STICKY: ATi 5xxx pre-release thread

[Syntax Error]

Can't wait for benches of the 5870 2GB. :Q

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Qbah

Originally posted by: Janooo
HD5870 Crysis Benchmark from Chiphell.

CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB

Crysis 1900x1200 4AA+16AF DX10 Very High
min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**


a comparison from hartware.de.


Crysis (very high) ? FSAA 4x / AF 8x
Intel Core 2 Duo 3.33 GHz, 2 GByte, Intel X38, Windows Vista

last table:

GeForce GTX 295 - 34fps
Radeon HD 4870 X2 - 31fps
GeForce GTX 285 - 23fps
GeForce GTX 280 - 21fps
GeForce GTX 260 - 17fps
Radeon HD 4870 - 17fps

HOLY SHIT! :shocked: Crysis Very High AAx4 on a single card with 30FPS min? The lower stuff for this gen is AVERAGE lol

This will be a beast Unless those results are fake, which I unfortunately think they are...

Maybe it has been a long time since I tested Crysis, but I have a hard time believing the card runs that smooth with 'Very High"... I could see "High" with those settings, but not "Very High". If it can, great! But, I doubt it. At any rate, I also know that the first part of Crysis (tropical levels) ran much, much smoother than ice stage. I remember my frame-rate roughly getting cut in half when the ice storm hit. This was also on Warhead too, probably where I noticed it the most. I loved the cut scene with the Geneva Convention conversation... Great graphics, great engine, and I hope that these benchmarks are true, but I am skeptical.

 

[imported_Scoop]

Originally posted by: Qbah

Originally posted by: Janooo
HD5870 Crysis Benchmark from Chiphell.

CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB

Crysis 1900x1200 4AA+16AF DX10 Very High
min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**


a comparison from hartware.de.


Crysis (very high) ? FSAA 4x / AF 8x
Intel Core 2 Duo 3.33 GHz, 2 GByte, Intel X38, Windows Vista

last table:

GeForce GTX 295 - 34fps
Radeon HD 4870 X2 - 31fps
GeForce GTX 285 - 23fps
GeForce GTX 280 - 21fps
GeForce GTX 260 - 17fps
Radeon HD 4870 - 17fps

HOLY SHIT! :shocked: Crysis Very High AAx4 on a single card with 30FPS min? The lower stuff for this gen is AVERAGE lol

This will be a beast Unless those results are fake, which I unfortunately think they are...

Wouldn't expect nothing less from a $399 part. I'm just glad I don't need a new GPU 'cause 5850 and 5870 at $299 and $399 respectively are way out of my budget.

 

[zagood]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
ATi appears to have done what I predicted: take the 4xxx series, add DX11 and beef up the existing execution units by a factor of two. This was the smartest thing to do as they simply cannot afford a failure of 2900XT proportions by risking a new architecture. Up to twice the performance of the 4890 is quite a lot to be excited about, and it?s a safe move on ATi?s part.

Gosh, I hope Charlie really tears into them for doing that. Judging by the way he reacts at nV doing it...

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: Qbah

Originally posted by: Janooo
HD5870 Crysis Benchmark from Chiphell.

CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB

Crysis 1900x1200 4AA+16AF DX10 Very High
min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**


a comparison from hartware.de.


Crysis (very high) ? FSAA 4x / AF 8x
Intel Core 2 Duo 3.33 GHz, 2 GByte, Intel X38, Windows Vista

last table:

GeForce GTX 295 - 34fps
Radeon HD 4870 X2 - 31fps
GeForce GTX 285 - 23fps
GeForce GTX 280 - 21fps
GeForce GTX 260 - 17fps
Radeon HD 4870 - 17fps

HOLY SHIT! :shocked: Crysis Very High AAx4 on a single card with 30FPS min? The lower stuff for this gen is AVERAGE lol

This will be a beast Unless those results are fake, which I unfortunately think they are...

Maybe it has been a long time since I tested Crysis, but I have a hard time believing the card runs that smooth with 'Very High"... I could see "High" with those settings, but not "Very High". If it can, great! But, I doubt it. At any rate, I also know that the first part of Crysis (tropical levels) ran much, much smoother than ice stage. I remember my frame-rate roughly getting cut in half when the ice storm hit. This was also on Warhead too, probably where I noticed it the most. I loved the cut scene with the Geneva Convention conversation... Great graphics, great engine, and I hope that these benchmarks are true, but I am skeptical.

Gonna depend on the clockspeed, naturally, so until we know clockspeed we can't really rule anything out performance-wise even if we have the proper shader/rops/etc specs.

And don't forget that once we have clockspeed and performance to go along with those specs then the bitchfest can begin anew regarding power-consumption and price.

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: Qbah

Originally posted by: Janooo
HD5870 Crysis Benchmark from Chiphell.

CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB

Crysis 1900x1200 4AA+16AF DX10 Very High
min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**


a comparison from hartware.de.


Crysis (very high) ? FSAA 4x / AF 8x
Intel Core 2 Duo 3.33 GHz, 2 GByte, Intel X38, Windows Vista

last table:

GeForce GTX 295 - 34fps
Radeon HD 4870 X2 - 31fps
GeForce GTX 285 - 23fps
GeForce GTX 280 - 21fps
GeForce GTX 260 - 17fps
Radeon HD 4870 - 17fps

HOLY SHIT! :shocked: Crysis Very High AAx4 on a single card with 30FPS min? The lower stuff for this gen is AVERAGE lol

This will be a beast Unless those results are fake, which I unfortunately think they are...

Maybe it has been a long time since I tested Crysis, but I have a hard time believing the card runs that smooth with 'Very High"... I could see "High" with those settings, but not "Very High". If it can, great! But, I doubt it. At any rate, I also know that the first part of Crysis (tropical levels) ran much, much smoother than ice stage. I remember my frame-rate roughly getting cut in half when the ice storm hit. This was also on Warhead too, probably where I noticed it the most. I loved the cut scene with the Geneva Convention conversation... Great graphics, great engine, and I hope that these benchmarks are true, but I am skeptical.

The google translated thread title is: "HD5870 Crysis Benchmark scores (core frequency is higher than the retail version)"

I wasn't able to find the overclock values though.

 

[MrK6]

Originally posted by: Janooo
The google translated thread title is: "HD5870 Crysis Benchmark scores (core frequency is higher than the retail version)"

I wasn't able to find the overclock values though.

If extreme cooling wasn't used, the fact that this is what the silicon is capable of is amazing enough .

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Grooveriding

Originally posted by: Janooo
HD5870 Crysis Benchmark from Chiphell.

CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB

Crysis 1900x1200 4AA+16AF DX10 Very High
min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**


a comparison from hartware.de.


Crysis (very high) ? FSAA 4x / AF 8x
Intel Core 2 Duo 3.33 GHz, 2 GByte, Intel X38, Windows Vista

last table:

GeForce GTX 295 - 34fps
Radeon HD 4870 X2 - 31fps
GeForce GTX 285 - 23fps
GeForce GTX 280 - 21fps
GeForce GTX 260 - 17fps
Radeon HD 4870 - 17fps

If that bench is accurate and taking into account min. framerates and 4xaa+16af, that's very nice, faster than gtx285 sli, 295 and tri285 sli. :thumbsup:

I read last night (at ABT maybe?) that one of the advances with 5xxx was a much improved AA/AF system. If so, then it's possible that gtx 295 would be faster with no AA/AF and slower with 4x/16x, depending upon how much the improvements help the AA/AF implementation.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
...do you somehow read that to mean that 5870 is 25-40% faster and 5870x2 will somehow, magically, be, um...

:roll:

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx

Originally posted by: Minas
I have personally used the stock design hd3870, hd4870, and gtx260, and they ran at about 60c idle to 90c under load, but all had fans/cooling that were very well designed barely audible over psu/cpu fans.

Occaisionally a bad design slips through for one reason or another, but for the most part they are quiet and effective. In recent memory there have been more problems with the custom fans/cooling put out my some card manufacturers than the stock design.

I also see your concern about temps, but you can understand that these companies make money by running the hardware fast and hot - giving best value for money. In a minority of cases that can cause problems where ambient temps are high, but it's hardly bad design.

Don't be put off from the newer generations of cards because of a bad experience in the past.

And this is coming from a new member.

ATI has been reducing temps in every single market level besides the very top end, where it matters.

Just take a look at the 46x0 series. They are the SAME GPU as the 3850/3870, yet can now be run passively if you want to. That is a clear indication that their cooling solutions are very efficient in the mid range. Don't even get started on the changes from the 3450 to the 4350. The 4350 has double the SP's (16 vs 8) and runs at comparable clocks, get this, at the same exact TDP.

It's all about price vs performance, not heat. If anything its been all of my nVidia cards to run hot, but i'm not one to complain. It's a NON-ISSUE. That didn't once dissuade me from purchasing an nVidia or ATI GPU.

they stopped focusing on such low temps b/c they copied nvidia from 8800 series. People want better performance in the gpus, not lower operating temps. As long as the card runs then people are happy. If you don't like running your gpu at 85c then 1. try a card that comes with an aftermarket cooler, 2. install your own aftermarket cooler, 3. use rivatuner or another 3rd party solution to customize your fan speed/profile, 4. try water, or 5. get better airflow in your case. If you are unwilling to try any of these then you're either in no need of a good video card in the first place or you're a blind nvidia fanboy.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Pelu

Ya something like that... with that thinking nvidia cards probably are around 4000 SPs lol[/quote]

At the end of the day you are arguing semantics of what an SP is (simple - ATI, vs. complex - NV). Whether ATI's 4870 has 160 SPs from your perspective or 800 SPs, performance is what counts; and ATI delivers, easily matching a GTX260 216.

You wouldn't start comparing a 256-bit vs. a 512-bit memory interface on the graphics card and completely ignoring if it's using GDDR3, GDDR5, etc.

Just because ATI and NV use a different type of GPU architecture doesn't mean one is better than the other - they are just different and they work.

In much the same way TFLOP specifications of a graphics card also don't entirely correlate to real world gaming performance.

 

[dguy6789]

Originally posted by: Pelu

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Pelu
the 1600 rops or whatever the name is is a bunch of lies... it only have 320...

Pelu, the ATI 3800 series had 320sp. And the will now be 2 gens old. The current 4850/70/90 all have 800sp. Do you think for some reason they will remove 480sp's from their current soon to be last gen arch? If they changed their shader architecture, then I can see 320 being a reality. But I don't think that is happening.

Ohhhhhhhhh!!!! I get it. Your going by the complex shader count only.. Like the current 4870 has only 160 5 part shaders. 160x5 = 800.

The new part will have 320 5 part shaders. 320x5 = 1600. Gotcha. Six of one, half a dozen of another. This is what you must have meant, right?

Ya something like that... with that thinking nvidia cards probably are around 4000 SPs lol

Do yourself a favor and read this and get educated.

 

[thilanliyan]

Remember everything ATI is a hoax like PhysX on ATI cards.

 

[Janooo]

Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

 

[Hauk]

Originally posted by: Janooo
Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

Good question.

Wow that setup is amazing...

 

[Qbah]

Where are the benchmarks?

 

[EnzoLT]

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: Pelu

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Pelu
the 1600 rops or whatever the name is is a bunch of lies... it only have 320...

Pelu, the ATI 3800 series had 320sp. And the will now be 2 gens old. The current 4850/70/90 all have 800sp. Do you think for some reason they will remove 480sp's from their current soon to be last gen arch? If they changed their shader architecture, then I can see 320 being a reality. But I don't think that is happening.

Ohhhhhhhhh!!!! I get it. Your going by the complex shader count only.. Like the current 4870 has only 160 5 part shaders. 160x5 = 800.

The new part will have 320 5 part shaders. 320x5 = 1600. Gotcha. Six of one, half a dozen of another. This is what you must have meant, right?

Ya something like that... with that thinking nvidia cards probably are around 4000 SPs lol

Do yourself a favor and read this and get educated.

thank you, too much people in here pull shit out of their ass like there's no tomorrow

 

[MR STROKE]

can anyone tell me when I will be able to buy one of these cards? I can't seem to find a solid release date anywhere

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Janooo
Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

That is pretty cool!! However, I'm not a big fan of huge black bars going through my gaming display. They need to remove the frames of those monitors somehow to make it almost seamless.

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Janooo
Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

That is pretty cool!! However, I'm not a big fan of huge black bars going through my gaming display. They need to remove the frames of those monitors somehow to make it almost seamless.

Already said it in the other thread but will say it again

Indeed... Im shocked that they have the technology to pull something like this, but the screens arent up to par :| We definitely need "borderless" screens

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: EnzoLT

Originally posted by: dguy6789

Originally posted by: Pelu

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Pelu
the 1600 rops or whatever the name is is a bunch of lies... it only have 320...

Pelu, the ATI 3800 series had 320sp. And the will now be 2 gens old. The current 4850/70/90 all have 800sp. Do you think for some reason they will remove 480sp's from their current soon to be last gen arch? If they changed their shader architecture, then I can see 320 being a reality. But I don't think that is happening.

Ohhhhhhhhh!!!! I get it. Your going by the complex shader count only.. Like the current 4870 has only 160 5 part shaders. 160x5 = 800.

The new part will have 320 5 part shaders. 320x5 = 1600. Gotcha. Six of one, half a dozen of another. This is what you must have meant, right?

Ya something like that... with that thinking nvidia cards probably are around 4000 SPs lol

Do yourself a favor and read this and get educated.

thank you, too much people in here pull shit out of their ass like there's no tomorrow

I wonder that if I knew there was no tomorrow, would I then proceed to pull sh*t out of my ass.

 

[Kakkoii]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Janooo
Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

That is pretty cool!! However, I'm not a big fan of huge black bars going through my gaming display. They need to remove the frames of those monitors somehow to make it almost seamless.

Already said it in the other thread but will say it again

Indeed... Im shocked that they have the technology to pull something like this, but the screens arent up to par :| We definitely need "borderless" screens

Yeah, I read news a few days ago about a certain company going to be producing a borderless LCD TV. but I can't seem to find the damn news story anymore =/.

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: Kakkoii

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Janooo
Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

That is pretty cool!! However, I'm not a big fan of huge black bars going through my gaming display. They need to remove the frames of those monitors somehow to make it almost seamless.

Already said it in the other thread but will say it again

Indeed... Im shocked that they have the technology to pull something like this, but the screens arent up to par :| We definitely need "borderless" screens

Yeah, I read news a few days ago about a certain company going to be producing a borderless LCD TV. but I can't seem to find the damn news story anymore =/.

Samsung is going to have a special Eyefinity monitor line with a thin bezel.

 

[MODEL3]

From Anand:

This is the successor to the RV770. We can't talk specs but at today's AMD press conference two details are public: 2.15 billion transistors and over 2.5 TFLOPs of performance. As expected, but nice to know regardless

I assume at AMD's press conference AMD had the higher 5870 parts.
So the over 2,5 TFLOPs figure must be for 5870.

So the probabilities for the SPs to be 1600 is extremely high.
The standard config must be 800MHz or more to achieve that.
The above specs was speculated a lot after hardspell.


Now, the 2.15 billion transistors figure is more interesting...

If we take the HD4670 (146mm2, 514mil. tran.) & HD4870 (260mm2, 956mil. tran.)
We have 271mm2 instead of 260mm2 (so we must cut -4%)

If we take the HD4770 (137mm2, 826mil. tran.) & HD5870 (Xmm2, 2,15 bil. tran.)
We have 357mm2 -4% (343mm2)

The UVD2 part between HD4670 & HD4870 was the same, but the UVD3 of HD5870 will probably have more transistors than the HD4770 UVD2, so it should be just a little more than 343mm2.


Although is wrong, i will do the scalling with NV scalling.

If we take the 9600GT (240mm2, 505mil. tran.) & 9800GTX (330mm2, 751mil. tran.)
We have 356mm2 instead of 330mm2 (so we must cut -7%)

If we take the HD4770 (137mm2, 826mil. tran.) & HD5870 (X mm2, 2,15 bil. tran.)
We have 357mm2 -7% (331mm2)

But the the scaling with 9600GT/9800GTX is wrong becauce the architecture is different with ATI's and becauce the memory bus in NV's correlation case (9600/9800) remains the same (256bit)

The above methods although not correct, give interesting results...

Don't nitpick with the data, it is from memory and the calculations are roughly made...

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Janooo

Originally posted by: Kakkoii

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: Keysplayr

Originally posted by: Janooo
Four cards rendering 55 Megapixels.

Does it mean the AFR is gone?

That is pretty cool!! However, I'm not a big fan of huge black bars going through my gaming display. They need to remove the frames of those monitors somehow to make it almost seamless.

Already said it in the other thread but will say it again

Indeed... Im shocked that they have the technology to pull something like this, but the screens arent up to par :| We definitely need "borderless" screens

Yeah, I read news a few days ago about a certain company going to be producing a borderless LCD TV. but I can't seem to find the damn news story anymore =/.

Samsung is going to have a special Eyefinity monitor line with a thin bezel.

There cannot be ANY bezels. C'mon. People were annoyed at the almost transparent horizontal lines on a SONY trinitron monitor way back when. How do you think they'll feel with even the smallest bezels cutting into their view?