AMD’s Radeon HD 5830: A Filler Card at the Wrong Price
by Ryan Smith on February 24, 2010 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Conclusion
The 5830 is a card that the public has had some very high expectations for coming in to this launch. The 4830 – as short lived as it was – was a well received card even if it wasn’t an immediate bargain. For anyone expecting a repeat performance on the 5830, we can’t help but feel that you’re going to come away disappointed.
On a global average, the 5830 sits about half-way between a 4890 and a 4870, or if you prefer is about 8% slower than a GTX 275 and 20% slower than a 5850. The latter is particularly interesting since it comes so close to the 5850 even though it only has 55% of the ROP capacity; clearly the hit to the ROPs didn’t hurt too badly.
At any rate, I had been expecting something that would consistently be to the north of the 4890 in performance, but the performance is what it is – there’s no bad card, only a poorly priced card.
And a poorly priced card is really what does the 5830 in. AMD expects this card to go for $240, a mere $20 below the original MSRP for the 5850; if one goes by the original MSRP of the 5850 this card is much too slow for the price. Conversely the 5830 is around 10% slower than the 4890, a card that was going for between $180 and $200 before supplies seemingly ran dry. The only price comparison where $240 makes sense is compared to the 5850’s current $300 price – you get 80% of the performance for 80% of the price. But the 5850 is priced for profit taking, it’s a fast card but it’s not a great deal.
When we were being briefed about this card, AMD’s (and former Beyond3D guru) Dave Baumann asked us to get back to him on what we thought the card should be priced at once we finished our testing. Our response to him, and the same thing that we’re holding to in this review, is that the sweet spot for this card would be $200, and the highest should be $220. $200 is a sweet spot because it picks up where the 4890 left off, even if it is around 10% slower. $220 on the other hand places a greater valuation on the 5000 series feature set, and is closer to the GTX 275.
Dave’s argument (and undoubtedly one that will resonate throughout AMD) is that the 5830 has some very useful advantages over the 4890 – DX/DirectCompute 11, Eyefinity, better OpenCL support, and bitstreaming audio. All of this is true, although the 5830 strikes us as a poor choice for Eyefinity usage (get something faster) or for bitstreaming audio (it’s not exactly a cool HTPC card). DX11 and OpenCL is harder to evaluate due to their newness, and in the case of OpenCL AMD doesn’t even distribute their OpenCL driver with the rest of their Catalyst driver set yet.
Meanwhile there’s a separate argument entirely over whether the 5830 is more future-proof (disregarding DX11) due to its higher shader throughput. Historically speaking this is a reasonable argument, but it’s also one that I’m not convinced will hold up when NVIDIA is going to be pushing tessellation instead of shading – you can’t ignore what NVIDIA’s doing given their clearly stronger developer relations.
Ultimately the problem is that being future proof comes at too high a price. The 5770 was a hard sale compared to the faster 4870, and this time we’re talking about what’s around a $60 premium based on performance over the 4000 series. AMD’s saving grace here is that you can no longer buy such a card – it’s either a GTX260/4870, or nothing.
At the risk of sounding petty over $20, a $240 5830 is $20 too much. If this were priced at $200-$220 it wouldn’t be a clear choice for the 5830, but it wouldn’t be such a clear choice against it. For $240 you can try to shop around for a 4890 and save $40-$60 while getting a card that will perform better at most of today’s games, or save even more by going with a 4870 that will slightly underperform the 5830. Alternatively you can save up another $60 and get the 5850, a card that is faster running and cooler running at the same time. There is no scenario where we can wholeheartedly justify a 5830 if it’s going to be a $240 card – this really should have been the new $200 wonder card.
Update: It looks like AMD's partners have been able to come through and make this a hard launch. PowerColor and Sapphire cards have started showing up at Newegg. So we're very happy to report that this didn't turn out to be a paper launch after all. Do note however that the bulk of the cards are still not expected until next week.
This brings up the other elephant in the room: today’s paper launch. Paper launches should by all means have died last year, but their ghost apparently continues to live on. If in fact no 5830s make it to retailers in time for today’s launch, then the card should not have been launched today – it’s as simple as that.
148 Comments
View All Comments
pierrebai - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
This is ridiculous and a poor service. The old drivers are more in tune with older cards. If I buy a new card, I would install the newer drivers do I that's what I want to see compared.It makes me doubt the honesty of the review: it makes you look like you wre pissed by the paper launch and chose to use old drivers to make the card look bad.
Did you use 5-months-old drivers for nvidia cards too?
leexgx - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
did they even have the older cards i would if guessed that 9.9 for the 4890 was due to them not having the cardsRyan Smith - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
No, we have them. We do a rolling benchmark suite; if you've pay attention to our charts we do what amounts to adding new cards to existing charts, as it's impractical to rebench every card with every driver change. We do rebench cards if we find that the drivers change performance significantly, but that's actually rarely the case.Otherwise everything gets refreshed at the 6 month mark. So that's why the 9.9s go with the 4000 series cards, because that's when this data was originally compiled.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
I believe what Ryan is saying is that he *did* use the latest drivers with the 5830. I don't believe the older drivers will even install on the card. The older drivers were just used on the 4xxx series cards, not the 5830.Take care,
Anand
Drazick - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
It seems that if you used the latest drivers you would have found that its performances are equal to the HD4890.Ryan Smith - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
We did. We used the review drivers AMD sent us, version 8.703RC2.Drazick - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
According to what you wrote you used 9.9 for all ATI's Cards.So I don't get it, did you use 10.2 for the HD5XXX?
ET - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
While this is a good review, I'd suggest that people who're looking to buy a card check out other reviews of it, too. I was just reading the TechSpot one, and it looks like if you're a CoD 6 fan (and it's been a best selling game), then the 5830 beats the 4890 by a long run and is close to the 5850. So while it's not as well rounded as the 5850, the 5830 might still have its place. (Though I agree I'd love to see all these prices come down.)ET - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
BTW, two other games where it beat the 4890 well in that review were Wolfenstein and S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Call of Pripyat. In the latter the 5830 is about twice as fast as the 4890 and quite close to the 5850.bill4 - Thursday, February 25, 2010 - link
Stop crying, over what is barely a paper launch at all. It seems you yourself aren't even sure that cards wont hit etail today. And my memory is fuzzy, but havent several recent AMD and Nvidia launches in the past year been "paper"? The difference is recently it's by a week or two instead of a month plus as in the past.If you dont like it so much, put your money where your mouth is and refuse to review the card until it's available. I'm betting plenty of your competitors will always be more than willing to review any "paper launch", so the only one losing would be you, as it should be.
On to the card..I agree with your view there. I have a 4890, had I been in the market for a $200-ish card today, 5830 might have been a good choice. But I would take it even farther than you and say the card doesn't really become compelling until maybe as low as $170. Especially given it's major ROP crippling would just leave me uneasy about it's performance in future games. This leaves 5850 as still the only real "budget" choice imo. Save up 300 or dont bother. Heck I think even a 5770 is a better deal than this.
I suppose, if you are in the market for a Dx11 card and have $240 and not a penny more, you now have a faster choice. Dubious honor, though.