About all the comments here - as I wrote, it should be an OC-d core i7 cpu. Why I suggested it is that so you could get the best possible reflection on what the card is actually capable of. Coupled with highest settings, lots of AA etc, I believe your conclusion could be different.
While I also know, that bit has very accurate review information always, so I do not have any grudge there :) Just maybe, a card like this could use a review that would explore the limits of what it' can and can not take - crysis on 'high' does not seem to be it's limit :)
Originally Posted by Evildead666 The GPU takes care of all the memory accesses with its driver or onboard hardware.
Try a 4Gb Tesla card in WinXP. It will still have 4Gb or Video Ram...its not OS dependant.
Originally Posted by Kris About all the comments here - as I wrote, it should be an OC-d core i7 cpu. Why I suggested it is that so you could get the best possible reflection on what the card is actually capable of. Coupled with highest settings, lots of AA etc, I believe your conclusion could be different.
While I also know, that bit has very accurate review information always, so I do not have any grudge there :) Just maybe, a card like this could use a review that would explore the limits of what it' can and can not take - crysis on 'high' does not seem to be it's limit :)
I don't know, it's hard to get over the £520 asking price frankly, regardless of what CPU we used. At US price (~£360) plus VAT, it should be £420, maybe £430 max. It needs to do a lot more than just perform in games to actually represent value for money at £520. I'd like it to make cups of tea for me as well at that price.
They were launched at 3pm the day before. It was physically impossible to use them, despite the fact we only had the card for two days anyway. If ATI had got us them before public release, then of course we would have used them.
Really? wow Im not even a major review site but I got the drivers early, same goes for a few other sites, if I was you guys I would contact Terry aka Catalyst Maker so that you guys can get the most recent drivers for when you test and what not.
Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan I do not even want those ultra high end dual GPU cards. Tell me how much gain in price/performance/value/etc. have in all the games you played against a mainstream card. I have played Crysis almost two years ago on my then new 8800GT. Do I want to play it again, hell no. Do I need such a high end card to play my online games like L4D. Nope. 8800GT doing fine on 1680 res.
I do notice however that with recent released games that my system is getting old (still on a 4800+ s939 socket). However the new games are playable. I rather see a review with the new 'mainstream' graphics cards on 'older' hardware configurations and see how the performance is holding up. Because most people buying a new card for their excising systems. How do these new cards perform on lets say a two year old system? If you want realistic real world benchmarking then that would be it.
"I do not even want those ultra high end dual GPU cards" thankfully, your not in charge at Array technologies Incorporated....
Scores reflect performance and pricing at time of launch. Simple as that.
Well, the thing is they don't reflect 'at time of launch' because outdated drivers were used, and coincidentally there are driver issues with the card.
Originally Posted by HourBeforeDawn Really? wow Im not even a major review site but I got the drivers early, same goes for a few other sites, if I was you guys I would contact Terry aka Catalyst Maker so that you guys can get the most recent drivers for when you test and what not.
Unfortunately, despite our best efforts and consistent asking, AMD does not afford us this luxury.
The European team we have to deal with is, to put it nicely, "overstretched". If they supply us with a card and don't tell us drivers are dropping hours before launch, how are we to know? Telepathy?
Originally Posted by batfink Yes, telepathy. Is that too much to ask from a professional e-publication in this day and age?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bede Crystal balls have existed before the dawn of binary, why dont you just use one of them if telepathy is too hard?
Quote:
@paisa666 and UncertainGod
Surely it's harder to trust the magazines/websites which routinely give games 90%+ reviews, and never score a game less than 70%. On the odd occasion a game gets a slagging, it's a novelty title reviewed only to show how impressively derogatory and witty the reviewer can be.
.
.
.
And, let's be honest, a game and a piece of hardware could not be more different. One is designed to entertain, one is designed to carry out a function. Reviewing hardware simply requires you to review the available data. Reviewing a game requires you to make a personal decision as to whether the game succeeds or fails, and is thus inevitably more complex and open to interpretation than a review of a hard disk.
remember that batfink? Requardless of drivers provided, Bit-tech when on nubers THEY OBTAINED!! The next drivers arn't gonna suddenly magic every problem out of exsistance. At most 10fps which I doubt will make a huge difference and wanna know why? I doubt you will even get the card. The only people who get cards on launch are people who want the best no matter what. If anything bit-tech highlighted the potential problems with the card rather than trying to polish a turd. At least be greatful for that.
Remember, not everything is 100% all over the world, different cards will perform differently, within a certain margin. Bit-tech test differently from some review sites, not happy? **** OFF!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonedsurd I have to agree with two things that have been stated in this thread.
1. The CPU needs much more juice
2. It's a little odd that BT is getting 10-30% lower scores for fps as compared to almost every other site out there.
Most likely 1 and 2 are related. Maybe a faster processor would be nice, but it does highlight that you will need a hell of a fast clock to run it. Think its time to start looking where and when cpu bottlenecks occur with each card.
most other sites have the i7 clocked at 3.7Ghz (bit tech is at 3.2Ghz) for the 10-30% Drift
i got an 3x9800GX2 setup (6 video cards) thats running XP32 and it has 1.5GB of usable ram, not sure what an 5970 would use thought (most likely be 3gb or 2.5gb usable under 32bit, Moot point as you be running windows 7 x64 (maybe vista) with 4-6gb of ram any way if you can afford an 5970 i guess your not going to be using an out of date OS now)
how many people will actually buy this card on this site
id guess 0
so rather irelivent
id also agree about the comments above. £520 for one card no matter how good it performs. Is simply inconcievable amount of money for a graphics card. You can build a whole pc for £400 that will play games that are released now
The people who buy this will own a intel extreme cpu chip so the i920 is rather irelivent. If your willing to spend £1000 on your cpu and £520 on your graphics card. Your in a planet 99% of this community cant afford to be in
After seeing this review I had to join the site. I've been reading reviews on this site for about a year now, and i'm sorry to say but this review was trash!
This is for the staff and all the comments who think this review was accurate and on point.
Originally Posted by Makaveli After seeing this review I had to join the site. I've been reading reviews on this site for about a year now, and i'm sorry to say but this review was trash!
This is for the staff and all the comments who think this review was accurate and on point.
careful they are sensitive about their reviews and although they will argue the way they test and blah blah when so many other review sites get consistent numbers and then when you throw their numbers on to the graph, BT are way outside of "norm" you have to wonder whats up but ehh thats just me.
Like many of you i've been reading reviews for quite sometime, so it not uncommon to see reviews like this where the numbers are way off. However anyone that is a first time reader to the site and doesn't read multiple reviews for a product will be put off by this one.
Very nice magazine Custom Pc, i do buy it often but with this review of 5970 and previews reviews on graph. cards its very very obvious their favourites are Nvidia cards. Its ok by me but when talking about prices between the 2 companies...i mean come on!!! is it Nvidia? Noo...whatever nvidia throws is always...(99%) better!!! I have now in my system BFG GTS250 OC so i hope im not biased,thank you.
I could have sworn I read a review a few days back that said this card will melt your face off..... all the other respected sites also vouch for this, so now I come back to see some updates to find that it is under performing... what gives can somone explain ( I am certain that there was a rave review here)
Originally Posted by mibas Very nice magazine Custom Pc, i do buy it often but with this review of 5970 and previews reviews on graph. cards its very very obvious their favourites are Nvidia cards. Its ok by me but when talking about prices between the 2 companies...i mean come on!!! is it Nvidia? Noo...whatever nvidia throws is always...(99%) better!!! I have now in my system BFG GTS250 OC so i hope im not biased,thank you.
Are you suggesting that CPC/Bit-tech are manipulating the figures? What I think it might be is that same old story - AMD bring out a new card that looks great on paper, yet the drivers are in a mess and the games used to test the cards run better on Nvidia hardware because TWIMTBP team have worked with the developers on making things run smoothly. A £500+ card that performs no better than a single 5870 is a waste of time.
You can have the most powerful car in the world, but if you are using ox cart wheels, it is all for nothing.
Originally Posted by Knowledge78 I could have sworn I read a review a few days back that said this card will melt your face off..... all the other respected sites also vouch for this, so now I come back to see some updates to find that it is under performing... what gives can somone explain ( I am certain that there was a rave review here)
Originally Posted by Knowledge78 I could have sworn I read a review a few days back that said this card will melt your face off..... all the other respected sites also vouch for this, so now I come back to see some updates to find that it is under performing... what gives can somone explain ( I am certain that there was a rave review here)
drivers, CPU bottlenecks
so which drivers were they using originaly ? are the new drivers inferior to the original ones the usedd ? and where they using an ingerior cpu on this round of testing compared to the original article or to all the other review sites ?
Comments 101 to 125 of 125
ReplyWhile I also know, that bit has very accurate review information always, so I do not have any grudge there :) Just maybe, a card like this could use a review that would explore the limits of what it' can and can not take - crysis on 'high' does not seem to be it's limit :)
What are you talking about?
I don't know, it's hard to get over the £520 asking price frankly, regardless of what CPU we used. At US price (~£360) plus VAT, it should be £420, maybe £430 max. It needs to do a lot more than just perform in games to actually represent value for money at £520. I'd like it to make cups of tea for me as well at that price.
Really? wow Im not even a major review site but I got the drivers early, same goes for a few other sites, if I was you guys I would contact Terry aka Catalyst Maker so that you guys can get the most recent drivers for when you test and what not.
You sure?
4gb - 512mb video ram and some other gubbins =3.25gb
"I do not even want those ultra high end dual GPU cards" thankfully, your not in charge at Array technologies Incorporated....
Well, the thing is they don't reflect 'at time of launch' because outdated drivers were used, and coincidentally there are driver issues with the card.
Unfortunately, despite our best efforts and consistent asking, AMD does not afford us this luxury.
The European team we have to deal with is, to put it nicely, "overstretched". If they supply us with a card and don't tell us drivers are dropping hours before launch, how are we to know? Telepathy?
remember that batfink? Requardless of drivers provided, Bit-tech when on nubers THEY OBTAINED!! The next drivers arn't gonna suddenly magic every problem out of exsistance. At most 10fps which I doubt will make a huge difference and wanna know why? I doubt you will even get the card. The only people who get cards on launch are people who want the best no matter what. If anything bit-tech highlighted the potential problems with the card rather than trying to polish a turd. At least be greatful for that.
Remember, not everything is 100% all over the world, different cards will perform differently, within a certain margin. Bit-tech test differently from some review sites, not happy? **** OFF!!
Most likely 1 and 2 are related. Maybe a faster processor would be nice, but it does highlight that you will need a hell of a fast clock to run it. Think its time to start looking where and when cpu bottlenecks occur with each card.
Actually we are developing an in house RSS feeder that links directly to our brains so we can read everything, simultaneously. :D`
i got an 3x9800GX2 setup (6 video cards) thats running XP32 and it has 1.5GB of usable ram, not sure what an 5970 would use thought (most likely be 3gb or 2.5gb usable under 32bit, Moot point as you be running windows 7 x64 (maybe vista) with 4-6gb of ram any way if you can afford an 5970 i guess your not going to be using an out of date OS now)
id guess 0
so rather irelivent
id also agree about the comments above. £520 for one card no matter how good it performs. Is simply inconcievable amount of money for a graphics card. You can build a whole pc for £400 that will play games that are released now
The people who buy this will own a intel extreme cpu chip so the i920 is rather irelivent. If your willing to spend £1000 on your cpu and £520 on your graphics card. Your in a planet 99% of this community cant afford to be in
LOL!!
This is for the staff and all the comments who think this review was accurate and on point.
Read these reviews
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-hd5970.html
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/11/18/amd_ati_radeon_hd_5970_video_card_review/
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3679
Get another 5970 and redo the numbers please!
careful they are sensitive about their reviews and although they will argue the way they test and blah blah when so many other review sites get consistent numbers and then when you throw their numbers on to the graph, BT are way outside of "norm" you have to wonder whats up but ehh thats just me.
Are you suggesting that CPC/Bit-tech are manipulating the figures? What I think it might be is that same old story - AMD bring out a new card that looks great on paper, yet the drivers are in a mess and the games used to test the cards run better on Nvidia hardware because TWIMTBP team have worked with the developers on making things run smoothly. A £500+ card that performs no better than a single 5870 is a waste of time.
You can have the most powerful car in the world, but if you are using ox cart wheels, it is all for nothing.
drivers, CPU bottlenecks
so which drivers were they using originaly ? are the new drivers inferior to the original ones the usedd ? and where they using an ingerior cpu on this round of testing compared to the original article or to all the other review sites ?
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums