• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Where are the damn Fermi reviews already!?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Will Robinson

Golden Member
Dec 19, 2009
1,408
0
0
The problem I have is that the 5850/5870 is a waste of time for anyone. There's no DX11 games that are worth playing and the performance of these cards is wasted on no games. So even if you can afford $400 on the card it's still not worth it.
That's some big words for someone who doesn't own one.
Seriously..wtf?
Go play BF2 Multiplayer on a 4850 then play again with a 5850.(I have both)
The new 5 series card is way nicer,noticeably smoother ,better colors,quieter and cooler and has much better AA.
It's all there to see and feel if you want to add a little depth to your posts...
 

Dadofamunky

Platinum Member
Jan 4, 2005
2,184
0
0
If you lack experience with the series and have only breezed through a couple of charts and reviews, I can understand this viewpoint. If you purchase a card from the series or get the time to sit down and tinker with one, I think it's true merits come to light.

First off, most reviews of the high-end (58xx) cards were done on launch, and the drivers have substantially improved since then. If I had to give a rough estimate, I'd say there's about 5% increased performance across the board with the 5870, with upwards of 20% in some games (Crysis, for example). There was a similar situation when I had my GTX295, where performance against the 4870X2 was lackluster at launch, however, there was a review done a few months after launch that I would always link to as it showed the performance improvements from the newer drivers.

At high resolutions (like the 2560x1600 I play at, so this is the point of view I'm coming from), the 5870 stomps all over my GTX295, no questions asked. Not just in raw FPS, but also in smoothness and quality of gameplay. Also, I can keep cranking IQ and the FPS really don't suffer much, which is not something I could do with my GTX295. At lower resolutions, some of the older hardware might keep up, but definitely not on my 30". In addition to this, the 5870 is faster while using ~60% of the power. It also overclocks much better than my GTX295 ever could, while remaining much quieter. It also has support for the latest features (DX11, Eyefinity), which is also nice.

However, I think the best buy in the 5xxx series is the 5850. In an enthusiast's hands, it can do 1GHz on the core for only $280. One has to go into the <$100 market to find a better price/performance ratio, and it even bests anything offered by the 4xxx series at it's release in June 2008. While performance-wise, the 57xx series is the same or a bit slower than their 48xx counterparts, they also only use 55-60% of the power and overclock much better. I'd rather have that versatility and make up the performance with a quick clock change. I haven't used and therefore won't comment on the lower 5xxx series, and I love my 4350, but newer parts will always carry a price premium compared to last generation, sometimes out of proportion to their added functionality.

As far as the few glitches I've seen with the 5xxx series, the large cursor problem is a thing of the past (which, if it's really that much of a problem, you need to go outside more). Now I've built four separate systems, including my own, based on 5xxx series GPUs and have yet to see a grey screen crash that wasn't brought on by my own doing (usually an overclocking attempt). Have these problems actually been reported mostly by AIBs to AMD (due to increasing numbers of RMAs) or is it only showing up on enthusiast boards? Call me a cynic, but many times these issues develop from people not doing their homework and overclocking improperly. If you can't be bothered to do something thoroughly correct, don't bother.

In either case, my point is that NVIDIA is entering quite late into one hell of a competition. They need to have a stellar part just to stay competitive, nevermind progress.
I like this, this is a well-reasoned argument. I'm looking at the 5850 as my next card upgrade if and when that ever happens.

Some others have a good point: with all the horsepower, what good is it if the software doesn't appear? It's a complete hardware deadend. I hope DX11 games come out this year that justify those expensive cards, or the GPU makers will be in trouble.
 
Last edited:

Will Robinson

Golden Member
Dec 19, 2009
1,408
0
0
If you own and game on a 1920x1200 24" panel right now the HD5850 is the perfect card.The image quality has definitely improved from the 4850 and it's so much cooler running.Mine idles about 36C and gets up to about 56C or so under full load.
You can't hear the fan ramp up at those temps it seems,on Auto fan it just does its thing.
So far....its a great card.:)
 

santz

Golden Member
Feb 21, 2006
1,190
0
76
i want to buy 5850 but am waiting for fermi to get a better price on 5850 haha
 
Last edited:

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
469
126
I like this, this is a well-reasoned argument. I'm looking at the 5850 as my next card upgrade if and when that ever happens.

Some others have a good point: with all the horsepower, what good is it if the software doesn't appear? It's a complete hardware deadend. I hope DX11 games come out this year that justify those expensive cards, or the GPU makers will be in trouble.
There's are already a couple DX11 games. Dirt 2, AvP, Battlefield Bad Company 2 just to name a few. With W7's adoption rate infinitely already higher than Vista, there's no need to worry about getting DX11 games. Just because games might not have DX11 doesn't mean you won't need new and better hardware to run it. Newer games will always push the envelope higher.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
26,840
280
126
That's some big words for someone who doesn't own one.
Seriously..wtf?
Go play BF2 Multiplayer on a 4850 then play again with a 5850.(I have both)
The new 5 series card is way nicer,noticeably smoother ,better colors,quieter and cooler and has much better AA.
It's all there to see and feel if you want to add a little depth to your posts...
I don't have to own one. I have a GTX295. Even a GTX280 is plenty. It's not my fault a 4850 is not a high end card.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
26,840
280
126
Extra features that may (or may not) be relevant in the near future are not worthless by default. I really hope you don't pull the fan boy double take on your stance when fermi comes out and has a performance edge at the top end (which if it doesn't gang green will be hurting).
Yawn, Yawn. More from the Red Eye lounge. Just wait and see before you talk shit.

Really people is it too hard to actually see the product before you bash it?
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
26,840
280
126
2010 has so many promising titles coming out, I cant imagine why anyone would think that having the horsepower for it would be superfluous

assuming you are purchasing within your economic means that is, but thats a whole different issue altogether
Promising means nothing. Consoles are getting all the better games and we get ports and left overs. Complete with dedicated servers removed and gimped match making.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
26,840
280
126
There's are already a couple DX11 games. Dirt 2, AvP, Battlefield Bad Company 2 just to name a few. With W7's adoption rate infinitely already higher than Vista, there's no need to worry about getting DX11 games. Just because games might not have DX11 doesn't mean you won't need new and better hardware to run it. Newer games will always push the envelope higher.
Just like there were hundreds of DX10 games right? Not really...

We've heard it before. Regardless of what you think about Vista is was NOT that bad to use.

I worry because of my previous postings, Consoles are pushing into PC levels graphically and the consoles sell many thousands of more copies.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
469
126
Just like there were hundreds of DX10 games right? Not really...
Did you not read the part where I said that W7's adoption rate is infinitely better than Vista's was at the same time? It's guaranteed to get more developers making more games that are DX11 since more people are going to have the OS for it. I never said Vista was bad. Hell I have Vista and see no reason to upgrade to W7 any time soon but it's just a fact that Vista didn't sell well and W7 is selling so much better.
 

Tempered81

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2007
6,374
0
76
Yawn, Yawn. More from the Red Eye lounge. Just wait and see before you talk shit.

Really people is it too hard to actually see the product before you bash it?
Hehe, I think you've accidentally quoted yourself and told yourself not to talk shit ;P
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
998
126
The problem I have is that the 5850/5870 is a waste of time for anyone. There's no DX11 games that are worth playing and the performance of these cards is wasted on no games. So even if you can afford $400 on the card it's still not worth it.

I'm going to agree with MJinZ, after Diablo 3 I think PC gaming is going to die off while developers just do PS3/Xbox 360 games.

I've gotten to the point now where I don't really care if there's never another video card released. They push all these wizbang features that never get used in games and when they do, the features being used kill framerates. I don't care so much about the cards as I do about quality games being released. The few in the past couple months that have come out are available on consoles as well and this hurts the PC version in some ways.
Says the guy with a GTX295... I know you said you got your GTX295 as a step up from an open box part, but even so I bet it cost close to $400, maybe even more.... it's about as fast as a 5870 (maybe a bit faster overall) and has less features. Yet you say the 5870 isn't worth it? I don't know your posting style, I don't know if you're an Nvidia fan boy, dislike AMD, or just don't feel that a GTX295 level card has much use after having owned one, but your post seems a bit odd given that you did infact buy and are using a GTX295.

Also, I personally do think the 5870 is worth it's price (actually I'm leaning towards a 5850 as it has better price:performance in my opinion and will do what I need). I got a 4870 512MB to use with my 22" monitor. I ended up getting a great deal on this 26" monitor, my 512MB 4870 does much better than I thought it might with 1920x1200 res and 2xAA, but it certainly struggles in AoC when I use DX10 and 4xAA. I don't play as many games as I used to, but I still will play and would like to play with DX11. I wouldn't buy a DX11 card right now if I had a high end part like you, but that doesn't mean that the 58xx cards are not decent buys or worthwhile for a good many of us.
 
Last edited:

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
475
126
There's are already a couple DX11 games. Dirt 2, AvP, Battlefield Bad Company 2 just to name a few. With W7's adoption rate infinitely already higher than Vista, there's no need to worry about getting DX11 games. Just because games might not have DX11 doesn't mean you won't need new and better hardware to run it. Newer games will always push the envelope higher.
Thought ill start a list of games coming out for x11 and the new ati cards (nvidia later)
and some general info on x11 and games.............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghazN5L7Ncw
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video [...] __ATI.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P25ukMJHfTI

S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Call of Pripyat ......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX6l8g0qH4w

DIRT 2................... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo4 [...] re=related

ALIENS versus PREDATOR ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC8RM1udgiY

BATTLEFORGE ......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reYcvhJWzPU

CRYSIS 2 : Not Confirmed, but the CryENGINE 3 supports DirectX 11

ED DICE: FROSTBITE 2 ENGINE....... http://www.dice.se/
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Battlefield 1943

TRINIGY: VISION ENGINE: http://www.trinigy.net/

TURBINE: LORD OF THE RINGS:



Dirt 2 is ok at best.
Crysis 2 should Rock at the end of the year.
Battlefield 2 looks great on March 2
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Thought ill start a list of games coming out for x11 and the new ati cards (nvidia later)
and some general info on x11 and games.............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghazN5L7Ncw
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video [...] __ATI.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P25ukMJHfTI

S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Call of Pripyat ......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX6l8g0qH4w

DIRT 2................... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo4 [...] re=related

ALIENS versus PREDATOR ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC8RM1udgiY

BATTLEFORGE ......... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reYcvhJWzPU

CRYSIS 2 : Not Confirmed, but the CryENGINE 3 supports DirectX 11

ED DICE: FROSTBITE 2 ENGINE....... http://www.dice.se/
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Battlefield 1943

TRINIGY: VISION ENGINE: http://www.trinigy.net/

TURBINE: LORD OF THE RINGS:



Dirt 2 is ok at best.
Crysis 2 should Rock at the end of the year.
Battlefield 2 looks great on March 2
also add Metro 2033 to that list. http://www.metro2033game.com/en

some cool vids of the game
http://www.gamestar.de/index.cfm?pid=1589&pk=13279

combat and tech interview HD
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/combat-and-metro-2033/61790

life after nuclear war interview HD
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/life-after-metro-2033/61791
 

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,209
50
91
Says the guy with a GTX295... I know you said you got your GTX295 as a step up from an open box part, but even so I bet it cost close to $400, maybe even more.... it's about as fast as a 5870 (maybe a bit faster overall) and has less features. Yet you say the 5870 isn't worth it? I don't know your posting style, I don't know if you're an Nvidia fan boy, dislike AMD, or just don't feel that a GTX295 level card has much use after having owned one, but your post seems a bit odd given that you did infact buy and are using a GTX295.

Also, I personally do think the 5870 is worth it's price (actually I'm leaning towards a 5850 as it has better price:performance in my opinion and will do what I need). I got a 4870 512MB to use with my 22" monitor. I ended up getting a great deal on this 26" monitor, my 512MB 4870 does much better than I thought it might with 1920x1200 res and 2xAA, but it certainly struggles in AoC when I use DX10 and 4xAA. I don't play as many games as I used to, but I still will play and would like to play with DX11. I wouldn't buy a DX11 card right now if I had a high end part like you, but that doesn't mean that the 58xx cards are not decent buys or worthwhile for a good many of us.
While you're busy trying to get a psychological profile on dredd, I'd like to hear more on your comment concerning GTX295 "it's about as fast as a 5870 (maybe a bit faster overall) and has less features." Are you sure you mean less features? Or is different features the proper way of telling this story?
I'm sure you could come out with a different conclusion if you weighed features between the two.
If you're considering DX11/Eyefinity a feature above a GTX295, then you'd be correct. If you said PhysX/CUDA/3DVision were features above a 5870, you'd be correct as well.
 

happy medium

Lifer
Jun 8, 2003
14,387
475
126
Nice! looks like a winner.

Edit:
From the preview....

"The custom-built technology behind Metro looks like it can compete with the big-name engines out there. THQ says it's going to be a poster child for Nvidia's PhysX technology while also using high dynamic range rendering under DirectX 9/10, as well as DirectX 11 in the long term. Perhaps even more impressively, it's genuinely difficult to see the difference between the PC and Xbox 360 versions of the game, both of which were shown at the event"


Hmmm, cant tell the difference between the xbox an PC? Crap.
 
Last edited:
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
5
76
Eyeinfinity is no gimmick. You may think so, but go try it out at a mates place or something and after a few hours, you will change your mind.

If anything, the best feature of the 5k series isn't dx11, its being able to game with 3 monitors. Dx11 will not mature for another year or so, 2010 will be some dx9 games with slight dx11 features. So yeah, if u game on 1 monitor, then a 5850 or above is overkill. On 3 monitors, you will need the power.
 

toyota

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
12,957
1
0
Nice! looks like a winner.

Edit:
From the preview....

"The custom-built technology behind Metro looks like it can compete with the big-name engines out there. THQ says it's going to be a poster child for Nvidia's PhysX technology while also using high dynamic range rendering under DirectX 9/10, as well as DirectX 11 in the long term. Perhaps even more impressively, it's genuinely difficult to see the difference between the PC and Xbox 360 versions of the game, both of which were shown at the event"


Hmmm, cant tell the difference between the xbox an PC? Crap.
if thats xbox360 footage in any of the vids I have seen then this will be the most stunning looking console game ever. this game appears to have the best textures I have ever noticed in any game so far. you can tell that the game engine has its roots in the x-ray engine that was used in STALKER games and even those games looked great in indoor environments.
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Here is some background story from Wikipedia.

"4A Games was founded by people who split off from GSC Game World a year before the the release of S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl, in particular Oles' Shiskovtsov and Aleksandr Maksimchuk, the programmers who worked on the development of X-Ray engine used in the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series.[7] The game will utilize multiplatform 4A Engine; there is some contention regarding whether the engine is an original development (as claimed by 4A Games) or whether it is an adapted and improved branch of pre-release X-Ray engine (as claimed by Sergey Grigorovich, the founder of GSC Game World[8], as well as users who have seen the 4A Engine SDK screenshots). Among the improvements compared to X-Ray, 4A Engine will feature nVidia PhysX support.[9]"
 
Last edited:

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Nice! looks like a winner.

Edit:
From the preview....

"The custom-built technology behind Metro looks like it can compete with the big-name engines out there. THQ says it's going to be a poster child for Nvidia's PhysX technology while also using high dynamic range rendering under DirectX 9/10, as well as DirectX 11 in the long term. Perhaps even more impressively, it's genuinely difficult to see the difference between the PC and Xbox 360 versions of the game, both of which were shown at the event"


Hmmm, cant tell the difference between the xbox an PC? Crap.
Doesn't the Xbox 360 have an ATI video card? So how is Nvidia Physx making a difference if the game looks the same on console and PC?
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Pardon me, I must have missed it...

APU?
Advanced processing unit. This is the name ATI (and I think Intel) are giving their upcoming System-on-a-chip designs. AMD also calls this "Fusion" because the CPU and GPU are fused together on one die. (ie, monolithic design)

We don't know price just yet, but it might be pretty cheap to produce. 32nm "stars" quad core with new power-management features and high-k gating combined with a 480 stream processor DX11 GPU.
 
Last edited:

TXAngel08

Banned
Feb 13, 2010
56
0
0
Advanced processing unit. This is the name ATI (and I think Intel) are giving their upcoming System-on-a-chip designs. AMD also calls this "Fusion" because the CPU and GPU are fused together on one die. (ie, monolithic design)

We don't know price just yet, but it might be pretty cheap to produce. 32nm "stars" quad core with new power-management features and high-k gating combined with a 480 stream processor DX11 GPU.
Ahh, thanks...

For most systems, a system-on-a-chip makes a ton of sense. For a gaming rig, it doesn't.

It will be a VERY long time before any GPU that is on-die with the GPU will be able to put out 58xx levels of performance, simply due to the power required. Yes, as the process scales down it will help, but then standalone GPUs will just be that much more powerful.

However, for the bulk of computers sold, I do agree that everything on-die is the future, as it probably should be.

Right now, people are getting used to 1920x1200 (or 1080, take your pick) as "standard" for gaming. The TV/Monitor people are working on the replacement already, but it will be awhile. I hope they skip 4K video and go right to 8K, but I suspect that they will do 4K first to milk it for all it is worth, then make us all replace our TVs again. :)

Ultra High Definition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Hi-Vision

7680×4320 , or 4 times 1920x1080

Yummy... :D
 

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Ahh, thanks...

For most systems, a system-on-a-chip makes a ton of sense. For a gaming rig, it doesn't.

It will be a VERY long time before any GPU that is on-die with the GPU will be able to put out 58xx levels of performance, simply due to the power required. Yes, as the process scales down it will help, but then standalone GPUs will just be that much more powerful.

However, for the bulk of computers sold, I do agree that everything on-die is the future, as it probably should be.

Right now, people are getting used to 1920x1200 (or 1080, take your pick) as "standard" for gaming. The TV/Monitor people are working on the replacement already, but it will be awhile. I hope they skip 4K video and go right to 8K, but I suspect that they will do 4K first to milk it for all it is worth, then make us all replace our TVs again. :)

Ultra High Definition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Hi-Vision

7680&#215;4320 , or 4 times 1920x1080

Yummy... :D
Well I like the idea of really high resolutions myself. 4K and 8k sound exciting.

Speaking of High resolutions, ATI management (in the RV870 article) spoke of deploying a first generation holodeck with get this...100 million pixels...by 2015. 100 million pixels they claim is almost 25 times the amount found in a single 2560x1600 30" monitor.

Okay, but back to APUs. If these are low cost it would seem to me an advanced 32nm quad core and 480 stream processors would be a good match for someone using a CRT or older lower resolution LCD (circa, 2004). 480 stream processors (provided bandwidth is sufficient) should have no trouble power games at that level. In fact 480 stream processors is better than what is found in a Xbox 360 game console.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY