AMD's ATI Radeon HD 5830 Review @ [H]

kac77 said:
Nope that spotlight belongs to you and you alone.


Yeah uh huh. Sure they did... on planet Cannondale. Here on planet Earth we all know what ATI released the 5xxx series with in Sept 2009, which was not the 5970, and the prices they released the 5850 and 5870 with. But I'm sure if you keep repeating yourself eventually you'll put yourself in a trance and eventually be able to join us.
Click to expand...
and was the 5870 to be their fastest card? HELL NO. get that through your fucking head that the 5970 was planned from the very beginning. the gtx295 was only a reaction because the ATI cards were faster than Nvidia thought they would be. the gtx280 was supposed to be their fastest card and if ATI wasnt competitive then the gtx295 would have never came out. gtx280 and gtx260 would have stayed at very high prices without competition just like the 5870 and 5970 are doing now. :rolleyes:
 
Looking at previous video cards that got [H] Harocp Editors Choice Gold awards. It's interesting to see what company this card keeps.

Video Gold:
10 ATI cards
4850 4870 4850 CrossFire 4870x2 4890
5670 the whole 5700 series 5850 5870

and
5 Nvidia cards
ASUS ENGTX280 TOP BFGTech
GeForce GTX 280 OC
GeForce 9600 GT SLI
Palit GeForce 9600 GT Sonic
EVGA e-GeForce 8800 GTS 512 MB

Most seem to be cards that really nailed price/performance curve at the time or were very very fast cards or otherwise nailed a segment. Seems to lean ATI's way but the listings look like they went back to the 4800 era which was strong for ATI. If it went back further I'd expect to see more 88xx nvidia cards in the list. I'm not going to rage about it, but in my laymans opinion it seems like the 5830 should get a Silver award. Mainly because I don't see a strong reason to upgrade to a 5830, don't buy 1 game and you've saved enought money to go up to a 5850. Or get a 5770 and but 2 more games. It fills a price gap, but not much of a performance gap.

-Bounty
 
Judging by the specs of this card, there's no reason it shouldn't be able to squeak past the 4890 at all times and with some oc'ing it could be an awesome budget card. Especially if the price gets dropped a little.

I'd say with a few driver updates we'll see the card's real performance because all of the results I'm reading don't make sense especially when compared to the 4890/275.
 
bh192012 said:
...I'm not going to rage about it, but in my laymans opinion it seems like the 5830 should get a Silver award. Mainly because I don't see a strong reason to upgrade to a 5830, don't buy 1 game and you've saved enought money to go up to a 5850. Or get a 5770 and but 2 more games. It fills a price gap, but not much of a performance gap.

-Bounty
Click to expand...

AMD priced this for people looking for budget gaming, not as much for upgrades. Unfortunately, people who purchase this card are effectively being taxed due to the lack of competition for now. I hope NVIDIA can apply some pressure to all of AMD's market segments very soon. While I support AMD's right to make money, no monopoly, no matter how brief, is good for us consumers.
 
cannondale06 said:
and was the 5870 to be their fastest card? HELL NO. get that through your fucking head that the 5970 was planned from the very beginning. the gtx295 was only a reaction because the ATI cards were faster than Nvidia thought they would be. the gtx280 was supposed to be their fastest card and if ATI wasnt competitive then the gtx295 would have never came out. gtx280 and gtx260 would have stayed at very high prices without competition just like the 5870 and 5970 are doing now. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


If ATi was going to launch with the 5970 as the flagship they would have done so on the date of launch. Was it in the plans? Yes, every single launch is planned right to the day. You would be an idiot to believe otherwise. However, the entire discussion was launch pricing, so do not take the 5970 or 295 into the equation as they were planned, but not as launch flagship models.

When you wrap your head around what a "Product Category and Segments within said Category" , then maybe you'll understand that you're making yourself look like a fool. I'll explain it in plain english for you. Product Category is the following: GPU's, and breaks down into multiple segments, for our purposes i'll break it down like this: Mainstream, Flagship and Dual GPU flagship. Each targeting different level of consumers based on where they are in the diffusion of innovation as well as specific need.


The 5970 and 295 were dual GPU options. If you are comparing a 5870 to a 5970 you're comparing Apples to Oranges. The 5870 serves a completely different niche market then the 5970. The same way the 285 serves a different market then the 295.

Basically its the following,
Flagship Competition: 5870 VS 280(or refreshed 285)
Dual GPU Flagship Competition: 5970 VS 295.

Two different target markets, two different product segments within the broad "GPU product category"

So yes, nVidia had planned on making the 280(or refreshed 285) the fastest SINGLE GPU FLAGSHIP product, and was so until Ati's 5870 went and stole the crown.
Same way the 5970 was planned as the FASTEST DUAL GPU product within the DUAL GPU segment.

So when you compare prices, do as the following 280@launch VS 5870@Launch for the Single GPU flagship segment, and 295@launch VS 5970@launch for the Dual GPU segment.

thanks for coming out, your posts were entertaining, please don't let the door hit you on the way out.


---------------------------------------------------------------
As for the 5830, its priced within reason considering current 58** prices. However, this is only reflected due to the pre-emptive launch increase for the 5850 and 5870.
Had prices remained stagnant at before 5830 launch prices, then we'd have a different equation on hand and would see the 5830 priced at ~200. However, thats not the case.
Are the GPU's right now expensive? yes. but do they fall in the right price/perfomance brackets together? yes.
 
Last edited:
mattlef said:
... then maybe you'll understand how much of a fool you're making yourself to look. I'll explain it in laments for you.
Click to expand...

Always proof-read insults.

Edit, thanks for being so polite about my snarky comments. :D
 
Last edited:
mattlef said:
If ATi was going to launch with the 5970 as the flagship they would have done so on the date of launch. Was it in the plans? Yes, every single launch is planned right to the day. You would be an idiot to believe otherwise. However, the entire discussion was launch pricing, so do not take the 5970 or 295 into the equation as they were planned, but not as launch flagship models.

When you wrap your head around what a "Product Category and Segments within said Category" , then maybe you'll understand that you're making yourself look like a fool. I'll explain it in plain english for you. Product Category is the following: GPU's, and breaks down into multiple segments, for our purposes i'll break it down like this: Mainstream, Flagship and Dual GPU flagship. Each targeting different level of consumers based on where they are in the diffusion of innovation as well as specific need.


The 5970 and 295 were dual GPU options. If you are comparing a 5870 to a 5970 you're comparing Apples to Oranges. The 5870 serves a completely different niche market then the 5970. The same way the 285 serves a different market then the 295.

Basically its the following,
Flagship Competition: 5870 VS 285
Dual GPU Flagship Competition: 5970 VS 295.

Two different target markets, two different product segments within the broad "GPU product category"

So yes, nVidia had planned on making the 285 the fastest SINGLE GPU FLAGSHIP product, and was so until Ati's 5870 went and stole the crown.
Same way the 5970 was planned as the FASTEST DUAL GPU product within the DUAL GPU segment.

So when you compare prices, do as the following 285@launch VS 5870@Launch for the Single GPU flagship segment, and 295@launch VS 5970@launch for the Dual GPU segment.

thanks for coming out, your posts were entertaining, please don't let the door hit you on the way out.


---------------------------------------------------------------
As for the 5830, its priced within reason considering current 58** prices. However, this is only reflected due to the pre-emptive launch increase for the 5850 and 5870.
Had prices remained stagnant at before 5830 launch prices, then we'd have a different equation on hand and would see the 5830 priced at ~200. However, thats not the case.
Are the GPU's right now expensive? yes. but do they fall in the right price/perfomance brackets together? yes.
Click to expand...
BS. the gtx295 would NOT have ever been released had ATI not been competitive. the gtx280 was planned to be the top card not just the top single gpu card. the 5970 was ATIs planned top card from the beginning. they did not release all the 5000 series on the same day now did they? so I guess the 5870 was the high end and the low end because it was released by itself and it was months later before the 5670 and other card were released too. lol
 
cannondale06 said:
BS. the gtx295 would NOT have ever been released had ATI not been competitive. the gtx280 was planned to be the top card not just the top single gpu card. the 5970 was ATIs planned top card from the beginning. they did not release all the 5000 series on the same day now did they? so I guess using your logic the 5870 was the high end and the low end because by itself and it was months later before the 5670 and other card were released too.
Click to expand...

I'm not even going to bother with half of your argument because you obviously didn't read what I had posted.

The 295 and 4870x2 were both strategically planned to combat each other not the single gpu cards.This is because they are in a completely different segment of the market. The same way the 5970 competes against the 295.

You're talking about three different segments in your post.
Maybe you should do a little research on the different consumer segments in the Graphics Processing Unit Category before you post again.
 
cannondale06 said:
and was the 5870 to be their fastest card? HELL NO. get that through your fucking head that the 5970 was planned from the very beginning. the gtx295 was only a reaction because the ATI cards were faster than Nvidia thought they would be. the gtx280 was supposed to be their fastest card and if ATI wasnt competitive then the gtx295 would have never came out. gtx280 and gtx260 would have stayed at very high prices without competition just like the 5870 and 5970 are doing now. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

We are cursing now? Really? Are you having a temper tantrum over a VIDEO CARD? Wow....
 
cannondale06 said:
BS. the gtx295 would NOT have ever been released had ATI not been competitive. the gtx280 was planned to be the top card not just the top single gpu card. the 5970 was ATIs planned top card from the beginning. they did not release all the 5000 series on the same day now did they? so I guess the 5870 was the high end and the low end because it was released by itself and it was months later before the 5670 and other card were released too. lol
Click to expand...


You have a lot of your "facts" just plain wrong....
 
Hadocp's review of the 5830...FAIL! Ati's 5830 FAIL.:mad:
I mean really can't even beat the 4890 across the board with 320 more sp's? more texture units higher memory clocks etc.come on.then i get to the end of the article and bam! there's a gold award:confused:. come on Kyle and Brent get it together.:eek:

And kyle that post with dirt2 and avp doesn't change anything.the 4890 still owns the 5830.
that's right mine and everybody's else 4890 will take the 5830 and pwn it.:p
 
mattlef said:
I'm not even going to bother with half of your argument because you obviously didn't read what I had posted.

The 295 and 4870x2 were both strategically planned to combat each other not the single gpu cards.This is because they are in a completely different segment of the market. The same way the 5970 competes against the 295.

You're talking about three different segments in your post.
Maybe you should do a little research on the different consumer segments in the Graphics Processing Unit Category before you post again.
Click to expand...
the market segments have nothing to do with it. kac77 was acting lie the 5870 and 5850 were ATIs top cards when its actually the 5970 and 5870. just because it was not released in the same month doesnt change that. all the 5000 series cards had staggered release dates. what if the gtx260 had came out a few weeks before the gtx280? that would not have really changed anything now would it?. ATI is charging as much as they can for their top two cards just like Nvidia did back then.
 
Patman08 said:
Hadocp's review of the 5830...FAIL! Ati's 5830 FAIL.:mad:
I mean really can't even beat the 4890 across the board with 320 more sp's? more texture units higher memory clocks etc.come on.then i get to the end of the article and bam! there's a gold award:confused:. come on Kyle and Brent get it together.:eek:

And kyle that post with dirt2 and avp doesn't change anything.the 4890 still owns the 5830.
that's right mine and everybody's else 4890 will take the 5830 and pwn it.:p
Click to expand...

I will see that you get a full refund.
 
mattlef said:
Dude, seriously, stop posting.... you've been proven wrong. Deal with it.
Click to expand...
no I havent. you just have a different view and opinion then I do. its ignorant to claim that Nvidia was charging as much as they could for their top two cards yet deny that ATI is doing the same thing.
 
Honestly, the sooner that Fermi comes to market the better for us ALL.

I would love to upgrade my 4850 512 to a 5XX0 series card. but there's no compelling reason to at this time. I game @ 1650x1050 (or 1080p, when I get the chance.) What options do I have?

5750, Similar performance to what I'm running now.
5770, Better performance, yet only close to a 4870 1GB card.
5830, Better yet performance, but out of my budget, and performs on par w/ a 4890.
5850, Best Price/Performane @ Launch. I figured I'd wait for price to come down and buy it, and we all know what happened.
5870, Awesome performance, Overkill for my gaming rez.
5970, Maybe if I didn't have a wife and 2 kids.

What I had decided on was wait till the 5830 came out, as I figured there would be one with all the issues TSMC was having with their 40nm yields. Unfortunately that card doesn't fit into my budget. Honestly the BEST price/performance option right now is the 5770CF. The 5830 is a dog, the 5850 is more expensive then a 5770CF setup w/ lower performance. 5770CF vs 5870 is easy, you save $115 (current prices on newegg) for similar* performance.

So where does that leave me? A 5770 is an upgrade, tho not as large as I'd like to see. And if I purchase a 2nd for CrossFire, I can essentially turn everything up on the games that I play and only have to worry about games that don't support CF on a case by base basis.

And Kyle, I agree your gold for the 5830 should have been a silver, regardless of DX11 and Eyefinity implementation. It's too expensive for not enough card, but only due to the fact ATI has no competition at the moment. Still an excellent review, albeit light, review.

note: This is the posters opinion from currently available data on said topic, and subject to change.
Note: * where crossfire is supported and implemented.
 
Patman08 said:
Hadocp's review of the 5830...FAIL! Ati's 5830 FAIL.:mad:
I mean really can't even beat the 4890 across the board with 320 more sp's? more texture units higher memory clocks etc.come on.then i get to the end of the article and bam! there's a gold award:confused:. come on Kyle and Brent get it together.:eek:

And kyle that post with dirt2 and avp doesn't change anything.the 4890 still owns the 5830.
that's right mine and everybody's else 4890 will take the 5830 and pwn it.:p
Click to expand...

The 4890 and 5830 were never designed to be in the same market segment or directly compared. People are upset that a now-budget card is not outperforming a then-high-end card. AMD cannot change the laws of physics and business. The design changes and available technology (via TSMC) only permit them to improve performance by certain amounts in order to launch new technology in a timely manner.

People who have a 4890 or any card in that family should feel fortunate that they are still competitive from a performance standpoint in most games. However, that is not a reason for people today to not enjoy the features offered by these cards. Yes, AMD is inflating prices, but they dominate every market segment - of course they will profit as much as they can from it. Monopolies - even temporary ones caused by NVIDIA's ineptitude - suck.

Will that stop me from recommending this card to someone who wnats a cheaper but good card? No. I would suggest that they wait for NVIDIA to pressure prices downwards, but they are still going to have a good gaming experience.
 
This may be a bass-ackwards way of thinking about it, but a successful graphics AMD will be more competetive with Intel in the CPU arena, no? They need the cash. Bad. Doesn't matter where it comes from.

With Intel trying to get in on the GPU market, I see little cause for concern over a monopoly. I am concerned about a CPU monopoly, though. We all need AMD earning money, otherwise we'll be shelling out $500 for a mid-range CPU, like back in the days of the Pentium I/II.
 
cannondale06 said:
well please correct me then. so the gtx295 was going to be released anyway? what would have been the point if the gtx280 was fast enough to beat ATI? you also know that the 5870 was just part of the 5000 series and that a dual gpu variant was coming out to be their top card. please tell me how that is wrong.
Click to expand...

Did you think they were going to release the 9800GX2 and not release a dual GPU version the the GT200? :confused:
 
ordovician said:
This may be a bass-ackwards way of thinking about it, but a successful graphics AMD will be more competetive with Intel in the CPU arena, no? They need the cash. Bad. Doesn't matter where it comes from.

With Intel trying to get in on the GPU market, I see little cause for concern over a monopoly. I am concerned about a CPU monopoly, though. We all need AMD earning money, otherwise we'll be shelling out $500 for a mid-range CPU, like back in the days of the Pentium I/II.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself. I'm not going to give a company my hard-earned money unless I think it's a good value. AMD has great graphics chips available but their value - relative to what it could be if NVIDIA didn't blow it - stinks. They're getting away with murder with their prices and kudos to them for being in a position to command their price - but they won't be getting my money yet.
 
ordovician said:
This may be a bass-ackwards way of thinking about it, but a successful graphics AMD will be more competetive with Intel in the CPU arena, no? They need the cash. Bad. Doesn't matter where it comes from.

With Intel trying to get in on the GPU market, I see little cause for concern over a monopoly. I am concerned about a CPU monopoly, though. We all need AMD earning money, otherwise we'll be shelling out $500 for a mid-range CPU, like back in the days of the Pentium I/II.
Click to expand...

PiSquared said:
Speak for yourself. I'm not going to give a company my hard-earned money unless I think it's a good value. AMD has great graphics chips available but their value - relative to what it could be if NVIDIA didn't blow it - stinks. They're getting away with murder with their prices and kudos to them for being in a position to command their price - but they won't be getting my money yet.
Click to expand...

I thought I was speaking for myself.... :( I'm not buying a 5xxx series either, but I was just trying to interpret the situation in a way that hasn't been screamed and shouted about in this thread for 20 pages. Plus, I keep saying that dual 5750's for the same price as a 5830 (if you get a good deal) are a very attractive option right now. IIRC, they outperform a 5850, for cheaper.
 
The only thing I can say for sure, is that there is no way given the current pricing and other options aviable should this card be given a gold award.

I could understand silver. I do understand the value of opinion, and a person right and in having and defending one, however I think it the height of hubris for [H] to pretend that in anyway that the 5830 is deserving of a gold award.
 
CrimandEvil said:
ATI doesn't want $259 for the 5850, they want $299.
Click to expand...

I went off what the article said...

The Radeon HD 5770 launched at $159, while the Radeon HD 5850 launched at $259.
Click to expand...

If people are paying more than suggested list that's their prerogative, I don't pay MSRP for anything. Still $20 or $40 is still too close in price and too far from the 5770 to be considered "in the middle".
 
jwalk6 said:
I went off what the article said...



If people are paying more than suggested list that's their prerogative, I don't pay MSRP for anything. Still $20 or $40 is still too close in price and too far from the 5770 to be considered "in the middle".
Click to expand...
ATI raised the price on the 5850/5870
 
I also think that Hard goofed a little on this one. I'm not sure why they are so excited about the performance. "Perfect" performance isn't sub 4890 performance to me. "Perfect" performance delivers some improvement over the previous gen at a lower price point. ATI is obviously inflating the price to take advantage of the lack of competition, and that's fine, but a consumer site shouldn't be defending corporate profit tactics that are clearly not in consumers' best interest.

The 5830 does not deserve a "gold" rating. It is overpriced. From an engineering standpoint it under-performs (5000 series clearly has a lower performance/transistor ratio).

And yes at "$225" it would be better, but still $25 too much for ~4870 performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ordovician said:
I thought I was speaking for myself.... :( I'm not buying a 5xxx series either, but I was just trying to interpret the situation in a way that hasn't been screamed and shouted about in this thread for 20 pages. Plus, I keep saying that dual 5750's for the same price as a 5830 (if you get a good deal) are a very attractive option right now. IIRC, they outperform a 5850, for cheaper.
Click to expand...

Wasn't yelling or anything. :) I'm glad AMD has a good thing going for it and I hope it spurs innovation in their CPU line as well...it will help us. That doesn't mean I'll pay their inflated prices, though!

It would be interesting to see the CF performance for the 5750 compared to a single 5830 for sure. My guess is that they would only have issue with bandwidth-heavy tasks, but I'm not a professional benchmarker. Plus I have an ancient 1280.1024 monitor so I don't need any of these cards yet. :)

Going in a different direction than the people who have ranted and raved while beating the same point to death is good, though. *raises glass* Cheers!
 
PiSquared said:
Plus I have an ancient 1280.1024 monitor so I don't need any of these cards yet
Click to expand...

:eek: Good god man. Get on craigslist and at least find an ANCIENT monitor that can do 1600x1200. Wouldn't be surprised if you could get your hands on numerous ones for free.
 
Nobody's thought that maybe, just maybe, it's all part of a lengthy shadow campaign where [H]'s telling Nvidia to start behaving more professionally? Might be my prescription painkillers kicking in but I think that sounds reasonable.
 
gold.png
 
Fail said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102879&cm_re=5830-_-14-102-879-_-Product

there it is, $25 more than the regular card, that's basically what you're paying for, the video card + CoD MW2 for $25

When you look at that kind of price the 5850 looks a lot better of a buy.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150477&cm_re=5850-_-14-150-477-_-Product $309

it was $299 a week or 2 ago when I last looked though.
Click to expand...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4&cm_re=radeon_hd_5850-_-14-131-184-_-Product

Radeon 5850 + dirt 2 which is a $60 game also. So really . You can get the 5850 for within $50 bucks of this card.


NO matter how you dress it the card isn't worth anything. I'm sure it sucks for eyeinfinty also.
 
It got a gold award, it looks like [H] thinks it's worth something lol.

It should have been given a bronze or silver at the most, it's not worth a gold award, the price/performance value for us at H just isn't there, there is no bang for the buck with this card, just a poorly priced product that gives no real hardware enthuaist anything to be enthuaistic about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top