• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

HD 5870 Discussion thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#1
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.
 

Mussels

Moderprator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
46,119 (9.57/day)
Likes
13,545
Location
Australalalalalaia.
System Name Daddy Long Legs
Processor Ryzen R7 1700, 3.9GHz 1.375v
Motherboard MSI X370 Gaming PRO carbon
Cooling Fractal Celsius S24 (Silent fans, meh pump)
Memory 16GB 2133 generic @ 2800
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X (BIOS modded to Gaming Z - faster and solved black screen bugs!)
Storage 1TB Intel SSD Pro 6000p (60TB USB3 storage)
Display(s) Samsung 4K 40" HDTV (UA40KU6000WXXY) / 27" Qnix 2K 110Hz
Case Fractal Design R5. So much room, so quiet...
Audio Device(s) Pioneer VSX-519V + Yamaha YHT-270 / sennheiser HD595/518 + bob marley zion's
Power Supply Corsair HX 750i (Platinum, fan off til 300W)
Mouse Logitech G403 + KKmoon desk-sized mousepad
Keyboard Corsair K65 Rapidfire
Software Windows 10 pro x64 (all systems)
Benchmark Scores Laptops: i7-4510U + 840M 2GB (touchscreen) 275GB SSD + 16GB i7-2630QM + GT 540M + 8GB
#2
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
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
4,001 (1.32/day)
Likes
1,652
Location
Sarasota, Florida, USA
System Name Awesomesauce 4.3 | Laptop (MSI GE72VR 6RF Apache Pro-023)
Processor Intel Core i7-5820K 4.16GHz 1.28v/3GHz 1.05v uncore | Intel Core i7-6700HQ @ 3.1GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X99-UD5 WiFi LGA2011-v3| Stock
Cooling Corsair H100i v2 w/ 2x EK Vardar F4-120ER + various 120/140mm case fans | Stock
Memory G.Skill RJ-4 16GB DDR4-2666 CL15 quad channel | 12GB DDR4-2133
Video Card(s) ASUS ROG Strix A8G Gaming GTX 1080 @ 2075/1368 boost | NVIDIA GTX 1060 6GB +200/+500 + Intel 530
Storage Samsung 840 EVO 500GB + Seagate 3TB 7200RPM + others | Kingston 256GB M.2 SATA + 1TB 7200RPM
Display(s) Acer G257HU 1440p 60Hz AH-IPS 4ms | 17.3" 1920*1080 60Hz wide angle TN notebook panel
Case Fractal Design Define XL R2 | MSI
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Z | Realtek with quad stereo speakers and subwoofer
Power Supply Corsair HX850i Platinum | 19.5v 180w Delta brick
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 | Windows 10 Home x64
Benchmark Scores GTX 1080 please?
#3
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.
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
3,779 (1.14/day)
Likes
567
Location
Latin America, Uruguay
System Name The Lizard v2.4
Processor Intel Celeron G1840 (for the time being
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-H81-S2PH
Cooling Intel Stock Fan
Memory 16GB Kingston HyperX 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming GTX 750Ti (For the time being)
Storage 500GB Samsung F1, 160GB Maxtor "Older than god"
Display(s) AOC 28' LCD
Case Coolermaster N200
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Antec VP500P
Software Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Benchmark Scores No crashes in the last 24 minutes.
#4
agree with jst, altough technically 256bit GDDR5 = 512bit GDDR3 it feels like its a bit slow for such gpu.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
4,001 (1.32/day)
Likes
1,652
Location
Sarasota, Florida, USA
System Name Awesomesauce 4.3 | Laptop (MSI GE72VR 6RF Apache Pro-023)
Processor Intel Core i7-5820K 4.16GHz 1.28v/3GHz 1.05v uncore | Intel Core i7-6700HQ @ 3.1GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X99-UD5 WiFi LGA2011-v3| Stock
Cooling Corsair H100i v2 w/ 2x EK Vardar F4-120ER + various 120/140mm case fans | Stock
Memory G.Skill RJ-4 16GB DDR4-2666 CL15 quad channel | 12GB DDR4-2133
Video Card(s) ASUS ROG Strix A8G Gaming GTX 1080 @ 2075/1368 boost | NVIDIA GTX 1060 6GB +200/+500 + Intel 530
Storage Samsung 840 EVO 500GB + Seagate 3TB 7200RPM + others | Kingston 256GB M.2 SATA + 1TB 7200RPM
Display(s) Acer G257HU 1440p 60Hz AH-IPS 4ms | 17.3" 1920*1080 60Hz wide angle TN notebook panel
Case Fractal Design Define XL R2 | MSI
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Z | Realtek with quad stereo speakers and subwoofer
Power Supply Corsair HX850i Platinum | 19.5v 180w Delta brick
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 | Windows 10 Home x64
Benchmark Scores GTX 1080 please?
#5
agree with jst, altough technically 256bit GDDR5 = 512bit GDDR3 it feels like its a bit slow for such gpu.
Yes, 256bit GDDR5 was a tad bit sluggish even for the 4890 @ 1000MHz core, IIRC.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#6
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
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?
 

erocker

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
42,380 (10.17/day)
Likes
18,023
Processor Intel i7 8700k
Motherboard Gigabyte z370 AORUS Gaming 7
Cooling Water
Memory 16gb G.Skill 4000 MHz DDR4
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 1080
Storage 3 x Samsung Evo 850 500GB, 1 x 250GB, 2 x 2TB HDD
Display(s) Nixeus EDG27
Case Thermaltake X5
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Zowie EC1-B
Software Windows 10
#7
Yes, 256bit GDDR5 was a tad bit sluggish even for the 4890 @ 1000MHz core, IIRC.
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.
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
3,779 (1.14/day)
Likes
567
Location
Latin America, Uruguay
System Name The Lizard v2.4
Processor Intel Celeron G1840 (for the time being
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-H81-S2PH
Cooling Intel Stock Fan
Memory 16GB Kingston HyperX 1600
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming GTX 750Ti (For the time being)
Storage 500GB Samsung F1, 160GB Maxtor "Older than god"
Display(s) AOC 28' LCD
Case Coolermaster N200
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Antec VP500P
Software Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Benchmark Scores No crashes in the last 24 minutes.
#8
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.
and performance/watt :)
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
4,001 (1.32/day)
Likes
1,652
Location
Sarasota, Florida, USA
System Name Awesomesauce 4.3 | Laptop (MSI GE72VR 6RF Apache Pro-023)
Processor Intel Core i7-5820K 4.16GHz 1.28v/3GHz 1.05v uncore | Intel Core i7-6700HQ @ 3.1GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X99-UD5 WiFi LGA2011-v3| Stock
Cooling Corsair H100i v2 w/ 2x EK Vardar F4-120ER + various 120/140mm case fans | Stock
Memory G.Skill RJ-4 16GB DDR4-2666 CL15 quad channel | 12GB DDR4-2133
Video Card(s) ASUS ROG Strix A8G Gaming GTX 1080 @ 2075/1368 boost | NVIDIA GTX 1060 6GB +200/+500 + Intel 530
Storage Samsung 840 EVO 500GB + Seagate 3TB 7200RPM + others | Kingston 256GB M.2 SATA + 1TB 7200RPM
Display(s) Acer G257HU 1440p 60Hz AH-IPS 4ms | 17.3" 1920*1080 60Hz wide angle TN notebook panel
Case Fractal Design Define XL R2 | MSI
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Z | Realtek with quad stereo speakers and subwoofer
Power Supply Corsair HX850i Platinum | 19.5v 180w Delta brick
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 | Windows 10 Home x64
Benchmark Scores GTX 1080 please?
#9
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.
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:
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#10
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.
 

erocker

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
42,380 (10.17/day)
Likes
18,023
Processor Intel i7 8700k
Motherboard Gigabyte z370 AORUS Gaming 7
Cooling Water
Memory 16gb G.Skill 4000 MHz DDR4
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 1080
Storage 3 x Samsung Evo 850 500GB, 1 x 250GB, 2 x 2TB HDD
Display(s) Nixeus EDG27
Case Thermaltake X5
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Zowie EC1-B
Software Windows 10
#11
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.
Maybe you should actually use one first?
 

Bo_Fox

New Member
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
480 (0.15/day)
Likes
56
Location
Barack Hussein Obama-Biden's Nation
System Name Flame Vortec Fatal1ty (rig1), UV Tourmaline Confexia (rig2)
Processor 2 x Core i7's 4+Gigahertzzies
Motherboard BL00DR4G3 and DFI UT-X58 T3eH8
Cooling Thermalright IFX-14 (better than TRUE) 2x push-push, Customized TT Big Typhoon
Memory 6GB OCZ DDR3-1600 CAS7-7-7-1T, 6GB for 2nd rig
Video Card(s) 8800GTX for "free" S3D (mtbs3d.com), 4870 1GB, HDTV Wonder (DRM-free)
Storage WD RE3 1TB, Caviar Black 1TB 7.2k, 500GB 7.2k, Raptor X 10k
Display(s) Sony GDM-FW900 24" CRT oc'ed to 2560x1600@68Hz, Dell 2405FPW 24" PVA (HDCP-free)
Case custom gutted-out painted black case, silver UV case, lots of aesthetics-souped stuff
Audio Device(s) Sonar X-Fi MB, Bernstein audio riser.. what??
Power Supply OCZ Fatal1ty 700W, Iceberg 680W, Fortron Booster X3 300W for GPU
Software 2 partitions WinXP-32 on 2 drives per rig, 2 of Vista64 on 2 drives per rig
Benchmark Scores 5.9 Vista Experience Index... yay!!! What??? :)
#12
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%:





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:
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#13
Maybe you should actually use one first?
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
 

wolf

Performance Enthusiast
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
5,576 (1.44/day)
Likes
864
System Name MightyX (MITX)
Processor Core i7 4770K @ 4.2ghz
Motherboard Asus Z87i-Pro
Cooling Noctua NH-L12
Memory 16gb DDR3 1600 LP
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX1080 G1 OC
Storage Lots of SSD's
Display(s) AOC AGON AG352QCX
Case Raven RVZ-01
Power Supply SFX 450 G
Mouse Razer Mamba Tournament Chroma
Keyboard Razer Blackwidow X Chroma
#14
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.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
5,606 (1.30/day)
Likes
1,282
Location
New York
System Name http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=73751
Processor i7-920 CO@4.2GHZ / ASUS GL553VW 15.6" Gaming Laptop NVIDIA GTX 960M 4GB Intel Core i56300HQ 8GB DDR4
Motherboard Asus P6T Deluxe Intel X58
Cooling Asetek Liquid CPU Cooling System
Memory CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) 2X ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB DDR5 PCI-Express
Storage (RAID-0) with 4 Identical Hard Drives (1.28TB (320GBx4)
Display(s) LG 50" 50PK550 1080p 600Hz Plasma/37 Inch WestingHouse @1920x1080
Case Thermaltake M9 (I hate it its like trying to live in a 1 inch box)
Power Supply ThermalTake ToughPower 1200 Watt
Software Windows 7 professional 64
#15
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

Performance Enthusiast
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
5,576 (1.44/day)
Likes
864
System Name MightyX (MITX)
Processor Core i7 4770K @ 4.2ghz
Motherboard Asus Z87i-Pro
Cooling Noctua NH-L12
Memory 16gb DDR3 1600 LP
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX1080 G1 OC
Storage Lots of SSD's
Display(s) AOC AGON AG352QCX
Case Raven RVZ-01
Power Supply SFX 450 G
Mouse Razer Mamba Tournament Chroma
Keyboard Razer Blackwidow X Chroma
#16
Given a little time for the drivers to mature then you will see the 5000 series shine....I doubt there will be disappointment then.
disappointment, who said that :laugh:

The fact that it's sooooo close to my old GTX295 makes me happy, too happy...:wtf:
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#17
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.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
630 (0.14/day)
Likes
156
Location
A suburb of Chicago, IL
System Name The W.O.P.R.
Processor Core i7 920 D0 @ 4.0GHz 1.24 vcore
Motherboard ASUS P6T
Cooling Xigmatek S1283 with push\pull fan configuration.
Memory 6GB Mushkin DDR3 1600MHz 7-8-7-20
Video Card(s) 2 - ASUS EAH5850 CrossfireX
Storage 1TB WD Black
Display(s) I-INC 28" 1920x1200 HDMI
Case Ultra M998
Audio Device(s) Realtek HD
Power Supply Corsair TX750W
Software Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit
#18
Given a little time for the drivers to mature then you will see the 5000 series shine....I doubt there will be disappointment then.
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:
 

Binge

Overclocking Surrealism
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
6,979 (2.07/day)
Likes
1,734
Location
PA, USA
System Name Molly
Processor i5 3570K
Motherboard Z77 ASRock
Cooling CooliT Eco
Memory 2x4GB Mushkin Redline Ridgebacks
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 680
Case Coolermaster CM690 II Advanced
Power Supply Corsair HX-1000
#19
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.
agree with jst, altough technically 256bit GDDR5 = 512bit GDDR3 it feels like its a bit slow for such gpu.
Yes, 256bit GDDR5 was a tad bit sluggish even for the 4890 @ 1000MHz core, IIRC.
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.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#20
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.
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.
 

temp02

New Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
493 (0.15/day)
Likes
165
#21
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*.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
9,950 (2.25/day)
Likes
2,309
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
#22
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.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,684 (1.00/day)
Likes
402
Location
Smithfield, WV
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
#23
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.
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.

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.
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:

erocker

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
42,380 (10.17/day)
Likes
18,023
Processor Intel i7 8700k
Motherboard Gigabyte z370 AORUS Gaming 7
Cooling Water
Memory 16gb G.Skill 4000 MHz DDR4
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 1080
Storage 3 x Samsung Evo 850 500GB, 1 x 250GB, 2 x 2TB HDD
Display(s) Nixeus EDG27
Case Thermaltake X5
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Zowie EC1-B
Software Windows 10
#24
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:

W1zzard said:
AMD definitely surprised me, and pretty much everybody else with their new products. I neither expected such a big performance increase, nor many of the other new features that AMD has put in their card. Looking at pure performance numbers, one has to admit that AMD did not claim the performance crown this time, their HD 4870 X2 and the NVIDIA GTX 295 are still faster. However, those are dual GPU cards, AMD's dual HD 5870 dubbed "Hemlock" will be out later this year to shatter all performance records we've seen so far.
Not only performance increased, AMD has also kept a tight lid on power consumption and die size didn't increase that much either, thanks to the 40 nm production process. I find the power consumption improvements very impressive. Especially in idle, the card is one of the most efficient cards you can find on the market today - and you still have all its rendering power just a click away. Under load the power draw is higher, but not nearly as high as performance numbers would suggest when applied to the last generation of cards. Looking at Performance per Watt, the Radeon HD 5870 leads by 23% over the next closest card, the GTX 295. While it is not the only improvement, a large power hog could be tamed by clocking down the GDDR5 memory when it is idle. Past cards had GDDR5 too, but due to the complex clocking mechanisms it wasn't possible to change the clock without an annoying flicker that would confuse users. Now the flicker is so short that it can be hidden between the monitor refresh intervals, enabling downlocking of GDDR5 in idle.
This latest generation of ATI graphics cards also brings support for DirectX 11, which includes a state of the art tesselation engine and support for DirectX Compute. Another area where we saw improvements are the multimedia features. The integrated audio device that is used for HDMI audio is now at HDMI 1.3a which means support for several new audio formats. As far as I know this puts the audio capabilities of the HD 5800 Series on par with anything that any external sound card can provide, making it an ideal choice for a media PC system.
Even though AMD has paid great attention to power, noise levels are not as low as I'd wished for. In idle the card's noise levels are very acceptable, but the idle temperatures are so low that I see no reason why the card couldn't be quieter and run a bit warmer. Under load the card gets fairly loud, but considering the performance, I'd say it's doing alright. Here again, some fan tweaking can give you higher temps and less fan noise if you want.
Finally, let's talk about your hard earned money. While not insanely expensive, those new cards can not claim the price/performance throne. They are high-end cards and that itself comes with a price premium. Being brand-new and having all the latest and greatest features adds a few dollars to the price tag, too. Still, I don't find the cards terribly expensive considering what they offer. If you are looking for the best deal on the market right now, you should look at other products like the HD 4870 which comes at extremely competitive prices at the moment. Also I already heard rumors that AMD's MSRP pricing will not hold for long and we'll soon see two digit $ price drops. Let's hope AMD has enough stock of these cards to supply all the gamers that can't wait to hold one in their hands now.
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:
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
9,950 (2.25/day)
Likes
2,309
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
Status
Not open for further replies.