Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Laughing at HD 5870 benchmarks....

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • AMD
  • Phenom
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 17, 2009 9:53:48 AM

All the lovely benchmarks posted were done with Phenom II 965!!!! Imagine that - Crysis results of 43fps (avg) with all the eye candy turned on using Phenom II 965. AMD is laughing right now... :D  :D  :D  :D 

There is absolutely NO need to release HD5890 or HD5870x2. We have reached an age where the CPU is once again the bottleneck.

Using an i7 920 is OVERKILL!!!!

More about : amd laughing 5870 benchmarks

September 17, 2009 9:55:13 AM

Just something for nVidia fanboi's to sleep on!
September 17, 2009 10:20:42 AM

Sleep on this:

HD5870 Crysis Benchmark Score
CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB
Crysis 1900x1200 4AA +16 AF DX10 Very High

min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**
Related resources
September 17, 2009 10:27:32 AM

Quote:
Can't wait till they pair it with a real processor



From the looks of things, if you replace that 4770 in you sig with one of these, you'd probably get 50-60 fps (avg).

September 17, 2009 10:37:48 AM

Quote:
I'm actually planning on getting Two for Xfire



Well - I'm afraid I've got bad news for you. You may need to upgrade that i7!!!!!!!! :D  :D  :D 
a c 180 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
September 17, 2009 11:55:39 AM

CPU is the bottleneck?

Maybe.

I'd like to see AMD's fastest graphics card paired with Intel's fastest CPU (overclocked) and benchmarked on most of the recent games.

Intel's 6C/12T CPU is being released in Q1 or Q2 2010.

Also, if there's no CPU to keep up with AMD's latest graphics card then just how DID they demonstrate it driving those six displays, hmmm?
a b U Graphics card
September 17, 2009 12:03:32 PM

Wont help me in GTAIV anywhere near as much compared to upgrading my CPU to an i7 of some sort and there are more examples, second - i use my system for multitasking and other heavy things - i7 with 8 threads dominates there.
September 17, 2009 12:04:04 PM

I'm confused.

The original poster said that the graphics card is bottlenecked by the CPU. Then, the next sentence, says that i7 920 is overkill. Was "overkill" meant to be "underkill" or is it way too early for me to try to make sense of anything? lol

September 17, 2009 12:08:52 PM

itsanss said:
I'm confused.

The original poster said that the graphics card is bottlenecked by the CPU. Then, the next sentence, says that i7 920 is overkill. Was "overkill" meant to be "underkill" or is it way too early for me to try to make sense of anything? lol


I think he meant to say, "using an i7 920, the 5870 is overkill."
September 17, 2009 12:34:07 PM

sedaine said:
Sleep on this:

HD5870 Crysis Benchmark Score
CPU:AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
Win 7 RTM Win 7 RTM
VGA:HD5870 1GB
Crysis 1900x1200 4AA +16 AF DX10 Very High

min:30.**
avg:43.**
max:54.**


Don't mean to ruin the feast but thats with 0AA + 00 AF DX10 VERY HIGH

It was a driver problem.
September 18, 2009 2:18:10 AM

a 965 could pump thru more than 54fps on crysis couldn't it?
a b U Graphics card
September 18, 2009 2:41:08 AM

This is pretty interesting tbh.

AMD could be using their complete victory in graphics as a means to sell more cpu's. I really do hope that the benchmarks we've seen are done with Phenom II's, if that's true then it's even more incredible.
September 18, 2009 2:09:55 PM

go amd,go intel,go nvidia, keep the goodies coming
September 18, 2009 3:14:30 PM

One review showed nvidia gtx 275 did best when paired with amd phenom II 965. Amd gpu would give best when paired with intel cpu. Do you see the funny side ?
September 19, 2009 12:49:59 PM

the nvidia g300 won't have a chance with 5870...
think about it amd's phenom II's are compared with the i7 where as amd has made almost no change in the cpu's architecture but the nehalem is the best one by intel..Still the phenom II's lack behind the i7 only by a lil'. Since amd has already made a winner with the 40nm gpu's they really should make a cpu with a new architecture to compete with nehalem. Then amd would take the performance crown for both cpu and gpu :D  maybe that'll teach intel to lower their prices!!:@
a b U Graphics card
September 19, 2009 1:01:22 PM

I really have to question this whole thing. It just seems way to far fetched to be true. Also I don't see how an i7 is overkill, if the card care give me more performance I want what I paid for, even if what I am getting is more then enough. Besides that you do realize some games are still CPU limited.

Also I use computers for more then gaming, and the i7 gives me the performance I (and many other people) need in different areas.
a b U Graphics card
September 19, 2009 1:16:41 PM

The OP is contradicting himself: if the CPU is the bottleneck than using a 920 would definitely improve framerates.
a b U Graphics card
September 19, 2009 1:43:04 PM

I think at a certain point, if all cpus are "bottlenecked" at most users resolutions, it means the gpus are taking care of business for the gaming end, and a faster cpu wont matter much, which is the case in almost every situation Ive ever seen where the cpu is the bottleneck, provided it is a new cpu, like a C2D,P2 or a i5/7, where the gpu pushes the fps to points where it simply doesnt matter, even when slowed by a limiting cpu
This I can see, and unless you do alot of encoding, where hours of usage each day would ulimately save you and hour on certain cpus, then I can see the OPs point
September 19, 2009 4:10:32 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
I think at a certain point, if all cpus are "bottlenecked" at most users resolutions, it means the gpus are taking care of business for the gaming end, and a faster cpu wont matter much, which is the case in almost every situation Ive ever seen where the cpu is the bottleneck, provided it is a new cpu, like a C2D,P2 or a i5/7, where the gpu pushes the fps to points where it simply doesnt matter, even when slowed by a limiting cpu
This I can see, and unless you do alot of encoding, where hours of usage each day would ulimately save you and hour on certain cpus, then I can see the OPs point



Exactly!

If you use your PC for other things - fair enough, but if you're a hardcore gamer then you should be smiling to see AMD tested the GPU with a Phenom 955BE and got those results. I know some people are not happy with 100fps and would rather have an i7 that can give them 120fps - but that's OVERKILL!

I think what THG needs to do is find the cheapest CPU that gives you playable experience on a game like Crysis using HD 5870.

I'm also still concerned about GTX 300 likely power needs. Will it idle at 30W and peak at 180W? Hope so or they need to rethink their Pentium 4 strategy.

There're two things AMD is going to do to change the GPU wars - these two things also tie into AMD's CPU policy (especially when they intro'd Athlon vs. P4):


1. Keep prices down (ensure manufacturing processes are efficient, and chip not too complex (Barcelona! - pay attention Nv)
2. Keep power needs down relative to performance (performance/watt)
a b U Graphics card
September 19, 2009 10:12:38 PM

Quote:
X4's are close in games only and get destroyed by 50%+ in aps.


The fact that the i7 beats them so hardcore in everything but gaming (imo) is showing that GPUs are still the bottleneck (if this wasn't obvious). Ok, yes the Phenom IIs are doing good here, but I want to see how well they do when you crossfire a couple or even a few of these babies. THEN I think we'll see what a monster i7 really is.

i7 may be overkill, but it just goes to show how powerful (and future-proof) it really is. Once games start releasing that will actually use and need the full power from 5870 xfire setups is when i7 (and i5) will be a no-brainer to anyone and everyone.

BUT I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the benchmarks show us in the future.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 3:39:05 AM

Quote:
again I would be bragging with 64gb in storage and a measly 4700 series gpu... talk about bottleneck


Seriously? Sigh....

You are a moron, learn to shut that mouth of yours before it bites you in the ass.

What, may I ask is wrong with getting 4770's in crossfire with what up until now was the lowest end i7? Perhaps not all of us have the cash to spend on a new high end crossfire setup every time a new card comes out... Besides that... not all of us game the same amount.. does it cross your mind that psycho actually uses his computer for.. gasp.. the tasks he says his i7 does better than a phenom in? You know.. along with 80% of the people in the market for a cpu... My box at work has an i7 as well, and you know what video it has? the lowest of the low quadro... did you know that computers do more than game and that an i7 helps in productivity tasks as well?

As for the ssd's... does it register to you that most people that run ssd's do it for speed and not storage.. Is it not blatantly obvious that most (read all, as even my father does..) will have a large HDD as mass storage on top of whatever ssd config they run?

And please... stop showing pictures that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand..
September 20, 2009 4:00:15 AM

Quote:
again I would be bragging with 64gb in storage and a measly 4700 series gpu... talk about bottleneck


Wow, a single 4870, you're really at the top of the pecking order of GPUs. Douche.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 4:03:57 AM

don't get too worked up over the 5x00...at least wait till Nvidia releases their 300 series so the prices of the ATI 5x00 takes a nose dive...
September 20, 2009 4:16:17 AM

Bluescreendeath said:
don't get too worked up over the 5x00...at least wait till Nvidia releases their 300 series so the prices of the ATI 5x00 takes a nose dive...


Why would 5x00 prices dive? You think Nvidia's gonna undercut amd? Thats some good stuff you're smokin'
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 4:19:38 AM

Bluescreendeath said:
don't get too worked up over the 5x00...at least wait till Nvidia releases their 300 series so the prices of the ATI 5x00 takes a nose dive...

Problem with your statement is, we have no clue whatsoever as to when the G300s will be coming, 1 month? 2? 3 or more?
You could be gaming on the fastest gpu ever made for mo0nths while others wait too.
Saw this happen with the R600, wouldnt want it to happen to anyone else, especially if the G300 isnt all that
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 4:21:34 AM

Chill pills guys.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 4:21:38 AM

I will heed my own advice and keep my mouth shut... even when one is asking for it
September 20, 2009 4:47:39 AM

sedaine said:
Well - I'm afraid I've got bad news for you. You may need to upgrade that i7!!!!!!!! :D  :D  :D 


His sig says i7 @ 4.2GHz. What is better than that at the present time?
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 4:50:33 AM

Dual i7's (Xeons) at 4.2 GHz :D 
September 20, 2009 4:56:30 AM

Raidur said:
The fact that the i7 beats them so hardcore in everything but gaming (imo) is showing that GPUs are still the bottleneck (if this wasn't obvious). Ok, yes the Phenom IIs are doing good here, but I want to see how well they do when you crossfire a couple or even a few of these babies. THEN I think we'll see what a monster i7 really is.

i7 may be overkill, but it just goes to show how powerful (and future-proof) it really is. Once games start releasing that will actually use and need the full power from 5870 xfire setups is when i7 (and i5) will be a no-brainer to anyone and everyone.

BUT I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the benchmarks show us in the future.


You contradict yourself. If the GPU is the "bottleneck", a faster CPU isn't going to change anything. If a CPU is the bottleneck, a faster CPU will provide more FPS by supplying the GPUs with data faster. That's why you see i7 performing better than PII with multiple GPU setups. Because of a CPU limitation, not GPU. You had it backwards.
September 20, 2009 5:03:05 AM

EXT64 said:
Dual i7's (Xeons) at 4.2 GHz :D 


LOL, Well, that would be better, but with the way most games are programmed, the gains wouldn't be too large. That would classify as overkill, too. :) 
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:04:21 AM

Some people are inclined that their cpus are NEVER the limitation, ever. Just go over to the cpu section, youd be amazed by just how "slow" the gpus are heheh
September 20, 2009 5:05:59 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Some people are inclined that their cpus are NEVER the limitation, ever. Just go over to the cpu section, youd be amazed by just how "slow" the gpus are heheh


My CPU is my limitation. My GPUs want more CPU power, but sadly, I can't do that. :( 
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:10:04 AM

one-shot said:
You contradict yourself. If the GPU is the "bottleneck", a faster CPU isn't going to change anything. If a CPU is the bottleneck, a faster CPU will provide more FPS by supplying the GPUs with data faster. That's why you see i7 performing better than PII with multiple GPU setups. Because of a CPU limitation, not GPU. You had it backwards.


Bottlenecks are more complicated than that. An i7 can certainly provide better crossfire scaling than another cpu yet still be the overall 'bottleneck.' The crossfire scaling bottleneck and the overall fps bottleneck are due to different subsystems and are not simply related.

As far as gaming goes Raidur was pretty close to the truth. The GPU is far more important at the vast majority of settings. Provided you have a relatively adequate CPU the gpu is more of a performance limitation to high end gaming, and will be for some time.

a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:19:19 AM

Lets let the 5870x2 decide this
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:23:25 AM

"We put the best cards in an octagon and while non of them moved or anything we're sure the (5870x2) would have kicked all the others asses"
September 20, 2009 5:26:35 AM

So different subsystems, if that's way you see it. Let me rephrase then. The X58/i7 platform produces higher frame rates and performance than 790FX/PII when paired with identical GPUs. But, with subsystems, they both have the same PCIe Gen2 x16 slots. RAM speeds have a very small impact on gaming performance as well. i7's three channels compared to PII's two channels shows a very small improvement. So I'm wondering what subsystem you are referring to. I agree with the rest of his comment, but the way he worded the first part was contradicting. My CPU can bottleneck my GPUs as well. If you're inferring that I stated an i7 can never be a bottleneck, then you must have not understood or didn't fully read my comment. It would be impossible for any CPU to never become a bottleneck with many variables. Please elaborate on the subsystems so I can better understand your point.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:33:57 AM

Homeboy2 said:
Why would 5x00 prices dive? You think Nvidia's gonna undercut amd? Thats some good stuff you're smokin'


Because that's what's been happening for the last couple of years. Nvidia releases a series of cards, then ATI releases theirs, then Nvidia either releases a new generation or cuts their prices. Vice versa for ATI.

GT300 probably will come out Q4 2009 or Q1 2010 and I'd say ATI's 5x00 prices will be cut by a good deal. (this is what happened with the GT200 and 48x0 series)
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:35:03 AM

2x5870 in crossfire is slightly better than 2xGTX295 in Quad SLi

Are the i7s bottlenecked by 2xGTX295 Quad SLi?
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:40:14 AM

one-shot said:
So different subsystems, if that's way you see it. Let me rephrase then. The X58/i7 platform produces higher frame rates and performance than 790FX/PII when paired with identical GPUs. But, with subsystems, they both have the same PCIe Gen2 x16 slots, so I'm wondering what subsystem you are referring to. I agree with the rest of his comment, but the way he worded the first part was contradicting. My CPU can bottleneck my GPUs as well. If you're inferring that I stated an i7 can never be a bottleneck, then you must have not understood or didn't fully read my comment. It would be impossible for any CPU to never become a bottleneck with many variables. Please elaborate on the subsystems so I can better understand your point.


No, I'm not saying that an i7 is some holy grail, or anything of the sort. Just that system design is more complicated than 'i have graphics power x and cpu power y so my fps is the slowest of the two'.

A cpu can be better suited to drive a single gpu than more than one. This is of course related to its overall power but not exactly. The chip set and the pci controller becomes a far bigger issue in crossfire than it does with a single gpu.

My point with this kind of bottleneck is that a phenom is not handicapped by a crossfire setup more than an i7 because it is too much graphics power for it to handle, but because it is inherently inferior at driving more than one GPU.

More often than not I see a computer bottleneck broken down into the simplest of examples where part A is so fast, part B is a bit faster.. thus the result is as fast as part A. Which is a great tool in explaining someone who is new to the subject. But the reason we do not see linear cutoffs in fps and scaling is that the issue is far more complicated than that and only in the most extreme situations does the result resemble that example in the slightest. Whether the setup is more than one GPU or not is just another factor to consider. Untill crossfire simply virtualizes as a single GPU with more power the cpu task will change slightly (or greatly.. it would depend on the drivers) with the addition of a second (or third..etc.) GPU. Different CPU's will handle this change in workload differently, introducing new limiting factors to the overall outcome.

I don't think the scaling issues we see by adding more than one gpu are exactly due to more graphics power and thus more of a cpu bottleneck.. but because the cpu is bottle necking overall performance at the same time as crossfire scaling.

To better illustrate my point.. When the new generation is released I do not expect the ration of crossfire scaling on i7 to that of a phenom to change much. The performance of the 5870 on an i7 is going to be a bit lower than people are assuming by the first numbers being on a phenom.. but the crossfire performance may be substantially higher than some are expecting.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 5:55:48 AM

Don't get me wrong.. with this generation I think that we are going to see that the current AMD offerings will not scale nearly as well as what intel delivers in the i7. But, because there is so much more going on with crossfire than simply "a more powerful GPU" the scaling issue of a phenom with a couple 4870x2's will not translate into poor scaling with a 5870. AT least not directly..

I do expect the i7 to stretch out a bit more of a lead in the single gpu race... but not as large of a jump people are hollering for based on the phenom results with crossfire. As I do not think the crossfire results are representative of doubling the power on a single GPU.
September 20, 2009 5:58:22 AM

Of course it won't scale linearly, but I agree that i7 will not have a huge advantage with single GPUs. Instead, I believe it will have a nice advantage with two 5870s in Crossfire.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 6:00:24 AM

one-shot said:
Of course it won't scale linearly, but I agree that i7 will not have a huge advantage with single GPUs. Instead, I believe it will have a nice advantage with two 5870s in Crossfire.


Aye, that is my main point.. not mentioning the linearity because of you.. but because it is a common misconception when these forums start brandishing the word bottleneck around.
September 20, 2009 6:02:03 AM

daedalus685 said:
Aye, that is my main point.. not mentioning the linearity because of you.. but because it is a common misconception when these forums start brandishing the word bottleneck around.


I hate the word bottleneck. There should be a warning, then PERMA BAN!!! for it's repeated usuage. If only... :) 
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 6:32:03 AM

Keep it clean. Soldier, you're walking a fine line with some of those posts.
September 20, 2009 7:48:44 AM

Bluescreendeath said:
Because that's what's been happening for the last couple of years. Nvidia releases a series of cards, then ATI releases theirs, then Nvidia either releases a new generation or cuts their prices. Vice versa for ATI.

GT300 probably will come out Q4 2009 or Q1 2010 and I'd say ATI's 5x00 prices will be cut by a good deal. (this is what happened with the GT200 and 48x0 series)


Well ati is releasing theirs next week, and we don't know when the gt 300 is coming out nor do we know if its any better than the ati card, so don't hold your breath waiting for an immediate price cut, much less a new generation from Nvidia
September 20, 2009 9:20:10 AM

EXT64 said:
Dual i7's (Xeons) at 4.2 GHz :D 



:o  :o  Nice!!! :D 
September 20, 2009 9:26:59 AM

I see a lot of HD 5850 flying off the shelves. $250 is not so bad for close to GTX 295 performance... imagine when you Xfire.

What I'd like to see is what happens when you have 4 HD 5870's in a rig. That's going to be the theoretical best setup you can have as of Monday!
September 20, 2009 1:08:17 PM

sedaine said:
What I'd like to see is what happens when you have 4 HD 5870's in a rig. That's going to be the theoretical best setup you can have as of Monday!


And then I'd like to see the owner of that rig's jaw drop when he realizes that Quad-Crossfire with the HD5870 doesn't improve much on a standard duals.
a b U Graphics card
September 20, 2009 1:21:49 PM

Snow_Patrol said:
And then I'd like to see the owner of that rig's jaw drop when he realizes that Quad-Crossfire with the HD5870 doesn't improve much on a standard duals.



But it does. If you are into benchmarking, showing your computer at tournaments where people win money for the best case, or if you are a folding@home type person you can have all of those GPU's folding away.

There are other reasons to have that much power then gaming.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!