AMD Radeon HD 6870 And 6850: Is Barts A Step Forward?
Features
published
Benchmark Results: Aliens Vs Predator
Aliens vs. Predator is an interesting case, and while the game makes use of the DirectX 11 tessellation feature, it certainly doesn't appear to be the limiting factor here. The new Radeon 6800 cards and their enhanced tessellation units gain no ground against their predecessors, suggesting that this game engine is pixel-shader limited (indeed, tessellation is proven to be sparsely utilized here, limited to the alien model). It is notable that this is the first game we've seen where the GeForce GTX 470 gains no ground against the Radeon HD 6870.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Current page: Benchmark Results: Aliens Vs Predator
Prev Page Benchmark Results: Lost Planet 2 Next Page Benchmark Results: Battlefield: Bad Company 2More about gpus
314 Comments
Comment from the forums
-
SteelCity1981 Yeah I agree. I don't get AMD's marketing on the 6000 series. One would think that the 6870 would obv performan better then the 5870 at first glance but instead it yelds less performance then the 5870. That just doesn't make any sense from a consumor standpoint.Reply -
TheRockMonsi I like where AMD is going with the 6000 series, not so much with naming, but pretty much everything else about it. Can't wait for the 6900's, those are going to be beasts!!!!!Reply -
Poisoner I think AMD did a great job with these cards. Its just sick at what performance you can get for 200 bucks.Reply -
duk3 Nice benchmark suite!Reply
I am looking forward to the 6900 series and 22nm gpus later on for some real performance improvements. -
takeapieandrun Not exactly powerhouses, but I do believe they will be great for market competition.Reply -
forces nice but... where is Crysis!!!? they can play Crysis i know but how well can they play it? everyone has Crysis and have played Crysis and will play it... :(, its a nice game to compare perfomance...Reply