Can you get great gaming performance for $99? That’s the burning question we wanted to answer when the XFX Radeon HD 5670 arrived. The version we tested, with 512MB of GDDR5, can be found for just under a hundred buckazoids on the web. The other question: How well does it stack up against a similarly priced Nvidia card?
Like other Radeon 5000 series GPUs, the 5670 chip is built on a 40nm manufacturing process. For those still trying to wrap their heads around the huge size of the Radeon HD 5970, the 5670 is a mere 6.5 inches long, occupies just a single PCI-E slot, and has no requirements for a power connector. The two cards, of course, are not in the same class.
The HD 5670 has half the stream processors, texture units, and ROPs of the Radeon HD 5770. The GPU core is also clocked lower, as is the GDDR5 memory. With these specs, we expected something to give when running games. Sure enough, when we tried running modern games at 1680x1050 at high detail, the frame rates were unacceptable. Antialiasing? No way.
We took the XFX card for a spin on our graphics test system, a Core i7-975 with 6GB of fast DDR, dialed the graphics option down a couple of notches and re-ran our benchmark games at 1280x720 (or 1280x768 for Battle Forge). Since we were running at a relatively low resolution, we did pump up AA to 4x, just to keep our eyes from bleeding at all the jaggies. We also ran our suite of tests on an EVGA GeForce GT 240, a $99 card based on Nvidia’s GT 240 GPU. Like the AMD GPU, the GT 240 also has 512MB of GDDR5 running at 790MHz, and a core clock of 550MHz.
The Verdict? The XFX card beat the EVGA card in most benchmarks, but the overall margins were fairly small. The sub-$100 category keeps getting better—but games keep getting more demanding. If you’re willing to sacrifice resolution and graphics detail, the XFX Radeon HD 5670 should get the job done. It’s not a strong card for gaming, but it should shine in home theater PCs and other environments that have space and power constraints.
One-slot wide; no power connector needed; low cost.
Resolution and detail need to be dialed down for decent gaming performance.
| XFX Radeon HD 5670 | EVGA GeForce GT 240 | |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Vantage Performance (fps) | 6,305 | 5,399 |
| Battle Forge / DX10 | 29 | 29 |
| Far Cry 2 / Action (fps) | 44 | 39 |
| Far Cry 2 / Ranch Long (fps) | 46 | 43 |
| HAWX (fps) | 37 | 36 |
| STALKER: Call of Pripyat (fps) | 26 | 23 |
| Dirt 2 (fps) | 59 | 52 |
Best scores are bolded. Our test system uses a 3.33GHz Core i7-95 Extreme Edition, 6GB of DDR3/1333, and Windows 7. Games were run at 1280x720 (except for BattleForge, which was run at 1280x768), and tested at medium-high detail with 4x AA.
| HD 5870 | HD 5850 | HD 5770 | HD 5670 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transistor Count | 2.15 Billion | 2.15 Billion | 1.04 Billion | 627 Million |
| Stream Processors | 1,600 | 1,440 | 800 | 400 |
| Texture Units | 80 | 72 | 40 | 20 |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 | 16 | 8 |
| Memory Interface | 256 bit | 256 bit | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| Memory | 1GB GDDR5 | 1GB GDDR5 | 1GB GDDR5 | 512MB or 1GB GDDR5 |
| Core Clocks | 850MHz | 725MHz | 850MHz | 725MHz |
| Memory Clock | 1.2GHz | 1GHz | 1.2GHz | 1GHz |
monkeykid753
March 23, 2010 at 11:08pm
I'm thinking of upgrading to this from a 8400 GS that I had to get because neither of my 5770s worked. My monitor is a few years old, and runs at 1276 * 768 resolution. I only play free games at the time, but I might start playing more graphically intense games for which you have to pay. My dad won't let me get something over $120 so I can't try my luck with another 5770 or even a 5750. Do you think this card will be a good upgrade? Or is there something with even better bang for the buck? I would rather it not have a PCIe power connector.
Specs:
Intel Core i5 750 @ 2.8 Ghz
Corsair XMS3 DDR3 1600 Mhz
Corsair TX650W
Asus P7P55D-E
BFG GeForce 8400 GS
Antec 900
Windows 7 Pro
fragonman
March 23, 2010 at 9:08am
in the end it will still be better than my sparkle geforce 8400
in the end does it matter?
nekollx
March 18, 2010 at 3:33pm
no Crysis scores? Has something become the new Crysis?
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
Lord Omega
March 18, 2010 at 3:51pm
It is called Metro 2033. Have you seen the requirements to max this thing out (Optimum settings)
Optimum:
* Core i7 CPU
* NVIDIA DirectX 11 compliant graphics card (GeForce
GTX 480 and 470)
* As much RAM as possible (8GB+)
* Fast HDD or
SSD :shock:Enabling 3D Vision
Metro 2033 utilizes NVIDIA 3D Vision with
compatible cards and hardware. To play in 3D you will require:* NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275 and above recommended
* A 120Hz (or
above) monitor
* NVIDIA 3D Vision kit
* Microsoft Windows Vista or
Windows 7
noobstix
March 18, 2010 at 4:18pm
I was wondering why it was running a little sluggish on my brother's machine (he has a Core i7-920 @ 3.4 Ghz with a Radeon HD4890). Had to tick it down from "Very High" to "High". Now the question should be, "Can it run Metro 2033?"
Anyhow, I bought this very same card but it turned out to be a dud after it wouldn't work from installing the drivers (did a clean re-install of Windows thinking it was driver conflict). Bought a 5770 and been happy since.
nekollx
March 18, 2010 at 4:12pm
*snigger*
I thought Nvidia dx11 card (fermi) wern't even on the market yet
------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.
avenger48
March 18, 2010 at 7:06pm
March 26th!
In regards to the 5670, when ATI's answer gets slaughtered by a 3-year-old nVidia design that's 10 dollars cheaper, it doesn't matter. The 9800GT still wins.
Print
