AMD’s Radeon HD 6870 & 6850: Renewing Competition in the Mid-Range Market
by Ryan Smith on October 21, 2010 10:08 PM ESTWhat’s In a Name?
GPU naming is rarely consistent. While NVIDIA is usually the biggest perpetrator of naming confusion or suddenly switched names AMD does not have a clear record either (the Mobility 5100 series comes to mind). However we’re not sure there’s precedent for AMD’s latest naming decision, and there’s really no stepping around it. So we have a few thoughts we’d like to share.
Since the introduction of the Radeon 3870 in 2007, 800 has been the series designation for AMD’s high-end products. The only time they’ve broken this is last year, when AMD ditched the X2 moniker for their dual-GPU card for the 5900 designation, a move that ruffled a few feathers but at least made some sense since the 5970 wasn’t a true 5870 X2. Regardless, the 800 series has since 2007 been AMD’s designation for their top single-chip product.
With that naming scheme come expectations of performance. Each 800 series card has been successively faster, and while pricing has been inconsistent as AMD’s die size and costs have shifted, ultimately each 800 series card was a notable step up in performance from the previous card. With the 6800 this is not the case. In fact it’s absolutely a step down, the 6800 series is on average 7% slower than the 5800 series. This doesn’t mean that AMD hasn’t made enhancements to the card –we’ve already covered the enhanced tessellation unit, AA/AF, UVD3, and other features – but these are for the most part features and not performance enhancements.
Click to enlarge
Today AMD is turning their naming scheme on its head by launching these Barts cards with the 6800 name, but without better-than-5800 performance. AMD’s rationale for doing this is that they’re going to be continuing to sell the 5700 series, and that as a result they didn’t want to call these cards the 6700 series and introduce confusion. Furthermore AMD is trying to recapture the glory days of the 4800 series, where those parts sold for under $300 and then quickly under $200. It wasn’t until the 5800 series that an 800 series card became outright expensive. So for these reasons, AMD wanted to call these Barts cards the 6800 series.
We find ourselves in disagreement with AMD here.
We don’t have a problem with AMD introducing the 6 series here – the changes they’ve made, even if not extreme, at least justify that. But there’s a very real issue of creating confusion for buyers of the 5800 series now by introducing the 6800 series. The performance may be close and the power consumption lower, but make no mistake, the 5800 series was faster.
Ultimately this is not our problem; this is AMD’s problem. So we can’t claim harm per-say, but we can reflect on matters. The Barts cards being introduced today should have been called the 6700 series. It would have made the latest rendition of the 700 series more expensive than last time, but at the same time Barts is a very worthy upgrade to the 5700 series. But then that’s the problem for AMD; they don’t want to hurt sales of the 5700 series while it’s still on the market.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
197 Comments
View All Comments
Finally - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Thank God morons don't compare prices.Naming is irrelevant as long as you actually get more performance for half the price when the HD5850 was introduced.
softdrinkviking - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
The fact that all of these people are complaining about the naming proves that it isn't irrelevant.Names are important to some people.
Not to you, clearly, but you're not everybody.
krumme - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
I was wondering before if Anandtech was going to use the overclocked 460 card. This day was a test for the new cards from AMD but it was more a test of Anandtech i my view.What a mess for the consumer, Anand and Ryan! - i know you must have discussed this.
- where does this lead to?
1. More agressive intervention from AMD and Nvidia on the review sites
2. More OC cards on the launch dates
This is not good for the transparancy for the consumer.
Therefore its a sad day. And i guess from your own writing, you dont feel quite comfortable about it yourself. Why the f... didnt you listen more to your own doubt?
- next time listen to yourself.
Otherwise a fine review - worth criticizing.
SandmanWN - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Exactly. If I were controlling the media for AMD I would start shipping out hand selected overclocked 5970's on every Nvidia review and demand they be used or no longer receive free review samples.Starting a bad trend here.
Mygaffer - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Other sites didn't bow to the pressure and include the OC'd gtx460. Guru3d is one that comes to mind. Not only that, but after admitting its your policy to not included them you include the very fastest OC'd gtx460 on the market?LAME. At least OC the 6850 so you can show that an OC'd 6850 beats an OC'd gtx460.
I've lost some respect for you with that decision.
AnnihilatorX - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
The CF HD6850 seems to be quite a good value for high end users.They seem to have improved crossfire performance on this generation
A single HD5870 still retails at twice the price of HD6850
but 2 HD6850s are 50-70% faster than a single HD5870
MeanBruce - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Notice the idle noise levels within this comparative are all in the 40db range, with load noise in gaming mode up to the 50 and 60db range. Anyone interested in gaming or working in the 10db range? It is very possible, I am doing it now with an older ATI 4850, talk about peaceful computing and late night gaming. Yup add an uber-efficient aftermarket heatsink I have tried a few from Arctic Cooling and Thermalright, the best one so far is the MK-13 from Prolimatech! Clip on a Noctua NF-S12B uln fan 6db or a 140mm Noctua FLX attenuated to 10db and you are there baby! Total Upgrade Costs: $85. Peace of Mind: Priceless. Bruce out!Ryantju - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
I used to play Crysis with HD 4830, which is not very good and I can't see the benchmarks. Since HD 4870's has such a outstanding Price/Performance, can it run Crysis 2?shiznit - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Anand I thought you tested the 5870 in WoW? The ugly texture transitions were blatantly obvious from the start. Imagine my dismay when upgrading from a 8800GT to a brand new just released 5870 and seeing worse texture filtering...Techman123 - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
I got my 5870 over a year ago and have been enjoying great frame-rates on my 30in monitor at 2560x1600. Even though it wasn't cheap, it has to have been one of the best buys I ever made, as this card is still one of the top tier of cards on the market. It's not often that a video card over a year old is still that competitive. Plus I have the option of adding a 2nd card once they are relegated to 2nd tier status.It is interesting the way they are introducing this card. With the 58xx series, they came out with the high end card first. It makes it seem that although the 6900 series will improve over the 5800 series, it won't be the huge step the 5800 was.