5970 benchmarks

straxusii · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:38

Anand - http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3679
Firing Squad - http://news.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_5970_performance_preview/
Techpowerup - http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/EAH5970
" " " " xfire - http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_5970_CrossFire/
Toms - http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/radeon-hd-5970,review-31732.html

More goodness here : http://translate.google.com/transla...re/76/ATI-Radeon-HD-5970-vykon-v-grafech.html

psychas · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:43

they are ridiculous and make no sense

Dunners · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:50

Graphs that dont start at 0% are always quite misleading at first glance

Cold Fusion · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:51

<laugh out loud> that benchmark has so many holes in it you could fit the 5970 through them.

I'd love for them to explain to me how they managed to get hold of a DX11 compliant Nvidia card for that comparison.

Its so bad its good.

Fenris · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:53

Cold Fusion said:
<laugh out loud> that benchmark has so many holes in it you could fit the 5970 through them.

I'd love for them to explain to me how they managed to get hold of a DX11 compliant Nvidia card for that comparison.

Its so bad its good.

What?

Of course they didn't, all they are doing is comparing the 295 and 5870 performance in a DX11 game, you are either not even paying attention or just looking for things to complain about.

Born_2_Kill_83 · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:56

Hmmm will it really be on average twice as fast as a 295GTX? I hope so but doubt it....

SfnX · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:56

very deceiving, if we look at the 5870 when these benchmark styles came along id say the 5870 was roughly 20% slower. but we will see tomorrow

Cold Fusion · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:56

Fenris said:
What?

Of course they didn't, all they are doing is comparing the 295 and 5870 performance in a DX11 game, you are either not even paying attention or just looking for things to complain about.

And that's a fair and balanced way or representing the 5970's performance?

Its fairer to not compare the two in DX11 at all. I also seriously doubt its 80% faster than a 295 on average

Fenris · 17 Nov 2009 at 10:59

Cold Fusion said:
And that's a fair and balanced way or representing the 5970's performance?

They are comparing the 295 and 5870 in 5 types of games, the only unfair part is that nvidia don't have a DX11 card...which is there own fault, if they DID have a DX11 card I imagine that is what they would test it against, however as they don't, they are showing performance against the leading competitor from Nvidia.

What exactly are you trying to prove? I mean the 295 is a DX10 card and they are testing both cards in DX10 games, they are also testing them both in DX9 and OpenGL games.

Your argument makes no sense, just give it up.

drunkenmaster · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:02

The most important things are, it sounds like the chips used on the 5970 aren't on the exact same process as the 5870, they are on the most expensive higher speed process that has less leakage, AMD are billiing this card as built out of the box for overclocking, vapour chamber in the heatsink that can cope with a 400w load fine, unlimited overclocks in the overdrive page is a big indication of what they think this card can do.

The lower clocks are JUST to drop it under 300W at stock which is a big advertising point to get under. Those that want the power have it available by default in the CCC without any issues. Also $600 supposedly, puts it at a ridiculous price point. that puts it at no more than £400 ex vat, so at some stage when supply isn't so much an issue , some competition is in and retail stores are pushing prices higher and higher, its designed to be a £400-420 card INC vat. Though it will likely be quite a bit more in the uk on launch with lower numbers as retailers seem happy to keep pushing prices higher while theres no alternative

drunkenmaster · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:03

Cold Fusion said:
And that's a fair and balanced way or representing the 5970's performance?

Its fairer to not compare the two in DX11 at all. I also seriously doubt its 80% faster than a 295 on average

Its fairer? Or it would make Nvidia look better, do you doubt Nvidia would use DX11 games in its benchmarking suite if Nvidia had it and AMD didn't, of course not. I find it incredibly strange that AMD made slides are pro AMD and promote the features they support their competitors do not. Send them an e-mail, next time they launch a product based on your recommendation they can pick tests and features that only show Nvidia in a positive light...........

Companies benchmark like this, ATI/Nvidia have done launch benchmarking like this for well, decades now, get over it.

magicroundabout · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:05

so those overclocks are basically taking upto 5870 clock speeds and the performace jumps quite a bit.

If these figures are to be believed then it is (in some cases) twice as fast as a 295 :eek:

Cold Fusion · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:23

I'm not arguing im having a discussion. In my opinion that benchmark is not accurate

@ drunkenmaster - I agree manufacturers will go to nefarious ways to embelish the performance of thier product against a rivals - both ATI and Nvidia do it. My point is this is a third party (Don't know if Czech Gamer is Pro ATi / Anti Nvidia) and that this benchmark is unlikely to be accurate. If I'm wrong thats a bloody amazing card.

Fenris · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:31

Cold Fusion said:
Im not arguing im having a discussion. In my opinion that benchmark is not accurate

Then please explain HOW and WHY.

magicroundabout · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:35

Cold Fusion said:
And that's a fair and balanced way or representing the 5970's performance?

Its fairer to not compare the two in DX11 at all. I also seriously doubt its 80% faster than a 295 on average

talk about shifting goal posts.

first people complain that the "5870 isn't the fastest the 295 is" regardless of having 2GPU's compared to one the green team still argued it. now they're arguing it's unfar to compare DX11 to a 295.

Fine. ignore the DX11 results and look at the DX10.1 results. it's clearly miles ahead.

Owenb · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:41

Fenris said:
Then please explain HOW and WHY.

We all know that the 5970 will be no where 80% faster than a GTX295. The 5870 is 10% slower than a GTX295, and these are clocked ~15% slower than that. It will be 25-35% faster in Dx9/Dx10 and probably a lot faster once it can run Dx11, but that will be in very few games for the next 12 months.

Cold Fusion · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:45

magicroundabout said:
talk about shifting goal posts.

first people complain that the "5870 isn't the fastest the 295 is" regardless of having 2GPU's compared to one the green team still argued it. now they're arguing it's unfar to compare DX11 to a 295.

Fine. ignore the DX11 results and look at the DX10.1 results. it's clearly miles ahead.

I'm not complaining I was merely trying to warn the casual reader that it is unlikely that the card truly is that powerful.

Ah I see I assumed this was MADE by Czech Gamer but actually comes from ATI my mistake on that point

Most benchmarks are based on FPS, state the test systems setup and give the full specs of the card (RAM or whether its overclocked), this doesn't have that information and it really is important to judge it. Until the main sites come in with their benchmarks im reserving judgment and not ordering one

Yurihyuga · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:55

lol well +1 to the ATI fanbois over in czech for the laughs. Will be better than a 295 yes at those levels no way. 20-40% at best maybe even pulling in 5-10% better in some games that are favoured to Nvidia.

Don't see it losing to the 295 in any benchmark though.

Fenris · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:55

Cold Fusion said:
I'm not complaining I was merely trying to warn the casual reader that it is unlikely that the card truly is that powerful.

Ah I see I assumed this was MADE by Czech Gamer but actually comes from ATI my mistake on that point

Well of course they won't, anyone who takes these on face value is kidding themselves.

Nvidia and ATI both produce these and they are always swayed in their own favor, it's just the way it goes.

Fenris · 17 Nov 2009 at 11:56

Yurihyuga said:
lol well +1 to the ATI fanbois over in czech for the laughs. Will be better than a 295 yes at those levels no way. 20-40% at best maybe even pulling in 5-10% better in some games that are favoured to Nvidia.

Don't see it losing to the 295 in any benchmark though.

What? the 5870 alone beats the 295 in some benchmarks, what makes you think a 5870x2 wouldnt?