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

HD 5870 Discussion thread.

Discussion in 'AMD / ATI' started by a_ump, Oct 25, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    This is just something that i've been wondering since i saw the results of the HD 5870's performance in w1z's review here.

    Like the graphs' show the HD 5870 only ever outperforms the HD 4870x2 at 1024x768, which doesn't really matter since no one in their right mind that games at that res would purchase such a card. But i thought i'd heard a couple or few times somewhere that ATI might have trouble getting all their shaders utilized n that they had some trouble with utilizing even the 800 shaders on the HD 4890/70/50. Now i don't own any HD 58XX series card(yet), but I had thought that since the HD 5870 has all 1600 shaders on a single die and double the ROP's that the HD 5870 would outperform the HD 4870x2 by a decent margin esp once AA was enabled but it doesn't. Am i the only person that thinks this? I know we can expect at least 10% more performance with mature drivers, probly up to 20%, but i'm still curious if what i'd read a few times is or could be true with ATI having a difficult time managing all 1600 shaders.
     
  2. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,276 (11.59/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,561
    the fact that a single GPU card even comes close to last gens dual GPU card is rare, and impressive.


    expecting it to whup it in every way is reaching - especially since they made it more power efficient too
     
    jpierce55 and AsRock say thanks.
  3. Jstn7477

    Jstn7477

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,858 (2.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,547
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida, USA
    I believe that the main bottleneck of the card is the RAM. It only has 256bit GDDR5, which doesn't seem to be enough bandwidth for the GPU. When one overclocks the RAM on one of these cards and leaves the GPU core @ stock, the performance of the card increases noticeably. If the RAM were not a bottleneck, then overclocking the RAM would have little or no effect on performance unless the GPU were also overclocked.
     
    Bo_Fox says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  4. LittleLizard

    LittleLizard New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,775 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    575
    Location:
    Latin America, Uruguay
    agree with jst, altough technically 256bit GDDR5 = 512bit GDDR3 it feels like its a bit slow for such gpu.
     
    Bo_Fox says thanks.
  5. Jstn7477

    Jstn7477

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,858 (2.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,547
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida, USA
    Yes, 256bit GDDR5 was a tad bit sluggish even for the 4890 @ 1000MHz core, IIRC.
     
    Bo_Fox says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  6. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    eh i wouldn't say rare
    HD 4870>HD 3870x2
    GTX 280>9800GX2
    8800GTX>7950GX2

    but this time at launch..
    HD 5870<HD 4870x2
    :( lol.

    well the price for the HD 5850 is great i think so im still getting that asap. Though no one has mentioned yet on whether what i'd heard bout ATI having difficulties getting all the shaders utilized on the HD 5870 or not :/, anyone?
     
  7. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,705 (13.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,103
    No, it most definitely is not. If this was the case the 5870 would be bottlenecked to 4890 speeds.

    As far as the 5870 goes, it's what I expected I guess. The 5850 seems to be the better card as far as price/performance.
     
  8. LittleLizard

    LittleLizard New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,775 (1.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    575
    Location:
    Latin America, Uruguay
    and performance/watt :)
     
  9. Jstn7477

    Jstn7477

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,858 (2.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,547
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida, USA
    Oh, that is true. Someone said what I said when the 5870s came out, and got me confused lol. Must be those trolls lol jk. :nutkick:
     
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  10. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    i wonder how many on TPU in a poll would say that the HD 58XX series met their expectations. I'm satisified with the HD 5850's price/perf for sure, but both let me down some performance.
     
  11. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,705 (13.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,103
    Maybe you should actually use one first?
     
    dr emulator (madmax) says thanks.
  12. Bo_Fox

    Bo_Fox New Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    480 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Location:
    Barack Hussein Obama-Biden's Nation
    Yeah, the 5870 is only like 25% faster than a GTX 285, which is hugely disappointing.. damn!!!

    EDIT: I mean 28%, according to the graph below, if I divide 100% by 78%:

    [​IMG]



    It's all about only 23% greater memory bandwidth than a HD 4890 that already uses roughly 100% of its memory in half of the newer games out there.

    That is precisely why a 5870 does not destroy a 4870X2 although it should at least always be equal or better than 2x 4890 Xfire, when only taking the GPU cores into account apart from the memory.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2009
  13. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    lol i would have, but my original thought was just about what i'd read on ATI n their shaders, the rest were just things i thought when i typed so the original question was bout that ATI thing but then i revised cause it didn't sound right....poll didn't even cross my mind then :p
     
  14. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,542 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    I expected more (performance), but bought one anyway :)

    I'd say it needs more memory bandwidth, but ATi are good at their R&D, if it *needed* more bandwidth I'd imagine they would have given it more.

    I think its a pity it doesn't outshine a 4870X2 at high res+AA, with an exact doubling +100mhz I expected more, thus IMO it has to be the memory bandwidth OR drivers holding the 58xx cards back at the mo.
     
    a_ump says thanks.
  15. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,793 (1.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    Location:
    New York
    Given a little time for the drivers to mature then you will see the 5000 series shine....I doubt there will be disappointment then.
     
    wolf says thanks.
  16. wolf

    wolf Performance Enthusiast

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,542 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    842
    disappointment, who said that :laugh:

    The fact that it's sooooo close to my old GTX295 makes me happy, too happy...:wtf:
     
    DRDNA says thanks.
  17. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    lol i guess if i had one of them i wouldn't be saying a thing just be awed by the performance i'd see, esp jumping from this 7800GTX, though i had a HD 4870 bout a month ago but sold to save for the 50....but money ended up getting spent XD, now saving again lol. I also haven't checked to see if the new official drivers helped any.
     
  18. Exeodus

    Exeodus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    623 (0.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    156
    Location:
    A suburb of Chicago, IL
    Exactly, it took a good couple driver releases when the 4800 series came out before the cards really started to shine. And I know because I had the 4850, 4870, 4870x2, and the 4890. :eek:
     
    DRDNA says thanks.
  19. Binge

    Binge Overclocking Surrealism

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    6,982 (3.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,752
    Location:
    PA, USA
    There's more of a problem with cache on chip that's slowing down this GPU than the memory bandwidth, but the low bus width does not help matters. There needs to be a room stocked with food and overclockable computers that ATI can keep a few level headed enthusiasts as a design conscience. It seems that more than one of us can see a flaw in design.
     
  20. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    lol that would be funny to hear if it were a reality. "I live at ATI in this room with food an graphic cards." though honestly it sounds like a good idea.
     
    Binge says thanks.
  21. temp02 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    493 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    166
    I remember when I bought my HD 2600 XT and in most cases it was slower than my previous X700 (in some cases it was even slower then a Radeon 7000 or a Riva TNT, like when rendering OpenGL lines), it took almost 6 months for ATi to sort this (and other) driver issues and make my card deliver the performance it was supposed to at launch times.
    I'm not saying that this new generation of ATi cards is slow (they most certainly are not, just look at them scaling at higher resolutions), all I'm saying is that ATi is kinda slow on driver fixes but eventually they will sort it out and make their cards *shine*.
     
  22. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,330 (2.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,197
    Good to know so many here have the resources to actually try out their theory, wait.......



    W1zz did the test already, and found that the 5870 is NOT bandwidth limited, but core limited to a small degree. I don't know how many times this needs to be reiterated, or if you guys just need to read the white paper on GDDR5. It has TWICE the bandwidth of GDDR3 so it is equal to a 512MB bus, and with shorter trace lengths due to learning it is faster, and at higer speeds......

    From the 5770 Review.

    "The overclocks of our card are 925 MHz core (9% overclock) and 1500 MHz Memory (25% overclock). The core overclock is ok, but the memory overclock is simply amazing. Remember, on GDDR5, for every MHz real clock you increase effective clock by 4 MHz. "

    "The actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 11.4%."




    If the performance increase was larger based off the huge 25% memory overclock then you could confirm the bandwidth starvation, however at a mere 2% more than the core overclock you can determine the minor increase the memory overclock gave was do to a few cache misses and the ability to deliver data at a much higher rate.


    Same for 5870.

    From the review.

    "The overclocks of our card are 890 MHz core (5% overclock) and 1275 MHz Memory (6% overclock). While they are not spectacular, they are decent and promising. Remember, we left the fan running at its default speed. Also we did not tweak any voltages, even though software adjustment is possible on these cards - there is just no software yet to do that."


    "The actual 3D performance gained from overclocking is 4.9%."


    Again, if the memory was the limiting factor the number would have increased more linear with the memory overclock, however it didn't. It followed the GPU core speed. Perhaps the reason he had a slower amount was the clock ratio at those speeds was out of sync, and the GDDR5 was also still erroring during transmission.
     
    Kei says thanks.
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  23. a_ump

    a_ump

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    3,605 (1.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    372
    Location:
    Smithfield, WV
    i understand what your trying to say but the HD 5770 is hardly part of this argument, it has exactly half the graphics horsepower so it cannot speak for the statements of the HD 5870 and the questioning of it being bandwidth starved or not. The HD 5770 had 96GB/s of bandwidth with that oc, the HD 5870 doubles everything of the HD 5770 except for the memory bandwidth. Now in w1z's performance charts, the HD 5870 with exactly double the processing power, it is only 63% faster overall and 82% faster at 2560x1600, so there's definitely something that isn't as effecient as it should be though i personally think drivers now.

    performance increase isn't going to be linear with overclocks, we all know that, but 4.9% isn't far from 6% at all. I haven't seen any review from w1z that show's him disproving the HD 5870 being bandwidth starved, could you link it for us? And as has been stated a guzillion times, a bandwidth starvation test should be done by decreasing the core clock and checking performance with stock clocks, not increasing memory and core clocks. Only memory or core clocks should be altered if someone were to do a test for the bandwidth suspicion we have, and it should be equal and done by percentages. Example: if you decrease core clocks by 5%, memory at stock, then you should also run through the same benchmarks with core clocks@stock and memory clocks increased by 5%
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  24. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,705 (13.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,103
    Not a dissapointment. You know what is dissapointing right now? Nvidia. Very dissapointing. I'm using a 5850 right now, and I am the opposite of dissapointed. I can't even buy a new Nvidia card to play with. We haven't even seen any real proof of a DX11 Nvidia card. Wow, that's dissapointing. My shoelace broke this morning. I'm dissapointed. Here's W1zzards conclusion to his review:

    What I gather from that. Not dissapointing.


    Like I said, I think you need to use this card before saying it's dissapointing. It most certainly is not. This thread is somewhat dissapointing.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  25. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,330 (2.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,197

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

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page