• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

5670 Review

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Wreckage said:
Way overpriced considering the GT240 and the 9800GT are cheaper.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a better performer than GT240 and is not that far off when it comes to 9800GT. I do think we'll see prices drop in a while though, it's waaay to close to HD4850 and GTS250.
 
Like all the 5xxx series, the 5670 is a tad overpriced.

Unlike the 5970 and the 5870/50 but alike the 57x0, this card has competition so the price is noticeable.

If you want a gaming card for this price point you grab a 4850 or a GTS250.

If you are interested on a card for HTPC that can play some games now and then, then the 5670 is a great card.

ATM the 5670 is a niche card. When NVIDIA finally brings any fermi parts to the table and ATI has to respond to it, we will most likely see some prices drops that will most likely affect the entire ATI line up, and then this card can be considered more reasonably priced.
 
Last edited:
after reading a couple reviews, looks like the ati 5670 or even the 5770 would be a good replacement card for my aging ati 3870 videocard. I only game on a 22in 1680x1050 lcd monitor.
 
sonoma1993 said:
after reading a couple reviews, looks like the ati 5670 or even the 5770 would be a good replacement card for my aging ati 3870 videocard. I only game on a 22in 1680x1050 lcd monitor.
Click to expand...

5770 would be. 3870 already has 320 SPs. 5670 is a bad upgrade from that card performance wise.
 
Agreed. 5670 is only a bit faster than the 3870. 5770 is the logical upgrade path to a 3870 and is supposed to work pretty well at 1680.
 
I think the 5670 is a little overpriced in the UK. Compared to the Geforce GT 240 DDR3 I would say the 5670 is worth the £20 difference in price. However there is only £1 difference in price between the 5670 and 4770. I have seen reviews which place the 4770 quite a bit faster than the 5670.
 
Last edited:
A card for the OEM's, IMO. Just like GT240 is. You're much better off spending 50% more dough for 100% more performance. Or find a 9800 GT or an HD 4850. For HTPC and other OpenGL/2D works, wait for the 5400's.

From an end-user perspective, it'd have been fantastic if this card was around $50~70 and Cedar was headed for IGP's. I guess that's too much to ask for, though.
 
well this card isn't intersting for me, my hd 4850 can out perform it by a margin and cost about 80 when I bought it. I think we need NV to put out some better cards to see more capable stuff at the 100 mark. so far no competition leads to poor products.
 
Wreckage said:
Way overpriced considering the GT240 and the 9800GT are cheaper.
Click to expand...

You could make the arguement that the 5670 is overpriced when you compare it to the 9800GT (and I do think the 5670 would be a better fit at a lower price than it's current MSRP), but I don't know why you included the GT240 in your statement. The GT240 is a much slower part.

I would think it may trouble Nvidia a little bit that their 40nm based 130mm2 GPU with 128 bit DDR5 is so much slower than AMD's 40nm based 100mm2 GPU with 128 bit DDR5.
 
Last edited:
Remember to not count the DDR3 GT 240s when you look at price. Whereas the DDR5 version can at least compete, the DDR3 one is pretty slow.
 
SlowSpyder said:
You could make the arguement that the 5670 is overpriced when you compare it to the 9800GT (and I do think the 5670 would be a better fit at a lower price then it's current MSRP), but I don't know why you included the GT240 in your statement. The GT240 is a much slower part.

I would think it may trouble Nvidia a little bit that their 40nm based 130mm2 GPU with 128 bit DDR5 is so much slower than AMD's 40nm based 100mm2 GPU with 128 bit DDR5.
Click to expand...

You can get a GT240 for $65 that will perform as well or better in a HTPC.

The 9800GT is also cheaper and much faster in gaming.

They need to drop the price to around $65.
 
Wreckage said:
You can get a GT240 for $65 that will perform as well or better in a HTPC.

The 9800GT is also cheaper and much faster in gaming.

They need to drop the price to around $65.
Click to expand...

Imagine that, old rebadged DX10 cards will be cheaper than a just introduced DX11 card.
 
Wreckage said:
You can get a GT240 for $65 that will perform as well or better in a HTPC.

The 9800GT is also cheaper and much faster in gaming.

They need to drop the price to around $65.
Click to expand...

Wreckage, you're just spitting garbage, the GT240 performs worse than the 5670 in almost all cases.
 
I would agree. I actually picked up a GT240 for my HTPC...works like a charm. I was tempted to return it for a 5670, but I recall not liking the DVD image quality with a spare 4850 I had and decided against it. I don't really game on my HTPC.
 
crisium said:
Remember to not count the DDR3 GT 240s when you look at price. Whereas the DDR5 version can at least compete, the DDR3 one is pretty slow.
Click to expand...

Yes that is a problem and in the UK the DDR5 version of the GT 240 is pretty rare and too expensive. GT 240 DDR3 = £60 and GT 240 DDR5 = £80 (only one brand and 2 instock)

For that kind of money (£80) you should be getting a GeForce GTS 250, Radeon 4850 or for an extra £8 a XFX 5750 (shame it's out of stock right now). Prices are from http://www.overclockers.co.uk
 
Last edited:
I am disappointed in this card overall, although it is about what I expected. They could not make the performance much better without approaching the performance of the 5750. I have a low power 9800GT that I got for 85.00 on close out at best buy. Guess I will be sticking with this card for a while. I try to support AMD, but overall the 5000 series disappoints, especially in the mid to lower range. They can barely beat 2 year old nVidia cards or their own 4000 series. At the high end you do get good performance and DX11 and eyefinity, but with the 56XX series, i doubt that DX11 will be useful. If it really is produced, the low power 5750 without a 6 pin connector would be sweet however.
 
You can almost go as low as you want for HTCP. The whole point is how much gaming do you want.

Even the lowly 4650 DDR2 allows you to play any game at all, just most from the past 3 years on medium or low settings. Then you got 4670 DDR3 that allows more gaming (probably around DDR3 GT 240 level) then you got GT 240 DDR5 then you got 5670. All have super low power consumption and can play games. You pay more for higher settings.

If you got room in your case and can handle and don't mind the higher power consumption, then grab a bloody 4850. But crap spewing from people's mouth, such as Wreckage, is so stupid. There's a very low floor for what you truly need for an HTCP. It's a game the GT 240 cannot possibly win at.
 
Hey Zeus said:
How many times has the 9800GT been rebadged these days? 2?
Click to expand...

None

G92 started as 8800GT. Later there was a beefier one with some more shaders and higher clocks, 8800gts 512. Here comes a die shrink and pci-e 2.0 and the 8800gts becomes 9800GTX, and the 8800GT becomes 9800GT. more tweaks/OC, GTX becomes gts250
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top