Radeon 7870/7850 Reviews Are up!

[Termie]

4850
Released: June 2008
Cost: $199


5850 100% MORE PERFORMANCE
Release: Sept 2009
Cost: $259 30% HIGHER COST


The release was well under two years apart, and the price was $60 more.

The 79xx series is a totally different tier of pricing - why would you be comparing them to the midrange 4850 and 5850?

Fixed.

Compare:

HD7970 100% MORE PERFORMANCE
Release: Jan 2012
Cost: $550 (>100% HIGHER COST)
So in 2009, it took 1 year and 30% more money to double your performance. In this generation, it took over 2 years and more than double your money to double your performance.

An even better comparison would be:
4870 ($300, June 2008 -> 5850 ($260, Sept. 2009) -> 7850 ($250, March 2012)

Three cards all for roughly the same price. About 60% more performance from 4870 to 5850, about 30% more performance from 5850 to 7850, and it took twice as long to get that gain. The rate of of advance in performance per dollar has thus slowed by 4x.

 

[Dark Shroud]

Somebody has to pay for the new 28nm process and it sure as heck isn't going to be AMD or Nvidia.

 

[notty22]

I also think that 7870 should have slotted in as a replacement for 6870 which at it's highest with custom coolers before GF114 launched was 249.00 in USA. Yes the new cards are a sidegrade to the 6970/6950. But how impressive is that. Was Cayman hot and unmanageable ? I'm playing devil's advocate, hopefully Nvidia does not completely do the same thing.
Tom's Hardware is reporting some issues.

Unfortunately, our in-depth evaluations in two different labs at opposite ends of the world turned up a handful of unexpected issues, too. Igor Wallsosek in our German office reports back with a lot of Radeon HD 7850-related issues: NewTek’s LightWave crashes with 4x AA or higher, Autodesk’s 3ds Max crashes in DirectX mode, and the card is incapable of running StarCraft II at its stock clocks. It would be tempting to chalk all of that up to a bad sample, but we had problems with our 7850 as well. World of Warcraft was particularly unstable, requiring a restart after every crash. And sometimes our test bed simply wouldn’t boot with the 7850 installed. Then there’s the whole issue of texture quality issues on both of the new 7800s. Oof. We’ve never seen a graphics card with so much potential for $250. But there are clearly issues to work out of the Radeon HD 7850. In this case, a paper launch might be the best possible thing for AMD, especially if it needs to tweak hardware specs and the driver. Interestingly, AMD claims that none of its partners plan to use the reference board design. If our problems are specific to AMD’s implementation, shipping 7850s could be better behaved. With weeks to go before these cards are available, we’re able to reserve judgement. On the other hand, both of the Radeon HD 7870s in our labs work great, so there’s little stopping us from recommending that card. Priced at $350, it performs a lot like the $470-ish GeForce GTX 580 and the $465 Radeon HD 7950. At this point, it’s hard to see spending extra money on either of those two technically higher-end boards unless you need a firmware selector switch (which the 7950 offers) or a three-/four-way multi-card setup. We can’t issue the Radeon HD 7870 an award, since it’s not available for sale, but consider us impressed.
There’s just one little caveat. We already know that Nvidia’s next-gen architecture is very near on the horizon. We already have to wait for the Radeon HD 7800s to hit store shelves. Could it be so bad to wait a little while longer to see how Kepler does? As a rule, I feel that waiting for “the next big thing” is a fool’s game when it comes to technology. But with two new architectures on the cusp of going head-to-head, weeks apart, this could an exception to that personal policy.

 

[RussianSensation]

But you're joking, what's wrong then?

You said what a delusional way of thinking:

1) Price fixing has happened before (nothing delusional about discussing it);
2) 40-50% performance increases have happened for 10 years (nothing delusional about discussing it).

You didn't provide anything that disputes #1 or #2, and yet you have the nerve to call people delusional?

My joking post was in regard to price fixing in reply to Stoneburner, not the post where I outlined View #1 and View #2. Do you actually read the posts at all? :whiste:

No one is stopping you from buying any of the currently available videocards, btw.

Somebody has to pay for the new 28nm process and it sure as heck isn't going to be AMD or Nvidia.

Brilliant post.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Also good luck finding any 6900 cards new at a decent price. They were already supply limited by AMD.

They are no longer in production, AMD is not taking remaining stock and tossing them into the ocean.

 

[Termie]

I also think that 7870 should have slotted in as a replacement for 6870 which at it's highest with custom coolers before GF114 launched was 249.00 in USA. Yes the new cards are a sidegrade to the 6970/6950. But how impressive is that. Was Cayman hot and unmanageable ? I'm playing devil's advocate, hopefully Nvidia does not completely do the same thing.
Tom's Hardware is reporting some issues.

BTW, it sounds like Tom's is flirting with NDA issues a bit here, suggesting that Nvidia's launch will be within weeks of AMD. Not that we didn't all guess it, but I think this is confirmation.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Sept 2009

4850-> $100

5850-> $259 and shortly $300.

100% more performance, 3x the price.

This seems to be the proper comparison.

 

[Zargon]

Accuracy matters here. 6970 was $369.

Proof: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/amds-radeon-hd-6970-radeon-hd-6950

I've never seen a 6970 for over $400.

I am of the belief that this is one of the worst moments in GPU history when it comes to price/performance improvements year-to-year. Honestly, I've never seen a better argument for buying last-gen parts for cheap.

I'm GUESSING that cost of manufacturing goex up each new process as is harder and harder, yields are worse = more waste

 

[RussianSensation]

Sept 2009

4850-> $100

5850-> $259 and shortly $300.

100% more performance, 3x the price.

This seems to be the proper comparison.

HD4850 had an MSRP of $199.
HD5850 had an MSRP of $259. How is that 3x the price?

vs.

HD6970 was $369.
HD7870 is $349 for 10% faster 15 months later.

If you are going to be consistent, either you price / performance based on MSRPs or use price/performance of older card @ market price vs. newer card @ MSRP. I already showed how HD4850 --> HD5850 was FAR better price/performance based on MSRP. Now let's move on to market rate vs. MSRP comparison:

If you want to discuss market rate pricing like you did by using $100 price for HD4850 @ Sept 2009, then a 15-months old HD6950 (unlocked) for $240 makes HD7870 look laughable in comparison considering HD7870 is not any faster in real world gaming at 2560x1600. Essentially, 15 months later, HD7870 is barely better. However, HD7870 is really a replacement for HD6870, not HD6970. How much is HD6870 right now? $140 vs. $350. Yet HD7870 is priced as a replacement for HD6970 but only brings 10% more performance, while HD7870 is about 42% faster than the $140 HD6870.

So don't even go there trying to use market pricing of HD4850 series and use that to arrive at 3x the price increase vs. the MSRP of launch HD5850 considering HD5850 was 2x faster than HD4850 was on average and had at least 20-30% overclocking headroom as well!

More importantly, on the price performance curve at the $350 price level, HD7870 only provides 7-10% more performance at 1080P / 1600P over the 15-months-old 6970. That's better, but not setting the world on fire.

 

[GaiaHunter]

HD4850 had an MSRP of $199.
HD5850 had an MSRP of $259. How is that 3x the price?

HD6970 was $369.
HD7870 is $349 for 10% faster.

If you want to discuss market rate pricing like you did by using $100 for HD4850 @ 2009, then a 13-months old HD6950 for $240 makes HD7870 look laughable. And HD7870 is is a replacement for HD6870, not HD6970. How much is HD6870 right now? $140 vs. $350.

So don't even go there trying to use market pricing of HD4850 series and use that to arrive at 3x the price increase.....not to mention HD5850 is 2x faster than HD4850 was on average.

I'm just showing that the 4850 lost half of its value in 1 year.

The last gen cards after 1 year barely dropped.

Why is that?

 

[Termie]

Sept 2009

4850-> $100

5850-> $259 and shortly $300.

100% more performance, 3x the price.

This seems to be the proper comparison.

[Edit: Russian and I are speaking the same language!]

Depends what you want to compare it to. You've completely change the comparison from a year-over-year one to an instantanous one. And let's stick with retail prices, because we have no idea what the 7800 series will actually sell for.

But I'll work with your model for arguement's sake.

Today you can buy a 6870 for $145AR.
In two weeks, you'll supposedly be able to buy a 7870 for $350. 1.4x more performance, 2.4x the price. With the 4850->5850, you got 2x more performance, 2.6x the price. Basically double the jump per dollar.

Is the problem clear yet? This generation simply is unlike any other generation since the 8800gtx was introduced for $650 in 2006.

 

[Zargon]

Depends what you want to compare it to. You've completely change the comparison from a year-over-year one to an instantanous one. And let's stick with retail prices, because we have no idea what the 7800 series will actually sell for.

But I'll work with your model for arguement's sake.

Today you can buy a 6870 for $145AR.
In two weeks, you'll supposedly be able to buy a 7870 for $350. 1.4x more performance, 2.4x the price. With the 4850->5850, you got 2x more performance, 2.6x the price. Basically double the jump per dollar.

Is the problem clear yet? This generation simply is unlike any other generation since the 8800gtx was introduced in 2006.

I just want to point out that the AMD docs for it say that the 7870 supports eyefinity 6. which is better than 6950 which do 4.

There is more on the table than purely performance going on as well as none of this crap was around much more than 2 years ago and eyefinity was a high end only feature

but it is priced where they were for launch. but its a huge feature jump for the 68xx's

 

[lifeblood]

HD7870 is really a replacement for HD6870, not HD6970. How much is HD6870 right now? $140 vs. $350. Yet HD7870 is priced as a replacement for HD6970 but only brings 10% more performance.

It also isn't really a replacement for 5870, either, despite what AMD says. Unless your running something incredibly compute intensive, it really doesn't offer much (anything?) over it. I'm really not sure why they went there. Must be some no-basis-in-reality thing by marketing.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'm just showing that the 4850 lost half of its value in 1 year.

The last gen cards after 1 year barely dropped.

Why is that?

HD4850 lost half its value because HD5850 made the entire lineup of GTX200/4870/4890 cards obsolete. Therefore, GTX260 216, HD4870/HD4890 were relegated to $125-175 price levels after HD5850 launched. That means HD4850 had to drop to $100 and lower.

HD5870 dropped significantly to $200-250 before it was discontinued.

The reason HD6900 series has barely dropped is because NV didn't release GTX600 series yet to obsolete GTX500 and HD6900 series. Instead AMD launched first. But the new HD7800 generation is not much faster @ $250-350. So AMD had to EOL HD6900 series. So why would HD6900 series prices drop? Especially not when HD7950 is 20% faster at stock. It's not rocket science.

Looks like AMD discontinued HD6900 series so that buyers would have no choice but to spend more for HD7800 than grabbing an HD6950 and unlocking it. Now AMD is laughing since they are selling a 212mm^2 die in place of a 389mm^2 die for $350 for a card that was really a replacement for a $239 HD6870.

Looks like the small die strategy is working wonders for us consumers....charge us more while die sizes drop and performance barely moves. :thumbsup:

It also isn't really a replacement for 5870, either, despite what AMD says. Unless your running something incredibly compute intensive, it really doesn't offer much (anything?) over it. I'm really not sure why they went there. Must be some no-basis-in-reality thing by marketing.

100% agreed. I said this before HD7800 launch and was flamed for it. Then Anandtech repeated my sentiment in their review that they thought it made no sense how HD5800 users would want to upgrade to HD7800. AMD's marketing dept. is way off base here.

As to your point regarding compute, that's all fine and dandy if you use worthless synthetic compute benchmarks like Civ 5. HD7800 series only has 1/16th DP performance. So in real compute, for example distributed computing apps such as MilkyWay, Collatz Conjecture, Folding @ Home and PrimeGrid, for us distributed computing guys, HD7800 series will drop dead vs. HD6900 series. Since HD6900 series are DP monsters, while NV has an entire eco-system around CUDA, it makes the 1/16th DP HD7800 series is a non-starter to begin with for anyone serious about compute. Its added compute performance is only wonderful on paper at the moment.

 

[tviceman]

AMD is hitting a home run with a super efficient architecture (vs. 40nm offerings) but the only price-performance improvement they have made vs. their previous generation was with the hd7870, but even that isn't a big jump like it's been in the past. Everything else they have released, price wise, has been a failing turd.

 

[GaiaHunter]

[Edit: Russian and I are speaking the same language!]

Depends what you want to compare it to. You've completely change the comparison from a year-over-year one to an instantanous one. And let's stick with retail prices, because we have no idea what the 7800 series will actually sell for.

But I'll work with your model for arguement's sake.

Today you can buy a 6870 for $145AR.
In two weeks, you'll supposedly be able to buy a 7870 for $350. 1.4x more performance, 2.4x the price. With the 4850->5850, you got 2x more performance, 2.6x the price. Basically double the jump per dollar.

Is the problem clear yet? This generation simply is unlike any other generation since the 8800gtx was introduced for $650 in 2006.

Exponential growth.

Manufacturing keeps getting more expensive, being more problematic, etc.

Also differently is that a 5870 bought 3 years ago keeps playing everything as long as you don't turn on some ridiculous "IQ enhancers" that barely improve IQ.

Try to do that with cards before the 8800 generation, playing games released 3 years after those cards.

 

[Fire&Blood]

I'm just showing that the 4850 lost half of its value in 1 year.

The last gen cards after 1 year barely dropped.

Why is that?

DX11 maybe?

I spent the last week hunting down benchmarks and reviews. I was looking for a cheap card (got 5770) to hold me over until June or so, I expect Kepler/Southern Islands to beat the crap out of each other by then.

48xx/ GTX 2XX parts disappeared from benchmarks and were effectively "hidden" from the mainstream consumer in favor of DX11 parts. But the truth is "old" and cheap 48xx parts were much better value than their modern counterparts.

 

[chihlidog]

I dont mind the price of the 7850. I do mind the price of the 7870, and to a lesser extent, the 79xx cards. Right now, for the price, I am not compelled to upgrade my 5850, but ONLY because the higher end cards are so expensive. The performance is there. Finally something exists that flat out smokes the aging 5850/5870 cards ( I didnt feel the 69xx cards were enough of an increase for their fairly high price). These 79xx cards wipe the floor with the 58xx and if the prices drop a bit I definitely see my self upgrading.

I dont begrudge AMD pricing the 7970 at whatever they want to sell it for. It's the fastest single card currently on the market, and as such demands a significant premium. I've never owned, and likely WILL never own, the top-end card but for those that have the cash, rock on.

The 7950 is selling at about $470. That is a tough one to swallow. Great performance, amazing card, but it's DAMN expensive. I dont think the issue even comes down to performance per dollar, I think it's just a kneejerk reaction to that price. Damn near $500 for a GPU that isnt top of the line just hurts. I think this is why there's so much back and forth over the card, and yes I definitely think it's priced too high.

My second biggest gripe is the sudden price jump from the 7850 to the 7870. A hundred bucks? Really? It just gives ya sticker shock. Again, not that it isnt worth it, but I see why people are reacting the way they are. I think we've all gotten spoiled with brutally powerful video cards for dirt cheap.

Fact is, though, the price of admission in this hobby has always been high and I think I and many others are just being reminded of that fact, and the gpu market is reflecting the rule rather than the exception we all got lucky with during the 48xx and even moreso the 58xx period. So at the end of the day, I cant complain about these prices I guess. The cards are bad ass, and if I wanna play ball, I've gotta pony up the cash.

 

[maddie]

I agree with you. Just wanted to add a couple things.

I think we're are seeing 2 sides of the story and probably the reason why so many arguments arise.

View #1: If you upgrade every 2-3 years, don't really care for GPU cycles and are in the market to upgrade right now:

People who are looking in the market to upgrade (say coming from HD4850/4870/5770) now don't really care about how great the older cards were 15-16 months ago. If they are looking to buy now, they don't use hindsight or foresight in their purchasing decision. Instead, they just compare what the best card is @ current time when they are ready to buy. In that case, HD7850 & HD7870 are great cards. Naturally, at $350, HD7870 OC can often approach and beat a stock GTX580. Sounds like an amazing deal. Based on this view, the pricing is justified.

View #2: If you plan your purchases and follow the technology curve to "bulls eye" your next card, you expect significant performance gains every 18-24+ months. This gives you an idea if the next upgrade is worth it based on what you had vs. what's expected from price/performance technology curve. It also gives you an idea of how fast the market is moving vs. the historical norm.

This side looks at price/performance curve in terms of technological cycles. In that case, the HD7870 really is a replacement for HD6870, not for HD6970/GTX570. Therefore, it should have HD6970 performance for HD6870 launch price ($239-249, let's say $259 with inflation). Instead AMD brings out this card 15 months later as an HD6870 replacement and prices it at $349? At that price, it's now like a replacement for an HD6970. Well in that case I am sorry but a 10% increase in those historical terms is extremely disappointing. Based on price/performance curve, it should be at least 40% faster. Otherwise, it seems excessive at $349. In fact, the replacement for HD6970 should have been a $379 HD7970 since it is indeed 40-45% faster. This also explains the divergent views on the 7970.

Depends on how you look at it, the entire HD7000 series can be mildly disappointing or if you are looking to buy now, the best thing ever since it made everything else irrelevant at $200+. Anyway you look at it, both of these views are going to dependent on where you are in the upgrade cycle. If you are rocking an HD5850 @ 850mhz+, HD5870, HD6950, GTX560Ti, then these HD7800 cards are an automatic pass. If you are coming from HD4850/HD4890/5770 or something similar to that, they are a good upgrade.

If anything, HD7870 reveals how poor the HD7950 is. The extra 55% memory bandwidth isn't helping HD7950 in higher resolutions by much. It looks like HD7900 series is very much ROP starved, which explains why memory bandwidth starts to become a huge factor once that bottleneck opens up the minute the 7900 series GPU is cranked to say 1200mhz+. Either way, there are some balance issues here.

These cards will eventually come down in price just like HD6870 did, making them a better deal and a worthy successor to the HD6850/6870. HD7850 @ $250 seems like the price/performance sweet-spot for those looking to buy soon.

Let's see what nV brings to the table now. Hopefully we see more performance and / or price wars. :thumbsup:

Speaking about that issue.

Are there several compartmentalized teams doing these designs?

When a much smaller GPU can challenge a higher level chip, one wonders if these teams talk at all. 48 rops for the 79xx series might have transformed it into a truly great performance leap reminiscent of previous node shrinks.

Would the increase in area been so harmful to yields and profits?

 

[Fire&Blood]

I dont mind the price of the 7850. I do mind the price of the 7870, and to a lesser extent, the 79xx cards. Right now, for the price, I am not compelled to upgrade my 5850, but ONLY because the higher end cards are so expensive. The performance is there. Finally something exists that flat out smokes the aging 5850/5870 cards ( I didnt feel the 69xx cards were enough of an increase for their fairly high price). These 79xx cards wipe the floor with the 58xx and if the prices drop a bit I definitely see my self upgrading.

I dont begrudge AMD pricing the 7970 at whatever they want to sell it for. It's the fastest single card currently on the market, and as such demands a significant premium. I've never owned, and likely WILL never own, the top-end card but for those that have the cash, rock on.

The 7950 is selling at about $470. That is a tough one to swallow. Great performance, amazing card, but it's DAMN expensive. I dont think the issue even comes down to performance per dollar, I think it's just a kneejerk reaction to that price. Damn near $500 for a GPU that isnt top of the line just hurts. I think this is why there's so much back and forth over the card, and yes I definitely think it's priced too high.

My second biggest gripe is the sudden price jump from the 7850 to the 7870. A hundred bucks? Really? It just gives ya sticker shock. Again, not that it isnt worth it, but I see why people are reacting the way they are. I think we've all gotten spoiled with brutally powerful video cards for dirt cheap.

Fact is, though, the price of admission in this hobby has always been high and I think I and many others are just being reminded of that fact, and the gpu market is reflecting the rule rather than the exception we all got lucky with during the 48xx and even moreso the 58xx period. So at the end of the day, I cant complain about these prices I guess. The cards are bad ass, and if I wanna play ball, I've gotta pony up the cash.

Yet I hope Kepler forces these prices where they "belong". I can't give the OEM's a free pass for pricing parts higher. I can't tell anyone they shouldn't pay the premium that's arguably charged now. At the same time, no one can blame me for expecting more value for the money.

 

[GaiaHunter]

HD4850 lost half its value because HD5850 made the entire lineup of GTX200/4870/4890 cards obsolete.

No, the 4850 was already that price when the 5850 was released.




And then it went up in price.

Until one company decide to wage a price war (this turn will have to be NVIDIA) we are screwed, especially if 28 nm is still not running full throttle and it isn't just a scheme to raise margins.

Either way the fact is, we had a drought during the transition between 55->40 nm and now we seem to have another drought between 40->28 nm.

These cards offer the performance expected from their die sizes (Tahiti offers a bit less than Pitcairn, GPGPU toll I guess ) and specs.

Their prices are inflated though - greed, semiconductor technology slowing and becoming more expensive, both?

 

[RussianSensation]

I just want to point out that the AMD docs for it say that the 7870 supports eyefinity 6. which is better than 6950 which do 4.

That's a good point. But then again, if you really can afford 6 nice monitors, you aren't buying something as slow as a single HD7870 (maybe 2 of those ).

If you needed 6 nice monitors on a budget though, you are better off grabbing 2 used HD5750s for $70 a piece. So it's not like it wasn't possible to achieve before on a budget.

 

[DeeJayeS]

A lot gamers out there play at 1920x1200. Is it fair to say the 7870 is the sweet spot in AMD's current lineup for that resolution?

 

[Coydog]

I watch as people complain at the cost of things, but lets face it, the marketplace does not operate in a vacuum.

Do I like the new prices? Nope, not one but factors such as inflation (some economists place the real inflation close to 8%, just start paying attention to your food bill a lot more closely) as well as rising energy costs (Price of oil has been going up sharply as of late).

 

[RussianSensation]

Speaking about that issue. Are there several compartmentalized teams doing these designs?

I am not sure if separate teams worked on HD7800 vs. HD7900. That's a good question. I would guess that large separate teams work on new generations (for example a separate team is working on HD8000 series right now while the team that's done with HD7000 will move on to HD9000). I can't say for sure. Maybe someone else can weigh in.

When a much smaller GPU can challenge a higher level chip, one wonders if these teams talk at all. 48 rops for the 79xx series might have transformed it into a truly great performance leap reminiscent of previous node shrinks.

It really does leave you wondering how AMD manages to release a card for $350 that sometimes beats its $450 one.

1000 mhz x 32 ROPs (7870) > 800mhz x 32 ROPs (7950) D:

That's a huge difference considering the latter card is a $450 semi-flagship.

Would the increase in area been so harmful to yields and profits?

Right now, probably. 28nm is just ramping up and capacity constrains are weighing in against all that demand. Smartphones, tablets, GPUs, all the companies making these products want 28nm manufacturing tech.

I am sure we'll see an enhanced GCN with more ROPs similar to X1800XT --> X1900XT series. That was a very healthy boost in specs for a half-gen product.

Also differently is that a 5870 bought 3 years ago keeps playing everything as long as you don't turn on some ridiculous "IQ enhancers" that barely improve IQ.

One of the best GPU cards ever! It's still a firepower as long as you don't need to game with heavy Tessellation or go crazy on High Rez texture mods.

A lot gamers out there play at 1920x1200. Is it fair to say the 7870 is the sweet spot in AMD's current lineup for that resolution?

I'd say so. Although HD7850 is about 20% slower for $100 less. HD7850 OCed is very good value. Can't lose go wrong with either of those if you are planning to buy this month (assuming NV doesn't have anything better).