bit-tech.net

XFX ATI Radeon HD 5830 1GB Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 47

Reply
Fizzban 22nd March 2010, 11:23 Quote
Reckon saving ya pennys till you can afford the HD 5850 would be a better choice.
Pete J 22nd March 2010, 11:41 Quote
I'm still not convinced by this offering. The only game it really distinguished itself in was World at War, in other games the 5770 or 5850 is a more logical choice. Hopefully Fermi will make ATI bring the 5850 back down to £200.

Also, for this price you could put two 5750s in crossfire (just saying).
SchizoFrog 22nd March 2010, 11:45 Quote
I just love the general notion that £200+ only gets you what seems to be an average performing Graphics Card these days. I don't care how fast or at what resolutions these latest ATi and the upcoming nVidia cards can run Crysis or future DX11 games, it is an upgrade I can live without when compared to the performance versus cost with regards to the previous genration of GPUs from both companies.
memeroot 22nd March 2010, 11:50 Quote
just still seems far to expensive for marginal returns.... the 5850 at 200 was good, this at margnialy less seems a big pile of meh....

fermi will be overly expensive but perhaps offers some return... otherwise the 4890 seems still the best card of the moment.
Bindibadgi 22nd March 2010, 12:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchizoFrog
I just love the general notion that £200+ only gets you what seems to be an average performing Graphics Card these days.

This is exactly what we were talking about last week actually - graphics cards have stagnated. Throwing more and more shaders etc doesn't give a tangible performance jump unlike previous generations.
memeroot 22nd March 2010, 12:12 Quote
"This is exactly what we were talking about last week actually - graphics cards have stagnated. Throwing more and more shaders etc doesn't give a tangible performance jump unlike previous generations."

would be nice if they'd just managed to drop the price.... this gen higher price and less performance.
Hustler 22nd March 2010, 12:21 Quote
So £180 for a performance increase of about 25-30% over my Radeon 4850 1Gb......

No thanks.....

The £75 i paid for my 4850 (new) last July seems like bargain of the decade.....

The only good thing about PC games these days is the fact that all the gfx engines today are designed to run on 2004/2005 era hardware that are stuck in the 360 and Ps3, which means my 4850 is likely to remain powerful enough for another year or two.
theskirrid 22nd March 2010, 12:23 Quote
This gen is also next-gen DirectX, lower power consumption, and lower heat output too don't forget. You get far more performance per watt, at least until that convection oven of a Fermi comes along.
wuyanxu 22nd March 2010, 12:31 Quote
i feel current graphics generations seems to go like this:
-double all numbers for new generation
-shrink die hoping for acceptable thermals/power usage
-expect 1.6x performance increase rather than double

expect more added gimmicks before the next generation of consoles. eyefinity, 3d vision are just the start.
Xir 22nd March 2010, 12:41 Quote
Quote:
foregoing a stock model and allowing its partners to use whatever PCB, power delivery circuitry and cooling solution they wanted
I actually prefer it this way, at least you get a choice of well/bad overclockers, well cooled but noisy or quiet.
On some generations virtually all boards were the same, featuring the same boring fan. Distributors only differentiating themselves by decals.
I guess noone wants that.
SchizoFrog 22nd March 2010, 12:57 Quote
It may be a coincidence... but I do think it is strange that hardware seems to have really outgrown the needs of software. Soundcards are largely unrequired due to HD Audio featuring on Motherboards as standard. As more and more developers concentrate on the console market, or at least making game engines compatible with the current console hardware, Graphics Cards as used in PCs are largely sufficient for gaming requirements unless you have a monitor with silly high resolutions that most games don't even support. And most recently we have a desktop CPU (albeit an 'Extreme Edition') that is well pretty much unrequired in a desktop and more suited to workstation or severs. So I wouldn't say that GPU or even hardware development in general has stagnated. More that current software just isn't push the barriers it once used to.
javaman 22nd March 2010, 13:35 Quote
I would like to see crossfire and eyefinity results with this card. While crossfire isn't always a good idea it does give an idea of where it performs in relation to the top cards. With current prices HD5770 in crossfire could be a better investment, and crossfire will be needed if your going for an eyefinity setup
knuck 22nd March 2010, 13:35 Quote
I think it would be interesting if you guys were to introduce bad company 2 to your game benchmarks. Unlike MW2, the engine is brand new and it's also one of the most popular game on bit-tech these days

just an idea
yakyb 22nd March 2010, 13:40 Quote
which is why i'm toying with buying a 5770 over the 5850 for my partial bust 9800gtx
PureSilver 22nd March 2010, 14:11 Quote
God-dammit, they lengthened the PCB over the initial announcement. That old PCB looked to be a 7-inch (17.8cm), like the 5670 reference 'card, and that would be just the thing for mITX gaming...
llamafur 22nd March 2010, 14:17 Quote
XFX actually put a "real" heat sink on it. Did they finally figure out the extruded aluminum crap doesn't work
?
Claave 22nd March 2010, 16:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghys
I think it would be interesting if you guys were to introduce bad company 2 to your game benchmarks. Unlike MW2, the engine is brand new and it's also one of the most popular game on bit-tech these days

just an idea

Stay tuned (hopefully)
Skiddywinks 22nd March 2010, 16:31 Quote
Fair play to XFX for pricing this really well. Not only is it a great deal (compared to other price points), but it is going to push prices down on all other vendors competing cards. At least one would hope.

And in doing this they missed the oppurtunity to really milk as much money as possible out of people, which seems to be a pretty popular outlook with VGAs these days.
cybergenics 22nd March 2010, 18:12 Quote
Just picked up a 5770 today for my sons new rig, performance is a real let down, its certainly no quicker than a GTX260 running 182.50, this 5830 is also priced too closely to the 5850 to be worth choosing. Sometimes just a 2-3 fps average can be enough to make a game playable, something that isn't widely recognised.
DbD 22nd March 2010, 18:22 Quote
So it's slower then the 4890 in ati card favouring benches and the GTX 260 in nvidia favouring ones. Both those cards were £120-£140 last Summer, now this is available for £190? Sure you can o/c but you could o/c the 4890 and GTX 260 too.
GregTheRotter 22nd March 2010, 18:45 Quote
XFX HD 5830 1GB Review
Manufacturer: XFXS

:D
SchizoFrog 22nd March 2010, 18:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybergenics
Just picked up a 5770 today for my sons new rig, performance is a real let down, its certainly no quicker than a GTX260 running 182.50, this 5830 is also priced too closely to the 5850 to be worth choosing. Sometimes just a 2-3 fps average can be enough to make a game playable, something that isn't widely recognised.

Slight adjustment of the settings can offer much greater performance increases. The problem is that more and more PC Gamers do not wish to turn anything off, down or overclock to improve performance (or do not bother to learn how to). Instead they adopt the Console Gamers attitude of 'I just want it to work out the box'. Personally I would rather do the reaserch and learn what I need to and save myself the best part of £100. What is widely recognised is that far too many people have more money than sense.
cybergenics 22nd March 2010, 18:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchizoFrog
Slight adjustment of the settings can offer much greater performance increases. The problem is that more and more PC Gamers do not wish to turn anything off, down or overclock to improve performance (or do not bother to learn how to). Instead they adopt the Console Gamers attitude of 'I just want it to work out the box'. Personally I would rather do the reaserch and learn what I need to and save myself the best part of £100. What is widely recognised is that far too many people have more money than sense.

Rather pointless statement. What you are saying is you get more performance by turning stuff down. Right, I also heard that my car would be lighter and go quicker if I removed the seats.

The bottom line is, cards like the 5770 which people (and on this very forum) are reckoning way exceeed the performance of old stuff like the 260, actually don't, and your solution is turn down settings.

Thanks for that one.
SchizoFrog 22nd March 2010, 19:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybergenics
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchizoFrog
Slight adjustment of the settings can offer much greater performance increases. The problem is that more and more PC Gamers do not wish to turn anything off, down or overclock to improve performance (or do not bother to learn how to). Instead they adopt the Console Gamers attitude of 'I just want it to work out the box'. Personally I would rather do the reaserch and learn what I need to and save myself the best part of £100. What is widely recognised is that far too many people have more money than sense.

Rather pointless statement. What you are saying is you get more performance by turning stuff down. Right, I also heard that my car would be lighter and go quicker if I removed the seats.

The bottom line is, cards like the 5770 which people (and on this very forum) are reckoning way exceeed the performance of old stuff like the 260, actually don't, and your solution is turn down settings.

Thanks for that one.

Its about cost versus performance. Yes the car would perform slightly better without the weight of the seats but as your sarcasm denotes it would be of detrimental effect. However, remove the golf clubs, bowling ball, tool box from the boot and speed, handling and MPG are all going to improve in varying amounts.

My point is that people tend to complain that said game is unplayable on certain hardware so they claim that they need to spend an extra £80-£150 for an extra 2-3 FPS. All I am saying is that a slight adjustment of the game's settings would increase the FPS and therefore playability far above 2-3 FPS gained just by chucking in a new GPU.

A massive part of these reviews are concerned with efficiency. You could also drive your car like a T@#T but if you were to learn to drive properly (low revs, stable speed instead of accelerating and then breaking, allowing for slowing down space behind the vehicles in front...etc) you actually look after your car and save hundreds of £'s per year.

So when it comes to actual practical gaming, I would keep my current hardware and adjust a games settings to a playable and still enjoyable level with the knowledge that my £200+ remains in my bank account.
confusis 22nd March 2010, 19:41 Quote
Time to upgrade from my 4850? Might need to upgrade to win7 too :S
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums

More About...