5750 - Holy Poop

They make noise, too.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

5750 - Holy Poop

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:16 am

That's all I have to say. It beats out the 4770 in all things, has a lower idle and lower draw by a considerable notch. Goes past 1920x1200 with 2x AA on.

dang.

hexus and hardocp have the best reviews.

Now for Mike C ! 8)

Jordan
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Scotland, UK

Post by Jordan » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:34 am

Links to said reviews would have been useful :idea:
CPU & HS: i5 2500K | Noctua NH-U12 - fanless
Case & PSU: Antec Solo II | Seasonic 460W Fanless
Components:16GB Corsair Vengeance PC3-15000 | Gigabyte Z68 | Sapphire Ultimate HD7750 | 1.5TB SSD storage
Cooling: Nexus RS 120mm controlled by mobo (very low RPM)
External Storage: HP N40L WHS2011 - 2x3TB WD Red

Mr Evil
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:12 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Mr Evil » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:40 am

It's also £110 compared to the 4770 at £70, so you would expect it to be better.

Meato
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: Tulsa, OK, USA

Post by Meato » Tue Oct 13, 2009 7:53 am

Hard OCP's site alone hurts my eyes, much less trying to follow their review of the product. Their charts are confusing. The products and in-game specs differ even in evaluating the same game. What the heck.. apples to apples?

AZBrandon
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:47 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Post by AZBrandon » Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:20 am

Meato wrote:Hard OCP's site alone hurts my eyes, much less trying to follow their review of the product. Their charts are confusing. The products and in-game specs differ even in evaluating the same game. What the heck.. apples to apples?
Actually HardOCP provides the reviews on games that gamers want to know - what the highest quality playable settings the video card can offer. Many (most?) other sites just give you a numerical score from a benchmark program or run the same settings for a zillion cards, regardless if the score is 17 fps or 231 fps. Nobody is going to play a game at 17fps or 231 fps.

The point of HardOCP's reviews is to determine the best playable settings in the "butter zone" of 30-60fps that the overwhelming majority of humans find pleasing for gaming. That way you see if one card has enough power to do 40fps at 4x AA and the competitor card can do 40 fps, but needs to drop to a lower resolution, or lower AA level, then you know how that affects the image quality when gaming. That way people get in the mindset of "OK, I don't own a 2560x1600 monitor, so the XYZ card is overkill" instead of "Well the XYZ did 250fps versus 125fps in the generic benchmark, it must be twice as good!"
[size=67]Phenom 1090T / 9800GTX+ / Antec P180 / Seasonic S12-600[/size]

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:53 am

Yeah well. I am not sure what to say about finding hexus or hardocp

just google them, first pick.

Yes, hexus is best because they aren't retarded. hardocp is also not retarded but aimed at people not wanting to know relative performance, but if they can view their favorite game at 1920x1200 with all the pretty eye candy. The 5750 scores high in eye candy ability. Playing without AA on is pretty crappy for the majority of games, so that is important to know what the min fps is and the average at the same time.

Personally, I have not seen a difference between 24-25 fps min scores and 30 fps min scores. Hardocp is a bit overally cautious in its recommendations normally. Remember that a movie film traditionally is 24 fps, and star wars looks great right? But the thing about the 5750 is that it plays ABOVE that at 1920x1200. This is the first time any card released that is not the x870 get a hardocp approval of 1920x1200. No sub max card since the 9800 pro from Ati has gotten this approval.

This makes the 5750 lightyears ahead of the 4770. Being slightly unable to handle huge textures and aa at 1920x1200 means it's utterly useless. Slighty unable = unable! And, there are non reference cards the first day out. For me, it was the x1900 aiw, 3870, 4770 and now the 5750 that are the most impressive cards ati has put out since the 9800 pro. (the x1900 had like 8-9% slower clock on it vs regular and consumed around 25% less wattage, was pimp)

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7449
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: Monterey Bay, CA

Post by CA_Steve » Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:59 am

1080p Gaming build: i5-4670K, Mugen 4, Asrock Z97 Anniversary, MSI GTX 1660 Gaming X, 8GB 1866 RAM, Samsung 860 Evo 500GB, Crucial MX100 256GB, WD Red 2TB, Samsung DVD burner, Fractal Define R4, Antec True Quiet 140 (2 front + rear) case fans, Seasonic SSR-550FX. 35W idle, 45-55W video streaming, 170-200W WoW, 318W stress test (Prime95 + Furmark)

Meato
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: Tulsa, OK, USA

Post by Meato » Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:17 am

Oh I completely agree with you on the 5750 being a great value, more so than the 4770 was. The price is only a small premium over the 4850 which it most closely compares to. The 5770 on the other hand, the price needs to come down to match the performance.

Jordan
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Scotland, UK

Post by Jordan » Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:49 am

edit: misread something :lol: :oops:
CPU & HS: i5 2500K | Noctua NH-U12 - fanless
Case & PSU: Antec Solo II | Seasonic 460W Fanless
Components:16GB Corsair Vengeance PC3-15000 | Gigabyte Z68 | Sapphire Ultimate HD7750 | 1.5TB SSD storage
Cooling: Nexus RS 120mm controlled by mobo (very low RPM)
External Storage: HP N40L WHS2011 - 2x3TB WD Red

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:37 pm

I am trying to figure out of the 5750 has less max draw than my reference 3870.

I think it is comparable... possibly the exact same. Amazing if that is the case. the 3870 was the best performance per watt with idle that was near 8-9 watts. 4770 beat it of course but wasnt a huge enough jump to jump on the 120 dollar bandwagon.

what is great is that ATI must have authorized non reference 5750's to be out at the starting gate.

Looking forward to an MSI non reference as sometimes they make an OC version that uses less power and has like 5-10% clocks faster. They did this with the 4770 but were sold out of it for months on end.

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7449
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: Monterey Bay, CA

Post by CA_Steve » Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:51 pm

1080p Gaming build: i5-4670K, Mugen 4, Asrock Z97 Anniversary, MSI GTX 1660 Gaming X, 8GB 1866 RAM, Samsung 860 Evo 500GB, Crucial MX100 256GB, WD Red 2TB, Samsung DVD burner, Fractal Define R4, Antec True Quiet 140 (2 front + rear) case fans, Seasonic SSR-550FX. 35W idle, 45-55W video streaming, 170-200W WoW, 318W stress test (Prime95 + Furmark)

sampo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:56 am
Location: Finland

Post by sampo » Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:54 am

Do you have any experience with Thermalright HR-03 A heatsink? I think it would work OK in pseudo passive mode with 5750. Is there any alternatives for passive heatsinks?

Image

RDaneel
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 4:49 pm

Post by RDaneel » Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:03 am

I'm excited about the 5750 - just ordered one for my Win 7 box. Plenty of power for 1920x1200 gaming at normal human FPS (30+) at least for the next year or two. Plus, the idle power consumption is amazing. With a micro-ATX mobo and an i7 860, I should have idle power consumption down to 75W or so, but still be able to game if I want. Cool.

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:05 pm

sampo wrote:Do you have any experience with Thermalright HR-03 A heatsink? I think it would work OK in pseudo passive mode with 5750. Is there any alternatives for passive heatsinks?
Hm. What about that VRM heatsink I think I see? I havent seen any stripped down or close ups of the 5750 yet.

I am looking for an aftermarket solution as well. I would want the heatsinks and vrm's being fanned though.

Too bad Zalman stopped making new VGA waterblocks. Really nothing for me after my 3870. I have to redo my whole rig now. This card looks worth it however.

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:06 pm

CA_Steve wrote:reference for 3870 power consumption.

About the same. :D
Ah, thanks yes. 81 watts. I remember it in the 80's which was great.

This is the perfect upgrade. too bad i cant figure on how to put a waterblock on it. I would overclock it quite a bit. Aluminum systems are hard to deal with.

khtse
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:33 pm

Post by khtse » Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:21 pm

This is a great time to buy "last gen" cards that people are throwing out in order to upgrade.

I just scored a second hand GeForce GTX 275 for $165 shipped, with warranty :). Radeon 5870 and 5850 (slightly, for 5850) are faster than this, but the cheapest 5850 is about $100 more than what I paid.

EDIT: oops, didn't notice that the thread is about the 5700 series

Olle P
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:03 am
Location: Sweden

Post by Olle P » Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:02 pm

~El~Jefe~ wrote:Personally, I have not seen a difference between 24-25 fps min scores and 30 fps min scores. Hardocp is a bit overally cautious in its recommendations normally.
Even 24 fps is fluid. That's what you get at the cinema, although they show every frame at least twice to prevent the flickering sensation.
I don't mind having a game run continuously at 20 fps, and can even stand shorter dips (a few seconds at a time) below 15 fps.

Cheers
Olle

ATWindsor
Posts: 285
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:53 pm

Post by ATWindsor » Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:19 am

Olle P wrote:
~El~Jefe~ wrote:Personally, I have not seen a difference between 24-25 fps min scores and 30 fps min scores. Hardocp is a bit overally cautious in its recommendations normally.
Even 24 fps is fluid. That's what you get at the cinema, although they show every frame at least twice to prevent the flickering sensation.
I don't mind having a game run continuously at 20 fps, and can even stand shorter dips (a few seconds at a time) below 15 fps.

Cheers
Olle
24 fps isn't fluid, cinema isn't anywhere near fluid, it has a lot of motion blur, and even then its visibly "jaggy" when it moves. However some pepole find it acceptable (like you), others would rather have more fluid motion.

Anyhow, the 5750 is very interesting, does anybody know the physical layout? Is it similar to the 4770, so one can use a accelero s1?

AtW

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:24 pm

Well, your eyes can see well over 120 frames per second so 30 fps sucks when you consider that. It would be interesting if someone could make a program that added intermediate blur when frames start to drop.

somehow someone made people believe you cant see past 70hz. One part of your eye has trouble discerning motion at that or higher but the rest of retina can see way beyond that.

i rather not have inane discussions like this I just realized... and instead find out more about non reference designs or which aftermarket passive heatsinks work fine with it.

It looks really tiny to fit the Accelero biggie on it without it overextending past the slot.

uraflit
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 2:05 pm

Post by uraflit » Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:42 pm

24fps in the cinema looks ok

24fps in PC video games = pretty bad

i dont know the exact details, but for most people, i'd say 35+ fps is recommended for "fluid" game motion. maybe even 40+

silo
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:16 am
Location: HOME

Re: 5750 - Holy Poop

Post by silo » Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:57 pm

~El~Jefe~ wrote:That's all I have to say. It beats out the 4770 in all things, has a lower idle and lower draw by a considerable notch. Goes past 1920x1200 with 2x AA on.

dang.

hexus and hardocp have the best reviews.

Now for Mike C ! 8)
no?

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/775-14/ ... -5750.html

Not a huge leap, considering the specifications@ price. The 5850 is a MUCH better buy-

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:54 pm

that's the worst review in years.

If you read it a few times, on various charts, you see that it implies that many cards perform within 20% of one another at the most. Which goes against every other NON FRANCE review out there.

plus it's from france.

ew.

freedom fries ftw.

OH, here's what hardocp said, (an American, not a communist/fascist/exoskeleton type)

" Brent_Justice [H] Video Card Managing Editor, 9.5 Years

Brent_Justice is offline
I’m gonna hit the hay, I just want to leave you guys with something to chew on. First, I suggest reading our conclusion carefully. If you are not impressed with the Radeon HD 5770, then maybe that isn’t for you, in that light I would suggest looking at the Radeon HD 5850. Otherwise, the Radeon HD 5700 series brings DX11 to budget prices, and this is good news for DX11 propagation and increasing the install base. Hopefully this will make game developers feel like they can push forward on DX11 gaming now that the user base is increasing. Getting these DX11 cards out there from top to bottom was needed before DX11 gaming could get off the ground. Plus, not everyone can afford an above $200 video card, these provide great options.

What I’m impressed about is the power savings these cards provide compared to the performance. Last April the Radeon HD 4770 was being praised for great price/performance near $100. Now, today, the Radeon HD 5750 replaced it at the same price point but delivers a heck of a lot more performance, while doing so with LOWER power. I think that is amazing. Everyone praised the HD 4770, it is only logical to also praise the HD 5750 for doing the same thing the HD 4770 did only 6 months ago. In 6 months AMD has improved near $100 gaming way over what the HD 4770 provided."

Bush aint dead BUDDIES!

ntavlas
Posts: 811
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Post by ntavlas » Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:41 am

Unfortunately the 57xx series are not such good value in europe though they`re still tempting thanks to their low power consumption. I can`t help wishing they came with a wider memory bus, that would turn them into all time classics.

Unfortunately, not many waterblocks are coming out for mainstream cards lately. In spite of being happy with aircooling so far, I think it`s a shame because cooling video cards is where water cooling excels.

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:43 am

this is the problem I am having!

I need blocks that have aluminum contacting the water part only (it can have a copper bottom or whatever. I use Zalman's tower. It really is a super heatsink, massive and silent.

Post Reply