How does 7850 compare to 5850, clock for clock?

[railven]

7870 launched at 350 bucks and was only about 5-10% faster than the last gen gtx570 which launched at 350 bucks 15 months before the 7870. heck prices had already dropped below 350 bucks for the gtx570 by the time the 7870 launched. in fact I bought my gtx570 for for 260 bucks 7 months ago. the ONLY way people can remotely justify the 7 series prices are to try and talk about overclocking.

New features, power saving, cooler, and quieter aren't something we can talk about?

I get that tehse are a "given" but sheesh, when I finally decided to buy my options were $560 HD 7970 or $530 GTX 580 3GB - I take it you'd have told me to get GTX 580?

 

[NIGELG]

7870 launched at 350 bucks and was only about 5-10% faster than the last gen gtx570 which launched at 350 bucks 15 months before the 7870. heck prices had already dropped below 350 bucks for the gtx570 by the time the 7870 launched. in fact I bought my gtx570 for for 260 bucks 7 months ago. the ONLY way people can remotely justify the 7 series prices are to try and talk about overclocking.

As a 5850 owner who wants to spend 300 to 350 bucks what do you suggest?

 

[toyota]

As a 5850 owner who wants to spend 300 to 350 bucks what do you suggest?

you don't really have many options and that is a my point. its just been a really sad time for those consumers trying to get any sort of decent performance per dollar.

 

[toyota]

New features, power saving, cooler, and quieter aren't something we can talk about?

I get that tehse are a "given" but sheesh, when I finally decided to buy my options were $560 HD 7970 or $530 GTX 580 3GB - I take it you'd have told me to get GTX 580?

of course those features should be a given for newer cards. and the gtx580 was always a poor value and everyone knew that. its pretty hypocritical for many people to now try and justify some of the high prices of new cards based on that poor value card from last gen.

 

[KompuKare]

2.5 years later and only 30% faster at the same price point is a freaking joke. we should be doubling performance at the same price point after 2 generations of cards and 2.5 years.

Hm, that was nice while it lasted but process shrinks are getting more expensive and someone has to pay for that :-(

Is it possible that people have become a bit spoiled? I personally think the current Great Repression is going to last for a lot longer than people expect and that we'll all be poorer when it finishes (with some exception of course).

Anyway, back to the OP and HD5850 vs HD7850 computerbase.de only lists the HD5870 but it's rating pretty much 100% vs HD7850 (stock):

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...eon-hd-7870-und-hd-7850/4/#abschnitt_leistung

And in their original reviews of the HD5850 and HD5870 they gave the HD5870 a Performancerating of 118% vs the HD5850.

Conclusion: maybe AMD released HD58x0 too cheaply...

 

[aaksheytalwar]

I have owned a 5850 plus 6970 plus 7970 so don't even start on that. And all of us know that 7850 ocs more and scales better, just because you are not aware means zilch.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

As a 5850 owner who wants to spend 300 to 350 bucks what do you suggest?

7870 custom and oc 20-30%. You will get the performance of a water cooled 580. It will pawn 5850 crossfire with reasonable but not perfect scaling or at least trade blows. If that isn't worth an upgrade then acc to many here all dual gpu owners are probably stupid which I don't believe is true acc to me

 

[railven]

of course those features should be a given for newer cards. and the gtx580 was always a poor value and everyone knew that. its pretty hypocritical for many people to now try and justify some of the high prices of new cards based on that poor value card from last gen.

...

It was the top end card. You keep avoiding this question, and I believe this is probably the 5th time I've asked you, where would you have priced the HD 7970?

Value is subjective.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

$370

 

[railven]

Hm, that was nice while it lasted but process shrinks are getting more expensive and someone has to pay for that :-(

Is it possible that people have become a bit spoiled? I personally think the current Great Repression is going to last for a lot longer than people expect and that we'll all be poorer when it finishes (with some exception of course).

Anyway, back to the OP and HD5850 vs HD7850 computerbase.de only lists the HD5870 but it's ratting pretty much 100% vs HD7850 (stock):

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...eon-hd-7870-und-hd-7850/4/#abschnitt_leistung

And in their original reviews of the HD5850 and HD5870 they gave the HD5870 a Performancerating of 118% vs the HD5850.

Conclusion: maybe AMD released HD58x0 too cheaply...

With your bold, definitely agree. And instead of realizing what is happening in the world they'll continue to pout and ask for their bottle.

I got a 1600 mile trip planned - gasoline is finally hitting $4 in my area.

First world problems.

 

[railven]

$370

Haha, and of course you'd still pan it and not buy em.

 

[toyota]

...

It was the top end card. You keep avoiding this question, and I believe this is probably the 5th time I've asked you, where would you have priced the HD 7970?

Value is subjective.

I am looking at it from the consumers point of view. the 7970 is a next gen card that is just over 40% faster than the 6970 so I would have expected that kind of increase for fairly close to the same price point as the 6970. I am pretty sure I have mentioned that many times when referring to the 7000 series prices.

 

[Termie]

I have owned a 5850 plus 6970 plus 7970 so don't even start on that. And all of us know that 7850 ocs more and scales better, just because you are not aware means zilch.

You do a lot of talking in every video card thread for someone who won't post his rig specs.

 

[railven]

I am looking at it from the consumers point of view. the 7970 is a next gen card that is just over 40% faster than the 6970 so I would have expected that kind of increase for fairly close to the same price point as the 6970. I am pretty sure I have mentioned that many times when referring to the 7000 series prices.

So you were expecting AMD to undersell their competitor? Understandable.

As a consumer, I had no issue with the price when looking at the landscape of options. Once the GTX 680 launched and defeated the HD 7970, the prince difference did make me bitter. But as someone who buys on impulse - I have only myself to blame.

 

[toyota]

So you were expecting AMD to undersell their competitor? Understandable.

As a consumer, I had no issue with the price when looking at the landscape of options. Once the GTX 680 launched and defeated the HD 7970, the prince difference did make me bitter. But as someone who buys on impulse - I have only myself to blame.

I don't know how many times I have to say it but AGAIN I expect a decent increase in performance at around the SAME price point from a next gen card.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

My rig specs aren't there because for some reason there isn't the signature option in my user panel, at least wasnt there when I was new. 2600k 16gb 7970

 

[toyota]

My rig specs aren't there because for some reason there isn't the signature option in my user panel, at least wasnt there when I was new. 2600k 16gb 7970

it takes too long to click on user cp and look now?

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Done

 

[railven]

I don't know how many times I have to say it but AGAIN I expect a decent increase in performance at around the SAME price point from a next gen card.

I get you, I never once said you're request was wrong or unfounded. I always agreed with people who said such a thing (I am a consumer too, the more my money could get me the better.)

Last two generations have been snail crawls in terms of progress. This moore's law we all love...where is it? It can apply to the GTX 680 as a "mid-range" part it be the cat's meow.

While I can see your point, I still see no issue with how it all ended up. Guys want our money - and we want their products, some more than others.

 

[Termie]

Done

Ok, now we're cool.

There's a restriction on new members posting sigs. You just needed a certain number of posts.

Honestly, I don't disagree with your analysis of 7000-series performance as much as I do your suggestion of what constitutes a good upgrade. 30-40% faster for $250 (after overclocking)? Bad value in my opinion.

 

[railven]

Ok, now we're cool.

There's a restriction on new members posting sigs. You just needed a certain number of posts.

Honestly, I don't disagree with your analysis of 7000-series performance as much as I do your suggestion of what constitutes a good upgrade. 30-40% faster for $250 (after overclocking)? Bad value in my opinion.

Factor in the huge improvements in specific games. For example, my HD 5870 was trucking along fine but choked on Batman:AC. My second play thru has been so much better. So much. Went from like 30-40 FPS - Ultra+PhysX to 60 pegged (even dabbled in some of that IZ3D mumbo jumbo - still not for me). World's better.

 

[Termie]

Factor in the huge improvements in specific games. For example, my HD 5870 was trucking along fine but choked on Batman:AC. My second play thru has been so much better. So much. Went from like 30-40 FPS - Ultra+PhysX to 60 pegged (even dabbled in some of that IZ3D mumbo jumbo - still not for me). World's better.

Hey, what are your specs, BTW?

And I agree that on certain games, the new cards are much better than the 5-series. That's the tessellation effect. No doubt they are much better cards, even where a TechPowerUp performance summary would suggest otherwise: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7850_HD_7870/26.html

But outside of a few current games, a 7850, and in my opinion even a 7870, is not a reasonable upgrade from a 5850/5870.

 

[KingFatty]

Ok, now we're cool.

There's a restriction on new members posting sigs. You just needed a certain number of posts.

Honestly, I don't disagree with your analysis of 7000-series performance as much as I do your suggestion of what constitutes a good upgrade. 30-40% faster for $250 (after overclocking)? Bad value in my opinion.

Would it be more consistent to use relative comparisons for both the increase in performance and the increase in price?

It seems to me that this analysis is thrown off by using a relative comparison for performance increase, but an absolute comparison for price, instead of looking at the symmetrical metric of relative price increase to match the metric of relative performance increase.

So extending this to the price, you'd compare the 30-40% relative increase in performance to what the relative increase in price would be, by asking what would be the relative increase in price to get the new card - you could sell the old card, and use that money as a starting point to see what the relative increase in price is - what is the additional cost of getting the new card after selling the old?

So maybe he will spend $100 additional, after selling the 5850 for $150, to get that 30-40% increase in performance. It still seems to be the same outcome of the anaylsis (higher increase in price than performance), but just not as mismatched/unbalanced as the original analysis that failed to apply relative increase to price when comparing to a relative increase in performance.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

That's the difference. If after overclocking I can get 40-50% extra performance from a new $250 card, I would jump on it. I would probably sell my old card for nearly $75-100 so that means about $150+ for a 50% increase average with heavy overclock in most games, not all perhaps. That is steal in my eyes

 

[3DVagabond]

Check this one Op
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/HD_7870_Twin_Frozr/26.html
7850 is around 20% faster than 5850.

*Actually, if I'm doing my math right, at 1080 it's [(85-66)/66] ~29% faster. That's stock! The 7850 will O/C so much more than the 5850 and scale better while it's doing it. It's not even close, really.




*That's using TPU's benchmark suite. YMMV. It's best to look at particular games the OP plays for a more accurate picture.