• What
    is this?

    You've landed on the AMD Portal on AnandTech. This section is sponsored by AMD. It features a collection of all of our independent AMD content, as well as Tweets & News from AMD directly. AMD will also be running a couple of huge giveaways here so check back for those.

    PRESENTED BY

Battlefield: Bad Company 2

The latest game in the Battlefield series - Bad Company 2 – remains as one of the cornerstone DX11 games in our benchmark suite. As BC2 doesn’t have a built-in benchmark or recording mode, here we take a FRAPS run of the jeep chase in the first act, which as an on-rails portion of the game provides very consistent results and a spectacle of explosions, trees, and more.

Bad Company 2 has ended up being a rather balanced game. Neither AMD or NVIDIA GPUs end up being favored giving us performance close to our global average. At higher resolutions the 6970 can meet or beat the GTX 570, while we have to drop to 1680 for the 570 to take a real lead. Meanwhile the 6970 CF is but a hair’s width away from the GTX 580 SLI.

Curiously this is another game where the 5870 holds an advantage over the 6950. Bad Company 2 is another game that normally appears shader-bound, so this may be an outcome from AMD’s shader change. At the same time it’s a very recent game, so it shouldn’t have any particular attachment to the older VLIW5 design.

As for our Water benchmark, it produces disappointing result for the 6900 series. AMD has simply never done well here and the 6900 cards don’t seem to have what it takes to break that curse. The result is that while the averages are close, the worst case scenario of minimum framerates looks much worse for AMD.

Civilization V STALKER: Call of Pripyat
POST A COMMENT

167 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    Exactly the same as on Cypress.

    L2: 128KB per ROP block (so 512KB)
    L1: 8KB per SIMD
    LDS: 32KB per SIMD
    GDS: 64KB

    http://images.anandtech.com/doci/4061/MidLevelView...

    I don't have the register file size readily available.
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    How likely is the decrease from 2 to 1 operations per clock likely to affect real world applications? Reply
  • yeraldin37 - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    My current cards are running at 870Mhz(GPU) and 1100Mhz(clock), faster than stock 5870, those benchmarks for new 6970 are really disappointing, I was seriously expecting to get a single 6970 for Christmas to replace my 5850OC CF cards and make room for additional cards or even have a free pcie to plug my gtx460 for physx capability. I was going to be happy to get at least 80% of my current 5850CF setup from new 6970. what a joke! I will not make any move and wait for upcoming next generation 28nm amd GPU's. We have to be fair and mention all great efforts from AMD team to bring new technology to newest radeon cards, however not enough performance for die hard gamers. If gtx 580 were 20% cheaper I might consider to buy one, I personally never ever pay more than $400 for one(1) video card. Reply
  • Nfarce - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    Reading Tom's Hardware they essentially slam AMD's marketing these cards as a 570-580 beater. Guru3D is also less than friendly. Interstingly, *both* sites have benches showing the 570 an d580 beating the 6950 and 6970 commandingly. What's up with that exactly? Reply
  • fausto412 - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    it's called AMD didn't deliver on the hype...they deserve to get slammed. Reply
  • medi01 - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    AMD delivers cards with better performance/price ratio that also consume less power. How come there is a reason to "slam", eh? Reply
  • zst3250 - Friday, December 31, 2010 - link

    Off yourself cretin, prefearbly by getting your cranium kicked in. Reply
  • Mr Perfect - Thursday, December 16, 2010 - link

    Wait, is Tom's reputable again? Haven't read that site since the Athlon XP was new.... Reply
  • AnnonymousCoward - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    As a 30" owner and gamer, I would never run at 2560x1600 with AA enabled if that causes <60fps. I'd disable AA. Who wouldn't value framerate over AA? So when the fps is <60, please compare cards at 2560x1600 without AA, so that I'm able to apply the results to a purchase decision. Reply
  • SimpJee - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 - link

    Greetings, also a 30'' gamer. If you see the FPS above 30 with AA enabled, you can assume it will be (much) higher without it enabled so what's the point in actually having the author bench it without AA? Plus, anything above 30 FPS is just icing on the cake as far as I'm concerned. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now