's probably safe to say that this is going to be a fluke, considering how similar the rest of the table is.

Call of Duty: World at War results (4x AA/AF):

Settings	Minimum framerate		Maximum framerate		Average framerate
	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890
1680x1050, settings on auto	64 fps	61 fps	94 fps	94 fps	83.7 fps	82.9 fps
1920x1200, settings on auto	45 fps	43 fps	93 fps	93 fps	79.4 fps	69.3 fps

The trend continues on here with the cards faring fairly close together, save for the average score on 1920x1200 resolutions. Still, the HD 4890 remains competitive with the GTX 275, and both cards give a smooth performance, rendering the games easily playable.

Left 4 Dead results (8xAA/no AF):

Settings	Minimum framerate		Maximum framerate		Average framerate
	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890
1680x1050, settings maxed	62 fps	91 fps	215 fps	203 fps	138.4 fps	145.7 fps
1920x1200, settings maxed	69 fps	80 fps	165 fps	164 fps	122.2 fps	125.1 fps

Left 4 Dead runs well on ATI video cards and it shows here, with the HD 4890 coming out on top in four out of the six metrics. Despite this, the average scores have a difference of less than ten percent, just like most of the other benchmarks in the review.

Crysis v1.2 results (no AA/AF):

Settings	Minimum framerate		Maximum framerate		Average framerate
	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890
1920x1200, all settings medium	23 fps	28 fps	82 fps	74 fps	46.9 fps	51.1 fps
1680x1050, all settings high	23 fps	24 fps	54 fps	55 fps	38.4 fps	40.5 fps
1920x1200, all settings high	22 fps	20 fps	64 fps	48 fps	36.6 fps	35.6 fps

Crysis has been the stress test for seeing how much game a video card can handle for some time, now, and it doesn't help that the game is optimized to run better on NVIDIA cards, not ATI cards. Despite this, the MSI 4890 performs admirably, giving average framerates of well over thirty frames per second in each of the three different tests. Once again, however, the overall scores are less than ten percent better or worse than the competition's offering.

Crysis Warhead results (no AA/AF):

Settings	Minimum framerate		Maximum framerate		Average framerate
	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890	GTX 275	HD 4890
1920x1200, all settings mainstream	27 fps	28 fps	83 fps	74 fps	54.6 fps	52.7 fps
1680x1050, all settings gamer	21 fps	20 fps	54 fps	50 fps	37.3 fps	37.3 fps
1920x1200, all settings gamer	18 fps	17 fps	50 fps	41 fps	33.2 fps	30.8 fps

Crysis Warhead gives pretty similar results to Crysis, save for the fact that its high (now called "Gamer") settings are a little tougher on video cards than the original game showed. One thing to keep in mind is that neither card can run this game at high resolutions smoothly at all times. In this case, MSI's HD 4890 dropped down to 17 frames per second at certain points during the game. Granted, the average was above thirty, but users would still experience jerkiness and/or slowdown during really intense scenes.

Power, Heat and Noise
The reference HD 4890 has lower idling power draws and higher maximum power draws than the HD 4870, and this seemed to bear out in our tests. At idle, the card still drew an extra 66 watts over the system minimum. When maxing out the graphics card, the test machine pulled an extra 187 watts. Gamers wanting to push the limits and overclock their cards will likely see some additional power draws. Recent ATI cards have opted to let the card run hotter by keeping fan speeds down, making the cards run a lot quieter than they otherwise might. This trend continues into the HD 4890; even when maxing out the card, fans only ramped up to 36% of maximum speeds.

When the computer first starts, the fans are impossibly loud, but they quickly spin down to almost silent. At idle, the fans run around 26% of total, keeping the card at a really toasty idle temperature of 60 degrees Celsius. After running for twenty minutes or so with FurMark, the card only managed to get to 71 degrees Celsius. For users who don't mind the noise, the fans can be dialed up a good bit faster; while it's a lot louder, it's also a lot cooler.

Conclusion
ATI has a solid performer on their hands with the Radeon HD 4890. It's certainly competitive against its closest twin on competitor NVIDIA's side, leaving the choice of cards down to features aside from performance. While NVIDIA grants users access to a relatively robust set of applications that take advantage of the computational abilities found in their GPUs, ATI gives users a lot of customization over how their cards work. Fan speeds and clock speeds are all mutable, and early reviews peg the 4890 as a very worthy card if overclocking is among a user's hobbies.

With prices almost the same and performance not much different, users are forced to look outside the box to decide which card to buy. It might be brand loyalty, it might be the yearning for great new GPU-enhanced programs, it might be how well the card overclocks. It comes down to which card meets a specific user's preferences, and with two very similar and yet very different options from which to choose, it's hard to pick the losing team.

Pros

• Runs quiet by default
• Good performance on most games
• Great overclocking potential

Cons

• Power adapters on ends of card make it difficult to connect in smaller cases
• Card either runs hot and quiet or cool and very loud
• One year warranty not as great as some other options

Samsung Unveils Its First Android Phone

Samsung has just officially announced its first phone running Google's Android. The Samsung I7500 will be a cutting-edge device with a 3.2-inch OLED touchscreen, 7.2 Mbps HSDPA, and Wi-Fi.

This model will have a tablet shape and an HVGA display. Users will need to depend on the touchscreen for text input and dialing numbers, as there is no hardware keyboard.

On its list of high-end features are a 5 megapixel auto-focus camera and 8 GB of built-in storage.

The Benefits of Android
The I7500 will run Android 1.5, an operating system developed by Google and one that's strongly tied to this company's services.

This includes Google Search, Gmail, YouTube, Google Calendar, and Google Talk. The integrated GPS receiver will let users take advantage of all of Google Maps' features, such as My Location, Google Latitude, Street View, local search and detailed route description.

In addition, there is a growing collection of third-party software in the Android Market.

Other Features
This Samsung model will be a quad-band GSM phone (850/900/1800/1900 MHz) with tri-band HSDPA at 7.2 Mbps and HSUPA at 5.76 Mbps (90 /1700/2100 MHz).

In addition, it will have Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 2.0.

This device will include a microSD slot with support for 32 GB cards, a 3.5 mm headset jack, and a 1500 mAh battery.

Overall, it will be 115 mm x 56 mm x 11.9 mm.

Coming this Summer
Samsung says the I7500 will be available in major European countries starting in June.

There was no mention of a release in the U.S., but this phone includes support for 3G at 1700 MHz, a strong hint that T-Mobile USA may offer it at some point. This isn't surprising, as Samsung has already announced it is developing a device for this carrier.

It is also working on one for Sprint, and a CDMA version of the I7500 could be it.

ASUS F50SV-A2 Review

The ASUS F50SV-A2 is a midrange gaming notebook that offers an Intel P8600 Core 2 Duo Processor and a NVIDIA GeForce GT 120M 1GB graphics card in a 16” shell. The notebook also offers a built-in Blu-ray drive for watching movies on the 16:9 display or outputting them through HDMI to your home entertainment system. Priced at $1,149 ASUS has this F50 competing against the HP dv6t, Gateway MC series, and Dell Studio XPS 16. Is the ASUS F50 worth checking out? Read our full review to find out.

ASUS F50SV-A2 Specifications:

• Processor: 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 (1066MHz FSB, 3MB L2 Cache)
• Chipset: SiS 671DX+968
• Memory: 4GB DDR2-800 (2GB x 2GB)
• HDD: 320GB 7200rpm
• Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 120M 1GB GDDR2 VRAM
• Display: 16.0” WXGA 1366x768 Color-Shine (Glossy)
• Optical Drive: BD-ROM + DVDRW+/-
• OS: Windows Vista Home Premium SP1 (64 bit)
• Wireless: Atheros AR928x B/G/N Wifi and Bluetooth 2.0
• Battery: 6-cell battery
• Dimensions: 14.96" x 10.43" x 1.4" ~ 1.64"
• Weight: 6lbs 5.9oz, 7lbs 5.2oz travel weight
• Warranty: 2 year global, 1 year accidental damage
• Price as configured: $1,149

Build and Design
The ASUS F50 has a slick design that looks clean and very modern. In a way you could easily compare it to the look HP uses in their notebooks having most of the surfaces color-matched and glossy. The palmrest and touchpad surface share the same design, with the pattern flowing seamlessly through both surfaces. Above, the keyboard keys are matte black with glossy black trim bordering the keyboard. The F50 lacks touch-sensitive multimedia keys, instead having only quick access buttons for Instant-On, power switching mode, Web browser, touchpad disable, and power.

Build quality is above average with solid plastic used throughout the notebook, which helps reduce flex and protect components. The screen cover gives adequate protection against impacts and the display shows no ripples when you press firmly on the back cover. The palmrest has good support and only flexes under strong pressure from your hands. Under normal activity it feels rock solid. The keyboard is the same, with minimal flex under heated typing.

ASUS gives quick access to user-serviceable components through two access panels on the back of the notebook. One bay houses only the hard drive, while the other has the processor, memory, and wireless card. No “warranty void if removed” stickers were present on the covers, but one was stuck to one of the processor heatsink screws.

Display
The 16” display is above average in terms of viewing quality, but I really wish ASUS could have included a higher resolution panel. When manufacturers stick with lower resolutions on larger panels pixels become more apparent and screen real estate seems wasted. The panel is a Samsung model, with the part number being 160At01-A05. Overall the panel looks good with good color saturation and contrast levels thanks in part to the glossy surface.

Screen brightness is fine for viewing in a bright office environment ... even at lower brightness settings. Outdoor viewing is limited by glare off the glossy surface, but it might be usable if you found a big tree to sit under with lots of shade. Vertical viewing angles are normal, having a narrow viewing sweet spot before color starts to wash out or invert. On the F50SV you have about 10 degrees forward or back before you start to see colors changing. Horizontal viewing angles are much better, staying true even to very steep angles.

Keyboard and Touchpad
The keyboard on the F50 is full-size with numberpad, using all of the space provided by the wide 16” chassis. It is comfortable to type on, but the key shape might take a bit to get used to. Individual key action is smooth with a light audible click when pressed. Most keys are shaped with a cupped surface on top and wide sloped edges. The F50 is designed with more of a flat top and narrow sloped edges. If you are used to sliding your fingers across the keyboard to other keys, you will catch your fingertip on the edge of each key. After typing for a couple of hours you get used to it, but it does feel weird if you aren’t expecting it. One odd feature of the F50’s keyboard is a rather large right-side control key, which is wider than the shift key on that side, coming in at 33mm wide.

ASUS includes a large Synaptics-based touchpad on the F50 which is comfortable to use and quick to respond to finger movements. The texture of the touchpad surface is matte and was easy to slide your fingertip across even when moist. The touchpad surface is recessed from the palmrest, and defined by a smooth ridge, making it hard accidentally slip off the surface. The touchpad buttons are operated through a seesaw-style button which requires a solid press to activate each side. It has a shallow throw with minimal feedback.

Ports and Features
Port selection on the F50 is adequate, but the layout seems awkward for a notebook of this size. No ports are located on the right side, reserved only for the optical drive. three USB ports are on the left side and one additional port on the back. No eSATA port is included, limiting fast external storage, which is odd considering many new notebooks include them. The remaining ports include LAN, VGA, HDMI, and audio jacks for headphones and a microphone.

Included with the purchase of the notebook are a wired USB optical mouse and carrying case. The mouse is average, but works great in a pinch when gaming. The carrying case provides some mild protection for the notebook against drops, but more importantly it keeps the new finish free from scratches right out of the box. If you plan on buying a new case anyway, it can be a temporary case to protect the F50 in the meantime.

Performance
System performance is very good for a midrange multimedia notebook, thanks in part to the 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo P8600 processor and NVIDIA GeForce GT 120M graphics card. The system was able to easily play games like Call of Duty: World at War and Left 4 Dead at native resolution and high settings without drastically slowing down or inhibiting gameplay. In Call of Duty with settings maxed, resolution set to 1366x768, and 2X anti-aliasing the game ran at 24-25 frames per second (FPS) under light action and dipped to under 20FPS under heavy action. With some mild tweaking it wouldn’t be hard to bump framerates even higher. Left 4 Dead at max detail settings, 1366x768 resolution, and anti-aliasing set to 2X ran above 30FPS throughout most of the game, only slipping to around 28FPS under heavy action.

wPrime processor comparison results (lower scores mean better performance):

Notebook / CPU	wPrime 32M time
Sony VAIO FW (Core 2 Duo T9400 @ 2.53GHz)	30.373 seconds
Dell Studio 17 (Core 2 Duo T9300 @ 2.50GHz)	31.574 seconds
Dell Studio XPS 16 (Core 2 Duo P8600 @ 2.40GHz)	31.827 seconds
ASUS F50SV-A2 (Core 2 Duo P8600 @ 2.40GHz)	31.857 seconds
HP Pavilion dv6z (AMD Athlon X2 QL-64 @ 2.10GHz)	38.519 seconds

PCMark05 measures overall system performance (higher scores mean better performance):

Notebook	PCMark05 Score
Dell Studio XPS 16 (2.4GHz Intel P8600, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670 512MB)	6,303 PCMarks
ASUS F50SV-A2 (2.4GHz Intel P8600, Nvidia GeForce GT 120M 1GB)	6,005 PCMarks
Sony VAIO FW (2.53GHz Intel T9400, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470)	6,002 PCMarks
Dell Studio 17 (2.50GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T9300, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650)	5,982 PCmarks
HP Pavilion dv6z (2.10GHz AMD Athlon X2 QL-64, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530 512MB)	4,119 PCMarks

3DMark06 graphics comparison against notebooks @ 1280 x 800 resolution (higher scores mean better performance):

Notebook	3DMark06 Score
ASUS F50SV-A2 (2.4GHz Intel P8600, Nvidia GeForce GT 120M 1GB)	5,152 3DMarks
Dell Studio XPS 16 (2.4GHz Intel P8600, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3670 512MB)	4,855 3DMarks
HP Pavilion dv6z (2.10GHz AMD Athlon X2 QL-64, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530 512MB)	3,254 3DMarks
Dell Studio 17 (2.50GHz Intel Core 2 Duo T9300, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650)	2,974 3DMarks
Sony VAIO FW (2.53GHz Intel T9400, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3470)	2,598 3DMarks

HDTune for the built-in hard drive:

Speakers
Speaker performance is average, with sound lacking low and midrange frequencies. Peak volume levels are decent for watching a movie or listening to music in a small room, but headphones or external stereo speakers would really be best. The speakers are mounted below the palmrest and lap-firing, which may get blocked by clothing if you have the notebook placed on your lap.

Battery
Battery life is limited by the NVIDIA GeForce GT 120M graphics card, making the notebook draw 29 watts at idle even when it lowered its clockspeed. With the system in balanced mode, wireless active, and screen brightness set to 70% the ASUS F50SV-A2 managed to stay on for 1 hour and 36 minutes with the 6-cell battery.

Heat and Noise
Noise under normal use is minimal or completely silent. Under light activity surfing the Web or typing a document the fan spins down and off, only spinning up to occasionally cool the system back down. Under heavier loads when gaming the fans stayed on constantly at a lower speed, which was audible but nothing that you could hear from across a room. External thermal performance was very good, with the system keeping its cool around the keyboard and palmrest. Under a full load the exhaust temperatures peaked at about 110F, with internal GPU core temps reaching 150F. Another source of heat was the power brick, which reached almost 120F when the notebook was under high load.

Conclusion
The ASUS F50SV-A2 gave strong performance in our benchmarks and real-life game tests, thanks mostly to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 120M graphics card. When not gaming though the graphics card had an abnormally high power consumption rate, making the system draw almost 29 watts at idle. For users who might want to take the notebook to class, it barely made it above 1 hour and 30 minutes in our tests.

I really enjoyed the design and great build quality, which should allow the notebook to last until it is no longer fast enough to run the latest software. Overall I think a perfect change might be swapping the Blu-ray drive for a higher resolution screen, but I may be biased already owning a Blu-ray player. If you are in the market for a higher performing multimedia notebook, check out the ASUS F50SV, but make sure you are always within range of a power outlet.

Pros:

• Good performance
• System able to keep its cool under heavy CPU and GPU loads
• Nice design and build quality

Cons:

• Mediocre battery life
• Very high power consumption at idle