AMD’s Radeon HD 5770 & 5750: DirectX 11 for the Mainstream Crowd
by Ryan Smith on October 13, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Far Cry 2
Far Cry 2 is another foliage-heavy game. Thankfully it’s not nearly as punishing as Crysis, and it’s possible to achieve a good framerate even with all the settings at their highest.
Update: When we first published this article, we had some anomalously high results for the 5770 at 1680 and 1920. We have found the reason for this and corrected it. This brings the 5770's scores down by 10fps or so.
Compared to Crysis: Warhead, Far Cry 2 paints a better picture for the 5770. Here it just manages to beat out our 4870, which may be slightly disappointing for those of you that are expecting a decisive victory over the 4870, but it's better than a loss like in Crysis. The GTX 260 is also neck-and-neck with our two Radeon cards here.
Far Cry 2 also paints an interesting case for the 5750 in comparison to the 4850. Far Cry 2 likes RAM, particularly on AMD cards. With the 1GB on our 5750, it doubles the terrible performance of the 4850. This is going to be the exception to the norm here though.
Finally, with the solid performance of the 5770, a 5850 buys around 40% performance improvement here.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
117 Comments
View All Comments
GrizzlyAdams - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
That may be due to some architectural improvements in the 5770's shaders. The drop in performance in other games may be due to the decreased memory bandwidth, which may not matter with regards to Far Cry 2.papapapapapapapababy - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
this cards are super lame... 5750, now with +80 stream processors ! XD that 5750 is basically a ( lower clocked!) 4770... guess what ati? that cost me $85 bucks 6 months ago! but who cares right? nvidia is dead so why bother? just slap a dx11 sticker, rice the price ati?The0ne - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
Just wanted to say I like the conclusion and it's dead spot on on the suggestions and advices.I'm very surprise almost no one is talking or bringing up the subject of DirectX. DX11 has more chance to succeed yet less attention. It's amazing how badly DX10 was to sway consumers about face.
kmmatney - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
The problem with DX10 was that you had to buy Vista to get it...MadMan007 - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
DX10 rendering paths of games that were also DX9 (meaning all of them at the time and even now) were also *slower* and provided little to no i.q. improvements. So even if it hadn't been Vista-only (and only morans keep on with the Vista FUD after SP1) there was no real benefit. DX11 looks to be different in all respects.Lifted - Wednesday, October 14, 2009 - link
Yeah, get a brain!http://24ahead.com/images/get-a-brain-morans.jpg">http://24ahead.com/images/get-a-brain-morans.jpg
Zool - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
Quite strange that with die size 166mm2 againts 260mm2(rv770) and with 128bit memmory it costs this much. And the 5750 has disabled one simd which even increase the amount of usable chips (but maybe its disabled just for the diference or else the two cards would be exatly the same except clocks).The Tessellation part with fixed units is exatly the same as 5800 series or tuned down ?
philosofool - Wednesday, October 14, 2009 - link
I chalk it up to lowish 40nm yields at TSMC.Spoelie - Wednesday, October 14, 2009 - link
+ higher cost per wafer as a 55nm one+ ddr5 prices
Mint - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link
Unless you absolutely need to take advantage of the lower power requirements of the 40nm process (e.g. you pay a ton for power)...According to your tests, the 5770 consumes a whopping 48W less idle power than the 4870, and other reviews have comparable results. If your computer is out of standby a modest 10 hours a day, that works out to 175 kWh per year. That's easily $15/year even for people with cheap electricity.
The funny thing is that I usually see people overstating the savings from power efficiency...