1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Radeon HD 6670 1024 MB

Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Apr 18, 2011.

  1. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,544 (4.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,216
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 19, 2011
  2. Nintendork

    Nintendork New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Great OC but:

    1
    How can "Not powerful enough for full HD resolutions" qualify as a con? These range of cards were never meant to play at full HD, that's hardly a con (non existant).

    That will continue until full HD becomes the new "1280x1024" with 4K monitors.

    2
    No support for CUDA / PhysX

    What's this? Add that is and nvidia gpu comes without that gimmicks. This is an AMD gpu, for now it'll never support that. Maybe you can add on a Nvidia gpu review "it doesn't support MLAA or UVD 3.0"

    That cons are not cons (maybe personal opinion but this a site review right?).
    mdm-adph, Radys and christian27 say thanks.
  3. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,544 (4.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,216
    yes, i'm just listing them, readers should think about those points and decide whether they matter for their own requirements or not
  4. demonkevy666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Messages:
    31 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    has wrong ROP's on GPU-z showing double the pixel fill rate because of it.
  5. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,437 (2.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    916
    You left out a zero on the memory spec on the first page.
  6. Over_Lord

    Over_Lord News Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    748 (0.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    84
    Location:
    Manipal
    You know, you can stop mentioning no CUDA and PHYSX on all AMD graphics cards reviews.

    You know asking for those features in AMD cards is illogical(i.e. an never happen), and mentioning them every time is nonsensical.

    Also, The summary should be based on the card's price. You should work out positively, like

    : Great for gaming at 1680x1050 @ 100$

    That puts a proper impression, instead of:

    : 100$
    : Not good at Full HD

    Just my opinions.. and I guess, DX11 relevance point will go once BF3 releases huh :p (crysis 2 made a fool of us already)
    Radys says thanks.
  7. Semi-Lobster

    Semi-Lobster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    353 (0.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    29
    The performance numbers here remind me of what my brother's 9800 GT gets
  8. hanzi New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    41 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    The size of the card is suitable for those who are in htpc setups. So I think the conclusion "Not powerful enough for full HD resolutions" is very relative.

    Still, great review W1zzard!
  9. RONX GT

    RONX GT New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    Messages:
    50 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    Location:
    Dhaka,Bangladesh.
    Wow i mean great HTPC card. Thanks for the review W1zz.:)
  10. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,544 (4.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,216
    right back to you: You know, you can stop mentioning no CUDA and PHYSX on all AMD graphics cards reviews

    getting tired of seeing the same comments every time in reviews
  11. W1zzard

    W1zzard Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    14,544 (4.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11,216
    yes, 9800 GT == GTS 250 is roughly in that performance class, just cheaper
  12. HalfAHertz

    HalfAHertz

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830 (1.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Location:
    Singapore
    It's nice to see the power consumption going down while performance goes up :)
  13. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,092 (1.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    451
    That's some pretty low Power Consumption, even under load. Seems like the perfect HTPC card imo.
  14. Cold Storm

    Cold Storm Battosai

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    15,014 (6.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,999
    Location:
    In a library somewhere on this earth
    W1zz, it was a good review. A card for those htpc's that don't have the full 1080p aspect.


    As for :thunderising:


    The card doesn't have the factor, so why shouldn't he add those specs? I mean, what if a "Joe Q Somebody" E-machine's video card died? Tech guys at work are talking about cuda/Physx on video cards? He want's it but doesn't know if "every" card has it? Goes to a review, and see is.. Boom, it doesn't.. He reads another review... He finds that it's only on one developer/manufacture... Now, he knows what to get...
  15. damric

    damric

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    326 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    86
    This little bugger packs a lot of punch. It definitely rules performance to size ratio :D Not sure why they didn't make it with a single slot cooler though.
  16. Cold Storm

    Cold Storm Battosai

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    15,014 (6.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,999
    Location:
    In a library somewhere on this earth
    The card will be like that soon enough.. If they do it the same via the 4670/5670.. There will be a single slot down the road not to far from now.
  17. mastrdrver

    mastrdrver

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    3,045 (1.62/day)
    Thanks Received:
    537
    Real quick W1z, what Civ 5 benchmark are you using? Thanks.

    I don't mean this to be personal in anyway (to W1z, thunder, or anyone else). I've never realized it myself either.

    You know I was not sure why W1z always put things like that in the comments. There was always a blatant obviousness to me. Now I realize that the target customer maybe oblivious (for obvious reasons) to those blatancies. Most on this site have the privilege of having something way faster while similarly costlier.

    It may look monotonous at first glance but its also stating a clear limit of a possible unawareness that the buyer needs to understand.

    "Great for 1680x1050" does not draw the line in the sand like "Not good at Full HD". They both say each other in their assumptions. Both also speak clearly at their intended point on the surface. thunder's tells you the max the card can provide without killing enjoyment. Though Wizzard's says don't go here, you need to turn around and go back to thunder's limit or spend more money to avoid "in hindsight" experience.

    In a review I'd rather state the plain and obvious (neg and/or pos) less the reader think they got hustled by me when I thought I was being clear. It reads as ymmv instead of "here and no further". I'm not saying you have to always put it in the negative. Just limits in their very nature carry some kind of negative tone in them.

    An analogy? How does the ref call the game if the lines are not on the field/court? Whether the lines are negative or not to the player depends on if they are the one disputing the clearness of them (clarity being the point).

    You always read how dumb/stupid/etc the buyers on the bottom end of the market are (the usual "they don't do research" comments), the ones who buy in to the marketing of whoever throws it out best. What does that say about the quality of the reviews out there then? Sounds to me like there are a lot of markless fields. I think most readers will forgive a negative tone to avoid a "in hindsight" moment.

    It's not always easy to see what is obvious to us either. It is always hard though to make the obvious, obvious when it is unapparent to the reader of their need to know. So you got to "cover all the bases" per-say without making the reader think they're being talked down to.

    That's a challenge.
  18. Jonap_1st

    Jonap_1st New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    288 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Location:
    South Green Jakarta
    GTS250 1GB = $80 ?? i found it still cost around $100, maybe that $80 is for 512MB models.

    but i think this card still give a good punch for 1680 x 1050 resolution, which you know.. like most of $100 cards are targeted
  19. christian27

    christian27 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    30 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Location:
    Lima,PE
    Nice power consumption improvements over HD 5670 ... and over HD 4670
  20. HalfAHertz

    HalfAHertz

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,830 (1.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Location:
    Singapore
    Well AT included a good old 8800GT along side the 6670 and the thing ate it for breakfast, usually edging the 8800 by a few fps in Dx9/10 games.
  21. Aleksander

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,252 (2.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    304
    The advantage between the 5670 seems really low. I don't think it is worth the money addition.
    Only thermal design power is much better!
  22. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,483 (6.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,725

    No CUDA and no PhysX support should still be listed because AMD has made no attempt to produce successful technologies equivalant to them. When AMD introduced Eyefinity, the lack of Eyefinity was listed as a con for nVidia cards. The difference is that nVidia actually produced a technology that is equivalant, so it isn't listed anymore.(Though the weaker display output still is.)

    As for not good at HD, the GTS450 is at the same $100 price point and is capable of gaming at HD resolutions(with AA disabled), so this card not being capable is definitely a con.
    HalfAHertz says thanks.
    More than 25k PPD
  23. Radys New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    8 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    AMD's APP is much better in transcoding than CUDA. Apparently Techpowerup never heard of that.

    Now for the review. HTPC card and no HD quality benches (hint: AMD much better than Nvidia) but we have instead the usual soup of TWIMTBP games, including...Metro 2033 - the famous game that works on low end cards and HAWX - the famous game nobody plays.

    Ludicrous. I lost every single bit of respect for this site.
  24. KainXS

    KainXS

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598 (2.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    501
    then leave, please . . . . . .
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2011
  25. Radys New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    8 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    You don't list them only as features for the Nvidia cards but also as bad points for the AMD ones. No APP feature on the AMD cards listed (or the lack of for Nvidia). No other features like dual GPU support on AMD platforms or UVD 3.0. No "Not powerful enough for full HD resolutions" for any Nvidia cards.

    Exactly the most important things for a HTPC card are missing from the review. Instead we have CUDA, Physix and Metro 2033.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 19, 2011

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page