Tuesday, February 23rd 2010

ATI Radeon HD 5830 Specifications Surface

AMD's new performance graphics card that targets an upper-mainstream price-point, the Radeon HD 5830, is slated for February 25. A set of company slides sourced by IT168.com shows the GPU's specifications are in tune with what we expected. The HD 5830 is based on AMD's Cypress 40 nm GPU. It has 1120 stream processors, a 256-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, 16 ROPs, 56 TMUs, and clock speeds of 800 MHz (core) and 1000 MHz (memory). The memory bandwidth on the card is 128 GB/s, on par with that of the Radeon HD 5850. The core clock speed is slightly higher, too.

With a GPU of these specifications, AMD targets the market price-range of $200-$250, where there's room for a DirectX 11 generation graphics card to be positioned between the Radeon HD 5770 and Radeon HD 5850. The maximum board power of the card is slightly higher than that of the HD 5850, but we think that's because reference designs - if there are - might not use high-grade digital PWM circuitry. That typically shouldn't affect overclocking headroom a big deal.
The Radeon HD 5830 further has 1 GB of memory, and supports ATI Eyefinity technology. With the same display controllers as on the Radeon HD 5870, the card can support up to six physical displays. AMD's add-in board partners should be able to release non-reference design graphics cards right away, so you wouldn't have to wait any further for a PCS+, the VaporX, or the IceQ+. Source: IT168
Add your own comment

72 Comments on ATI Radeon HD 5830 Specifications Surface

#1
fochkoph
About freakn' time! :D:rockout::cool:
Posted on Reply
#2
Maban
Only 16 ROPs? Disappointing.
Posted on Reply
#3
jaredpace
From these specs I can say this card is horrible compared to a 5850. Should be called a 5805 at most
Posted on Reply
#5
TheLaughingMan
This is about what i expected. Not sure why every one is so mad. I think it is a good fit for those who want good power, but don't think the 5770 is cutting it.

Why is the power usage rating higher than the 5850?
Posted on Reply
#6
arroyo
Because core is overclocked from 725 to 800MHz and probably ATI used cheaper parts in PWM section.
Posted on Reply
#8
El_Mayo
I'm guessing they don't want it to have better price:performance than the 5850
Posted on Reply
#9
afw
Its expected to perform the same as HD4890 .... but whats with the price ??? ... :shadedshu
you can find 4890 for less that $200 ...

anyways ATis on a roll .... :respect:
Posted on Reply
#10
Imsochobo
afw
Its expected to perform the same as HD4890 .... but whats with the price ??? ... :shadedshu
you can find 4890 for less that $200 ...

anyways ATis on a roll .... :respect:
Its faster than 4890.

Memory performance is the same.(slightly higher)
Shaders. 1120 vs 800, rofl.. and higher IPC, meaning higher ;)

Rops and texture units is the same as 4890, atleast rops.
Core clock is almost the same, this is like a GTX280 if i should guess.

4890 is just slightly faster than 5770 so dont see a point of making something as fast as 4890, has to be slightly faster than that again :p
Posted on Reply
#11
Reefer86
it will be intresting to see the price point im thinking about £170 - 180 due to the 5770 being at £120 and the 5850 being £220
Posted on Reply
#12
theorw
FAIL...An OCed 5770 @1000-1030 will be really close on performance.2 5770s will destroy 5830...:cool:
Posted on Reply
#13
jagd
It has 16 rop but also pixel fillrate under 5770 .It will be interesting to see how it will perform under actual games vs 4890 and 5850 .But i guess 5850 will still be best price/performance card.
Posted on Reply
#15
alwayssts
Wow, with specs like that they must be using darn near every Cypress die, because that is indeed some very weak sauce. Better be cheap.

Also, it explains why Fermi must REALLY be screwed with a chip 2/3 larger (552.25mm2?).

Comparatively speaking, think of a RV770 or Juniper/5700 with 560 shaders, 8 ROPs, 28 TMUs, when the lowest RV770 we ever saw was 640sp/32TMU and still 16 ROPs. That's terrible.

Clockspeed is likely higher to make up pixel fillrate. Also, the TDP is in accordance with the clockspeed of the chip, and disabled units have never really (unlike nvidia when they've shut down part of the bus) lowered TDP on ATi chips.

Also, it explains why Fermi must REALLY be screwed. (again for effect)

I thought we'd get a card to match up against GTX275/280, instead we get a card that matches up against 4890 with some extra flops for DX10/11 features, but skimping on the fillrate that seperate the midrange from the performance section.

Suddenly, $199 makes a LOT more sense. I'm going to go out on not even a limb and say ROPs are going to bottleneck that thing up in many TWIMTBP games. Heck, it's got lower fillrate than 4890. Hell, it's got lower fillrate than 5770!

I was expecting 16 ROP and 960sp on the 128-bit Northern Island, but this is pushing it.

You're an ugly card, 5830.
Posted on Reply
#16
Imsochobo
jagd
It has 16 rop but also pixel fillrate under 5770 .It will be interesting to see how it will perform under actual games vs 4890 and 5850 .But i guess 5850 will still be best price/performance card.
Yeah, 5850 is really, superior to any other card, i bought one, and i cant say i regret, going another one when i cant run full AA at max res anymore :P
5850 will run all ur games at max 1920x1080, as im playing on the 42" tv/projector i dont use the 30" anymore.
So dont really need more than the 5850 at the moment :)
Posted on Reply
#17
Zubasa
jaredpace
From these specs I can say this card is horrible compared to a 5850. Should be called a 5805 at most
The problem is the 5850 is now the 4770 of the HD5k series.
It is simply too fast if you look at that compare to the 5870.

theorw
FAIL...An OCed 5770 @1000-1030 will be really close on performance.2 5770s will destroy 5830...:cool:
The 5830 still out perform any 5700 at stock clocks ;)
What makes you think that a 5830 will not overclock just as well (if not better) than the 5850? :p
Posted on Reply
#18
pantherx12
Zubasa
The 5830 still out perform any 5700 at stock clocks ;)
What makes you think that a 5830 will not overclock just as well (if not better) than the 5850? :p
I thought the same, 1ghz 5830 would beat 1 ghz 5770.
Posted on Reply
#19
Assimilator
Ouch... I was expecting 5830 to be a cut-down 5850, not neutered. That said, it may very well be an excellent clocker, but on the other hand, why bother if you can get a 5770 which will probably perform almost as well and has lower power requirements? As others have said, 5830 will need to be cheap to sell.

Also, given these specs, I reckon 5830 was never on ATI's roadmap to start with; rather, it is a solution to the problem of large numbers of defective Cypress dies manufactured by TSMC.
Posted on Reply
#20
gumpty
Assimilator
Also, given these specs, I reckon 5830 was never on ATI's roadmap to start with; rather, it is a solution to the problem of large numbers of defective Cypress dies manufactured by TSMC.
I remember seeing some leaked ATI document on here after the 5870 & 5850 launched that inferred that there'd be three 5800 series GPUs, so I think it has always been on their roadmap. Most likely they have some forward-thinking engineers on board that predicted the situation you describe.

EDIT: Nope, I was wrong - it indicated three 5700 series.
Posted on Reply
#21
Zubasa
gumpty
I remember seeing some leaked ATI document on here after the 5870 & 5850 launched that inferred that there'd be three 5800 series GPUs, so I think it has always been on their roadmap. Most likely they have some forward-thinking engineers on board that predicted the situation you describe.

EDIT: Nope, I was wrong - it indicated three 5700 series.
They might need a card to fill in the gap between the 5750 and the 5670, although the price difference will get narrower over time.
Maybe a 640SP card that sits somewhere near the 4770 performance.
Posted on Reply
#22
$ReaPeR$
since we have not got any performance tests, why are you prejudging this card, think a bit before you post. do you know how this card is going to react in the real world? :)
Posted on Reply
#23
chaotic_uk
how come it uses more power under load than the 5850 ?
Posted on Reply
#24
[Ion]
WCG Team Assistant
chaotic_uk
how come it uses more power under load than the 5850 ?
Higher clock speeds
Posted on Reply
#25
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
24 rops would have made more sense to me given they still kept the 256 bit bus and a fair few sp's from that lovely cypress core this chip started with.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment