The Test

For the 5700 series launch, AMD issued some new drivers as the previous 8.66 driver set did not include support for these cards. The driver set we used for these cards is 8.66.6, which is from the same branch as the earlier drivers. In our own testing, we haven’t seen any performance differences between these drivers and the previous ones on the 5800 series cards, but AMD did note that certain configurations might see a small performance boost. As such our results are still using the original 8.66 driver for the 4000 and 5800 series.

Also, as AMD sent us a pair of 5770s, we have tested these cards in a Crossfire configuration. This configuration is largely academic, as 2 5770s is just shy of the price of a 5870 and brings with it all of the limitations of multi-GPU scaling as compared to single-GPU scaling.

On a final note, our 5750 sample is a 1GB card.

CPU: Intel Core i7-920 @ 3.33GHz
Motherboard: Intel DX58SO (Intel X58)
Chipset Drivers: Intel 9.1.1.1015 (Intel)
Hard Disk: Intel X25-M SSD (80GB)
Memory: Patriot Viper DDR3-1333 3 x 2GB (7-7-7-20)
Video Cards:

ATI Radeon HD 5870
ATI Radeon HD 5850
ATI Radeon HD 5770
ATI Radeon HD 5750
ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
ATI Radeon HD 4890
ATI Radeon HD 4870 1GB
ATI Radeon HD 4850
ATI Radeon HD 3870
ATI Radeon HD 4670 512MB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT

Video Drivers:

NVIDIA ForceWare 190.62
ATI Catalyst Beta 8.66
ATI Catalyst Beta 8.66.6
ATI Catalyst 9.9

OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit

Meet The 5750 Crysis: Warhead
POST A COMMENT

117 Comments

View All Comments

  • silverblue - Wednesday, October 14, 2009 - link

    With any luck they'll become plentiful in a short space of time, offering early adopters the chance to set up a decent EF, umm, setup.

    If you think the typical EF setup will be two or three monitors, do you expect the full six monitor glory with an X2 part? I'm still wondering if even the 5870 can handle three monitors and still offer smooth gaming performance. That said, despite their power they're not going to strictly be gaming cards.
    Reply
  • papapapapapapapababy - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    the fact that this cards consume little power is irrelevant when you have that great efficiency on the 5800... also including the Eyefinity gimmick here is a mistake, it only diminishes the value of that feature on the 5800. It should have been 1 card. HD 5770:
    no Eyefinity, 800 SP, 750MHz, 512MB = $99 USD

    Reply
  • CarrellK - Wednesday, October 14, 2009 - link

    Eyefinity (EF) will be in all 5xxx products for a multiplicity of useful reasons, many of which aren't apparent yet. There will be frequent roll-outs of new EF goodness. There will be many, many customers who will find EF very useful. Hopefully you will realize what EF can do for you and buy one of our products. We'd like for you to be a happy customer of ours.

    CarrellK



    Reply
  • yacoub - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    " It should have been 1 card. HD 5770:
    no Eyefinity, 800 SP, 750MHz, 512MB = $99 USD "

    Close, but no. 1GB of VRAM is mandatory anymore, and it needs the 256-bit bus or more texturing units and ROPs. And then it could be $125.
    Reply
  • yacoub - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    Something's wrong when two of these in CrossFire can't match a single 5850. Blah. Reply
  • qwertymac93 - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    why no mention of 4770? i know its older and slower, but its also 40nm like the 5750 and is the same price, it would be nice to see the difference between the two as they are specked quite closely(640sp@750mhz, 720sp@700mhz, both 128bit gddr5) Reply
  • snarfbot - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    legion hardware has a good review comparing them both.

    the 5750 is between 1-3 fps faster.

    the 5750 has better overclocking potential thanks to the ram i guess, but im not sure if its worth the extra 25 bucks.

    kinda a wait and see thing for this part
    Reply
  • Seramics - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    Yet another good reviews from AT, thanks Ryan. However, it becomes clear cards like HD5870 and HD5770 isnt a very good performer for its price. HD5850 and HD5750 512MB repeesents a more solid bang for bucks. Again its very amazing that AMD has been able to bring us so many next gen DX11 cards when Windows 7 isnt even launched yet and their competitor is being super slow by onli recently releasing a non high end part of G200 derivatives. That being said, from the point of view of solely performance, Cypress and Juniper is kinda a disappointing performer for its price, as well as for its specifications. Reply
  • pullmyfoot - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    Hmm. I was expecting the 5770 to perform either at the 4890 levels or slightly slower at very least while running cooler and taking up less power. This is quite disappointing. I was all ready to get one to replace my 4850 if the price was right. I wonder how well they can tweak the drivers for this thing. Reply
  • yacoub - Tuesday, October 13, 2009 - link

    Same here, although I'd replace my 8800GT with it. I expected about 25% more performance, and about $10 less MSRP ($150). Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now