AnandTech GPU Bench

Rroff · 18 Aug 2010 at 22:14

Tute said:
300W PSU.

Also the HD5850 is supposed to be a good clocker (not tested mine, as i'm running at about my PSU limits).

They clock quite well as far as raw MHz goes (around 33% increase in core speed) but actual percentage performance gained isn't as good.

liquidex · 18 Aug 2010 at 22:27

Tute said:
300W PSU.

Thats an immense rig for that power.

What PSU are you using as it needs to be pretty good if its near its peak all the time?

kylew · 18 Aug 2010 at 22:40

liquidex said:
Thats an immense rig for that power.

What PSU are you using as it needs to be pretty good if its near its peak all the time?

You'd be surprised just how little the average PC uses. A lot of high-end PCs won't draw much more than 350-400w from the wall.

Tute · 18 Aug 2010 at 22:56

liquidex said:
Thats an immense rig for that power.

What PSU are you using as it needs to be pretty good if its near its peak all the time?

It's the Sugo SG05 stock PSU.

To be honest, i've got a 450W PSU that fits the case in the box behind me. I've never gotten around to fitting it as everything seems to work fine on 300W, and I don't want to mess up the cable tidying that took me hours to do.

But from what i've read, it'll happily run at 80-90% capacity forever. Fantastic little PSU.

I did think a few days ago about dabbling with a GTX465 or 470 before SI arrives. But at the end of the day, I don't think i'd be able to match the combination of noise/heat/performance I have at the moment. Obviously for a lot of people it's not a problem, but when the rig is literally centimeters from my fingers as I type on the desk, it IS a problem for me.

Mr Krugga · 18 Aug 2010 at 22:57

Rroff said:
They clock quite well as far as raw MHz goes (around 33% increase in core speed) but actual percentage performance gained isn't as good.

Source on this one please. Your statement would be deleted from any Wiki unless proved by the source. It's no so obvious to me that 58** overclock with worse real world results than any Fermi card. Same goes for a widely exaggerated myth about minimum framerates (it may be true for Crossfire vs SLI though, dunno about that).

Lol @Tute being too lazy to manage cables

Gashman · 18 Aug 2010 at 22:57

yeah i noticed that before, who comes up with these figures in reviews, just put 4870X2 into my system today and it works with 450W PSU :confused:

liquidex · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:01

Its probably a branded PSU thats the difference.

Some no branded ones are very poor at pushing anything even close to their advertised spec. Also they tend to put more amps on the 3.3V rail as used by older computers instead of the 12V which modern graphics cards use.

Gashman · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:03

it was OCZ PSU, which are meant to be rock solid, or so i have read

aaron333 · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:04

This is actually awesome. HDD bench?

Lightnix · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:05

lol 5830

Tute · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:06

liquidex said:
Its probably a branded PSU thats the difference.

Some no branded ones are very poor at pushing anything even close to their advertised spec. Also they tend to put more amps on the 3.3V rail as used by older computers instead of the 12V which modern graphics cards use.

Q-Tec for example?

Lightnix said:
lol 5830

Even more LOL when compared to the GTX460.

Lightnix · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:10

I'm just amazed that the 5830, a good year and half after I bought my 4870, costs more or less the same as the 4870 did back then and basically ties with it.

Marine-RX179 · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:12

Lightnix said:
lol 5830

Be nice...it is a whole 12 frames higher than 4870 in Wolfenstein at 1920x1200 High Quality 4XAA, and average 1-5fps higher in other results

Tute · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:15

I'm sure the gap was bigger at release - has the HD4870 seen better driver improvements?

Mr Krugga · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:18

Tute said:
I'm sure the gap was bigger at release - has the HD4870 seen better driver improvements?

No but it's only a few games that are being compared really. Radeon 5830 is more likely in the middle of performance between 4870/5770 and 4890. Then there's quite a gap till 5850.

Tute · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:20

I thought the 5770 was meant to be the newer, cooler, less power hungry HD4870 with Dx11. Then the 5830 was the same for the HD4890.

Obviously if you close that gap, then one of the cards becomes utterly useless.

kylew · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:23

The 5830 ended up not really having a proper place to sit in with its odd performance and poor price. ATi are a bit guilty of market flooding at the moment I think.

Shaftydude · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:39

Mr Krugga said:
So?

So getting a GTX 460 and over-clocking it, resulting in getting 5 less fps compared to a GTX 480 which cost twice as much is amazing. Thats great vale for performance your getting right there with a GTX 460.

titaniumx3 · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:41

The 5800 series definitely has an efficiency issue as performance increase over the 4800 series simply does not match the higher specs. A good example is the performance difference between the 4890 and 5870. I'd expect something near double the performance, but in reality it's nowhere near that.

I've got a feeling that the R600 architecture is slowly maxing out.

Mr Krugga · 18 Aug 2010 at 23:41

Shaftydude said:
So getting a GTX 460 and over-clocking it, resulting in getting 5 less fps compared to a GTX 480 which cost twice as much is amazing. Thats great vale for performance your getting right there with a GTX 460.

Sure you can compare two different cards from two different setups :rolleyes: