5770 is NOT good as 4870 or GTX260

[Meaker10]

Perhaps in the future games will use double precision. nevermind it has 50% lower bandwidth compared to 4870.

Really? 50%....

900mhz GDDR5 256bit bus = 115.2 GB/sec
1200mhz GDDR 128bit bus = 76.8 GB/sec

2/3rds of the bandwidth actually.

In overclocking we get up to 1400mhz that puts it at 89.6GB/sec. Thats 77.8% of the bandwidth of a 4870, a card that is bandwidth SATURATED.

At that point it has 40% more bandwidth than the 4850.... A card it should NEVER loose to. There is something going on with the drivers.

 

[dreddfunk]

Really? 50%....

900mhz GDDR5 256bit bus = 115.2 GB/sec
1200mhz GDDR 128bit bus = 76.8 GB/sec

2/3rds of the bandwidth actually.

In overclocking we get up to 1400mhz that puts it at 89.6GB/sec. Thats 77.8% of the bandwidth of a 4870, a card that is bandwidth SATURATED.

At that point it has 40% more bandwidth than the 4850.... A card it should NEVER loose to. There is something going on with the drivers.

It really depends on your intent when you say "50% lower bandwidth."

If you look at the above figures, you'll see that the 4870 has precisely 1.5x the bandwidth of the 5770, which is what I suspect AzN meant:

(76.8 * 1.5 = 115.2)

Now, as a function of the 4870's bandwidth, the 5770 has 66.7% of the the 4870's bandwidth, as you demonstrate.

So, it's technically correct to say *both* that the 5770 has 66.7% of the bandwidth of a 4870, and that the 4870 has 150% of the bandwidth of a 5770.

I don't really have an opinion on the overall discussion (it truthfully seems very argumentative to me, with no one really listening).

It does seem to me that both sides have given up introducing truly great midrange cards. The provide overly cut-down versions of the higher-end cards during a generation's launch, and then expect their higher-end cards to be pushed down into the midrange to become the real midrange performance solutions (while their ostensible midrange parts push into the bargain market).

 

[Meaker10]

He said 50% lower....

Also I would like to point out that the 4870x2 with 50% more bandwidth looses to the 5770 in crossfire.

 

[Wreckage]

if the 4870 is "right up there", where is the 4890?

I was not talking the fastest card. (That's why I fixed his quote with 285). I was more referring to the seeming most popular and best price/performance.

 

[Meaker10]

I'd also like to point out that ATI disagree with you aswell AzN the 5750 has almost identical memory, a mere 50mhz difference, yet to differentiate it from the 5770 they reduce clocks and shader count, they even leave all the back end (such as rops) the same. Obviously they believe the card is shader limited.

 

[zebrax2]

AzN
An example of driver causing decrease in performance for 4850 but not in 4890
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/2764/ati_catalyst_9_5_vista_driver_analysis/index.html
An example of driver causing increase in performance for 4850 but not in 4890
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/2793/ati_catalyst_9_6_vista_driver_analysis/index.html

And those are from the same series. Now imagine what drivers could do to GPUs of different series.

 

[dreddfunk]

He said 50% lower....

Also I would like to point out that the 4870x2 with 50% more bandwidth looses to the 5770 in crossfire.

Yes he did.

I just don't happen to think that we're all 100% precise with every statement we make when we're responding to a thread. I would guess that he was thinking of the difference in bandwidth between the two and misspoke. That happens pretty often in the back and forth of a contentious conversation.

My larger point was that clarifying meaning is more valuable than taking an errant word or two and running with it. The former seeks the common ground necessary for understanding, the latter creates divisions where none may exist.

 

[Gulzakar]

I was searching for an HTPC card...mostly hulu and netlifx, but some mild gaming (Dawn of War, Sins of a Solar Empire).

The power consumption of the 5770 was attractive to me, but the high price was not...at least for one with a fairly quiet cooler. You're looking at 170 or so for a good one..and even then it's iffy.

I've even seen an HQV report showing the 5000 series wasn't at the same level as the 4000 series, especially on HD content. Again, it's probably solved by better drivers, but at this point, I'm failing to understand where improvements can be made. The 4700 series suffered similar issues in HQV. These cards are not all that dissimilar.

I'm actually leaning towards the Sapphire HD4860 for 129.99...it may sound stupid, but the 4800 series scores near perfect in HQV, has the performance I need for the games I play, and in the case of this card, uses a very quiet cooling system. I just don't see the 5770 performing well at 1080p for Directx11...if the time should arise when I need directx 11, I'll pick up a 5850 when the prices are more reasonable.