- Dec 5, 2009
- 2,589
- 0
- 20,960
Ill start with the facts:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/EAH_5850_TOP_DirectCu/28.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2848
So the 5850 is a good 10-15% slower than the 5870. The 5850 also has 11% less SPs and TUs, so this makes sense. Also, the clocks are lower, 17% lower on the core, and 20% lower on the memory. With a bump of clockspeeds were the core is 11% and the memory is 7% slower on the 5850 TOP and the 5870 stock, we see the performance lead of the 5870 shrink to under 10%. This would tell us that at the same clock speeds, the performance difference between the 5850 and the 5870 is going to be well under 10%.
Take a card like the Asus 5850 TOP that can pretty easily hit 1GHz on the core and 1250-1300 MHz on the memory with voltage increasing. Compare this to a stock 5870, that can hit the same 1GHz on the core and 1300-1350 MHz on the memory with voltage increasing. Both top out at about the same level with the cores, and the 5870 seems to have an edge with the memory. This edge costs you $80 more for the reference 5870, which will not give much more performance so we are still looking at an under 10% difference here. Where is memory important? With extreme resolutions. However, we already know that any setup with 3 or less 1080p monitors doesn't show a benefit from even a full 2GB of VRAM, let alone a few clocks on the memory. This is backed up with the fact that the 5xxx series is core limited, not memory limited when it comes to clockspeeds.
So since the cores on the 5850 and the 5870 top off at about 1GHz with voltage adjustment, we are looking at the same cards with an 11% decrease in SPs and TUs on the 5850. The above benchmarks show that this 11% decrease does not equate to a linear performance decrease.
Here is my theory: With both the 5850 and the 5870 overclocked to 1GHz on the core, we are looking at an unnoticeable performance difference between the two, with one costing $100+ more. It seems to me that the 5870 is a useless waste of money for those of us who overclock. Am I missing something? I knew the 5850 was by far the better buy, but I never knew how little the difference actually was, I assumed a somewhat linear performance difference with the decrease in SPs and TUs.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/EAH_5850_TOP_DirectCu/28.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2848
So the 5850 is a good 10-15% slower than the 5870. The 5850 also has 11% less SPs and TUs, so this makes sense. Also, the clocks are lower, 17% lower on the core, and 20% lower on the memory. With a bump of clockspeeds were the core is 11% and the memory is 7% slower on the 5850 TOP and the 5870 stock, we see the performance lead of the 5870 shrink to under 10%. This would tell us that at the same clock speeds, the performance difference between the 5850 and the 5870 is going to be well under 10%.
Take a card like the Asus 5850 TOP that can pretty easily hit 1GHz on the core and 1250-1300 MHz on the memory with voltage increasing. Compare this to a stock 5870, that can hit the same 1GHz on the core and 1300-1350 MHz on the memory with voltage increasing. Both top out at about the same level with the cores, and the 5870 seems to have an edge with the memory. This edge costs you $80 more for the reference 5870, which will not give much more performance so we are still looking at an under 10% difference here. Where is memory important? With extreme resolutions. However, we already know that any setup with 3 or less 1080p monitors doesn't show a benefit from even a full 2GB of VRAM, let alone a few clocks on the memory. This is backed up with the fact that the 5xxx series is core limited, not memory limited when it comes to clockspeeds.
So since the cores on the 5850 and the 5870 top off at about 1GHz with voltage adjustment, we are looking at the same cards with an 11% decrease in SPs and TUs on the 5850. The above benchmarks show that this 11% decrease does not equate to a linear performance decrease.
Here is my theory: With both the 5850 and the 5870 overclocked to 1GHz on the core, we are looking at an unnoticeable performance difference between the two, with one costing $100+ more. It seems to me that the 5870 is a useless waste of money for those of us who overclock. Am I missing something? I knew the 5850 was by far the better buy, but I never knew how little the difference actually was, I assumed a somewhat linear performance difference with the decrease in SPs and TUs.
)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram