Revised: Upgrade HD5850 to GTX570?

RedTop89 · 29 Dec 2011 at 02:34

JAKUS said:
Well don't for one minute think it's a 560 or like any of the 560's, its as I said a 570/580 card that has been slightly crippled

I realised that when i compared it on Anandtech. but its £240 and i can get a 570 for £250.

Davefran · 29 Dec 2011 at 02:38

Battlefield 3 settings for GTX570

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 04:01

JAKUS said:
Have You listened to a word people have said ?

What's a 2GB 560ti ??? It's a toy card compared to the "448" You have fallen right into the Memory Hype BS

2 points.

1- the 448 is more expensive. He can get a 2500k, z68 mobo and a 2gb 560 or 6950 for the money he has. He can't get a 448.

2- I've noticed frame rate dips due to running out of VRAM on my heavily (1ghz core) overclocked 580 1.5gb. Which I didn't get with a 6950 2gb. There is no memory hype bull****. It is a perfectly valid argument.

So please don't give silly advice. He is clearly better off going with the 2500k/z68/560 or 6950 2gb.

RedTop89 · 29 Dec 2011 at 04:33

Looks like its just a graphics card upgrade for me boys, i just found out i wont be able to use my OEM Windows 7 key for a fresh install after i change the Mobo and CPU. and i aint forking out for another W7 Key. i might just give up and get a bloody console.

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 09:54

RedTop89 said:
Looks like its just a graphics card upgrade for me boys, i just found out i wont be able to use my OEM Windows 7 key for a fresh install after i change the Mobo and CPU. and i aint forking out for another W7 Key. i might just give up and get a bloody console.

Don't do this, you will regret it (getting a console).

I learnt this lesson when I upgraded from Phenom II to Nehalem, it's a pain in the arse. Your best bet right now would be probably to go with a 6950 2gb, sell your previous card, and save the extra 60 quid it costs to get a new windows key if you look around

shamus21 · 29 Dec 2011 at 10:05

Shayper said:
2 points.

1- the 448 is more expensive. He can get a 2500k, z68 mobo and a 2gb 560 or 6950 for the money he has. He can't get a 448.

2- I've noticed frame rate dips due to running out of VRAM on my heavily (1ghz core) overclocked 580 1.5gb. Which I didn't get with a 6950 2gb. There is no memory hype bull****. It is a perfectly valid argument.

So please don't give silly advice. He is clearly better off going with the 2500k/z68/560 or 6950 2gb.

Hi shayper what game and setting were you playing at to get the drop frames, due to VRAM.

Jakus · 29 Dec 2011 at 11:47

shamus21 said:
Hi shayper what game and setting were you playing at to get the drop frames, due to VRAM.

, Nice question Shamus, You don't think for one minute we will hear from him again in this thread do you

RedTop89 · 29 Dec 2011 at 13:24

Shayper said:
Don't do this, you will regret it (getting a console).

I learnt this lesson when I upgraded from Phenom II to Nehalem, it's a pain in the arse. Your best bet right now would be probably to go with a 6950 2gb, sell your previous card, and save the extra 60 quid it costs to get a new windows key if you look around

I may just wait until i can afford a new key, that way the parts i want may have come down in price.

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 14:11

shamus21 said:
Hi shayper what game and setting were you playing at to get the drop frames, due to VRAM.

Metro 2033, Crysis 2 with DX11 patch, Battlefield 3 and Starcraft 2.

All at max at 1080p.

Edit: this was with a 6950 unlocked to a 6970 with 1.15ghz on the core, vs a 1.5gb 580 with 1 ghz on the core, using a 5ghz i5 2500k and 8gb of hyperx ram.

Average and max FPS in monitoring (afterburner) were within 1-2 FPS of each other, but minimums dropped by about 20fps on the 580. And there were visible FPS spikes during gameplay. Checked afterburner logs and the VRAM usage on these games with the AMD card maxed out at between 1.5gb and 1.8gb dependent on the game, whereas it was hitting the limit on the 580's VRAM. These results were under water and were consistent. I was rather annoyed that I had to turn AA down on the 580 to make it playable

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 14:12

JAKUS said:
, Nice question Shamus, You don't think for one minute we will hear from him again in this thread do you

Aren't you a character. :rolleyes:

Final8y · 29 Dec 2011 at 14:20

RedTop89 said:
Looks like its just a graphics card upgrade for me boys, i just found out i wont be able to use my OEM Windows 7 key for a fresh install after i change the Mobo and CPU. and i aint forking out for another W7 Key. i might just give up and get a bloody console.

A friend of mine has OEM Windows 7 Ultimate, i gave him a Hex 1100T, the install complained but he was able to reactivate it on-line with the automated services but there is no guarantee.

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 14:24

Yeah, I tried to activate mine again when I moved from a 770 chipset to a p55 chipset, called up and they asked me how I got hold of an OEM copy, then wouldn't deactivate it.

For some reason it didn't even ask me for a new key moving from a p55 to z68 :confused:

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 14:24

DP sorry, damn Ipswich's slow mobile Internet

Jakus · 29 Dec 2011 at 15:14

Shayper said:
Metro 2033, Crysis 2 with DX11 patch, Battlefield 3 and Starcraft 2.

All at max at 1080p.

Edit: this was with a 6950 unlocked to a 6970 with 1.15ghz on the core, vs a 1.5gb 580 with 1 ghz on the core, using a 5ghz i5 2500k and 8gb of hyperx ram.

Average and max FPS in monitoring (afterburner) were within 1-2 FPS of each other, but minimums dropped by about 20fps on the 580. And there were visible FPS spikes during gameplay. Checked afterburner logs and the VRAM usage on these games with the AMD card maxed out at between 1.5gb and 1.8gb dependent on the game, whereas it was hitting the limit on the 580's VRAM. These results were under water and were consistent. I was rather annoyed that I had to turn AA down on the 580 to make it playable

Well You are pretty unique then ! everyone else finds you need massive resolutions, lots of AA and or multiple GFX Cards to see a difference.

You can not assume because a game is using all the VRAM it is a bottleneck.

I've only tested 3GB 580's against 1.2gb 570's and seen next to didly gains @ 1920x1200.....whatever the 570 can't play, the 3gb 580 could not either !

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 15:21

JAKUS said:
Well You are pretty unique then ! everyone else finds you need massive resolutions, lots of AA and or multiple GFX Cards to see a difference.

You can not assume because a game is using all the VRAM it is a bottleneck.

LOLWUT? May want to reread that statement dude

I've only tested 3GB 580's against 1.2gb 570's and seen next to didly gains @ 1920x1200.....whatever the 570 can't play, the 3gb 580 could not either !

No, I'm not unique, it isn't hard to see that Battlefield 3 with AA applied at 1080p is bottlenecked by the VRAM. In fact, there are graphs done on OcUK by the staff that show this.

As for using massive AA, I did say I was running these games AT MAX. So maximum amounts of AA.

I overclocked these card to a point where core speed, CPU and system ram weren't the limiting factor, but VRAM was. As for saying that because a game uses all of the cards' VRAM doesn't mean it's a bottleneck, well, words fail me.

oweneades · 29 Dec 2011 at 17:04

kissenger said:
The GTX 570 will eat a 6950 for breakfast, less vram or not. Doesn't matter. A 570 will trade blows with a 6970 but beats it in BF3 which is all I care about. ATI cards are better for multi-gpu setups though.

A HD6950 isn't much slower than a HD6970 so how does the GTX570 - which you state; "trades blows with the HD6970, eat the HD6950 for breakfast?

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 17:11

He also says AMD cards are better for multi GPU setups.

Which is wrong. You have to get lucky for them to work right, and I know. Mine didn't.

Jakus · 29 Dec 2011 at 18:00

Shayper said:
No, I'm not unique, it isn't hard to see that Battlefield 3 with AA applied at 1080p is bottlenecked by the VRAM. In fact, there are graphs done on OcUK by the staff that show this.

As for using massive AA, I did say I was running these games AT MAX. So maximum amounts of AA.

I overclocked these card to a point where core speed, CPU and system ram weren't the limiting factor, but VRAM was. As for saying that because a game uses all of the cards' VRAM doesn't mean it's a bottleneck, well, words fail me.

I suppose all these benchmarks are wrong also ?.....

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...s/49646-amd-radeon-hd-7970-3gb-review-14.html

And this memory muncher BF3...

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...s/49646-amd-radeon-hd-7970-3gb-review-13.html

Shayper · 29 Dec 2011 at 18:38

That looks legit. The 580 3gb beaten by the 580 1.5gb. Of course.

And OcUK themselves have proved that BF3 needs more than 1280mb ram at 1080p with 4xAA.

So yeah.

KelDG · 29 Dec 2011 at 18:46

Re : Skyrim

I5 2500k at stock (no need for overclock at the moment don't shoot me) and a 5850 at stock. 1080p Ultra settings + visual mods (better hi-res faces/bodies/water/skies), silky smooth everywhere. I don't see the problem.