Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

HD 5670: Are we going backwards?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 14, 2010 4:48:26 AM

I was just reading the fancy new HD 5670 reviews on the interwibble again and I noticed the RRP of the HD 5670s. It's about $99 USD. How ridiculous is that? Almost anybody with the sense higher than of a mushroom would fare the extra mile with a few more bucks and purchase the HD 5750. :pfff: 

But, I see a greater concern. The Perf/Price ratio is finally shifting in the other direction. At the $99 price point not that long ago, we got HD 4850s. Now, they are about 15-20% more expensive. The HD 5670 performs beneath the HD 4850 and still costs more. I don't know about you guys, but is the cheapness over time thing going backwards without heavy pressure from Nvidia?

I dunno, it just feels weird when tech gets more expensive for similar perf. I mean like I know there are new features and all, but doesn't AMD make savings using the 40nm node? Isn't it cheaper to make? I mean like if the 40nm node was *that* bad would they logically use it on all their products?

I dunno.

More about : 5670 backwards

January 14, 2010 4:59:16 AM

Yes, indeed. Quite an efficient card.

I'm just disappointed it's not cheaper.

:p 
January 14, 2010 5:09:19 AM

The 4850s were a marketshare gain card, and needed to be cleared out as well.
This card is brand new release, which is nowheres near the 4850s release pricing, and the bigger part, no competition, as its priced to perf, and until nVidia either lowers its prices on its old old parts, or comes in with something new, thats what were going to get, but even so, look for small drops not to long from now

I guess also, depends on who you read, Ive seen 115 and now this:
Bottom Line: if your budget is below 100 USD, and all you do is occasionally play a game at a monitor resolution of say 1280x1024 to 1600x1200, watch movies often and do a lot of desktop work then we can wholeheartedly recommend the Radeon HD 5670. The card packs plenty of performance and features and it will surprise you in that fashion -- in a good way.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-5670-review-tes...
Related resources
January 14, 2010 5:18:38 AM

Well it still can't beat the HD 4770 or GTS 250 which are only priced a bit higher.
January 14, 2010 5:25:05 AM

Time and competition will bring them down.
The 4 series was priced for marketshare gain, and these prices are still under what wed seen in the past before then, so without competition and brand new, meh

Heres what Anand has to say, like I said, nVidia needs to drop their prices:
At $99, the 5670 is intended to stake out the all-important sub-$100 position for video cards, which is a big price point for price-sensitive buyers and OEMs. Bear in mind that the entire sub-$100 market encompassed 2/3rds of all video card sales last quarter, according to AMD and Mercury Research. Given the low transistor count and small die size of the 5670, we expect that AMD will have a lot of price latitude to work with going forward – as 40nm production costs and GDDR5 costs come down, this board should be cheaper to make than the 4670 ever was.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3720&p=1

These other cards will die in supply, and the 240 is priced waaaay too high
January 14, 2010 5:30:09 AM

Well it's poorly placed now.

Priced above the 9800GT and below the GTS 250.

Price should drop to become more competitive.
January 14, 2010 5:34:28 AM

No, but you saw the benchies on Dx11...

January 14, 2010 5:37:38 AM

I wouldn't buy either of them over the 5670 for the simple fact of DX11 and Eyefinity
said:
I wouldn't buy either of them over the 5670 for the simple fact of DX11 and Eyefinity


lol,fail. dx11 on a 5670 is a long shot already, then eyefinity? who are we kidding?
January 14, 2010 5:41:13 AM

I was just reading the fancy new HD 5670 reviews on the interwibble again and I noticed the RRP of the HD 5670s. It's about $99 USD.
said:
I was just reading the fancy new HD 5670 reviews on the interwibble again and I noticed the RRP of the HD 5670s. It's about $99 USD.


relax, the 4670 was the same price when it was released.
January 14, 2010 5:49:23 AM

Its true competition is this years release, or newest cards, which are the 240s, where its priced and performing better.
That is, unless nVidia wants to make even more G92/94s for sale eventually, and even then, ATI could bury them in price and perf.

PS Look towards next month, as rumor has it, only 50,000 cards are ready now anyways, which isnt enough, the next batch and Feb should see better pricing and amounts
January 14, 2010 5:59:45 AM

Arguably best bang for buck right now
January 14, 2010 6:01:37 AM

1GB on a 5670? What a waste of RAM... >_<
January 14, 2010 6:01:42 AM

There should be no more than a 10% price premium for being "new" and the questionable new "value" features of DX11 and eyefinity, ect when compared to a similar performing card from the previous gen. So, by this logic, the entire 5xxx series is WAY overpriced. Maybe they are just hoping everyone will think " newer is better even if it performs worse" ...I see many people on these forums thinking that way, but to me all builds should come down to price/performance. And the 5xxx series has nothing to recommend based on that criteria.
January 14, 2010 6:03:50 AM

Quote:
But the 5670 doesn't suck down power like the 4850's. I like these new cards. I'm probably going to buy two and have some fun with them. Two 1GB XFX Versions please

http://www.xfxforce.com/ecms.ashx/cb3c1a2d-b5b6-46e0-ad05-8b9d8004ffa9/RelatedGraphicCardSeries_RelatedGraphicCardModels1/HD567XZNFC2354x312.jpg

Edit - One important Note for those considering these cards. The HD 5670 1.0GB graphics card supports ATI CrossFireX. However the HD 5670 512MB graphics card does not support ATI CrossFireX.


This link says yes to 512/xfire.... read down a little. Some will come with it and some without from what I read..... buyer beware.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1187/1/
January 14, 2010 6:06:30 AM

This card does seem underwhelming. It's a DX11 9600GT for $100. It's a slightly better GT 240 for the same price... These are not impressive things to be.
I would be interested in seeing a real OC on these cards however. They may be impressive in that area. I hope so at least, otherwise they are an afterthought until they drop $20 in price.
January 14, 2010 6:27:01 AM

belial2k said:
There should be no more than a 10% price premium for being "new" and the questionable new "value" features of DX11 and eyefinity, ect when compared to a similar performing card from the previous gen. So, by this logic, the entire 5xxx series is WAY overpriced. Maybe they are just hoping everyone will think " newer is better even if it performs worse" ...I see many people on these forums thinking that way, but to me all builds should come down to price/performance. And the 5xxx series has nothing to recommend based on that criteria.


Better put than myself :p 
January 14, 2010 6:38:36 AM

Quote:
The fact of the matter is that neither game is playable at those settings, the 5670 is simply too slow. This is a test that would be better served with more DX11 benchmarks, but based on our limited sample we have to question whether the 5670 is fast enough for DX11 games. If it’s not (and these results agree with that perspective) then being future-proof can’t justify the lower performance.


Anand's Review of the HD 5670.
January 14, 2010 6:53:36 AM

HD 5750 requires a CF mobo.
January 14, 2010 7:02:45 AM

You will find almost always two cards in crossfire/sli will outperform a single card for about the same price, or be cheaper for similar performance.
January 14, 2010 7:05:49 AM

belial2k said:
There should be no more than a 10% price premium for being "new" and the questionable new "value" features of DX11 and eyefinity, ect when compared to a similar performing card from the previous gen. So, by this logic, the entire 5xxx series is WAY overpriced. Maybe they are just hoping everyone will think " newer is better even if it performs worse" ...I see many people on these forums thinking that way, but to me all builds should come down to price/performance. And the 5xxx series has nothing to recommend based on that criteria.

Based on that criteria, youre recommending a 285 over a 5850 then
January 14, 2010 7:12:57 AM

I also dont see battleforge using DX11 here at all in lower res. They talk about it, but dont show it in the conclusion, and dont use it in their benches either, saying this:
BattleForge is EA’s card-based online-only RTS. As the first DirectX11 title it’s of particular importance for the latest rendition of DirectX, although in this case we aren’t using any features that would be impacted by it. Even without ambient occlusion, BattleForge manages to be a rather punishing game for GPUs.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3720&p=7
So, if its hard on higher cards, duh
January 14, 2010 7:13:33 AM

No, based on that criteria I'm recommending 2x 4850s for $200 over either.
January 14, 2010 7:26:31 AM

Guess I didnt see the CF mobo or the ATI vs ATI only here, oh well, thats any persons desire to CF or SLI or not, and yet, when we see the Fermi pricing, will be yet yearning for the olden days? heheh
January 14, 2010 8:28:15 AM

If they hugely cut their margins, then itll be priced within close to ATI, otherwise, theyll be expensive.
Reading around, and speaking to TGGA, it appears the early wafer costs of 40nm are very high, by some 30-50% higher, and is one reason why both companies 40nm parts have run high at this point IMHO.
This wont have changed by fermis release, so dont look to see low pricing there, as yields, die size and node costs dont really make for it comfortrably, and if it does perform well, nVidia wont be cheap, add into the rumors of the release at extremely low numbers as well, keeping costs up, just due to yields.
I point out that the 5670s had a 50,000 number for release unofficially, which is tiny, but shows the problems TSMC has had. The ranp has focused on the 58 series and the 57 series, being so far behind, its also letting out slow numbers for newer releases, it appears, and this wont let up before Fermi arrives, as Feb ATI releases the rest of their lower lineup
January 14, 2010 8:41:31 AM

Coming, but nothing more than what youve probably heard, tho I have seen it tied in with the lower end cards a few times, maybe Feb?
Guesstimations put it over 4970, having more SPs, but this is all speculations
January 14, 2010 10:47:12 AM

Does anyone noticing how ATI is trying to expoit the situation and price their cards higher. its no surprise to me, and we cant think of AMD/ATI as the good guy always. Both are companies with interests to make money, so if we dont see competition soon prices will stay high and not get competitive soon.

The bad thing is that Fermi wont change that, so we are stuck with high prices for probably the whole 2010. Thumbs down on nVidia letting everyone down.
January 14, 2010 10:48:51 AM

if there was competition in that segment, 5670 should be priced at $80. Thats HUGE overprice for ati and probably doubles their profit on a single card sell.
January 14, 2010 10:53:05 AM

rawsteel said:
if there was competition in that segment, 5670 should be priced at $80. Thats HUGE overprice for ati and probably doubles their profit on a single card sell.


Good for them I say. They deserve to make some profit!
January 14, 2010 12:04:50 PM

i've seen the benchmark 5670 running DIRT 2 in DX11 mode. so i wonder how fare will 5500 and 5400 series will handle DX11 stuff
January 14, 2010 12:09:21 PM

Andandtech did a review of the 5670, and came with a very interesting point:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3720&p=14

Quote:
So where does that leave the 5670? The 5670 does surprisingly well against the 9800 GT. It wins in some cases, trails very slightly in a few more, and then outright loses only in games where the 5670 is already playable up to 1920x1200. From a performance standpoint I think the 9800 GT is ahead, but it’s not enough to matter; meanwhile the “green” 9800 GT shortens the gap even more, and it still is over 10W hotter than the 5670. The 5670 is a good enough replacement for the 9800 GT in that respect, plus it has support for DX11, Eyefinity, and 3D Blu-Ray when that launches later this year.

Then we have the 4850. The 4850 won’t last forever (at some point AMD will EOL it), but we can currently find a pair of them on just Newegg for $99. In our existing games, the 4850 wins and it wins a lot. While the 5670 clearly beats a GT 240 and is good enough for a 9800 GT, I can’t make a performance case against the 4850. The 4850 has more of everything, and that means it’s a much more capable card with today’s games.

AMD’s argument for this matter is that the 4850 is an older card, and doesn’t support everything the 5670 does. This is true – forgoing the 5670 means you lose DX11, bitstreaming audio, and Eyefinity among other things. But while this and the much lower power draw make the 5670 a much better HTPC card, I’m not sure this a convincing argument as a pure gaming card.

To prove a point, we benchmarked the 5670 on some DX11 games using what we’d consider to be reasonable “medium” settings. For Battleforge we used the default Medium settings with SSAO set to Very High (to take advantage of the use of ComputeShader 5.0 there), and for the STALKER benchmark we also used Medium settings with Tessellation and Contact Shadows enabled. These are settings we believe a $99 card should be good enough to play at, with DX11’s big features in use.

Radeon HD 5670 DirectX 11 Performance
Battleforge DX11: 19.4 STALKER DX11: 27.2

The fact of the matter is that neither game is playable at those settings, the 5670 is simply too slow. This is a test that would be better served with more DX11 benchmarks, but based on our limited sample we have to question whether the 5670 is fast enough for DX11 games. If it’s not (and these results agree with that perspective) then being future-proof can’t justify the lower performance. Until AMD retires the 4850 it’s going to be the better gaming card, so long as you can deal with the greater power requirements and the space requirements of the card.

There’s really no way to reconcile the fact that in the short-term the performance of cards at the $99 price point is going to get slower, so we won’t try to reconcile this. In an ideal world we’d like to go from a 4850 to a 5670 that has similar performance and all of the 5670’s other advantages, but that isn’t something that is going to happen until 5750 cards fall about $30. On the flip side at least it’s significantly better than the GT 240.

Ultimately, AMD has produced a solid card. It’s not the 5850 or the 5750 – cards which immediately turned their price brackets upside down – but it’s fast enough to avoid the fate of the GT 240 and has enough features to stand apart. It’s a good HTPC card, and by pushing a DX11 card out at $99, buyers can at least get a taste of what DX11 can do even if it’s not quite fast enough to run it full-time (not to mention it further propagates DX11, an incentive for developers). Pure gamers can do better for now, but in the end it’s a good enough card.
January 14, 2010 12:12:53 PM

belial2k said:
There should be no more than a 10% price premium for being "new" and the questionable new "value" features of DX11 and eyefinity, ect when compared to a similar performing card from the previous gen. So, by this logic, the entire 5xxx series is WAY overpriced. Maybe they are just hoping everyone will think " newer is better even if it performs worse" ...I see many people on these forums thinking that way, but to me all builds should come down to price/performance. And the 5xxx series has nothing to recommend based on that criteria.


That sums it up perfectly. The end user will be pissed when he tries to run a dx11 game.
This thing is slower in dx9/10 already. Putting dx11 on the box of this card is beyond gimmick.
January 14, 2010 12:22:37 PM

It would help if we had more DX11 benchmarks, but I'd argue anything less then a 5850 is too week for DX11.
January 14, 2010 12:30:06 PM

Quote:
I wouldn't buy either of them over the 5670 for the simple fact of DX11 and Eyefinity



and both are useless on a value card, no one whom is going to drop 200 USD*3 or more on monitors is going to skimp on gfx to THIS degree, for the 5770 or 5750, they are right in the league of a value and capable eyefinity and some what of a DX11 gaming card. while for this thing, if you are running multi monitor, the price of this thing is too close to the 5750 or even the 5770 (or hell 5970 if you are going 6 * 30 inch....) when you look at the cost of 3x or 6x monitors.

Then as a DX11 performer, it doesn't, and honestly there will not be any budget games in the next 5-10 years that will use DX11, because value games will likely hinge on IGP performance rather than low end discreet performance, so that DX11 feature set is useless as it can't run the best and brightest, and the low end DX11 stuff won't be released for some time.


Now if you drop the res to 1024*768 in a DX11 title for a mobile device or something, then maybe it's got a shot, otherwise, useless.
January 14, 2010 12:42:21 PM

If it were priced $75-85 USD then I would buy it since I need to finish my CF build that is using a a 8800gtx. How ever these cards are being held back by the low ROP count 8 is simply not enough to do the job while the shader performance puts many Nvidia cards to shame my G92, G80, and my Dual G71 included. So I will do as usual hit the second hand market and maybe just get a dirt cheap 3870X2 for like $40-60 if I can't land a used 4850 under $75.
January 14, 2010 12:53:02 PM

nforce4max said:
If it were priced $75-85 USD then I would buy it since I need to finish my CF build that is using a a 8800gtx. How ever these cards are being held back by the low ROP count 8 is simply not enough to do the job while the shader performance puts many Nvidia cards to shame my G92, G80, and my Dual G71 included. So I will do as usual hit the second hand market and maybe just get a dirt cheap 3870X2 for like $40-60 if I can't land a used 4850 under $75.



how are you going to cf a ati with nvidia? you got one of them hydra boards? or you mean pick up two?
January 14, 2010 1:01:15 PM

theholylancer said:
how are you going to cf a ati with nvidia? you got one of them hydra boards? or you mean pick up two?



Wow in one ear and out the other. :sleep:  I am hunting for the first card or for both cards to replace my 8800gtx before or doing CF.
January 14, 2010 1:17:20 PM

Well its a budget card its not for hardcore gamers, and it was just released so give it a few months and you will see that card drop from $99 to like $79.
January 14, 2010 1:30:17 PM

mpavao81 said:
Well its a budget card its not for hardcore gamers, and it was just released so give it a few months and you will see that card drop from $99 to like $79.


You miss the point: The card is already beaten at that price by the 4850 by a decent margin. The only advantages are DX11 and Eyefinity, which the card is too weak to even use. As such, what purpose does the 5670 even have?
January 14, 2010 1:36:10 PM

amdfangirl said:
Yes, indeed. Quite an efficient card.

I'm just disappointed it's not cheaper.



Yeah they should be free to everyone, a GPU in every pot. [:thegreatgrapeape:5]

Seriously this is a launch card with launch pricing, are you really that naive? :heink: 
Guess what EVERY card when it launches is a bad deal versus the previous generation, welcome to the free market. :hello: 
January 14, 2010 1:38:15 PM

Bluescreendeath said:
1GB on a 5670? What a waste of RAM... >_<


Not really in our GPU-accelerated situation, heck even Adobe CS4 could make use of that, why would you want to further cripple any card? I'd rather have more memory than I need than not enough.
January 14, 2010 1:54:52 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Not really in our GPU-accelerated situation, heck even Adobe CS4 could make use of that, why would you want to further cripple any card? I'd rather have more memory than I need than not enough.


Agreed +1 and is why when I bought both my 9800gt(s) 1GB editions which go far when playing GTA IV and Oblivion.
January 14, 2010 2:23:56 PM

gamerk316 said:
You miss the point: The card is already beaten at that price by the 4850 by a decent margin. The only advantages are DX11 and Eyefinity, which the card is too weak to even use. As such, what purpose does the 5670 even have?


I find it quite amusing really, When the 5770 launched it was seen as expensive (i thought so to) because it didn't perform like we were lead to believe it could/should by the various journo's, that and it was priced too near the 4850/4870.
Do i need to type the rest ?
Yes basically the very card (4850) that was only going to be around for a short while and the reason why the 5770 was priced as it was (to help shift 4850's/4870's). Well that what we were told.
Well its still with us and now that very same card is the reason the 5670 is over priced for what it is, to help shift stocks of 4850's
Sorry guys that reason isn't washing this time. There has been plenty of time to clear the channels of 4850's.
This card is priced where it is because it can be and AMD want to milk the market situation while they can. They think they have a card with a feature set that merits the price its set at and the market will tell.
That's up to them and as a consumer i don't like it any more than most of the rest of us but that's the way it is. I also don't believe any of us would do different if we were in charge of AMD either.

Mactronix
January 14, 2010 2:49:47 PM

mactronix said:
I find it quite amusing really, When the 5770 launched it was seen as expensive (i thought so to) because it didn't perform like we were lead to believe it could/should by the various journo's, that and it was priced too near the 4850/4870.
Do i need to type the rest ?
Yes basically the very card (4850) that was only going to be around for a short while and the reason why the 5770 was priced as it was (to help shift 4850's/4870's). Well that what we were told.
Well its still with us and now that very same card is the reason the 5670 is over priced for what it is, to help shift stocks of 4850's
Sorry guys that reason isn't washing this time. There has been plenty of time to clear the channels of 4850's.
This card is priced where it is because it can be and AMD want to milk the market situation while they can. They think they have a card with a feature set that merits the price its set at and the market will tell.
That's up to them and as a consumer i don't like it any more than most of the rest of us but that's the way it is. I also don't believe any of us would do different if we were in charge of AMD either.

Mactronix


Perfect answer.
January 14, 2010 5:06:03 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
are you really that naive? :heink: 


Nope, but I haven't slept in 3 days (trying for a new record)
January 14, 2010 5:14:01 PM

Take some melatonine, and some herbal tea, and then turn it to C-PAC (sorry, C-SPAN in the states), sleep comes almost instantaneously. :sleep: 
January 14, 2010 5:43:46 PM

TheGreatGrapeApe said:
Take some melatonine, and some herbal tea, and then turn it to C-PAC (sorry, C-SPAN in the states), sleep comes almost instantaneously. :sleep: 


Yep sums it all up well about any Congressional debate or Obama speech. The only reason why it doesn't put people to sleep as it used to is that people at least here in the states know that they are being lied to and being screwed for life. Perhaps the nation will implode by the end of the year due to insolvency or another war.
January 14, 2010 6:29:03 PM

To be honest these cards are almost exactly what I expected. Performance and feature wise they are in line with a home use with the occasional game type machine, or gaming with a limited budget, they'll eventually replace the 4670 for suggested builds, though not at the current price. They'll come down like everything else does in time, you always pay a bit of a premium for the latest series cards, and I'd expect it even more right now since nVidia has yet to release anything to compete with the 5xxx series.

Right now they're usable, though arguably not the best value. I expect them to drop to $70-80 in a bit, at which point they'll be much easier to recommend.

Another thing to note of course is the lack of external power and compact size which are significant for the millions of name-brand computers saddled with super low end PSU's and funny shaped case layouts.
January 14, 2010 6:38:31 PM

lol and every cards come down in price after launch, i just hope amd don't have any yields issue again, thankfully i grabbed my 5870s nice an early
January 14, 2010 6:39:45 PM

mpavao81 said:
Well its a budget card its not for hardcore gamers, and it was just released so give it a few months and you will see that card drop from $99 to like $79.

The performance isn't worth 80 bucks let alone the large margin it fails at 100 dollars.
It's price range should be more around 60-70 it's a media card with a light incline for gaming. and considering the die size the card shouldn't be too costly to make. Either way the price should go down else ATI is just ripping ppl off. Just remember when the GT 240 came out a lot of AMD fans complained that the price was too high and it still is nothing has changed so i'd expect it cheaper then a GT 240. Either way in a few months the price should drop i'd expect it to be around 70 bucks.
January 14, 2010 6:50:29 PM

mactronix said:
I find it quite amusing really, When the 5770 launched it was seen as expensive (i thought so to) because it didn't perform like we were lead to believe it could/should by the various journo's, that and it was priced too near the 4850/4870.
Do i need to type the rest ?
Yes basically the very card (4850) that was only going to be around for a short while and the reason why the 5770 was priced as it was (to help shift 4850's/4870's). Well that what we were told.
Well its still with us and now that very same card is the reason the 5670 is over priced for what it is, to help shift stocks of 4850's
Sorry guys that reason isn't washing this time. There has been plenty of time to clear the channels of 4850's.
This card is priced where it is because it can be and AMD want to milk the market situation while they can. They think they have a card with a feature set that merits the price its set at and the market will tell.
That's up to them and as a consumer i don't like it any more than most of the rest of us but that's the way it is. I also don't believe any of us would do different if we were in charge of AMD either.

Mactronix

And what about shifting the remaining HD4670s? This card isn't a HD4850 replacement (despite the similar current price tag) just like the HD5770 wasn't an HD4890 replacement even though they cost the same at launch. It's performance is much closer to an HD4670 so if you were willing to accept that reasoning on the pricing of the HD5750/HD5770s I don't see how it wouldn't apply here.
!