Radeon HD 5770, Radeon HD 4890, And GeForce GTX 275 Overclocked

Graphics Chips Compared And Test Setup

Each of our two MSI cards appears in this table three times. Both models are sold as OC editions, meaning that they run at overclocked speeds to begin with. Since the higher frequencies are coded into the BIOS, we consider them the cards’ stock frequencies, so they show up in the table under their normal model name. We also tested each of the cards at the reference speeds specified by Nvidia and ATI, respectively, labeling their scores as “No OC.”

In our third test, we tuned the factory overclocked MSI boards even further. This setting is labeled “Max OC” in the table. ATI’s Radeon HD 5770 is the only DirectX 11-capable card, and it uses ATI’s reference design. Its overclocked scores are marked as “OC” in the table, simultaneously representing the maximum overclock we achieved.

To put the score in context, we decided to add results from various cards that we have already tested running at stock speeds. To ensure that none of the cards was being held back by the CPU, we chose a Core i7-920 overclocked to 3.8 GHz as the heart of our testing platform.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware

A word of warning: these overclocking tests are by no means a recommendation for your hardware. Overclocking can damage your graphics card and may void your warranty. Make changes to your card’s clock speeds at your own risk.

Nvidia Graphics Cards

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Manufacturer and Model Name Code Name Memory GPU Frequency Shader Model Memory Frequency SPs
GeForce GTX 295 2 x GT200b 2 x 896MB GDDR3 576 MHz 4.0, 1,242 MHz 2 x 999 MHz 2 x 240
GeForce GTX 285 GT200b 1,024MB GDDR3 648 MHz 4.0, 1,476 MHz 2 x 1,242 MHz 240
GeForce GTX 280 GT200 1024MB GDDR3 602 MHz 4.0, 1,296 MHz 2 x 1,107 MHz 240
BFG GTX 275 (GTX 275) GT200b 896MB GDDR3 648 MHz 4.0, 1,440 MHz 2 x 1,152 MHz 240
Gainward GTX275 Golden Sample (GTX 275) GT200b 896MB GDDR3 648 MHz 4.0, 1,420 MHz 2 x 1,185 MHz 240
MSI N275GTX Lightning Max OC GT200b 1,792MB GDDR3 720 MHz 4.0, 1,600 MHz 2 x 1,200 MHz 240
MSI N275GTX Lightning GT200b 1,792MB GDDR3 700 MHz 4.0, 1,404 MHz 2 x 1,150 MHz 240
MSI N275GTX Lightning No OC GT200b 1,792MB GDDR3 633 MHz 4.0, 1,404 MHz 2 x 1,134 MHz 240
GeForce GTX 275 GT200b 896MB GDDR3 633 MHz 4.0, 1,404 MHz 2 x 1,134 MHz 240
MSI N260GTX Lightning BE (GTX 260 216SPs) GT200b 1,792MB GDDR3 680 MHz 4.0, 1,458 MHz 2 x 1,050 MHz 216
Sparkle GeForce X265 (GTX 260 216SPs) GT200b 896MB GDDR3 666 MHz 4.0, 1,476 MHz 2 x 1,134 MHz 216
Zotac GeForce GTX 260 (GTX 260 216SPs) GT200b 896MB GDDR3 576 MHz 4.0, 1,242 MHz 2 x 999 MHz 216
GeForce GTX 260 GT200b 896MB GDDR3 576 MHz 4.0, 1,242 MHz 2 x 999 MHz 216
GeForce GTX 260 GT200 896MB GDDR3 576 MHz 4.0, 1,242 MHz 2 x 999 MHz 192
Geforce GTX 250 G92b 1,024MB GDDR3 740 MHz 4.0, 1,836 MHz 2 x 1,100 MHz 128

ATI Graphics Cards

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Manufacturer and Model Name Code Name Memory GPU Frequency Shader Model Memory Frequency SPs
ATI Radeon HD 5770 OC Juniper 1,024MB GDDR5 895 MHz 5.0 4 x 1,430 MHz 800
ATI Radeon HD 5770 Juniper 1,024MB GDDR5 850 MHz 5.0 4 x 1,200 MHz 800
Sapphire Toxic HD4890 1G Vapor-X (HD4890) RV790 1,024MB GDDR5 960 MHz 4.1 4 x 1,050 MHz 800
MSI R4890 Cyclone SOC max OC RV790 1,024MB GDDR5 1,030 MHz 4.1 4 x 1,065 MHz 800
MSI R4890 Cyclone SOC RV790 1,024MB GDDR5 1,000 MHz 4.1 4 x 1,000 MHz 800
MSI R4890 Cyclone SOC no OC RV790 1,024MB GDDR5 850 MHz 4.1 4 x 975 MHz 800
Radeon HD 4890 RV790 1,024MB GDDR5 850 MHz 4.1 4 x 975 MHz 800
Radeon HD 4870X2 R700 (2 x RV770) 2 x 1,024MB GDDR5 750 MHz 4.1 4 x 900 MHz 800
Radeon HD 4870 RV770 1,024 MB GDDR5 750 MHz 4.1 4 x 900 MHz 800
HIS H487QT1GP ICEQ4+ (HD4870) RV770 1,024MB GDDR5 770 MHz 4.1 4 x 1,000 MHz 2 x 800
Sapphire Vapor-X HD4870 2G (HD4870) RV770 2,048MB GDDR5 750 MHz 4.1 4 x 900 MHz 800
Radeon HD 4870 RV770 512MB GDDR5 750 MHz 4.1 2 x 900 MHz 800
Radeon HD 4850 RV770 512MB GDDR5 625 MHz 4.1 2 x 993 MHz 800
Radeon HD 4830 RV770 512MB GDDR5 575 MHz 4.1 2 x 900 MHz 640
Radeon HD 4770 RV740 512MB GDDR5 750 MHz 4.1 4 x 800 MHz 640

SPs=Stream Processors, Shader 4.0 = DirectX 10, Shader 4.1 = DirectX 10.1, Shader 5.0 = DirectX 11

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Test Setup
CPU Intel Core i7-920 @ 3.8 GHz (20x190), BIOS 1.2625 Volt, 45 nm, Socket 1366 LGA
Motherboard Asus P6T, PCIe 2.0, ICH10R, 3-Way SLI
Chipset Intel X58
Memory Corsair, 3 x 2GB DDR3, TR3X6G1600C8D, 2x570 MHz 8-8-8-20
Audio Realtek ALC1200
LAN Realtek RTL8111C
HDDs SATA, Western Digital, Raptor WD300HLFS, WD5000AAKS
DVD Gigabyte GO-D1600C
Power Supply Cooler Master RS-850-EMBA 850 Watts
System Software and Drivers
Graphic Driver ATI Catalyst 9.10, Nvidia GeForce 191.07
Operating System Windows Vista Ultimate 32 Bit, SP1
DirectX 9, 10, and 10.1
Platform Driver Intel 9.1.0.1007
  • amdgamer666
    Nice article. Ever since the 5770 came out I've been wondering how far someone could push the memory to relieve that bottleneck. Being able to push it to 1430 allows it to be competitive to it's older sibling and makes it enticing (with the 5700 series' extra features of course)
    Reply
  • Onyx2291
    Damn some of these cards run really well for 1920x1200 which I run at. Could pick up a lower one and run just about anything at a decent speed if I overclock well. Good ol charts :)
    Reply
  • skora
    If you're trying to get to the next cards performance by OCing, shouldn't the 5850 be benched also? I know the 5770 isn't going to get there because of the memory bandwidth issue, but you missed the mark. One card is compared to its big brother, but the other two aren't.

    I am glad to see the 5770 produce playable frame rates at 1920x1200. Nice game selection also.
    Reply
  • quantumrand
    I'm really disappointed that they aren't any benchmarks from the 5870 or 5850 series included. Why even bother with tha GTX 295 or 4870x2 and such without the higher 5-series Radeons?

    I mean if I'm considering an ATI card, I'm going to want to compare the 5770 to the 5850 and 5870 just to see if that extra cost may be justified, not to mention the potential of a dual 5770 setup.
    Reply
  • presidenteody
    I don't care what this article says, when the 5870 or 5970 become available i am going to buy a few.
    Reply
  • kartu
    Well, at least in Germany 4870 costs quite a bit less (30-40 Euros) compared to 5770. It would take 2+ years of playing to compensate for it with lower power consumption.
    Reply
  • kartu
    "Power Consumption, Noise, And Temperature" charts are hard to comprehend. Show bars instead of numbers, maybe?
    Reply
  • arkadi
    Well that put things in prospective. I was really happy with 260gtx numbers, and i can push my evga card even higher easy. To bad we didn't see the 5850 here, it looks like the optimal upgrade 4 gamers on the budget like my self. Grade article overall.
    Reply
  • B16CXHatch
    I got lucky with my card. Before, I had a SuperClocked 8800GT from EVGA. I ordered a while back, a new EVGA GeForce GTX 275 (896MB). I figured the extra cash wasn't worth getting an overclocked model particularly when I could do it myself. I get it, I try to register it. The S/N on mine was a duplicate. They sent me an unused S/N to register with. I then check the speeds under one utility and it's showing GTX 275 SuperClocked speeds, not regular speeds. I check 2 more utilities and they all report the same. I had paid for a regular model and received a mislabeled SuperClocked. Flippin sweet.

    Now they also sell an SSC model which is overclocked even more. I used the EVGA precision tool to set those speeds and it gave me like 1 or 2 extra FPS is Crysis and F.E.A.R. 2 already played so well without overclocking. So overclocking on these bad boys doesn't really do much. Oh well.

    One comment though, GTX 275's are HOT! Like, ridiculously hot. I open my window in 40 degree F weather and it'll still get warm in my room playing Team Fortress 2.
    Reply
  • With the 5970 out there seems to be nothing else about graphic cards that interests me anymore :D Its supposed to be the fastest card yet and beats Crysis too!
    Reply