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

[Guest]

How exactly are you running stability problems with a Radeon 5770 with such a low GPU core frequency? Mine runs games with no artifacts with a 950 Mhz GPU frequency.

You better RMA that card.

Also, as other posters said, I'd be ashamed to use The Last Remnant in any serious benchmark article.

 

[jjchmiel78]

I read an interesting article on another sight, the type that should be here, about if Nvidia and ATI are even playing the same game. They made mention on how well the ATI cards do in synthetic tests and windows features but poorly in games. The article attributed the difference in that Nvidia was on top for so long and had extra money to spend with game developers for coding on their cards. They theorize that with the recent success of ATI cards and the large settlement to AMD that ATI will be able to spend some money with game developers for games optimized for their cards. I do not think the games were selected because they favor Nvidia, but rather they are popular. I still bought the 5770 for my new build. The compromise for games to give me features that will help me be more productive (eyefinity)and future compatible (DX11) is what sold me. I was going to buy the 5850, but none available and I needed a good card for my build now. I doubt I will open the case back up in 6mos to a year now.

 

[eyemaster]

The article doesn't care about NVidia versus ATI. It's not what this is about. It's about the Overclockability about the cards. Stop complaining that the benchmarks are favorable towards one or the other, it's not relevant at all!

The article is about Overclocking, not who's the king of the hill.

 

[Guest]

There is a known issue with the Last Remnant running on ATI cards when shadows are set to max. Simply bringing them a notch down fixes the issue, and that is what the reviewer should have done with both sets of cards instead of preseting the benchmark results like this.

 

[kokin]

Could of been nice to see Sapphire's 4890 Toxic, I'm sporting one and it can go up to 1060core/1050mem on stock voltage, a much better OC than MSI's 4890 Cyclone.

 

[kokin]

[citation][nom]jjchmiel78[/nom]I read an interesting article on another sight, the type that should be here, about if Nvidia and ATI are even playing the same game. They made mention on how well the ATI cards do in synthetic tests and windows features but poorly in games. The article attributed the difference in that Nvidia was on top for so long and had extra money to spend with game developers for coding on their cards. They theorize that with the recent success of ATI cards and the large settlement to AMD that ATI will be able to spend some money with game developers for games optimized for their cards. I do not think the games were selected because they favor Nvidia, but rather they are popular. I still bought the 5770 for my new build. The compromise for games to give me features that will help me be more productive (eyefinity)and future compatible (DX11) is what sold me. I was going to buy the 5850, but none available and I needed a good card for my build now. I doubt I will open the case back up in 6mos to a year now.[/citation]
Not even to clean up the dust?

 

[Guest]

Damn that is one helluva benchmark suite to compare ATI cards with their Nvidia counterparts..... .... ...

 

[pike84]

I don't know enough about what games favour which cards, to make any claims myself, but it seems suspicious that the author, Tino Kreiss, hasn't even bothered to answer any of these accusations.

It's possible that he just hasn't gotten around to see what people have said, but if I was making a test like this, I'd be interested in what people think about it.

I don't think this does any good to Tom's Hardware's reputation...

 

[MARSOC_Operator]

Why TH is still trying to sell the overpriced GTX275 as a viable option? The GTX275/280/285 are dead! Quit pushing them...

 

[kokin]

[citation][nom]MARSOC_Operator[/nom]Why TH is still trying to sell the overpriced GTX275 as a viable option? The GTX275/280/285 are dead! Quit pushing them...[/citation]
You really think they are dead? They do still max out most of the games out there, I mean many people don't even have GPU power close to the GTX 200 series, so it goes back to my original question: how can you say those GPUs are dead?

 

[MARSOC_Operator]

You really think they are dead? They do still max out most of the games out there, I mean many people don't even have GPU power close to the GTX 200 series, so it goes back to my original question: how can you say those GPUs are dead?

They are dead because you can get similar or better performance with a much cheaper 4890 (faster than the 285 with a mild overclock), and it doesn't require a top CPU to prevent bottlenecking (the GTX285 with anything less than a 2.8MHz Quad-Core is a major a bottleneck fest). Not to mention that the GTX280/285 is priced so close to the 5850 that it should not even be recommended at all. Nvidia has only two viable options: the GTX260 and the GTX295. The rest is pretty much dead because they can be surpassed for less money.

 

[kokin]

[citation][nom]MARSOC_Operator[/nom]They are dead because you can get similar or better performance with a much cheaper 4890 (faster than the 285 with a mild overclock), and it doesn't require a top CPU to prevent bottlenecking (the GTX285 with anything less than a 2.8MHz Quad-Core is a major a bottleneck fest). Not to mention that the GTX280/285 is priced so close to the 5850 that it should not even be recommended at all. Nvidia has only two viable options: the GTX260 and the GTX295. The rest is pretty much dead because they can be surpassed for less money.[/citation]
Oh you were talking in terms of price value, then yes, I totally agree with you. Sorry as I was thinking purely performance-wise cause those cards are still very much alive, though not the best option for their price range.

Does the GTX285 really require a quad core like what you mentioned? I know many people have Core2Quads or i5/i7 systems that run stock speeds of less than 2.8GHz(not MHz since it would bottleneck any GPU)and it wouldn't bottleneck at all. Some could even outperform my PhenomII 955 and 4890 Toxic, at least when in stock settings.

 

[bstm300]

[citation][nom]scrumworks[/nom]I haven't seen a single review from the author that wouldn't be somehow made selectively nvidia biased. Last Remnant, HAWX DX10.0, no HD5870/HD5970 are just quick examples. Reviewers should stay absolutely neutral in these matters and arrange proper conditions for all parties. I won't analyze any deeper of the results but it seems like Radeon's don't perform quite as well as they should perform in many other reviews.[/citation]

I would have to agree with this assessment. Many times I have read graphics reviews, and there is either a poor selection of benchmarked games or a lopsided ATI/Nvdia comparison. There should also be more reviews done on comparing lower budget crossfires to higher budget single-GPU cards. I also like that you use reference benchmarks like l4dead, but please, try some games that push these cards to the max. Include more benchmarks like Crysis Warhead, Supreme Commander Forged Alliance, Sins of a Solar Empire Entrenchment, etc. If it is true that at any frame rate above 35-40 fps, one finds it too difficult to tell if the game is losing its fluidity, reviewers should focus more on the cards that can play the most taxing games with at least 35-40 fps range and set to medium graphics settings.

 

[raybob95]

My EVGA GTX 275 can get to 713, 1548, and 1242. Interesting how my memory goes way higher yet the shader is way less . . .

 

[DZeroENT]

[citation][nom]Wickedsnow[/nom]While I normally refrain form ever commenting on video card reviews. I could not resist this.I agree with falchard (to a degree) that while i don't think the review is biased, I do think something is not right about it. In most of the games listed, the 4890 (1024 version) is not only loosing to the gtx260 192 AND 216 versions, but loosing by a huge margin. I own both cards myself in 2 machines that are the same (except the videocards) and 99% of the time, the 4890 spanks my other rig. (with an evga SSC gtx260 core216).I'm not saying anything is biased (just a reminder) I am saying something just is not right. PSU not big enough, wrong drivers,... etc etc... no idea.[/citation]
This is the very best point I've read on this entire article, I also noticed w/o knowing anything about the preference of the game engines I could see that the game engine was holding back the ATI, Unreal Engine 3 is completely biased, I would like to kick that guy in the sack.

 

[DZeroENT]

lol, that wasn't the guy I was trying to quote...

...however Wickedsnow has it pinpointed.

 

[fahad Khan]

palit 9800gt is the best then above cards

 

[Evil_HAF]

using the ati utility ive maxed out my settings with no issues

 

[vestrum]

Hello Guys / Girls!

I just bought yesterday an Asus Ati HD 5770 CuCore, and the temperature is usually at over 80 and between 105 °C (for an example: World of Warcraft Ultra 1080p)... I Think it's a very high temperature and it's really damage my video card... or im just too nervous about it?

 

[aquicl]

he lists benchmarks for different versions of the very same cards. it makes the review very cluttered

 

[Guest]

Wow you must have got some broken ati . My 5770 runs at 920core 1400mem and temps never go over 54C everything is stable been playing games for like a month or so on this settings aprox. 5 h a day whit no chrashes.I have the gigabyte version.