I laugh at your benchies. First off it can't play crysis the way you state. Secondly you left out cod4, which this card also spits and sputters on.
I purchased it when it first came out and was advertised as a 512/1gig card, which turned out not to be true. it was indeed a 256/1gig card.
my 8800gts640 blows this thing out of the water......... sorry

Specs: 6850 dual/4gig crucial ballistics/vista 64bit/ 16x10 res.

Quite a few improvements rolled out with later driver releases--ATI released a hotfix, even Crytek released a hotfix; I did run into problems benchmarking the card (because Crysis pitches a wobbly installing on Vista x64) but they had to do with the detail settings being fixed too high; when I re-benched the video card (when we added 3DMark Vantage) I got the same Crysis results.

This card is a good example of rushed hardware. While the card itself was solid (aside from the curved PCB--an exception as I've never come across any card with that bad of an irregularity) the drivers were terrible. Now that time has passed, the software has caught up significantly.

I also benchmarked an 8800 GTX--which will be included in future graphs--and it outperforms the 3870 1GB on medium detail settings, and a 9800 GTX matches and beats it, Crysis-wise. None of the results are particularly anomalous; the card just needed better drivers.

IMO I thought it was the 256bit memory interface that was holding this card ( and others ) back. When I saw it advertised as 512 I said "finally".

I find the 9800gtx's have the same flaw. Ive been around hardware for a while ( friend builds custom computers ) and I can't understand how some reviewers can say these cards are great when they really aren't. It's not because you feel obligated because the manufacturers send hardware to try out is it ?..... lol

I can't see playing Crysis on medium detail. You lose a lot of eye candy doing that. Also a lot of depth to the game. guess I'm spoiled....?

By the way, it was a gts not a gtx and I played all on high, 1680x1050 with no aa and only had to crank it back to 1024x768 after I hit a certain spot in the snow. Perhaps it's hardware differences between your machine and mine ?

Anyways, this month should bring salvation if the new cards from both camps are released and released on time. I had sent the 1gig 3870 back after it failed to perform to my expectations and can't wait to get my hands on one of the new ones. Really looking forward to an AMD/ATI card for a change of pace. Been a while since I had a good one from that camp. And even if Nvidia's new card stomps their product, I'll still buy it.

south side sammy: One thing you will NEVER see here at TheTechLounge is an overenthusiastic review in order to please the company providing the product for review. Sponsorship of a product and even advertising has absolutely no impact on the outcome of our reviews. Ever. Just wanted to make that very clear.

"IMO I thought it was the 256bit memory interface that was holding this card ( and others ) back. When I saw it advertised as 512 I said 'finally'."

You're spot-on. While it's obviously enough for single-gpu gaming, both CF and SLI are suffering inside the limited memory bandwidth. You can double up for faster framerates, but the detail and anti-aliasing ceilings remain practically the same; defeating the purpose, since most hardware can hit decent FPS in single-card setups.

By the way, having just benched an 8800 GTX, I have to say, those G80 parts are fantastic. No other hardware in history has not only stayed competetive, but actually put pressure on the high-end, like those video cards. Two years and the 9800 GTX is only marginally superior, and mostly for non-performance stuff.

how nice
i like ur explanation about video card thank you for your information