HD5970 Reviews

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-19-2009, 01:48 AM
kadozer

Quote:

Originally Posted by D749

It's all the same when you rip off the heatsink and put it under water. :shrug:

nope, these are supposedly higher bin chips... if they allow easier to get 1000/1500 sound good? But thanks for pointing out the other obvious asthetics didnt realize that one.
11-19-2009, 01:51 AM
D749

Quote:

Originally Posted by kadozer

nope, these are supposedly higher bin chips... if they allow easier to get 1000/1500 sound good? But thanks for pointing out the other obvious asthetics didnt realize that one.

You're welcome. Where did you read that they will "supposedly" use higher binned chips?
11-19-2009, 01:53 AM
W1zzard

Quote:

Originally Posted by kadozer

http://filesmelt.com/downloader/ATrH..._medBEcopy.jpg

What a nice looking card.

you really like that sticker design?

Quote:

Originally Posted by D749

You're welcome. Where did you read that they will "supposedly" use higher binned chips?

amd stated they used chips binned for leakage voltage, not higher clock

oh and i fixed the crysis scores in my review. it ran at high, not very high
11-19-2009, 01:54 AM
jaredpace

Quote:

Originally Posted by D749

You're welcome. Where did you read that they will "supposedly" use higher binned chips?

FF to 12:30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhTb2DRPUoI
11-19-2009, 02:01 AM
D749

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredpace

FF to 12:30

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhTb2DRPUoI

Quote:

Originally Posted by W1zzard

you really like that sticker design?

amd stated they used chips binned for leakage voltage, not higher clock

oh and i fixed the crysis scores in my review. it ran at high, not very high

Good link, thanks. I was referring to the fact that all the current 5970s are the same once you rip off the heatsink - they're all reference designs as far as I'm aware. Kadozer seemed to imply that the XFX used higher binned chips. I doubted this and thus ask for more information. ;)
11-19-2009, 02:05 AM
W1zzard

all 5970 cards are the same, came from the same factory, only changes are the sticker and possibly very light changes to the bios (subvendor id, minor clock changes). in a conference call, amd said they dont expect/allow pcb changes until q2 2010
11-19-2009, 02:27 AM
jaredpace

oh yeah. You're right the "black edition" is the same as all the other 5970's. I pointed you at that video because i thought you were asking about the gpus inside a 5800 vs. 5900 card.
11-19-2009, 02:49 AM
kadozer

Quote:

Originally Posted by D749

Good link, thanks. I was referring to the fact that all the current 5970s are the same once you rip off the heatsink - they're all reference designs as far as I'm aware. Kadozer seemed to imply that the XFX used higher binned chips. I doubted this and thus ask for more information. ;)

The assumption is that its similar to Sapphire Toxic series, but since XFX doesn't official state it I can't confirm. Which is what people point out as the justification for the higher price tag vs other vendors. ie less voltage better required, better power components..I guess will have to wait for 1 of the review sites to get their hands on it. All the speeds are ref however.

Quote:

Originally Posted by W1zzard

all 5970 cards are the same, came from the same factory, only changes are the sticker and possibly very light changes to the bios (subvendor id, minor clock changes). in a conference call, amd said they dont expect/allow pcb changes until q2 2010

Thanks for the Crysis confirmation btw. :up:
11-19-2009, 03:01 AM
initialised

Any word on waterblock/pre-blocked availability?
11-19-2009, 03:32 AM
naokaji

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piotrsama

VAT is adding to that price. 70£... ouch.

Even before vat it is still 768$, msrp is 600$, which is 360£, so the shops are trying to con you out of 100£+, that has to be some new negative record.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan7777

anthor place in the uk that have 5 in stock wow! big price difference £573....http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/p...IHD5900Series/

957$...
:shakes:

We need a price war, nvidia where are you?
11-19-2009, 04:24 AM
Chrono Detector

Its a bit disappointed ATI had to downclock the card due to heat or power issues, if you want the extra FPS then Crossfired 5870's is the way to go. I hope ATI will release a 5890 because I'm interested in that the most.
11-19-2009, 04:44 AM
kadozer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

Its a bit disappointed ATI had to downclock the card due to heat or power issues, if you want the extra FPS then Crossfired 5870's is the way to go. I hope ATI will release a 5890 because I'm interested in that the most.

Not really as many others already showed its not hard to overclock higher than ref 5870 speeds.
11-19-2009, 04:48 AM
rouvio

wonder why they really did that if the card can easily go over 900MHz.
I mean.. this card is intended for the hardcore gamers.. right?

I think that a person spending over 600$ for a GPU has enough airflow in his/her computer case to compensate for the heat generated by the "extra" few MHz's..
11-19-2009, 04:53 AM
kadozer

Quote:

Originally Posted by rouvio

wonder why they really did that if the card can easily go over 900MHz.
I mean.. this card is intended for the hardcore gamers.. right?

I think that a person spending over 600$ for a GPU has enough airflow in his/her computer case to compensate for the heat generated by the "extra" few MHz's..

Directly from horse's mouth "ATI was adamant that OEMs didn’t play the deciding role this time around. While OEMs feelings regarding a 300W+ board certainly were a concern, ATI says the primary reason why they decided not to opt for the full 5870 speeds and feeds for the 5970 was they wanted to maintain compatibility with the existing power supply infrastructure.

Quite simply, ATI didn’t want users to potentially have to upgrade their PSU (power supply unit) just to run the 5970. They wanted the card to be compatible with as wide a variety of PSUs as possible. Therefore in order to make the card work with as wide a variety of PSUs as possible, while still retaining as much of the 5870’s performance, ATI opted to deliver a card with the full 1600 shaders as the 5870, but with the 5850’s clock speeds.
"

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...view/page2.asp

Their nice way of saying : We gotta account for the noobs out there with crappy psu's trying to run this.
11-19-2009, 04:54 AM
Shadov

Quote:

Originally Posted by naokaji

We need a price war, nvidia where are you?

You are talking as if a price war would fix availiability issues caused by TSMC? Get real... :shakes:
11-19-2009, 04:56 AM
Tuvok-LuR-

Quote:

Originally Posted by rouvio

wonder why they really did that if the card can easily go over 900MHz.
I mean.. this card is intended for the hardcore gamers.. right?

I think that a person spending over 600$ for a GPU has enough airflow in his/her computer case to compensate for the heat generated by the "extra" few MHz's..

maybe the want to leave more room for a 5990 in first half of 2010
11-19-2009, 06:03 AM
Manicdan

Quote:

Originally Posted by kadozer

Directly from horse's mouth "ATI was adamant that OEMs didn’t play the deciding role this time around. While OEMs feelings regarding a 300W+ board certainly were a concern, ATI says the primary reason why they decided not to opt for the full 5870 speeds and feeds for the 5970 was they wanted to maintain compatibility with the existing power supply infrastructure.

Quite simply, ATI didn’t want users to potentially have to upgrade their PSU (power supply unit) just to run the 5970. They wanted the card to be compatible with as wide a variety of PSUs as possible. Therefore in order to make the card work with as wide a variety of PSUs as possible, while still retaining as much of the 5870’s performance, ATI opted to deliver a card with the full 1600 shaders as the 5870, but with the 5850’s clock speeds.
"

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...view/page2.asp

Their nice way of saying : We gotta account for the noobs out there with crappy psu's trying to run this.

i would hope to see an overdrive checkbox that automatically overclocks it back to 5870 speeds. make it an idiot proof 15% bonus
11-19-2009, 06:57 AM
grimeleven

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan7777

should fit in me HAF 932 shouldnt it ?

I measured my HAF932, it should fit, there is a 14 inch gap to the first x16 slot, once installed it shall be 1 inch apart the HDD bays plate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kadozer

Quite simply, ATI didn’t want users to potentially have to upgrade their PSU (power supply unit) just to run the 5970. They wanted the card to be compatible with as wide a variety of PSUs as possible. Therefore in order to make the card work with as wide a variety of PSUs as possible, while still retaining as much of the 5870’s performance, ATI opted to deliver a card with the full 1600 shaders as the 5870, but with the 5850’s clock speeds.

Yeah i fully understand them, smart move support wise... but that 300W limit spec needs to be raised now :) if possible.
11-19-2009, 07:18 AM
trinibwoy

When did we switch from complaining about high power consumption to complaining about not-high-enough power consumption? :ROTF:
11-19-2009, 07:40 AM
bigdaddy25fb

I don't understand why A*TI*MD would lower the speed just for users who don't have a beefy enough PSU? Yes it's to reach a wider customer base, but hasn't it been said time and time again that the high end cards aren't the money makers? If I'm going to buy a $600 graphics card I'm going to make sure that my PSU can handle it. Just doesn't make sense to me...
11-19-2009, 07:47 AM
trinibwoy

Because not every gamer is a PSU or hardware enthusiast.

Computerbase is up - http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/h...formancerating
11-19-2009, 08:01 AM
Earzz

Well i dont get it, they are worrying about the PSU limitations for some users but they forgot about that the card wont fit in a lot of cases :shrug:
11-19-2009, 08:21 AM
grimeleven

Like reviewers said, they just couldn't release a card that wasn't compliant with the PCI-e spec. http://www.pcisig.com/news_room/faqs/pcie2.0_faq/

*Edit* err it's 2.1 http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=c....1&hl=en&gl=uk
11-19-2009, 08:50 AM
Manicdan

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigdaddy25fb

I don't understand why A*TI*MD would lower the speed just for users who don't have a beefy enough PSU? Yes it's to reach a wider customer base, but hasn't it been said time and time again that the high end cards aren't the money makers? If I'm going to buy a $600 graphics card I'm going to make sure that my PSU can handle it. Just doesn't make sense to me...

this also gives them an opportunity to release one or two exclusive cards that are real monsters, and dont obey the laws of PCIe (kinda like the MARS, except that somehow got approved)
11-19-2009, 09:23 AM
Nedjo

remember 4890? It was capable of reaching higher clocks, but ATI didn't go as high as possible to make room for partners to differentiate with overclocked cards...

option to differentiate is appealing to the partners, and it makes them want to put additional effort around these kind of products... and that helps if you have product in highend, high price market...

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page