Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Where is HD5790/HD5830?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 20, 2009 5:38:42 AM

HD5770 sucks and can't scale at all with OC due to its memory bandwidth bottleneck. A complete failure from AMD!

Where is the HD4890 equivalent DX11 gfx?

More about : hd5790 hd5830

a c 358 U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 6:19:39 AM

Next year.

Maybe...
Score
0
November 20, 2009 6:23:27 AM

Damn.... I was told that it will be out in November two months ago.
Score
0
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 6:58:16 AM

ummmm its a budget card - expect budget results

Where is HD5790/HD5830? who says there making them? and if its anything like the 4 series, 6 months away perhaps.
Score
0
November 20, 2009 7:05:44 AM

apache_lives said:
ummmm its a budget card - expect budget results

Where is HD5790/HD5830? who says there making them? and if its anything like the 4 series, 6 months away perhaps.

I know it's a budget card.

However, I expected it to perform at least as good as a HD4870 regarding the raw FPS and I would have bought it if that was the case.

Guess I will have to wait till Q1 next year.... Anyway, I will have more choices then as nVidia's new card will be out too.
Score
0
a c 358 U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 7:09:42 AM

The HD 5830 is the more probable card that will be produced since AMD can use "failed" HD 5850 GPUs that did not met specs.

The HD 5790 is unlikely and probably just pure speculation. There was the "proposed" HD 4790 that never saw the light of day.
Score
0
November 20, 2009 7:52:27 AM

I wouldn't expect to see any 5790's due to the small gap between the 5850 and the 5770 already, maybe a 5830 but whats the point when they have 5750, 5770, 5850, 5870 and 5970 now?
next one will most likely be a 5950, then MAYBE a 5830 if they want to dump a card into the market to compete with the gtx 280 which is right now the 5850 and blowing it out of the water. even the 5770 has been performing better than the GTX 260 in most games and it's 30$ less
Score
0
November 20, 2009 7:57:02 AM

You are right, but I want a card that is at least equal to HD4870 in FPS. HD5770 is 20%+ worse than HD4870 in some games.
Score
0
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 9:20:18 AM

I know i feel your pain, unfortunately its all down to marketing strategy.
The 5870 is the top dog(single chip) and so they need somewhere for its failed or not quite up to scratch chips to go, that brings the 5850 into existence.
Years ago(not that many to be honest) when processes were not as good as today's you would have ended up with a whole family that was basically the same chip in various states of being such as XT,GT,LE, etc. Today they find themselves getting far fewer failed chips so these families are much smaller. I would speculate there may be a 5830 but wouldn't expect it to be a major part.
The 5 series chips cater for the mid to lower end, they are on a basic level half of a 5870 chip and so that much cheaper to make. They basically put it on a 128 bit bus for this very reason, to keep the cost down. Unfortunately the cost savings don't seem to have filtered down to the consumer this time.
Personally I'm skipping it this time around and waiting to see whats coming next. The question of how these cards will actually perform on a big DX11 title is still one that needs answering before i part with any cash for an upgrade.
I think those of us who are disappointed are in the minority as they seem to have about 5 customers for every 1 that isn't impressed.
I have a GPU that isn't struggling, don't need/want multi monitor support. No DX11 must have games about just yet. Had there been a game or had it been cheaper then it would be powering this monitor right now but as it is Personally just no point.

Mactronix
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:55:22 AM

I think that most of the disappointed people simply had unrealistic expectations. Tons of reviews/benchmark can be found so I don't know how that can come to be, but I don't exclude people's ability to over-hype anything, false raising other's expectations.

As for the XX90 series of cards, they are usually the result of maturing manufacturing process and I wouldn't have expected to see some appear only a few month after the release of the main series itself. If you look at the 48XX cards, the 4830 was released 4 months after the 4850 and the 4890 was released 10 months after the 4870 so similar expectations could be assumed. Given that, a 5830 could be expected after Feb. 2010 and a 5890 around Aug. 2010.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 12:01:07 PM

Last year's 4890 & 4830 were tweaked/crippled (respectively) versions of the 4870 & 4830 (respectively again) The 4890 was a tweaked version of the 4870 in that they found some faults in the circuitry regarding GPU & Memory speeds, the tweak allowed for MUCH higher clocks, nothing more. The 4830 was the same thing only they worked backwards with that one so it would be cheaper (or so they thought) and have almost the same performance, not to mention that it was their first 40nm product.

So, think of it this way, the 5830 would be a 32nm part (which will not happen this time i'm sure) which is not available yet. The 5890 would be a tweaked version of the 5870 and it would appear that they have not had that much time to mature yet... Patience young Jedi!

Not to mention, the 5890 will be used as an insurance policy for the upcoming Fermi cards that arrive next quarter, i imagine the 5830 will be used for the same reason...
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 12:16:27 PM

Theres info out showing the lower cards wont be out til Janiary, which often preceed "off" cards such as a 5830.
Maybe by the end of January as was always known, possibly later
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 1:32:56 PM

Jebus, for a mid-range card the HD5770 is fine, those of you with issues with it don't understand what's require to make an F'in card. :pfff: 

Did the GF9600GT outperform the GF8800GTX? HD4670 outperform the HD3870? GF8600/HD2600 outperform the X1800/1900? :non: 

Get you head out of your HD4770 A$$ which is a card that came out LONG after the HD4870, so expecting the HD5770 to be in anyway similar and to be faster than the previous top end of the generation is ignorant. It's good enough that it's faster than the HD4850 in most things. Not since the R9500Pro have you had anything that fits better.

Where's the DX11 HD4890 equivalent... NEXT YEAR the 4890 was a refresh !! [:thegreatgrapeape:5]

If you don't like the HD5770 then buy and HD4890 and stop whining, it's a pretty simple proposition. [:mousemonkey:2]
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 1:52:49 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Theres info out showing the lower cards wont be out til Janiary, which often preceed "off" cards such as a 5830.


Why would you make an HD5830 when you can't meet the demand for the HD5850, let alone HD5870, until yields improve, there won't be any spin-offs unless there are alot of bin'able parts that aren't canibalized by the HD5770 for value to the AIB and AMD.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 1:53:15 PM

TY Ape, as theres just too many mistakes to correct here. Times, dates, promises etc, and then the whining to boot.
I say, just go out and buy a Fermi card
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 1:59:28 PM

Yep, I think AMD should've just released the HD4770 with some new car scent, saying DX11 is too hard to put in a mid-range, and then people would be satisfied.... :heink:  Or at least that's what's come out to compete with it.

I don't know what would've helped people get over their expectations, calling it the HD5696 or else waiting until next year and launching it as the HD5670, neither of which benefits people wanting a mid-range DX11 card, and neither of which benefits AMD, nor does dropping the price of the HD5770 when the process is borked at the fab and $50 less means the cards in the hands of people who don't deserve them (whining n00bz). :pfff: 

Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 2:04:54 PM

They need to understand that coming up with a full coverage in all segments takes time, but by the time this happens, then people start whining about how many there are. LOL
This is just too much lol
Score
0
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 7:07:06 PM

Zenthar said:
I think that most of the disappointed people simply had unrealistic expectations. Tons of reviews/benchmark can be found so I don't know how that can come to be, but I don't exclude people's ability to over-hype anything, false raising other's expectations.

As for the XX90 series of cards, they are usually the result of maturing manufacturing process and I wouldn't have expected to see some appear only a few month after the release of the main series itself. If you look at the 48XX cards, the 4830 was released 4 months after the 4850 and the 4890 was released 10 months after the 4870 so similar expectations could be assumed. Given that, a 5830 could be expected after Feb. 2010 and a 5890 around Aug. 2010.



When you say "Tons of reviews/benchmark can be found so I don't know how that can come to be," That would be hindsight, very hard to have expectations after the fact or indeed benchmarks before the fact.
TGGA, As you say a 5830 would be a hard part to market well, so in the event that they do find themselves with lots of bin'able chips whats the chances they would do something like EOLing the 5770 and putting the 5830 in its place. pure speculation i know, just wondered if that would be a scenario that could happen ?
JDJ, who was it that was posting every crumb of rumour or speculation about the 57 series cards and hyping it up abit as well i seem to remember ?
I know Andy has a bit of a bee in the bonnet about this but then again not everyone knows as much about processes etc, as Ape said "those of you with issues with it don't understand what's require to make an F'in card." Well thats probably very true for lots of forum members.

Mactronix
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 7:20:06 PM

They need to understand that coming up with a full coverage in all segments takes time, but by the time this happens, then people start whining about how many there are. LOL


So, heres my response. They do need to understand.
They also need to understand filling in a complete line up of cards isnt easy, you lay down segments, then you fill in between according to the competition, of which there isnt any.
I dont see people whining about cpus this way?
Score
0
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 8:00:12 PM

That's all well and good but just saying you don't understand get over it helps no one. Respected sites like Anand were running reports speculating this card (5770) had more performance than it does, and they were not alone. I don't see a problem with people expecting more than was delivered, on that front AMDs recent performance was enough to think that it might indeed be the case.
Where the problem lies is getting over it, lots of people myself included posted early on regarding these cards but have gotten over it and moved on, looks like Andy had his heart set on it and is taking the disappointment of over expectation rather badly.

Mactronix
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 8:11:37 PM

jonpaul37 said:
Last year's 4890 & 4830 were tweaked/crippled (respectively) versions of the 4870 & 4830 (respectively again) The 4890 was a tweaked version of the 4870 in that they found some faults in the circuitry regarding GPU & Memory speeds, the tweak allowed for MUCH higher clocks, nothing more. The 4830 was the same thing only they worked backwards with that one so it would be cheaper (or so they thought) and have almost the same performance, not to mention that it was their first 40nm product.

So, think of it this way, the 5830 would be a 32nm part (which will not happen this time i'm sure) which is not available yet. The 5890 would be a tweaked version of the 5870 and it would appear that they have not had that much time to mature yet... Patience young Jedi!

Not to mention, the 5890 will be used as an insurance policy for the upcoming Fermi cards that arrive next quarter, i imagine the 5830 will be used for the same reason...


The 4770 was AMD's first 40nm product not the 4830 which was a 55nm product just like the others. And the 4830 was released to knock the 8800/9800 GT off of its throne as the best value card at the time.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 8:15:40 PM

andy5174 said:
HD5770 sucks and can't scale at all with OC due to its memory bandwidth bottleneck. A complete failure from AMD!

Where is the HD4890 equivalent DX11 gfx?


I wouldnt say it's a complete failure from AMD, I built a PC not too long ago for a buddy with dual 5770's and IMO it can hold it's own... In some games it is comparable to a 5850 or even a 5870.... We just need better drivers....
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 8:47:27 PM

And anyone thinks it wont get better?
And Anand? Links?
Id like to see what theyve said, so I can better understand how others feel, because my thoughts were formed from other sources admittedly.
If you look at the current situation, the competition hasnt lowered their prices on their inferior products, so, the 5xxx series looks high priced without the competition giving any wriggle room, and no, every release isnt a 4xxx series, but the single isnt going for 650 either.
Ive seen the complaints, cost too much, wanting more, running it down saying thats what you get when you have no competition, running the older gen down, not admitting it was a good deal, and then turning around and expecting it is hypocrisy at its best.
Ive been in conversations before, and I know when I see unreasonable nit picking done with ulterior motives being used.
In my "hyping rumors", what was my rumors? Didnt I say the 5870 would be between the 4870x2 and the 295?
Lets see what drivers do, and I bet it ends up right there.
But, these same people whine about the 5870 perf too, saying it was supposed to beat the 295, well, I never said that in my rumor spreading did I?
No, I gave good advice then, as I did now,
Quit whining, it takes time.
If thats too harsh, and if they dont believe me, what else can I do? Lie to em like children? To protect them somehow?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
a b } Memory
November 20, 2009 8:55:02 PM

andy5174 said:
You are right, but I want a card that is at least equal to HD4870 in FPS. HD5770 is 20%+ worse than HD4870 in some games.


IDK where you got the 20% from but I have wondered several sites and they are about the same in most common games. Give or take, in a few months with more mature drivers it should surpass the performance of a 4870 easily....

http://guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-5770-review-test/18


Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:12:07 PM

give it 6 months of driver updates and the 5770 will be smoking the 4870 in every game or getting damn close in all the others.

for a card that is only about a month old it's to be expected that it wont be running at it's full potential yet. when the 4870 was a month old it was running very close to the 4770 too, then it's had 18months worth of driver updates and coding tweaks to push it's performance.

we need some clarity in the review sites, run all the cards on their drivers that come on disk and you'll see a huge difference to how they run now
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:17:56 PM

Zenthar said:
I think that most of the disappointed people simply had unrealistic expectations.


Is it unrealistic to expect a new released card on the same price range as the old ones to be at least equal to the old? What a COMMON SENSE!

Quote:
TheGreatGrapeApe:
Did the GF9600GT outperform the GF8800GTX?


Was 9600GT on the same price range as the 8800GTX? Do you know 9800 is 8800 rebranded? You have no clue what you are talking.

Stop whining and calling others noobs, you noob!
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:26:38 PM

Jeeze, the whining. Lets do some simple comprehension here: HD 4870 and HD 5770. The performance is as close as it should be. The HD 5870 had the 4870 to beat, and we all know that is what happened. Going down the line to compare performance isn't necessary. It's a budget card with previous-gen (also pre 4890 which was a refresh) high-end performance. Give it time, it's like you didn't realize the prices on the last generation haven't also depreciated greatly before the stock ran out.

Waaahhh, I want brand new technology in my product with better performance for $100!
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:26:59 PM

New PC parts should be better and cheaper than the old ones.

For example, i5 is better and cheaper than Q9550!

i5 is the mainstream and Q9550 was the top end!
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:28:07 PM

You have to be patient. Traditionally graphics card companies release the best/high-end cards first, then when yields improve & the process is cheaper they trickle down.
Also seeing the small gap between the 5770 & 5850 wouldn't the 5790 & 5830 almost overlap?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:28:29 PM

andy5174 said:
New PC parts should be better and cheaper than the old ones.

For example, i5 is better and cheaper than Q9550!


If that was the case AMD would go bankrupt. Do you have bills to pay? If you do, you can relate. The Q9550 costs more to make than the i5 and its also EOL'd which may give it some type of sentimental value to some people. Also, Intel doesn't have any yield problems or much debt they're worrying about.

Also, how about the GT240? It's slower than an 8800GT and costs $20-40 more with zero compelling features. No DirectX 11 (it just got DirectX 10.1) and no Eyefinity nor SLi. It goes both ways except in that case it's horrendously worse. At least the 5770 has some new technology in it and the potential to beat a 4870s performance in DirectX 11.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:29:58 PM

Yes the i5 is cheaper and better than the Q9550 (now's the time for me to wave a OC'ed Q9450 around) but it's based off the i7, which has been out for a while.
i5:Q9550::4770:3850
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:31:08 PM

brockh said:
If that was the case AMD would go bankrupt. Do you have bills to pay? If you do, you can relate.

So you are saying we are paying more for less so AMD can earn more?!

There are hundreds of company go bankrupt due to bad products everyday! Are you going to pay more for their bad products so that they can survive?!
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:31:44 PM

sabot00 said:
Yes the i5 is cheaper and better than the Q9550 (now's the time for me to wave a OC'ed Q9450 around) but it's based off the i7, which has been out for a while.
i5:Q9550::4770:3850

i7 is top end and not on the same price range.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:35:08 PM

andy5174 said:
So you are saying we are paying more for less so AMD can earn more?!

There are hundreds of company go bankrupt due to bad products everyday! Are you going to pay more for their bad products so that they can survive?!


Go take high school economics. I'm not about to explain it. :??: 

I really dislike how you make all these half-baked threads in an attempt to start some kind of "discussion" but your points never make any logical sense to someone with at least a high school diploma...
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:36:03 PM

EXACTLY, the 4870 is top end and not on the same price range.
Your comparing the 5770 (mid-range) to the 4870 (high-end).
Also I'm saying the i5 is based off the i7, so the i5's design has had time to mature.
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:37:14 PM

sabot00 said:
EXACTLY, the 4870 is top end and not on the same price range.
Your comparing the 5770 (mid-range) to the 4870 (high-end).
Also I'm saying the i5 is based off the i7, so the i5's design has had time to mature.

They ARE on the same price range now! And HD4870 IS better than HD5770 now!
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:39:52 PM

brockh said:
Quote:
andy5174 wrote :

So you are saying we are paying more for less so AMD can earn more?!

There are hundreds of company go bankrupt due to bad products everyday! Are you going to pay more for their bad products so that they can survive?!

Go take high school economics. I'm not about to explain it. :??: 

If that's what the economic in you country teach you, then good luck to your country!
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:40:20 PM

andy5174 said:
So you are saying we are paying more for less so AMD can earn more?!

There are hundreds of company go bankrupt due to bad products everyday! Are you going to pay more for their bad products so that they can survive?!


It performs almost the same as the last gen high end, yet has half the bus. Even still, it has dx11 and MUCH lower power consumption.

How exactly is it a bad product?

Perhaps you don't like it, fine, then don't buy it.

Many people will though..

It is not AMD's fault that you allowed yourself to fall victim to the hype and couldn't get over having your inflated expectations broken. It is also not AMD's fault the experts who guessed how it would perform were wrong.. evidently dx11 support slowed the clock for clock speed of the chips more than expected, big whoop.

How many times does TGGA have to explain that the prices we enjoyed for 4800's were not the norm, nor would they continue?
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:42:05 PM

andy5174 said:
If that's what the economic in you country teach you, then good luck to your country!


You and everyone else will always be paying a premium for new products if you choose to buy them early regardless of the company or type of product. The simple solution for you is to go buy a 4870 and call it a day. This is not some kind of exclusive trend unique to AMD nor the technology industry.

Also, the lower tier education in the U.S. sucks, but we're about free thinking. I can choose to buy something if I believe it's overpriced or I can't. That's economics. If you don't want to buy it, don't buy it. Maybe they're forcing you to buy it in your country? :sarcastic: 
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:43:08 PM

Quote:
brockh:
You and everyone else will always be paying a premium for new products if you choose to buy them early regardless of the company or type of product.

i5 is NEW product and cheaper than Q9550 which is an extremely old products and better too. It seems that Intel is more considerate of customers now!

In conclusion, you guys BELIEVING AMD is right for making HD5770 is WORSE and MORE EXPENSIVE than HD4870!
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2009 11:48:27 PM

What makes you think AMD is making it more expensive? What is the MSRP of the two cards?
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:50:04 PM

OK! AMD is RIGHT for making HD5770 WORSE and MORE EXPENSIVE than HD4870! I am so wrong! My apology.
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:53:12 PM

it's NEW less than a month old, yeah it's going to be more expensive than the card thats been around for a YEAR AND A HALF

and the biggest difference was that the 4870 and 4890 are both enthusiast range cards, 5770 is a mainstream range.

the 5770's competing with the 4770 and the GTS 250 (mainstream cards that are between 100 and 200$)
likewise to the 5850 +4850
and the 5870 + 4870/4890 (higher binned 4870 chip)

also why the 5970 is competing with the 4870x2 and GTX 295

gotta get your ranges straight before using caps so often, makes you look like a newb
Score
0
November 20, 2009 11:54:08 PM

every stop...hammer time

dont buy a 5770 period. Pretty useless card imo unless you crossfire them, or if you cant pay 2bucks more on your power bill. They are overpriced, dont have enough power to run eyefinity in games, dx11 is useless till 2011 at the least and by the time dx11 comes out it'll be to weak to power the games.

Save your old card and just wait, dont buy it if ya dont want it, no need to bash anything Nvidia or Ati, that is what professional review sites are for, not biased forum fan boys.

Anyways, I'd bet nvidia cards would come out b4 the rehash 5xxx serious come out (or as a response to nvidia's cards), just wait for all the supplying issues and hype to die down and then make your pick in 2010.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 21, 2009 12:06:56 AM

Early adopters have always paid "more" than people who waited, not because the product is simply better, but because R&D isn't cheap and manufacturing processes need to be adjusted to make it truly profitable. The manufacturing effectiveness of will improve over time so the prices will drop. I don't think AMD is right or wrong, neither is Nvidia or Intel, don't hate the players, hate the game. If AMD is so wrong with the 5XXX series, why are the GTX285 still priced the same as the 5870 while delivering maybe 70% of the performance? Why is the GTX295 priced ~25% over the 5870 and delivers only ~10% more performance.

In a card's price, there is a lot to consider, like technology, newly adoption, manufacturing process overclockability and even a premium to get the "best" whether the price overhead isn't justified by the performance difference with the 2nd best.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 21, 2009 12:08:43 AM

andy5174 said:
OK! AMD is RIGHT for making HD5770 WORSE and MORE EXPENSIVE than HD4870! I am so wrong! My apology.


/facepalm

Performance is just one way they determine MSRP. Many deem dx11 worth paying more for, if you do not then do not pay more for it and get a 4870.

I don't see the problem here.. You want the performance of a 4890, for the price of a 4890... then buy a bloody 4890... If you want dx11 then take the bite to the wallet and the performance and get it. If the 5770 does not have something you wanted why are you complaining? There is no reason to complain about it unless you do value what it offers over a 4890, in which case don't be so cheep, or be patient.

Do you really think any company makes prices based on what they did in the past? They make prices based on what is reasonable now, they deem this reasonable. If you disagree then wait for it to be lower, which will happen. As it is the same performance as last years high end, with more features and less power is costing far less than the launch MSRP of the 4870, which in itself was very low considering.

Is it too hard to think that maybe the 4870s were crazy cheep, thus the price is not sustainable, and the 5770 is at the correct price?

Don't people have to take logic in school anymore? Since when did a company have to please every single person... if nothing meets your needs then wait, if something does then stop whining.
Score
0
November 21, 2009 12:10:02 AM

^ nah, logic is something they have left the youngsters to learn by being idiots until they fail out of highschool and work at macdonalds or starbucks. those who develop logic and common sense get the scholarships and go onto design and produce the products that the macdonalds and starbuck workers purchase and complain about how much they cost, which sends up into a very humorous chain of events

-> no logic = low paying job = no money for better components.

surprisingly you can run eyefinity on current gen games with the 5770 even without putting it in crossfire

all depends on which games you play, what resolution you use and how high of settings you want to use.

best comparison on that point would be to say you can run 3d vision on a gts 250, but you're going to have to lower the detail and resolution. even the GTX 260 struggles at 1920x1200 with 3d vision when you start cranking up settings.

Dx11's first few games will be coming out Q1+Q2 2010 which is only a few months away and once the engines have been coded and tested you'll start seeing an explosion of games for it.

crytek engine is finished and being tested on cards to tighten up the Dx11 coding for ATI's cards right now before they release the games. and with Dx11 you are looking at a similar performance boost that (most of us) saw going from Dx9 to Dx10 if anyone remembers back in those days.
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 21, 2009 12:13:07 AM

Core 2 came out 4 years ago, i5 less than 5 months. You have over a 3 year tech gap. 4XXX series came out little over 1 year ago, 5XXX a few months, you're comparing a 3 year gap with a 1 year gap.
So following your logic: i5/C2D = 5770/4870
But in reality because of the gap: i5/C2D = 3(5770/4870)
Score
0
a b U Graphics card
November 21, 2009 12:13:08 AM

Umm, so what was the release price of a 4870?
Lets see, the number 3 card is the 5770.
The number 3 card at the time was the 9600, following the 9800 gtx and gt
Lets wait til the 9.12 drivers come, as the rumors are saying some bumps in perf, which [H] showed on the 5870 in 1 game having 22% perf increase, so who knows.
Lots to consider, as since theres still old cards in the channel, the prices will stay higher than normal, and the previous gen was way underpriced, which Ive never seen an underpriced Intel anything.
So just wait it out, because the competition has nothing to counter with, and why anyone expects ATI to lower its prices on a brand new card, and not mention nBidia refusla to lower its prices on it old gen first, should think twice, plus theres more, if you want it
Score
0
November 21, 2009 12:21:14 AM

original release price for the 4870 - 1GB on July 8th 2008 was $349 CAD and competing directly with the 9800GTX (it was a sunny day here :D )
Score
0
!