HIS Radeon HD 6970 2 GB

[NdMk2o1o]

Does that make up for the lack of PhysX and CUDA? I'm sorry, but having to buy an extra card just to be able to do PhysX is not on in my opinion.

A handful of games use PhysX and it's an NVIDIA owned API why in the hell would it be on an ATI card? if you MUST HAVE PhysX then buy NV though not a lot of people are that bothered with it,

As for CUDA, if you mainly use your GPU for cuda you wont be buying a mainstream consumer GPU and would be opting for a workstation card a'la Quadro instead, you have 2 minute moot points, what are you doing in here anyway besides trolling as usual?

 

[hrvoje]

for me:
im a bit disappointed, thought it will be a much better vs 5850.
now its probably better to buy 2nd hand 5850 and crossfire, then upgrade to 69xx

btw nice review as always wizz

cheers

 

[Fourstaff]

I wonder why most says that this product is a fail. It clearly is a good product at its price point, just that the performance is weaker than expected. pre GTX 580, most of us believed that the 6970 will beat the GTX 480, and since that it's just as powerful as the GTX 480 its only justified to say that this product is only slightly disappointing, not epic fail as what this thread sounded like.

Also, at 1920x1200, the 6950CF scales about 70%, which is a lot better than the 5870 CF.

 

[cdawall]

I must have missed something in the review because overall at the resolution I play the card was quite good. Yes the 570 traded blows with it big deal amd cards always drop in price a month or so from now this card will be $250 and a great value. Amd didn't flop the card did exactly what its priced to do be a smidge better than the 570 at high resolution. Heck it trades a few blows with the 580.

Nv fanboys really need to stop saying oh look xyz is better and this doesn't have cuda or this doesn't have physx. No big deal your card doesn't have audio out your card doesn't have multi display that's comparable. This is stupid and so is bashing. A simple redo gave 570 performance so in theory you got beat by a suped up 5870.

 

[Red_Machine]

what are you doing in here anyway besides trolling as usual?

Trolling? Me? I'm contributing to a discussion. Trolling would be like this:

"LOL AMD you FAIL! GTX 580 is the best and that's a FACT! NVIDIA FTW!"

 

[yogurt_21]

performance is right about where I expected it to be for 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 but the lower resolution performance I'm sure will come up in time with drivers.

so slower than 580 but typically faster than the 480, that's where i posted it would perform many times, but people seemed to have gotten it in their heads that the 6970 would beat the 580 which just wasn't likely. Both the 5XX and the 6XXX series were bridge series while both sides work on the next big thing and wait for tmsc to get their sh1t together.

so if you have a GTX4X0 or a 5XX0 card there really isn't much incentive to go to the GTX5X0 or 6XX0 card these are probabally more targeted at those who are still on older series or those who just like their rigs to be the latest and greatest.

so I'm not dissapointed at all, the cards performed where I expected them to and there really isn't a single game that the 6970 can't play at a high res and high detail so what more do you want anyway?

 

[jpierce55]

Not a bad price, but I am disappointed that the power efficiency wasn't better for the performance. I don't see why everybody is so upset when it is not the top level g-card. It is considerably cheaper than the 580.

 

[brandonwh64]

I had a feeling that this what the outcome of the 6950 and 6970 benches would be. hopefully they are making the 6990 a beast to blow away all other cards like the 5970 did at release but only time will tell.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

Trolling? Me? I'm contributing to a discussion. Trolling would be like this:

"LOL AMD you FAIL! GTX 580 is the best and that's a FACT! NVIDIA FTW!"

Ok well maybe you need to rethink your argument on PhysX and CUDA I could say NV doesn't even have eyefinity or stream WTH .... see my point?

 

[Red_Machine]

True, CUDA is mostly redundant unless you're folding or GPGPU'ing. But EyeFinity is only for ultra-enthusisats, so not worth the added price or board complexity in my opinion. I doubt I will even multi-mon as it is with my setup.

 

[NdMk2o1o]

True, CUDA is mostly redundant unless you're folding or GPGPU'ing. But EyeFinity is only for ultra-enthusisats, so not worth the added price or board complexity in my opinion. I doubt I will even multi-mon as it is with my setup.

You can run Eyefinity on a 5650 they are not expensive, gaming on one is a different story, though there are other uses for eyefinity aside from gaming.

I could care less about these latest gens from both teams, they seem to be playing catch up with each other and not actually looking to do best for the consumer, again, when I can get a card that gives me double the perf of my current (GTX 470) for the same price I paid £200 then it will be time to upgrade, as it happens anything along the lines of a GTX460+ and ATI 5850+ is fine for gaming for at least 1-2 years

 

[WhiteLotus]

True, CUDA is mostly redundant unless you're folding or GPGPU'ing. But EyeFinity is only for ultra-enthusisats, so not worth the added price or board complexity in my opinion. I doubt I will even multi-mon as it is with my setup.

Physx is only for the ultra-enthusiasts. And almost completely pointless as only a handful of games uses it. Why would ATI pay it's rival nVidia for a licence to something that no one gives two squirts about?


I think this review is a little harsh on the card, it's still high performing, a reasonable price for what it offers. However temps are what gets me.

 

[sneekypeet]

I'm not trying to start anything, just want a simple answer....Can these cards fold worth a fart yet? Was sort of hoping they got some lovin this time around

 

[WhiteLotus]

I'm not trying to start anything, just want a simple answer....Can these cards fold worth a fart yet? Was sort of hoping they got some lovin this time around

That's a damn good question, I remember wizz including f@h scores once upon a time.

 

[bear jesus]

True, CUDA is mostly redundant unless you're folding or GPGPU'ing. But EyeFinity is only for ultra-enthusisats, so not worth the added price or board complexity in my opinion. I doubt I will even multi-mon as it is with my setup.

Why thank you, it feels nice to be called an ultra-enthusiast with my £300 triple monitor setup

I'm not trying to start anything, just want a simple answer....Can these cards fold worth a fart yet? Was sort of hoping they got some lovin this time around

As far as i know we are waiting on stanford to release a new client not on AMD to release a card that folds better as cards better than things like 3850/70's are out yet there is next to no increase in performance

 

[newtekie1]

No big deal your card doesn't have audio out your card doesn't have multi display that's comparable.

Don't have audio out? You sure about that?

And being able to use 3 monitors with one card isn't all that great of a think when the card isn't powerful enough to actually drive all 3 monitors. So needing 2 cards with nVidia isn't really a drawback.

And the thing you missed in the review is that everyone doesn't play at the resolution you play at, that is why we are concerned with overall performance, and not one specific resolution and the card gets judged on overall performance and not just one resolution.

And yes, the cards will come down in price, but so will nVidia's cards, so that point is rather moot.

 

[bear jesus]

Don't have audio out? You sure about that?

And being able to use 3 monitors with one card isn't all that great of a think when the card isn't powerful enough to actually drive all 3 monitors. So needing 2 cards with nVidia isn't really a drawback.

I think he was giving random out dated examples as just something to use as a point not to be exactly accurate.

But i have to say at the moment I'm gaming at 5040x1050 on a single 6870, to me that would suggest many cards in the Nvidia range have the power as long as you don't want things like x24AA

 

[cdawall]

Don't have audio out? You sure about that?

And being able to use 3 monitors with one card isn't all that great of a think when the card isn't powerful enough to actually drive all 3 monitors. So needing 2 cards with nVidia isn't really a drawback.

And the thing you missed in the review is that everyone doesn't play at the resolution you play at, that is why we are concerned with overall performance, and not one specific resolution and the card gets judged on overall performance and not just one resolution.

And yes, the cards will come down in price, but so will nVidia's cards, so that point is rather moot.

They don't have onboard audio like the ati cards do unless something changed while I was on hiatus. Also a 5650 could easily drive 3 monitors no not in games but for cad and such that's a great entry level thing.

Also I can judge at one resolution as that's what I play at. However for reviews I think 1024x768 needs to bite the bullet...

 

[newtekie1]

They don't have onboard audio like the ati cards do unless something changed while I was on hiatus. Also a 5650 could easily drive 3 monitors no not in games but for cad and such that's a great entry level thing.

Also I can judge at one resolution as that's what I play at. However for reviews I think 1024x768 needs to bite the bullet...

Ummm...

Before you go on raging fanboy rants, perhaps you should make sure you know what your talking about.

And who gives a shit if the HD5650 can drive 3 monitors. If you aren't gaming on them, just buy two of the cheapest PCI cards you can find and save the money over a HD5650. It is idiotic to buy a gaming card, even a low end gaming card, just for 3 monitor support. People have been driving 3+ monitors on $15 graphics cards for ages. And with the PCI cards you can use more available DVI and VGA monitors and not be forced to use a DisplayPort monitor or a DisplayPort adapter.

 

[Red_Machine]

They don't have onboard audio like the ati cards do unless something changed while I was on hiatus.

They've had it since the 200 series. At least the ones that weren't based on the G92/94.

 

[cdawall]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131339

Maybe you should do some aswell hd5450 $30 with dvi vga hdmi and eyefinity mustbe tough to find monitors to use that and for cad what $15 pci cards are you using I do 3d and it kicks my x1270 and single monitors ass...

Ummm...

Before you go on raging fanboy rants, perhaps you should make sure you know what your talking about.

And who gives a shit if the HD5650 can drive 3 monitors. If you aren't gaming on them, just buy two of the cheapest PCI cards you can find and save the money over a HD5650. It is idiotic to buy a gaming card, even a low end gaming card, just for 3 monitor support. People have been driving 3+ monitors on $15 graphics cards for ages. And with the PCI cards you can use more available DVI and VGA monitors and not be forced to use a DisplayPort monitor or a DisplayPort adapter.

 

[newtekie1]

PowerColor Go! Green AX5450 512MK3-SH Radeon HD 54...

Maybe you should do some aswell hd5450 $30 with dvi vga hdmi and eyefinity mustbe tough to find monitors to use that and for cad what $15 pci cards are you using I do 3d and it kicks my x1270 and single monitors ass...

Except that card can't drive 3 displays at the same time, because the 3rd display must be on a DisplayPort connecter. Come on, you're touting these technologys and you don't even know how they work or what is required? Do some research.

From AMD's Site:

To enable more than two displays, additional panels with native DisplayPort™ connectors, and/or certified DisplayPort™ adapters to convert your monitor’s native input to your cards DisplayPort™ or Mini-DisplayPort™ connector(s), are required.

The cheapest card that would work to drive 3 monitors would be this HD5450 for $45. But again, you have to use a more expensive DP monitor, or a $30 DP adapter to get it to work.

 

[cdawall]

Except that card can't drive 3 displays at the same time, because the 3rd display must be on a DisplayPort connecter. Come on, you're touting these technologys and you don't even know how they work or what is required? Do some research.

From AMD's Site:

Yea went and looked it up my bad poor design imo...oh well still no reason the 6970 is a bad deal in comparo to nvs cards

 

[bear jesus]

POWERCOLOR Active DisplayPort to Single-Link DVI-D...

$27 for an active display port to DVI adapter is not exactly a deal breaker for most, also cheaper adapters are usable with things like vga or hdmi.

 

[newtekie1]

POWERCOLOR Active DisplayPort to Single-Link DVI-D...

$27 for an active display port to DVI adapter is not exactly a deal breaker for most, also cheaper adapters are usable with things like vga or hdmi.

It is when the card your talking about buying is practicly the same price.