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

flip-mode said:
You're one of those selective reading types. Always a pleasure. Till next time...
Click to expand...

And you have tunnel-vision. :) There is one 4890 on sale right now on newegg, and it's out of stock. The 5000 series offers more than performance over the 4000 series. If you can't see that then don't buy one. But don't assume everyone has your exact needs and wants, you are not the "galactic supreme consumer."
 
HOLY SHIT THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!11

Why must we go through this EVERY SINGLE TIME a new generation of GPU's is released! :mad:

Every time ATI leapfrogs Nvidia, or vice verse, the forums erupt in rage that [H] is in the pocket of one or the other. There are ALWAYS brand new midrange cards that cost the same if not more than the top of the line card from the generation that is being replaced. The high price is due to low supply, high demand, and no competition. My god just look back to the release of the GTX260 and how it dropped hundreds of dollars in price once the 4000 series was released.

This is nothing new! There is nothing to see here. Move along and stop fighting over a GPU situation that comes about ever 18-24 months. Do you people remember nothing from the past?
 
Hey Kyle, are you guys going to release an update with some crossfire numbers? When the price drops I could see these being a pretty slick set-up. I ran Crossfire 4830s for a while, never should of sold them, and it worked great! Especially considering they were down to 100-120 each while the high-end cards were still up there in price. Anyway, thanks for the review!!
 
Last edited:
CrossFire + Eyefinity numbers would be interesting... Tho at current prices you're probably better off w/2x 5770 or a 5850/5870, but who knows where prices will go once Fermi has been out for a while...
 
Kinda funny how people are defending this card saying that it supports new Tech like Eyefinity, yet in the review it says that the performance in Eyefinity wasn't there. My car has a 140 mph speedo but it won't do it unless I drive it off a cliff.
 
maddude0025 said:
HOLY SHIT THE SKY IS FALLING!!!!!11

This is nothing new! There is nothing to see here. Move along and stop fighting over a GPU situation that comes about ever 18-24 months. Do you people remember nothing from the past?
Click to expand...

Actually, this may be new, because I've been thinking about the past and I cannot, cannot remember there ever being a card released that cost more, considerably more in this case, and offered LESS performance than an existing card. Can anyone?
 
flip-mode said:
Actually, this may be new, because I've been thinking about the past and I cannot, cannot remember there ever being a card released that cost more, considerably more in this case, and offered LESS performance than an existing card. Can anyone?
Click to expand...

Yes, go look at the ATI 2000 series release and the Nvidia recent GTS series.
 
flip-mode said:
Actually, this may be new, because I've been thinking about the past and I cannot, cannot remember there ever being a card released that cost more, considerably more in this case, and offered LESS performance than an existing card. Can anyone?
Click to expand...

Can you remember cards costing more when they launch, and having more of a focus on shaders and other various intelligent rendering thingies that take a little time to grow into before their full performance is realized? (hint that's like the last five years or something) They are here to be the next 4890, not compete against their own older model. Plenty of reviews stated they are roughly equal to a 4890 with a benefited nod towards dx11 for the future. It all depends on how it's benchmarked doesn't it, and all the different variable and factors that go into it. Everyone should know by now that apples to apples is never a perfect match.
 
OldPueblo said:
The 5000 series offers more than performance over the 4000 series. If you can't see that then don't buy one.
Click to expand...
How can he see that when "that" is not true. The 5830 is slower than the 4890 in a majority of reviews.

Your statement makes even less sense considering many benchmarks show that the 5000 series clock-for-clock is slower than the 4000 series.

The 5830 should be $200-$210 based on performance, but I'd take $10 off that for the poor performance/watt.
 
OldPueblo said:
Can you remember cards costing more when they launch, and having more of a focus on shaders and other various intelligent rendering thingies that take a little time to grow into before their full performance is realized? (hint that's like the last five years or something) They are here to be the next 4890, not compete against their own older model. Plenty of reviews stated they are roughly equal to a 4890 with a benefited nod towards dx11 for the future. It all depends on how it's benchmarked doesn't it, and all the different variable and factors that go into it. Everyone should know by now that apples to apples is never a perfect match.
Click to expand...
there is NO future for card that cant even beat old products now. its laughable that you think DX11 means much because in games like AvP even the 5870 doesnt perform great with DX11 at just 1680. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...-benchmarks-and-graphics-comparison/Practice/

sorry but the 5830 fails because people wanted a card that could beat he 4890 because the 5770 couldnt. unfortunately consumers didnt get that card.
 
Vegas P11 said:
Kinda funny how people are defending this card saying that it supports new Tech like Eyefinity, yet in the review it says that the performance in Eyefinity wasn't there. My car has a 140 mph speedo but it won't do it unless I drive it off a cliff.
Click to expand...

And there's the car analogy...
 
cannondale06 said:
sorry but the 5830 fails because people wanted a card that could beat he 4890 because the 5770 couldnt. unfortunately consumers didnt get that card.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel. Look back 1 generation, the 4770 beat out the 3870 handily.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/...gh-quality-1st-release/compare,1470.html?prod[2714]=on&prod[2722]=on

If I want to upgrade from a 4870 today (which I do), I have the option of a 5830 for $240 for a small performance increase or a 5850 for $300 for a good performance increase.
 
Again: Maybe there is one, but I cannot think of one - can anyone think of a card, other than the 5830, that, when launched, provided LESS performance while COSTING MORE than an existing card?
 
cannondale06 said:
honestly I am not all that impressed with the 5000 series at all. its a joke that the 5870 cant even beat the 4870x2 in many cases. it matches it spec wise and even has higher clocks and no crossfire to deal with yet it is not better at all and costs more.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this. The HD 3870x2 is within 4% or so of the performance of the HD 4870.. hardly worth the upgrade when the HD 4870 was released as a flagship. Why are we using X2 cards as benchmark comparisons? The single card should always be valued for the more consistent performance regardless if the raw numbers are worth the upgrade or not.

I will be seriously surprised if the HD 6870 will beat CrossFired HD 5870s.
 
Why is everyone calling this such a fail product when obviously this is just a driver issue.Look at the first 4890 reviews.Now look at more recent ones.Driver updates can help a ton.If the 5830 is performing the same or close right off the bat then in about a month or so it will be able to beat it handily.So once the drivers mature i would say its worth its gold award.I must say the performance of it right this second isn't worth the money or award but obviously the specs are.And this isn't a new Architecture its a update.So its not like its shit because of the hardware.Like others have already plainly stated we have to wait for the next GPU series for a total update.
 
DoomD said:
Why is everyone calling this such a fail product when obviously this is just a driver issue.Look at the first 4890 reviews.Now look at more recent ones.Driver updates can help a ton.If the 5830 is performing the same or close right off the bat then in about a month or so it will be able to beat it handily.So once the drivers mature i would say its worth its gold award.I must say the performance of it right this second isn't worth the money or award but obviously the specs are.And this isn't a new Architecture its a update.So its not like its shit because of the hardware.Like others have already plainly stated we have to wait for the next GPU series for a total update.
Click to expand...

Newflash: The 5800 series has been out for months. The time for making drive excuses has long passed by.
 
friend'scatdied said:
I don't understand this. The HD 3870x2 is within 4% or so of the performance of the HD 4870.. hardly worth the upgrade when the HD 4870 was released as a flagship. Why are we using X2 cards as benchmark comparisons? The single card should always be valued for the more consistent performance regardless if the raw numbers are worth the upgrade or not.

I will be seriously surprised if the HD 6870 will beat CrossFired HD 5870s.
Click to expand...
lets break this down. 5870 and 4870x2 had the same total number of SP, TMU, and ROPs. the 5870 had higher clocks across the board. the 5870 had no crossfire to deal with.

now based on all that please tell me why the 5870 is not faster than the 4870x2. there is absolutely no reason the 5870 should not easily beat the 4870x2.

the 5000 series architecture has certainly screwed up some stuff from the previous 4000 series because the cards are slower then their specs would indicate.
 
DoomD said:
Why is everyone calling this such a fail product when obviously this is just a driver issue. ook at the first 4890 reviews.Now look at more recent ones.Driver updates can help a ton.If the 5830 is performing the same or close right off the bat then in about a month or so it will be able to beat it handily...
Click to expand...
Drivers can't fix a pixel fill rate lower than the 5770 and barely over half as much as a 5850. There may be little a driver update can do to specifically improve 5830 performance without improving all cards in the 5800 series, or entire 5000 series.
 
All the complaining made us curious.

avp_graph_big.gif


dirt2_graph_big.gif
 
Why'd you have to go ruin it, it was gonna be funny to bump this thread in a couple months. :(
 
cannondale06 said:
lets break this down. 5870 and 4870x2 had the same total number of SP, TMU, and ROPs. the 5870 had higher clocks across the board. the 5870 had no crossfire to deal with.

now based on all that please tell me why the 5870 is not faster than the 4870x2. there is absolutely no reason the 5870 should not easily beat the 4870x2.

the 5000 series architecture has certainly screwed up some stuff from the previous 4000 series because the cards are slower then their specs would indicate.
Click to expand...

http://hardforums.com/showpost.php?p=1035379574&postcount=201

Plus the fact that (as "Evergreen" suggests) the 5870 performs damn close to the 4870 while using 60% of the power during load.. and ~20% during idle?

I'm sure if they wanted to go Gung-Ho they would've outed R800 and upped TDPs and performance commensurately without regard to performance/watt. But looks like a certain Green company is already on that game..
 
Last edited:
LOL, nice post Kyle. I suppose that is a small consolation. Others show the 5830 consistently getting beat by the 4890 though, so its not a clean victory. But, again, nice post!
 
flip-mode said:
LOL, nice post Kyle. I suppose that is a small consolation. Others show the 5830 consistently getting beat by the 4890 though, so its not a clean victory. But, again, nice post!
Click to expand...

And others are showing them as roughly equal. Funny how many benchmarks out there aren't consistent. Did that just start?
 
I don't completely understand GPU architecture, but can somebody explain why this loses to a 4890? The more shaders, texture units, and higher memory speed seem better than the extra 50mhz the 4890 had on the core to me, especially since the 5830 is a 40nm chip and should hopefully overclock better than the 4890.

I don't really see why people are obsessively comparing this to the 48xx series. It seems like wasted effort comparing to cards that cannot be bought (at newegg at least).Yes there is a large price difference, but the entire 5xxx line has been priced significantly higher than their 4xxx replacements. I don't think it is that the 5xxx cards are a bad value, but the 4xxx cards were exceptional values. Before the 4xxx launch, high end video cards were much more expensive, and it appears that the lower prices brought by that series were only for a single generation.

As to this review, it would be helpful for the reader base if there were comparisons to the previous generation (4890) and to the closes priced competitor from Nvidia (GTX 260). As much as [H] talks about how great Eyefinity, a single benchmark would have at least been nice to see. As far as the gold award, I don't see a problem. This is simply the best card you can get for $240 at this point in time. Upgrading between consecutive generations of video cards (with a couple of exceptions) has never really been about value.
 
jamesrb said:
I don't completely understand GPU architecture, but can somebody explain why this loses to a 4890? The more shaders, texture units, and higher memory speed seem better than the extra 50mhz the 4890 had on the core to me, especially since the 5830 is a 40nm chip and should hopefully overclock better than the 4890.
Click to expand...

Because it is literally a slower architecture per clock cycle:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3734&p=15
paragraphs 6, 7, 8
 
And just for the record, those graphs show REAL WORLD GAMEPLAY...no benchmarks as usual.
 
Anyone remember the 4830 vs. the 4770? I find the opposite proposition here -- the 5830 offers higher performance than the 5770 at a higher price (where the 4830 offered less performance for an initially higher MSRP that dropped substantially). The MSRP is too high on this one, but hopefully it'll drop just as sharply since it's a similar product in spirit.
 
We know a lot of you were hoping that the 5830 would offer 4890 levels of performance with the addition of DX11, Eyefinity, etc. Based on our benchmarks today, the 5830 accomplishes on this mission, but it isn’t a clean sweep. The two boards are neck-and-neck in Crysis, but the 5830 trailed the 4890 in games like Resident Evil 5 and Far Cry 2 in our testing. Fortunately the two boards are close enough to call it a draw in the other titles, and the 5830 was able to leverage DX11 to gain a significant lead over the Radeon 4890 in STALKER.
Click to expand...

Like it or not, the 4890 is going and gone, and AMD needed a card that fit into today's price structure. This isn't rocket science and it's close enough for me. Why should they negatively compete against their own cards, undercutting themselves?
 
OldPueblo said:
Like it or not, the 4890 is going and gone, and AMD needed a card that fit into today's price structure. This isn't rocket science and it's close enough for me. Why should they negatively compete against their own cards, undercutting themselves?
Click to expand...

Making the next generation worse at the same pricepoint is what I call taking advantage of the customers. You can't possibly be happy that they're providing less performance for more money than compared to a product released 9 months ago.

Spare me the lecture about supply, demand, businesses and competition. I just want a reasonably priced upgrade.
 
How much you choose to spend is up to you, there are several cards faster then the 4890/5830 especially if you factor in CF options.
 
AMD is being very smart when it comes to pricing the 5000 series. They have no direct competition and are in posession of a product that is in high demand. When Nvidia releases their next gen card, AMD can evaluate on how to adjust pricing (lower or the same) and still be able to keep their heads above water. I would be curious to see how much money they spend just on developing a next gen card before it even gets to manufacturing.

As far as benchmarks being incosistent, do all review sites use actual game play or canned benchmarks. Different factors make for different results.
 
Talonz said:
Kyle, the two examples you gave for the 5830 vs 4890 make a good point. However, if we look at the 8 games that anandtech reviews, and 18 games that techpowerup reviews, those 2 titles seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

If I were to only look at the post you made with those 2 games, I would say that you cherrypicked those 2 games to show us.
Click to expand...

It's a curious couple of choices (and why DX9? do those game not run DX10?), but whatev.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top