AMD’s Radeon HD 6670 & Radeon HD 6570: Two’s Company, Sub-$100’s A Crowd
by Ryan Smith on April 19, 2011 12:01 AM ESTCrysis: Warhead
Kicking things off as always is Crysis: Warhead, still one of the toughest games in our benchmark suite. Even three years since the release of the original Crysis, “but can it run Crysis?” is still an important question, and for three years the answer was “no.” Dual-GPU halo cards can now play it at Enthusiast settings at high resolutions, but for low-end cards even Mainstream/Medium quality is about the best that can be achieved.
It takes a 5770 to crack 30fps in Crysis at 1680x1050, so the fact that the 6670 is only a bit over 20fps isn’t a big surprise. As far as performance at 1680 is concerned Crysis is a good summary of what we’ll see: too slow for 1680, and well behind the next tier of cards represented by the GTS 450 and the Radeon HD 5770/5750. However the 6670 does have a notable advantage here: with 1GB of VRAM it handles 1680 much better than the 512MB 5670, even if it’s ultimately too slow to be playable at these specific settings.
So for the kind of high settings we like to test at, it’s 1280 that’s going to be playable on the 6670, 6570, and similar cards. Once we drop down to 1280 and Mainstream quality the 6670 can crack 60fps, and with a bit of fiddling it should be possible to increase the quality of a setting or two without significantly impacting performance. Overall the 6670 has a 10% lead over the 5670 it replaces, which is a reasonable outcome for a game that’s largely (but not completely) shader-bound.
As for the 6570, it’s well-entrenched near the top of the pack. At 95% of the performance of the 5670 it does quite well, and the next-fastest modern card is the GT 240 which is quite some distance off. Against the 5570 it has a 35% lead, thanks largely to the use of GDDR5 instead of DDR3.
We have also thrown in the 8800GT into our 1280 results, just to offer a different look at performance relative to NVIDIA’s retired champion. It’s a good reference point for where we’re at now, versus what a $300 card did 3 years ago; and once we get to power/temperature/noise testing how better process technology and smaller GPUs have improved those metrics.
Looking at the minimum framerates, the relative ranking of our cards remains unchanged. The 6670 cements its lead over the 5670 here at 1680 thanks to its 1GB of VRAM, while at 1280 the gap narrows significantly to 5%. Meanwhile the 6570 loses ground on the 5670, with the 5670 taking a 10% lead.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
Ryan Smith - Tuesday, April 19, 2011 - link
Our primary focus on reviews is for the North American market. I'm not sure about Europe and Asia, but in North America the 6450 does (did?) not go on sale in retail until today. It has been available to OEMs for a couple of months however.mino - Tuesday, April 19, 2011 - link
Even ignoring your global audience, if a card was available for MONTHS in the OEM channel, calling it "paper launch" is absurd.But; who pays, he gets. :(
AstroGuardian - Thursday, April 21, 2011 - link
Consider opening an European branch. Many of us do not agree with many things in the reviews.Targon - Tuesday, April 19, 2011 - link
If a game is CPU limited after that many years, that hints that the game is not multi-threaded by design. Both Intel and AMD have really been more focused on multi-core designs, rather than really pushing the performance of individual cores. Yes, there have been improvements, but it has not been the real focus of CPU development. AMD looks to be working on getting the core design improved to be more competitive with Intel, but that is pretty much it at this point. Going to a 32nm CPU design should also help.vavutsikarios - Tuesday, April 19, 2011 - link
I guess it's not really multithreaded, and even if it is, it definitely won't use more than 2 cores. Afterall, it's a 2005 game. But this is besides the point. The game is CPU limited because of its nature. It is not a design flaw or anything. To clarify: the CPU is the limiting factor not from a performance POV but from a gaming experience POV. After you do whatever you have to do you click the "end turn" button. Then you have to wait for the AI to make their move. This takes awhile. It was minutes, worst case, on the PC I had when I first played the game, it may be less than a minute on the 3GHz quadcore I use now. Still, in order to have smooth gameplay, I need this to become 100x faster.SlyNine1 - Wednesday, April 20, 2011 - link
Thats like saying ChessMaster is CPU limited. Or saying Every game out there is HDD/SDD limited. Yes you will have to wait for complexe operations, but it doesn't interfer with gameplay. Because of that its hard pressed to say its CPU limited, as It doesn't limit gameplay.vavutsikarios - Wednesday, April 20, 2011 - link
I understand what you re saying. The CPU speed, at these levels of CPU performance, doesnt interfere with the functions of the game, that is true. But it does affect the gaming experience. Imagine having to wait a couple of hours for the AI. Wouldnt that be really frustrating? More than that, wouldnt it render the game unplayable? The way you define gameplay, having to wait any amount of time doesnt matter. So, I guess, it is a matter of semantics, of definition of what gameplay is.In the broader sense, which, IMHO, is what matters, things like that are important. They directly affect the pleasures we make for ourselves in the precious little time we have. So, yes, obviously, Every Game out there is HDD Limited! -nice line that one :)
Btw: Chessmaster is not CPU limited, although it should be. It is not though, because having to wait for your opponent to move is part of the normal chess experience. Truth is, chessmaster moves way too fast sometimes, and sometimes it thinks a lot when what it has to do is obvious, but still.
AstroGuardian - Thursday, April 21, 2011 - link
+1fic2 - Tuesday, April 19, 2011 - link
CPU limited on an i7-2600k Sandy Bridge? Or CPU limited on the cpu you bought 6 years ago to play Heroes 5?vavutsikarios - Tuesday, April 19, 2011 - link
See my reply to Targon above. An i7-2600 Sandy would probably be a nice improvement over my phenom2, but still a long way from not being the limiting factor.