AMD’s Radeon HD 6870 & 6850: Renewing Competition in the Mid-Range Market
by Ryan Smith on October 21, 2010 10:08 PM ESTThe latest game in the Battlefield series - Bad Company 2 – remains as one of the cornerstone DX11 games in our benchmark suite. As BC2 doesn’t have a built-in benchmark or recording mode, here we take a FRAPS run of the jeep chase in the first act, which as an on-rails portion of the game provides very consistent results and a spectacle of explosions, trees, and more.
Our experience with Bad Company 2 more or less matches our experiences with other shader-heavy games at 1920x1200. The GTX 470, 6870, and EVGA GTX 460 all vie for the top of their pack within a frame of each other, while the 6850 enjoys a clear lead over the GTX 460 1GB. However what’s interesting is that the Radeon 5800 series takes a very obvious lead here, a lead that’s larger than in most other games. If you ever wanted to know just how shader-bound Bad Company 2 is, there’s the answer you’re looking for.
As for the Crossfire situation, once again the 6800 series closes the gap. Even the GTX 470 in SLI can’t quite keep up with the 6850CF, which is much a story of how well the game runs on AMD cards as it is a story of what’s clearly going on with the 6800 series and Crossfire.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
197 Comments
View All Comments
Targon - Thursday, October 21, 2010 - link
Since the 6870 can not beat the 5870, shouldn't AMD leave the 5870 on the market until they have a true replacement ready? Price vs. Performance is one thing, but dropping their high end parts and replacing them with mid-range cards($200ish) just doesn't have the "Wow!" factor that helps drive sales across the price ranges.Jansen - Thursday, October 21, 2010 - link
That would be the 6900 series next month:http://www.dailytech.com/Radeon+6800+Series+Launch...
Kyanzes - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Just to be on the safe side I'd like to see minimum FPS results. Although there's very little doubt in my mind that it underperforms.animekenji - Saturday, December 25, 2010 - link
It doesn't underperform. HD6970 replaces HD5870. HD6870 will be replacing HD5770, which it vastly outperforms. What about the new numbering scheme don't you get?Onyx2291 - Thursday, October 21, 2010 - link
If I had a job and the money, one of these would be on it's way to my house right now.Doctor_Possum - Thursday, November 11, 2010 - link
One of these is on it's way to my house right now. Can't wait.Onyx2291 - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link
Over a year later, and one is now on it's way to my house right now :DRasterman - Thursday, October 21, 2010 - link
Ok nVidia, ATI, Intel, enough with the shitty naming of your devices, a 5870 beats a 6870? Really? I mean come on! Really? Create a committee to agree on a group of benchmarks the result of which is what you get to name your card. Score 100, you now have the Radeon 100, score 340, you now have a GeForce 340.Fleeb - Friday, October 22, 2010 - link
Though I must agree with you, AMD gave a reason why they did that (marketing perspective) - they are not going to drop 5770 and 5750 yet but replace 5870 and 5850 with 6970 and 6950. Perhaps everything will go back to normal again in the 7xxx series.bennyg - Saturday, October 23, 2010 - link
Maybe if it were something like 6810 and 6830 there wouldn't be so many complaints.But the wider issue is the quasi-quantitative naming schemes in general, they'll never be a perfectly accurate representation of "performance" (or "value for money" or whatever other metric that every individual buyer interprets it to be)
There'll never be any standard like that, marketing needs wiggle-room that independently-derived pure numbers do not provide. So they'll never agree to it.