Radeon HD 6850 & 6870 reviews...

**Biker** · 10-21-2010, 04:51 PM

First full Radeon HD 6850 & 6870 review pushed live a bit early...

...and promptly taken down but first copied and mirrored here

Enjoy

EDIT:

onetreehill has posted links to all the other reviews here (post 32 in this thread

)

**Sly Fox** · 10-21-2010, 05:00 PM

Thank you sir.

**Movieman** · 10-21-2010, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by Biker

...and promptly taken down but first copied and mirrored here

Enjoy

Biker to the rescue..
God bless ya laddie!

**Metroid** · 10-21-2010, 05:07 PM

Google cache is also working.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...6870-review/23

**Biker** · 10-21-2010, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by Metroid

Google cache is also working.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...6870-review/23

**bamtan2** · 10-21-2010, 05:11 PM

big performance on a small chip means big price drops, and forcing nvidia to make big price drops too.

6870 and gtx 470 perform similarly for around $250. 6850 and gtx 460 perform similarly for around $200.

to catch up to 5870, they clocked 6870 as high as it will go. 6850 on the other hand has some overclock room left.

Both cards are <150W cards. these are very small, very inexpensive chips, so amd is making a lot more money here than nvidia. gtx 470 is a loser for nvidia right now. In a way you can consider it a steal that you can get such a huge chip for such a low price..

amd has out-executed nvidia so well this year it is tear-jerking.

**Biker** · 10-21-2010, 05:13 PM

... and here is the first full Crossfire review

**tbone8ty** · 10-21-2010, 05:13 PM

Dba and power efficiency are awesome!

6850 OC 900/4400

6870 OC 950/4344

but this is without voltage adjusted i guess

**safan80** · 10-21-2010, 05:14 PM

Yay!! now I don't have to wait for hours!!

**Jowy Atreides** · 10-21-2010, 05:18 PM

2 x 6850 power consumption - 393 watts (full system)
1 x GTX 470 power consumption - 411 watts

**Biker** · 10-21-2010, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides

2 x 6850 power consumption - 393 watts (full system)
1 x GTX 470 power consumption - 411 watts

In terms of power consumption ATI er AMD

was always ahead this round but that is a pretty killer stat you have pulled out right there

**kuroikenshi** · 10-21-2010, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides

2 x 6850 power consumption - 393 watts (full system)
1 x GTX 470 power consumption - 411 watts

AMD should think of chasing down abatements for reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions their products have in comparison to others... would be a powerful strategy

**Carfax** · 10-21-2010, 05:31 PM

The Crossfire performance is impressive! And it looks like AMD finally got around to adding a way to disable the texture optimizations in the control panel, just like Nvidia.

Cayman is going to be a monster!

**n!Cola** · 10-21-2010, 05:36 PM

wow, i am definitely getting one, thanx for links.

**hurleybird** · 10-21-2010, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by kuroikenshi

AMD should think of chasing down abatements for reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions their products have in comparison to others... would be a powerful strategy

I think most nerdy techie types are smart enough not to buy into the global warming scare though

Some great numbers on these new chips. Hopefully Cayman is 2x Barts and not 1.5x, that would be killer.

**Metroid** · 10-21-2010, 05:48 PM

The 6850 for only $179 is surprising. I thought it would end up $199. Great price / performance ratio.

**Mechromancer** · 10-21-2010, 05:51 PM

$249 and $189?! Wow AMD got the prices right this time. A couple of 6850s should get the job done for anybody at only $380.

**villa1n** · 10-21-2010, 05:57 PM

I wonder how the scaling will be in trifire. This is impressive as I think it out performs the 5870 across the board at 1080p.

And these temps etc.. are just reference cooling too... which actually might be enough this time around ^^

**trn** · 10-21-2010, 05:57 PM

Crossfire and Eyefinity testing is missing

**labs23** · 10-21-2010, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by Metroid

The 6850 for only $179 is surprising. I thought it would end up $199. Great price / performance ratio.

But w/ no Physx...

I'm kiddin.
Its better to see lower prices from the start/release since price-cuts virtually have a slight-to-no effect here in my place.

**BeepBeep2** · 10-21-2010, 06:13 PM

I'm definately not liking the 6870 OC... 900 to 954? My 5770's do 955 core at 1.14v...

5850 @ $255:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-500-_-Product

6870 @ $240:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-909-_-Product

Since the 6870 @ 900 Mhz is slightly faster than the 5850 @ 725 Mhz (but not as fast as the 5870) , wouldn't a 5850 @ 1000 just blow the 6870 out of the water?

Yes, yes, I know power consumption would be higher.

Originally Posted by villa1n

I wonder how the scaling will be in trifire. This is impressive as I think it out performs the 5870 across the board at 1080p.

And these temps etc.. are just reference cooling too... which actually might be enough this time around ^^

It won't exist because there is only one crossfire bridge. (Just using common sense, feel free to correct me.)

Originally Posted by trn

Crossfire and Eyefinity testing is missing

It's in another review and it's also already been posted in this very thread?

**labs23** · 10-21-2010, 06:20 PM

It seems those reviews are officially back now.

**~CS~** · 10-21-2010, 06:27 PM

http://www.pconline.com.cn/images/ht...bnamecode=home

This suggests that load voltage is 1.172v,which is very low.

AMD went with different VRM's Chill instead of Volterra,software like MSI afterburner just needs an update to support the new voltage controller,after which am sure these will do 1GHz and more.

Reviewers should have just edited the I2C values with a quick bios mod,I know I would have

**Chrono Detector** · 10-21-2010, 06:32 PM

Just checked the Guru3d review, was expected, the 6850/6870 is indeed a little slower than the 5850/5870 but its faster in Far Cry 2.

Decent enough, just wish ATI/AMD didn't mess up the naming scheme. Should have kept the 6750/6770 name instead would make more sense.