5770 is NOT good as 4870 or GTX260

[Patrickz0rs]

you must be a hit with the girls.

They LOL'ed all the way to class with me. Cause I getz mad hoes.

 

[Craig234]

4870 1gb is a sweety spot card right now isn't it, run pretty much anything you want 1920x1200 and affordable?

 

[cusideabelincoln]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd5770-hd5750_8.html#sect0

There's the same bench with the 5770. It's a little better than the 4850 but look at the minimum frame rates still plummeting in upper resolutions even when massively overclocked. GTX260 and 4890 does not show this behavior.

It might be 12% lower average frame rates but when you look at minimum frame rates it's 35% slower @ 1920x1200.

Just going by those results...

The 5770 has better minimums than the HD4890 and GTX260 in Stalker

It has better minimums than the GTX260 in Fallout 3

It has better minimums than the HD4890 and GTX260 in Need For Speed

Obviously the HD5770 has a bit of an erratic performance, but I would say it's certainly much better than the HD4850.

And we really can't put all of the blame solely on bandwidth. Let's not overlook the memory error detection. Let's not overlook drivers. Let's not overlook how the HD5770 is faster than the 4890, and of course in other games it's a bit slower than an HD4870.

 

[BFG10K]

I blame the bandwidth.

The GTX285 has more than twice the bandwidth, yet the 5770 absolutely destroys it in games like Doom 3 at 2560x1600 with 8xAA. You can’t get much more bandwidth limited than that. On the flip side, the 5770 is sometimes slower than the 4850 despite having more bandwidth than it.

Such erratic behavior cannot be explained by bandwidth, but it can be explained by drivers.

Between that and my bottleneck investigation, I’m really not convinced the 5770’s primary bottleneck is memory bandwidth as the entire internet seems to believe.

 

[nemesismk2]

I cannot agree any more, the 5770 is well overpriced for the performance it offers at this time

I agree as well but ATI can charge what they want because there is no competition atleast where DX11 is concerned.

 

[exar333]

IF there were an abundance of DX 11 games, the 5770 might make more sense. Right now, get a GTX 260 or 4870/4890 (whatever has the best deal).

 

[mmntech]

I bought a 5770. Yeah, the 4890 is faster but it was still a big jump over my 3850 and it's a little more futureproof. I like the card.

 

[yacoub]

As much as 5770 is a decent mid-range card I still think this card is not even in the same league as 4870/4890/GTX260. It's more like overlclocked 4850/4770 and overpriced at that.

Of course it's not because AMD neutered it on bus bandwidth. 128-bit is pathetic and even Anandtech's review noted that in the conclusion - how much that held the card back from being a value and bang-for-the-buck winner it could have been. They said it's worth maybe $130. So we wait until it drops in price or something better comes out from NVidia or the AMD refresh parts come out.

 

[T2k]

Exactly. From my testing the 5770 outruns the GTX285 in some games, and it's slower than the 4850 in others. I also found it to be roughly on par with the GTX260+ overall.

The 5770’s performance is all over the place at the moment, and I blame the drivers.

Seconded. Add to your + list the far-superior AA methods, lower power reqs -> better OC (needs Asus or similar hacked card, I guess), better CF scaling, Eyefinity and, of course, DX11.

Around $150 I believe 5770 is actually a better investment than the already-EOL'ed 4870 - and after Christmas, Bing and other promos you can score one at this price IMO.

 

[T2k]

Of course it's not because AMD neutered it on bus bandwidth. 128-bit is pathetic and even Anandtech's review noted that in the conclusion - how much that held the card back from being a value and bang-for-the-buck winner it could have been. They said it's worth maybe $130. So we wait until it drops in price or something better comes out from NVidia or the AMD refresh parts come out.

Sure it's the memory, it was quite obvious when we first got the name, the 57xx-series number speaks for itself.
But then again: if you were AMD how else would you differentiate it from your top cards, costing twice as much and up?

 

[exar333]

Sure it's the memory, it was quite obvious when we first got the name, the 57xx-series number speaks for itself.
But then again: if you were AMD how else would you differentiate it from your top cards, costing twice as much and up?

It's a good card if your not running in resolutions >1920x1200.

 

[T2k]

It's a good card if your not running in resolutions >1920x1200.

Of course.

 

[AzN]

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/23/powercolor_hd5770_video_card_review/1

If we take a look at a few graphs of the frame rate, all the cards seem to follow the same general FPS lines. There seems to be a few places where the 5770 just hiccups. Too bad they didn't have the Far Cry bench there. There is also the obligatory benchmark where the difference is too high based on architecture to consider.

Could be poor driver executions during load time?

It's not like Far Cry 2 is the only game that show this behavior. It's in WIC, COD, and so forth.

 

[Highmodulus]

I don't know if it will be able to play them or not in the future. Still, I'd rather have it than not. I also was on a tight budget and couldn't get a great PSU...so, yeah, power consumption matters. Don't forget that it's also a shorter card. Not a big issue for most, but still nice.

Some people care about things other than just performance.

Yeah you hit the nail on the head, its really a great upgrade card for those who are coming from a 3XXX series card on a stock machine like the Dell XPS which don't have a great PS or often the room for an absurdly large, hot, power hungry card. Especially if you are only running 1680x1050.

The upper end 4XXX series card uses lots more power, puts off more heat, its bigger, its louder ect, no DX11.

The 5770 and 5750 are good tools (if overpriced due to demand). Whether they are the right tool for you depends on the circumstances.

Also, they're just video cards- often sold for $20-30 apart in the various prices overall. Its not like it really matters whether you went with the 4890/5770 or the equivalent Nvidia card- they all will be fine (assuming you have the right PSU and case ventilation).

 

[AzN]

I don't know if it will be able to play them or not in the future. Still, I'd rather have it than not. I also was on a tight budget and couldn't get a great PSU...so, yeah, power consumption matters. Don't forget that it's also a shorter card. Not a big issue for most, but still nice.

Some people care about things other than just performance.

Tell you what. I run a loaded system with GTX 260 on a 450watt power supply capable of 30A to 12v. I have 2 hard drives, 2 pci cards, game controllers, etc and overclocked it for good measure and not a single hickup with power issues. Unless you want to run 300 watt dell systems I doubt it's an issue for most of us.

 

[AzN]

Sure, why wouldn't it?

maybe if we are talking about some super demanding DX11 game (sort of like the Crysis of DX11) coming out five years from now. Otherwise, of course it will.

I was also playing dx10 games with my 8600gt too. It was able sure but I was underwhelmed by the performance I wish I had my 1900xt back.

 

[AzN]

Just going by those results...

The 5770 has better minimums than the HD4890 and GTX260 in Stalker

It has better minimums than the GTX260 in Fallout 3

It has better minimums than the HD4890 and GTX260 in Need For Speed

Obviously the HD5770 has a bit of an erratic performance, but I would say it's certainly much better than the HD4850.

And we really can't put all of the blame solely on bandwidth. Let's not overlook the memory error detection. Let's not overlook drivers. Let's not overlook how the HD5770 is faster than the 4890, and of course in other games it's a bit slower than an HD4870.

I'm not saying some games do not show some effects of SP and get not better results. Stalker has dx11 mod or something like that and swayed by SP and it shows but the difference is very little. 1fps difference isn't what I call an advantage now.

Fallout 3 is also 1 of those games that sway on SP to some degree. We can think back in time to oblivion. Need for speed engine as well. This game loves SP.

When it's all done the difference on SP forefront is very little difference if not subtle but the bandwidth isn't. It shows huge disadvantages where some games needs a certain bandwidth and 5770 just doesn't have enough and start bottoming out like in WIC, COD, Far Cry 2.

 

[AzN]

The GTX285 has more than twice the bandwidth, yet the 5770 absolutely destroys it in games like Doom 3 at 2560x1600 with 8xAA. You can’t get much more bandwidth limited than that. On the flip side, the 5770 is sometimes slower than the 4850 despite having more bandwidth than it.

Such erratic behavior cannot be explained by bandwidth, but it can be explained by drivers.

Between that and my bottleneck investigation, I’m really not convinced the 5770’s primary bottleneck is memory bandwidth as the entire internet seems to believe.

1 game showing architectural differences does not mean drivers.

Your bottleneck investigation on the 5770 was missing minimum fps. You can't conclude on just on avg. fps alone. You should update your investigation further and show minimum fps of the 5770 where bandwidth has the most effects on instead of only showing avg fps that is swayed by core clocks to come up with that conclusion.

 

[T2k]

As long as you don't want to use all eye candy in 1920 and up its memory bandwidth should be fine for this card at this price.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I wanted to get a 5770, but I really think it will struggle with some DX11 games because of bandwidth. So I got a 5850 instead.

 

[Schmide]

It's not like Far Cry 2 is the only game that show this behavior. It's in WIC, COD, and so forth.

The behavior of generally following the other two cards in FPS?

 

[cusideabelincoln]

When it's all done the difference on SP forefront is very little difference if not subtle but the bandwidth isn't. It shows huge disadvantages where some games needs a certain bandwidth and 5770 just doesn't have enough and start bottoming out like in WIC, COD, Far Cry 2.

Drivers can also cause this (this = card bottoming out).

But note I'm not denying some games don't perform as well as they should because of bandwidth issues. Far Cry 2, for example, loves everything. It loves more memory, more memory bandwidth, more CPU speed, more CPU cores, more GPUs.

 

[edplayer]

I was also playing dx10 games with my 8600gt too. It was able sure but I was underwhelmed by the performance I wish I had my 1900xt back.

The 58XX cards will perform better but I don't see anything about it to indicate that it would perform poorly for an entry level gaming card.

Like I posted above, the main problem is its pricing. There would be many more compliments instead of complaints if it launched at $129 msrp. I think fud's latest radeon article says that the 57XX series is selling poorly. Nothing that a drastic price drop can't fix!

 

[AzN]

The behavior of generally following the other two cards in FPS?

Yes. The same kind of results as Far Cry2.

 

[AzN]

Drivers can also cause this (this = card bottoming out).

But note I'm not denying some games don't perform as well as they should because of bandwidth issues. Far Cry 2, for example, loves everything. It loves more memory, more memory bandwidth, more CPU speed, more CPU cores, more GPUs.

Perhaps drivers but that's something we can't prove but only with time but bandwidth is obvious how the 5770 performs compared to GTX260 and 4870/4890 in these games.

COD also show this behavior as well as WIC, Crysis, and that's just the only benches I've seen so far.