Radeon HD 6850 & 6870 reviews...

[SKYMTL]

Can SKYMTL confirm or burry this please?

The Sapphire card in question uses a custom BIOS that is tailored for their cards' fan speed profiles, etc. You may also notice their "HD 6850" sported a 900 MHz hot clock as well. To me, this seems to be a manufacturing error on their part. Whether or not it was fixed for actual retail card rollouts has yet to be seen....

The HIS card is a question mark since for all intents and purposes it is based off of the reference design I believe. I had a friend send me a dumped BIOS from one of his samples and I failed to "unlock" any of my HD 6850 samples.

Both of my HD 6850 cards have the reference speeds and SP counts.

[Manicdan]

i threw together a few numbers which have perf/price, but price includes electricity costs. basically for every watt i add 15c per year, and i plan to keep the card for 1.5 years. a 6850 stock would be 32$, and a 470OC would be 67$. so in the end its looking quite interesting. these new 6800s have a better total price to perf ratio at stock, thats better than 5850s and 470s when overclocked.

when all things are maxed out, these can edge out the 460 when OCed in total cost to perf aswell. but its very close. a 460 is an incredible deal for people who plan to OC, and looks like it would have won if the energy cost wasnt holding it back just that hair. all in all, both options are great. and its about damn time 2010 became a worthwhile option for so many of us who were unhappy for the first half of the year.

[Vardant]

techPowerUp!, ComputerBase.de and... what were the other two sites?

www.extrahardware.cz and www.diit.cz

[Dimitriman]

The Sapphire card in question uses a custom BIOS that is tailored for their cards' fan speed profiles, etc. You may also notice their "HD 6850" sported a 900 MHz hot clock as well. To me, this seems to be a manufacturing error on their part. Whether or not it was fixed for actual retail card rollouts has yet to be seen....

The HIS card is a question mark since for all intents and purposes it is based off of the reference design I believe. I had a friend send me a dumped BIOS from one of his samples and I failed to "unlock" any of my HD 6850 samples.

Both of my HD 6850 cards have the reference speeds and SP counts.

thank you for the reply mate at least we know the performance of 6850 is not inflated and it is indeed as good as the gtx460 1gb stock.

[damha]

DilTech might have a point in that the only great difference between this and the competition is power consumption.

It's blah for the XS crowd, but AMD needed a 460gtx contender. Bart isn't a big deal to people who wipe their butts clean with dollar bills. For gamers on a budget,casual gamers and AMD, Bart is a plus in their books no matter how you slice it. Well.. it might not be all joy and sunshine for AMD because it will undercut 5770, 5850 and 5870 sales. But those cards have been out forever and stale inventory is always a concern with a new product. If AMD handled the release correctly it might not harm sales at all. 5870/5970s are the only cards that will be available until Caymann arrives and 5770/5850 should be EOL by now.

The only group negatively impacted by the release of Bart is nvidia & co.

[RSC]

www.extrahardware.cz and www.diit.cz

I wonder how many more are out there...

[DilTech]

U don't see too clearly...

Before this release, u couldn't have this type of performance for $179 bucks.

I see very clearly... Pretty much every other generation we've seen a mid-range that matched the year before's TOP card... Now we get one that saves you $20? I got my 800 mhz palit gtx 460 for about the same price here, and it performs pretty much equally to what we see out of the 6870, which is more expensive...

What am I missing here?

I just fail to see how one can be so praising of AMD on this one... Some are the same ones who blasted the GTX 460 when it released when it pulled off the matching(and exceeding) of last generation's high end. So someone fails to keep up with the norm and it's suddenly impressive?

As for the "1120" shader issue on some of the reviews, I'm not too surprised. I'm just glad it's a small scale issue and not like what we saw with the x800 launch(for those who are forgetful, in that launch ATi sent every reviewer different clocked cards, to figure out what clockspeed they needed to compete with the 6800).

[Manicdan]

didnt you also see the 400s have worse efficiency than the 200s in practically every way for gaming? its only because they were on a new node that it was better than before. if they shrunk the 200 series onto 40nm it would have been like a 460 from the start, without the same yield issues, and 6 months earlier.

an architecture change that offers a atlesat 20% better perf per mm2, and 10-20% better perf per watt, is a very good upgrade. you seem to be stuck on the naming or the price, both of which have zero to do with the architecture and everything to do with simple management choices set for certain reasons they decided on.

[donitsi]

Performance, 6870 = 470 but 470 can be 50% overclocked.

You can also get 6850 CF with ~ 470 power consumption

[RaZz!]

6850 & 6870 are great and all, but what really matters is... ANY NEWS ON CAYMAN YET?

a 6970 for <=400€ would be great!

[DilTech]

didnt you also see the 400s have worse efficiency than the 200s in practically every way for gaming? its only because they were on a new node that it was better than before. if they shrunk the 200 series onto 40nm it would have been like a 460 from the start, without the same yield issues, and 6 months earlier.

an architecture change that offers a atlesat 20% better perf per mm2, and 10-20% better perf per watt, is a very good upgrade. you seem to be stuck on the naming or the price, both of which have zero to do with the architecture and everything to do with simple management choices set for certain reasons they decided on.

.... the gtx 460 1gb used less power than even the GTX 260. It actually uses less than the radeon 4850(and doubles it easily in performance a lot of the time). The GTX 470 and 480's issue had nothing to do with what it can do for gaming and everything to do with the amount of transistors they had to add for those workstation type improvements. That's why the GTX 460 does what it does, they took those changes out of it.

This is exactly my point. We have practically always seen a scenario where a current gen high end is matched by a next-gen mid-range. This is one of the VERY few times that hasn't been the case, THIS is why I'm not impressed. No arguing about power consumption, or "oh it's a smaller die on the same node" is going to matter to me one bit, because in the end they sacrificed performance to make that happen.

Now, does anyone have something logical to add to this discussion?

[Manicdan]

.... the gtx 460 1gb used less power than even the GTX 260. It actually uses less than the radeon 4850(and doubles them easily it performance a lot of the time). The GTX 470 and 480's issue had nothing to do with what it can do for gaming and everything to do with the amount of transistors they had to add for those workstation type improvements. That's why the GTX 460 does what it does, they took those changes out of it.

Now, does anyone have something logical to add to this discussion?

the launch date of the 460 is much closer to the 6800s than the 5800s, which do you think its really competing with?

i see your edit:

This is exactly my point. We have practically always seen a scenario where a current gen high end is matched by a next-gen mid-range. This is one of the VERY few times that hasn't been the case, THIS is why I'm not impressed. No arguing about power consumption, or "oh it's a smaller die on the same node" is going to matter to me one bit, because in the end they sacrificed performance to make that happen.

there are ONLY 2 things which really let you get double the perf with every new release. architecture and process.

the 4870 to 5870 was 2 fold increase because it got 50% smaller from process changes, 0% from architecture, and is much bigger.
was the 9800 twice as fast as the 8800? how about 3870 vs 2900,

you just need to stop worring about the simple naming convention and be happy with the price to perf changes that gradually change across time. what was the biggest jump you ever saw?

[AffenJack]

www.extrahardware.cz and www.diit.cz

Then it's at least six websites:
techPowerUp!, ComputerBase.de , HardTecs4u.de, pcgameshardware.de and your two.
But i think they're all Sapphire Cards beside the HIS card from techpowerup!

[DilTech]

the launch date of the 460 is much closer to the 6800s than the 5800s, which do you think its really competing with?

i see your edit:


there are ONLY 2 things which really let you get double the perf with every new release. architecture and process.

the 4870 to 5870 was 2 fold increase because it got 50% smaller from process changes, 0% from architecture, and is much bigger.
was the 9800 twice as fast as the 8800? how about 3870 vs 2900,

you just need to stop worring about the simple naming convention and be happy with the price to perf changes that gradually change across time. what was the biggest jump you ever saw?

I guess someone forgot the R580, which was on the same process as the R520 but had 3x the shader power... No die shrink needed, it just came out the gates swinging.

Biggest jump in recent memory, i think we'll ALL agree on, was the 8800GTX hands down. Ironically enough, that was the last time I bought a high-end card too... go figure. The following year, we had a $200 card(the 8800GT) that was pretty close to it performance wise, and they were both from the same series.

The 2900 to 3870 most of us all knew was a sham. AMD wanted to, as quickly as possible, get away from the HD 29xx name because everyone related it to bad performance. NVidia then had to follow suit with the 98xx because because people will automatically think "oh look, new series of cards, it has to be better than the last series". I will tell you this much, I didn't buy anything from either series that "generation"(which, lets be real here, was NOT a new generation), but it WAS a situation that was initially forced by AMD.

The key issue with the name is, they're actually trying to swindle customers(much like NVidia did with renaming the G92 or going further back ATi did with the x600 that was really a 9 series card) by changing up the name scheme. I mean, it's not like it's a bad card per-say, but in comparison to the cards that THEY named them to be the successor(going by their OWN names, quit telling me about cayman, tell AMD that), there's no excuse for performance lower than that point. If it's such a smaller die in comparison, they should've used some of that die space to incorporate enough shaders TO over-come last gen.

It's like we're always reminded... We are the minority, the well informed hard-ware buyer. If you knew how many people buy on name alone you'd probably laugh yourself to tears, then cry yourself to sleep from laughing so hard. As such, I do see things like this as a big deal(much like I didn't like the renaming of the G92, but at least it's performance never got WORSE) because it's mis-leading to the population... Do you have any idea how many people there are who constantly buy the next generation cards without knowing anything about them?

They're going to see that the 6870 is out, know they have a 5870 in their computer because that's what their buddy told them when he built it from them, and think this card is an upgrade... Man will he be in for a surprise, no?

Of course, I'm sure someone will come up with a good excuse for that situation too, no?

[Manicdan]

we already had the argument for the naming from a dozen other pages of posts in half a dozen other threads.
a few things are already in question, first is xfire compatibility, a 6700 is only compatible with 6700s. the only exception is the duel gpu cards which were given the name 5970, before then was the 3870x2, 4850x2, 4870x2. so duel gpu cars usually went into the same group, and it seems the 6990 is trying to do that again. SO if the top end cards are all called 6900s, 6800 is a perfect place for the gpu right below it. no need to skip that one completely simply because perf numbers dont match perfectly with the old generation.

theres also the question about chip size, that all things under the x800 were between certain sizes, and anything above that was a x900, and everything below that was an x700.

or theres power consumption ranges which is the same idea as chip size

in the end any buyer who goes out and buys a 200+$ gpu, a year after they just bought a 400$ gpu, deserves to a slap in the face if they dont spend a few seconds to research it. they have family or friends to help, or they can simply google it.

would people get mad is the 2011 model had less torque than the 2010 model? but had better MPG and more room and the same horsepower.

to summarize. since the reason for the name choice is unknown, picking the worse case scenario and acting like its a fact is probably just not very nice. there is no proof to back up any of the ideas, so just be happy with conspiracy, and no need to feel threatened or inferior (not saying you are)

[Calmatory]

It's like we're always reminded... We are the minority, the well informed hard-ware buyer. If you knew how many people buy on name alone you'd probably laugh yourself to tears, then cry yourself to sleep from laughing so hard.

Discrete cards. 'Nuff said.

People who buy discrete graphics cards and install them themselves... Either way, GJ AMD for delivering yet another solid product during these hard times. Nvidia can't keep up.

[DilTech]

we already had the argument for the naming from a dozen other pages of posts in half a dozen other threads.
a few things are already in question, first is xfire compatibility, a 6700 is only compatible with 6700s. the only exception is the duel gpu cards which were given the name 5970, before then was the 3870x2, 4850x2, 4870x2. so duel gpu cars usually went into the same group, and it seems the 6990 is trying to do that again. SO if the top end cards are all called 6900s, 6800 is a perfect place for the gpu right below it. no need to skip that one completely simply because perf numbers dont match perfectly with the old generation.

theres also the question about chip size, that all things under the x800 were between certain sizes, and anything above that was a x900, and everything below that was an x700.

or theres power consumption ranges which is the same idea as chip size

in the end any buyer who goes out and buys a 200+$ gpu, a year after they just bought a 400$ gpu, deserves to a slap in the face if they dont spend a few seconds to research it. they have family or friends to help, or they can simply google it.

would people get mad is the 2011 model had less torque than the 2010 model? but had better MPG and more room and the same horsepower.

to summarize. since the reason for the name choice is unknown, picking the worse case scenario and acting like its a fact is probably just not very nice. there is no proof to back up any of the ideas, so just be happy with conspiracy, and no need to feel threatened or inferior (not saying you are)

I'd be mad if I bought the 2011 model for torque, but of course gas milage adds up to a lot more money per year than electricity in my area, where adding roughly less than a standard lightbulb in power draw means pretty much nothing in terms of money spent per year. As such, it's not quite as relevant as it may have seemed when typing it out. Good idea for an analogy, but a bit on the extreme side.

The name thing ticks me off because I am that "friend" you mentioned that these guys who don't research it themselves call on to do the job. I was hoping for a clear cut card to advise anyone who has me build them a new christmas PC(I get a lot of these people, trust me), and now I can't say there is one. I've already had 2 people ask me(they were shopping together) "hey, I saw ATi's new cards when I was at microcenter buying ink cartridges, should I buy one for you to put in my system, and then I get to explain to them that the 6870 is slower than their 5870 and they say "what's the *#%$ point?".

Either way, I say you and I just agree to disagree. We clearly won't see eye to eye on this, and the more it drags on the more it's just going to make it seem like we're "overly enthusiastic" about the side of the argument we're on.

[Dimitriman]

As I always said there will MAYBE be 30 days of confusion.
6970>6870 = 350$ vs 250$
My 85 year old grandma can tell which is faster and which is better than my previous 350$ card.
I guess some people need SOMETHING to criticise.

[Manicdan]

my trick is to tell people to simma down and wait a few months. theres ALWAYS a reason to wait a few months, even if its better prices. if they cant, it better be for a good reason.

[Nikolasz]

Discrete cards. 'Nuff said.

People who buy discrete graphics cards and install them themselves... Either way, GJ AMD for delivering yet another solid product during these hard times. Nvidia can't keep up.

I dont think "nvidia cant keep up"..
Why make gpu and spend milions to dev one chip for such small performance gains.
Price drop was smart strategic move.

We here dont talk like: old cyrix686 cpu vs celeron300(huge diference)

We talk abaut same fps graphics nvidia vs ati wery small diference (same score)

[DilTech]

my trick is to tell people to simma down and wait a few months. theres ALWAYS a reason to wait a few months, even if its better prices. if they cant, it better be for a good reason.

Now THIS we can agree on.

I'm one of the biggest "sit and wait" advocates on this site, but we all have friends who just have to have the newest toys.

Only reason I got my GTX 460 was because someone wanted my 4850(to crossfire with his) and made me an offer I could refuse, and I got it for a STEAL. Reason I had the 4850? Someone wanted to buy my 8800GTX to SLi it, and I actually made money on that deal. If it wasn't for these occurrences I'd still happily be using my old 8800GTX. I'd have liked these cards to be beasts, if for nothing else, because someone wants me to build them a system with a 460 1 GB wants to buy mine, and it would've been a solid chance for a free upgrade.

None the less, looking forward to Cayman(whatever AMD decide to name it, I'm done speculating that) and seeing what it brings to the table. If they price it right and release it before I build that PC, it may still end up in my system.

Discrete cards. 'Nuff said.

People who buy discrete graphics cards and install them themselves... Either way, GJ AMD for delivering yet another solid product during these hard times. Nvidia can't keep up.

A lot of people actually do buy a card at best buy and have them install it there... Yes, there ARE people that are that computer illiterate. I remember when my buddy chris bought a radeon 9800pro over the x800pro because "the number was higher". Luckily, he brought it to me to install, and I MADE him take it back.

[grimREEFER]

the naming actually makes sense if you look at performance per watt...however, most gamers just look at performance.
same deal with 9800gtx vs 8800gtx

[Manicdan]

i might have to ebay my 4850xfire when caymen comes out. my new case is good for one card, and one big card only, so its time to indulge. and a 4850 is still a very worthwhile card, even if i get just 50$ for each.

[Dimitriman]

I'm not really pulling for either side to win I like draws when it comes to hardware. So I agree as well that wait and see can work very well in ones favor. Nobody with a 48xx and above or 27x and above needs to buy anything till Christmas time where they will get to make the best possible purchase decision.

[damha]

I'm not really pulling for either side to win I like draws when it comes to hardware. So I agree as well that wait and see can work very well in ones favor. Nobody with a 48xx and above or 27x and above needs to buy anything till Christmas time where they will get to make the best possible purchase decision.

You do realize prices go up holiday season.. I'd wait until boxing day