Conclusion

The 5830 is a card that the public has had some very high expectations for coming in to this launch. The 4830 – as short lived as it was – was a well received card even if it wasn’t an immediate bargain. For anyone expecting a repeat performance on the 5830, we can’t help but feel that you’re going to come away disappointed.

On a global average, the 5830 sits about half-way between a 4890 and a 4870, or if you prefer is about 8% slower than a GTX 275 and 20% slower than a 5850. The latter is particularly interesting since it comes so close to the 5850 even though it only has 55% of the ROP capacity; clearly the hit to the ROPs didn’t hurt too badly.

At any rate, I had been expecting something that would consistently be to the north of the 4890 in performance, but the performance is what it is – there’s no bad card, only a poorly priced card.

And a poorly priced card is really what does the 5830 in. AMD expects this card to go for $240, a mere $20 below the original MSRP for the 5850; if one goes by the original MSRP of the 5850 this card is much too slow for the price. Conversely the 5830 is around 10% slower than the 4890, a card that was going for between $180 and $200 before supplies seemingly ran dry. The only price comparison where $240 makes sense is compared to the 5850’s current $300 price – you get 80% of the performance for 80% of the price. But the 5850 is priced for profit taking, it’s a fast card but it’s not a great deal.

When we were being briefed about this card, AMD’s (and former Beyond3D guru) Dave Baumann asked us to get back to him on what we thought the card should be priced at once we finished our testing. Our response to him, and the same thing that we’re holding to in this review, is that the sweet spot for this card would be $200, and the highest should be $220. $200 is a sweet spot because it picks up where the 4890 left off, even if it is around 10% slower. $220 on the other hand places a greater valuation on the 5000 series feature set, and is closer to the GTX 275.

Dave’s argument (and undoubtedly one that will resonate throughout AMD) is that the 5830 has some very useful advantages over the 4890 – DX/DirectCompute 11, Eyefinity, better OpenCL support, and bitstreaming audio. All of this is true, although the 5830 strikes us as a poor choice for Eyefinity usage (get something faster) or for bitstreaming audio (it’s not exactly a cool HTPC card). DX11 and OpenCL is harder to evaluate due to their newness, and in the case of OpenCL AMD doesn’t even distribute their OpenCL driver with the rest of their Catalyst driver set yet.

Meanwhile there’s a separate argument entirely over whether the 5830 is more future-proof (disregarding DX11) due to its higher shader throughput. Historically speaking this is a reasonable argument, but it’s also one that I’m not convinced will hold up when NVIDIA is going to be pushing tessellation instead of shading – you can’t ignore what NVIDIA’s doing given their clearly stronger developer relations.

Ultimately the problem is that being future proof comes at too high a price. The 5770 was a hard sale compared to the faster 4870, and this time we’re talking about what’s around a $60 premium based on performance over the 4000 series. AMD’s saving grace here is that you can no longer buy such a card – it’s either a GTX260/4870, or nothing.

At the risk of sounding petty over $20, a $240 5830 is $20 too much. If this were priced at $200-$220 it wouldn’t be a clear choice for the 5830, but it wouldn’t be such a clear choice against it. For $240 you can try to shop around for a 4890 and save $40-$60 while getting a card that will perform better at most of today’s games, or save even more by going with a 4870 that will slightly underperform the 5830. Alternatively you can save up another $60 and get the 5850, a card that is faster running and cooler running at the same time. There is no scenario where we can wholeheartedly justify a 5830 if it’s going to be a $240 card – this really should have been the new $200 wonder card.

Update: It looks like AMD's partners have been able to come through and make this a hard launch. PowerColor and Sapphire cards have started showing up at Newegg. So we're very happy to report that this didn't turn out to be a paper launch after all. Do note however that the bulk of the cards are still not expected until next week.

This brings up the other elephant in the room: today’s paper launch. Paper launches should by all means have died last year, but their ghost apparently continues to live on. If in fact no 5830s make it to retailers in time for today’s launch, then the card should not have been launched today – it’s as simple as that.

Power & Temperature
Comments Locked

148 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    We redo our test suite roughly every 6 months. We'll be redoing it in time for GF100, but this uses the same suite we had for the 5870 launch. In the mean time benchmarking DX11 games doesn't really tell us a whole lot when the results are going to be perfectly in lockstep with the performance differences of the 5000 series cards.
  • gumdrops - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    The Fermi cards that are coming out in April aren't exactly competing in the same price point as this one and it'll be months more before NVIDIA even announces mainstream Fermi derivants.

    It would be nice to know if this card is closer to a 5850 in DX11 performance than a 5770.
  • Calin - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    Yes, it would be nice to know.
    However, a new test methodology would invalidate the earlier results - unlike now, when you have a graph with 20 cards, you'll have a graph with two cards (that's it, until the old cards are retested, which will take quite a bit of time).
  • ET - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    But Fermi being in another price range might not prevent Anandtech from testing the lower end cards again. They did test the 3870 in the 5x00 reviews, which I thought was a nice touch.
  • HotFoot - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    It really was nice to see a 3870 in the graphs. I don't upgrade my video card every generation, and in fact this round went from a 3870 to a 5870. I hope in a couple years' time I'll be able to see the odd 5870 performance comparison to some 7xxx-generation (or nvidia equivalent).
  • sc3252 - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    I can't say I am surprised, the 5770 was a huge let down, and the 5450 wasn't much better. Really I was thinking the same thing looking at every graph, way to much. It shouldn't even be priced at $200 more like $189. You should have just given them a big fat F at the end of the review.

    As a 5850 owner I really do think a lot of the Directx 11 effects really don't go well with the cards, the cards take to much of a hit to enable the effects a lot of the time and makes me feel like I am gaming on a umm 5800 fx series card.
  • smokedturkey - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link

    This is the reason I am still using a Radeon X1900 Crossfire Edition i picked up on Ebay for $65 to play Oblivion at 1650x1080 high settings. hahaha I wonder where the performance vs. price has really come into play these last few years?
  • ev1l - Friday, July 9, 2010 - link

    I want to buy a new video card and i can not...

    I have a old 8800gts512 and i still dont have any reason to change it....
    I saw less than 100w for all my system, silence and fresh

    i ply crysis, i ply dirt, i ply stalker, left4dead2 etc.... more 5 or 10fps for 300$

    I want some real progress pls

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now