Hey i'm a bit of an end user so dont troll on me for asking this but ive got an Hp s5216f system the graphics card i got with it is shovel ware and i need one that can play games like modern warfare 2 and the like...will this do the trick and if not what will.......... thanx for the help............ Cheers mates
I got one of these to play Battlefield Bad company 2 on a little ITX system.
I OCd it to 720 core 1080 mem leaving the fan at AUTO.
at 1920x1080 Med detail settings, DX10, no AA 2xAF it's quite "playable" 25-mid 30 FPS and looks OK to be honest for such such a low power card. which is exactly what I was hoping.
Saying that I really wish they were equiped with downclocked DDR5! and the same 42w TDP. that would have been incredible bang / watt and size! disapointing AMD :(
I purchased HIS 5570 HD 1GB video card from Newegg on Feb 15. When playing games after 5 to 15 mins of play I get crackling sound and frame rate degradation. The problem gets worse till the frame rate drop becomes progressively worse and noise continues. Also the OS slows down (mouse slow down). The only way to recover is to reboot. I have gateway SX2802-01 quad core Q8300 with 4 meg ram and windows 7 64 bit and latest catalyst driver dated 2/17/10 from ati.com. I have sent a belarc trouble report to ati and HIS and awaiting their feedback. Not sure if this is a hardware or software problem.
Thank you for a very informative article. It clears a lot up. I'm interested because I'm sick of using old hot noisy hardware.
I don't normally like typo posts, but when it confuses, it's a problem.
"As with Sapphire’s 5450, their 5770 comes in a surprisingly large box. Inside is the card, a low-profile bracket, drivers, an installation guide, and Arcsoft’s SimHD video conferencing plugin."
While I'd love to see a 5770 utalise a low profile, I doubt it will happen.
The GT and older ATI cards don't support the Protected audio path which means that any soundtracks higher than 16-bit 48 khz are downsampled to 16-bit 48 khz.
Also the HD 5570 should support support Vector Adaptive with newer drivers.
My upgrade process over the last several years has led me to the following system, which I am very happy with in terms performance for the things I actually do (World of Warcraft, media encoding, productivity applications, music production). However, I have a couple "issues" that I'd like to resolve.
eVGA 8600GT 256MB video
1600x900 resolution
Asus P5K-VM motherboard
Q8200 2.33GHz CPU
6GB 667MHz RAM
Seagate 7200RPM 16MB Cache HD
The thermal performance of my case, a modified AT server tower cira 1991, is great and the 8600GT runs at 50c idle 73c avg load, which compairs nicely to the 5570. Ultimately, I'd like a fanless card that can do what I do now.
In WoW I can run at full (4x AA and 8x AF in driver) settings as long as I turn Shadow Detail all the way down to Min. However, any time there is a lot fog or spell detail, I end up with a nice 5FPS picture show. Turning spell detail to half resolves that.
Do you think the 5570, when someone creates a fanless version, would solve those two issues and perform a little better than the 8600GT with its whopping 256MB of slow RAM?
I've been reading this sentence in GPU reviews since some time now:
[quote]The GT 240 is the biggest winner here, beating even the 5570. However this is likely due to differences in how AMD and NVIDIA throttle their cards under FurMark.[/quote]
Doesn't it bother you to basically say "Well, half of all these measurements are probably wrong, but we'll show them as a comparison anyway"? Either rename the FurMark.exe or use a different test. 3DCenter.org have shown that Bioshock is very demanding and reaches the highest real world power usage ever recorded in a game (still lower than FurMark, of course).
Now that the 5450 and 5570 are out, and nVidia won't have replacements for the 210 and 220 for a while, can we have a HTPC card showdown article? I noticed that the GT 220 review didn't analyze the video quality quite like the 5450 and 5570 reviews have, so I'm wondering how they all compare.
Could we have a showdown that analyzes these newer HTPC cards for audio and video capabilities, and maybe throw in the new Intel HD graphics? Would be very educational for those of us that want a good HTPC card but don't care about gaming.
If you check the 5450 article, I actually do have a shot of the GT 220 in there. It actually does rather well at the VA test, but going NVIDIA means you have to give up some degree of post-processing control, along with bitstreaming audio.
Please give us comparison with intel HD graphics and also Ion in video post processing. Can we change gamma in intel drivers? Can we select different interlacing? Can we select the output RGB or YUV, 0-255 or 16-235? In some articles here on Anandtech you point intel HD as an perfect HTPC graphics? But is it really?
I forgot that you included those screen shots of the 210 and the 220 doing the "cheese slices" test in the 5450 article. Thanks for pointing that out. I downloaded those screen-shots as well. Very useful for comparison.
It's kind of irritating that they (AMD and nVidia) can't get the HTPC thing fully right unless you spend $100 and get a card that has a bunch of 3D capabilities that aren't needed if you just want to enjoy HD. I wonder, though, if half of the 5570's video-quality issues are driver-related and not hardware-related. As far as I know, the 4670 can handle all of the video-quality stuff, and 5570 seems very comparable hardware-wise.
The card really should be clocked at ~500Mhz with lower voltage, and maybe even 80 disabled SPs. All of that power wasting rendering ability is mostly idling while waiting for memory.
Why do we still have VGA ports on these things? Those still using old-ass monitors can use an adapter off the DVI-I port that pretty much every video card includes for free. Give me DVI-I Dual Link, HDMI, and DisplayPort. VGA is dead and can be adapted with no downsides from other ports, there is no reason to keep putting that useless port there.
Spoken like someone who doesn't understand how every penny needs to be scrimped with the miniscule margins on these parts, especially given DVI royalties.
You couldn't take a metal tool to the Sapphire heatsink to find out what material it is? I doubt it's actual 'paint' it's probably anodizing on aluminum which should be easy to scrape through.
"In our testing we didn’t notice any obvious playback issues with the 5450 or 5570 when we had ESVP disabled, but we’ve seen enough forum posts of this feature magically fixing poor video playback performance that we’re not confident enough to recommend disabling this feature. It’s something we think should be left enabled, at least for the time being."
I don't think there's any "magically fixing" for those people was probably done because of ESVP disabling post-processing features and nothing esoteric, so I think it's safe to assume that this aggressive disabling of feature by ESVP on these drivers is a bug, and you can safely disable it, and just enable some post-processing options you want, as long as you don't get choppy video or have issues with A/V sync.
I don't see how ESVP could affect smooth video playback more than what was explained by AMD (seems the forum user I mentioned on the 5450 thread was right about what it does). Once you have all the video frames showing in sync (no dropped frames), there's nothing more to make the video smoother besides using more post-processing to interpolate video and show it at higher refresh rates (which is clearly not happening here, and it would require a 120 Hz monitor at least.
Pretty much the GT 240 basically wipes the floor with it in terms of performance, power, and noise. I don't see any real selling points on this card even DX11 and Eyefinity don't seem too viable on such a castrated card performance wise.
Get the GT240 instead or spend the extra $10-$20's on a better performance card or save yourself a $10-$15's on the quieter and more energy efficient one is what it boils down to.
I think that's a bit harsh, though really the review was harsh I think in fact it was a bit unfair.
- the lower power draw of the gt240 has no connection to reality. All other reviews (some of them measuring power draw directly, some at the wall) show the hd5570 has a quite a bit lower power draw than the gt240 ddr3 under load (at idle it's a wash), not to mention the gt240 gddr5 (or HD4670) which are even a bit higher. I strongly suspect either something was wrong with the sample card or measurement error (or rather, not keeping the setup consistent).
- the RE5 numbers are very puzzling, and I'd say they are just bogus. Toms also tested this game, and the HD5570 just behaved like in any other title (that is, close to HD4670) there. Seems a lot more believable.
- the comparison to gt240 gddr5 seems a tad unfair. Now AMD thinks this should be compared to gt220 which isn't really useful, but it seems to me that price-wise it will be really the same as the gt240 ddr3, not gddr5 version. Granted, that's probably only a 10 dollar difference but when talking about 80$ cards this does make a difference.
when compared to 4670, there is no improvement on neither performance nor power consumption.besides its more expensive and doesn't have a fanless version atm.
It's probably too late to ask this as this article/thread probably never gets checked anymore, but what PSU was used in the review?
I'm assuming that it's the standard 750W or higher rated unit that's used for most VGA reviews... but wanted to know how much savings there is to be had by using a low-rated, high-efficiency PSU more suited to a low-power HTPC build.
Okay, I have an HP a6203w desktop with a Bestec 250w PSU. I am looking for an average cheap replacement to the very crappy nvidia 6150se nforce 430 graphics. I am basing my choice off of the fact that video cards without power connectors use the 75 watts of the PCI slot, and since my full system is stock besides 2 more gigs of ram, I figured it could hold it. Professional opinion?
I was working on the study of the Radeon HD 5570 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M for <a href="http://www.bestdealscomputers.net">my blog</a> .... and look for performance comparisons between the two. Is there someone can help?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
36 Comments
Back to Article
YogiBeer - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - link
Hey i'm a bit of an end user so dont troll on me for asking this but ive got an Hp s5216f system the graphics card i got with it is shovel ware and i need one that can play games like modern warfare 2 and the like...will this do the trick and if not what will.......... thanx for the help............ Cheers matesmAJORD - Friday, April 2, 2010 - link
I got one of these to play Battlefield Bad company 2 on a little ITX system.I OCd it to 720 core 1080 mem leaving the fan at AUTO.
at 1920x1080 Med detail settings, DX10, no AA 2xAF it's quite "playable" 25-mid 30 FPS and looks OK to be honest for such such a low power card. which is exactly what I was hoping.
Saying that I really wish they were equiped with downclocked DDR5! and the same 42w TDP. that would have been incredible bang / watt and size! disapointing AMD :(
avi1956 - Sunday, February 28, 2010 - link
I purchased HIS 5570 HD 1GB video card from Newegg on Feb 15. When playing games after 5 to 15 mins of play I get crackling sound and frame rate degradation. The problem gets worse till the frame rate drop becomes progressively worse and noise continues. Also the OS slows down (mouse slow down). The only way to recover is to reboot. I have gateway SX2802-01 quad core Q8300 with 4 meg ram and windows 7 64 bit and latest catalyst driver dated 2/17/10 from ati.com. I have sent a belarc trouble report to ati and HIS and awaiting their feedback. Not sure if this is a hardware or software problem.PhantomKnight - Tuesday, February 23, 2010 - link
Thank you for a very informative article. It clears a lot up. I'm interested because I'm sick of using old hot noisy hardware.I don't normally like typo posts, but when it confuses, it's a problem.
"As with Sapphire’s 5450, their 5770 comes in a surprisingly large box. Inside is the card, a low-profile bracket, drivers, an installation guide, and Arcsoft’s SimHD video conferencing plugin."
While I'd love to see a 5770 utalise a low profile, I doubt it will happen.
office boy - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - link
With the NV GT cards supporting 8 channel LPCM is ATI's support of Bitstreaming that important? Decoding in the PC vs in the receiver.Isn't the outcome is the same? Uncompressed 7.1?
wlee15 - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - link
The GT and older ATI cards don't support the Protected audio path which means that any soundtracks higher than 16-bit 48 khz are downsampled to 16-bit 48 khz.Also the HD 5570 should support support Vector Adaptive with newer drivers.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1392217&a...">http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1392217&a...
falacy - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - link
My upgrade process over the last several years has led me to the following system, which I am very happy with in terms performance for the things I actually do (World of Warcraft, media encoding, productivity applications, music production). However, I have a couple "issues" that I'd like to resolve.eVGA 8600GT 256MB video
1600x900 resolution
Asus P5K-VM motherboard
Q8200 2.33GHz CPU
6GB 667MHz RAM
Seagate 7200RPM 16MB Cache HD
The thermal performance of my case, a modified AT server tower cira 1991, is great and the 8600GT runs at 50c idle 73c avg load, which compairs nicely to the 5570. Ultimately, I'd like a fanless card that can do what I do now.
In WoW I can run at full (4x AA and 8x AF in driver) settings as long as I turn Shadow Detail all the way down to Min. However, any time there is a lot fog or spell detail, I end up with a nice 5FPS picture show. Turning spell detail to half resolves that.
Do you think the 5570, when someone creates a fanless version, would solve those two issues and perform a little better than the 8600GT with its whopping 256MB of slow RAM?
MrSpadge - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
I've been reading this sentence in GPU reviews since some time now:[quote]The GT 240 is the biggest winner here, beating even the 5570. However this is likely due to differences in how AMD and NVIDIA throttle their cards under FurMark.[/quote]
Doesn't it bother you to basically say "Well, half of all these measurements are probably wrong, but we'll show them as a comparison anyway"? Either rename the FurMark.exe or use a different test. 3DCenter.org have shown that Bioshock is very demanding and reaches the highest real world power usage ever recorded in a game (still lower than FurMark, of course).
Moizy - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Now that the 5450 and 5570 are out, and nVidia won't have replacements for the 210 and 220 for a while, can we have a HTPC card showdown article? I noticed that the GT 220 review didn't analyze the video quality quite like the 5450 and 5570 reviews have, so I'm wondering how they all compare.Could we have a showdown that analyzes these newer HTPC cards for audio and video capabilities, and maybe throw in the new Intel HD graphics? Would be very educational for those of us that want a good HTPC card but don't care about gaming.
Ryan Smith - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
If you check the 5450 article, I actually do have a shot of the GT 220 in there. It actually does rather well at the VA test, but going NVIDIA means you have to give up some degree of post-processing control, along with bitstreaming audio.vlado08 - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Please give us comparison with intel HD graphics and also Ion in video post processing. Can we change gamma in intel drivers? Can we select different interlacing? Can we select the output RGB or YUV, 0-255 or 16-235? In some articles here on Anandtech you point intel HD as an perfect HTPC graphics? But is it really?Moizy - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
I forgot that you included those screen shots of the 210 and the 220 doing the "cheese slices" test in the 5450 article. Thanks for pointing that out. I downloaded those screen-shots as well. Very useful for comparison.It's kind of irritating that they (AMD and nVidia) can't get the HTPC thing fully right unless you spend $100 and get a card that has a bunch of 3D capabilities that aren't needed if you just want to enjoy HD. I wonder, though, if half of the 5570's video-quality issues are driver-related and not hardware-related. As far as I know, the 4670 can handle all of the video-quality stuff, and 5570 seems very comparable hardware-wise.
mariush - Wednesday, February 10, 2010 - link
We wouldnt need these 100$ cards just to run a movie well if the crap that INTERLACING is would have been removed from the HD standard.Almost all the performace problems are caused by the need to deinterlace content. With progressive content, these cards don't have issues.
Slaimus - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
The card really should be clocked at ~500Mhz with lower voltage, and maybe even 80 disabled SPs. All of that power wasting rendering ability is mostly idling while waiting for memory.MrSpadge - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Agreed. Although that could become a HD5550.wolrah - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Why do we still have VGA ports on these things? Those still using old-ass monitors can use an adapter off the DVI-I port that pretty much every video card includes for free. Give me DVI-I Dual Link, HDMI, and DisplayPort. VGA is dead and can be adapted with no downsides from other ports, there is no reason to keep putting that useless port there.Taft12 - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Spoken like someone who doesn't understand how every penny needs to be scrimped with the miniscule margins on these parts, especially given DVI royalties.MadMan007 - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
You couldn't take a metal tool to the Sapphire heatsink to find out what material it is? I doubt it's actual 'paint' it's probably anodizing on aluminum which should be easy to scrape through.Ryan Smith - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
I actually tried scraping through it, but I don't exactly have the right tool for the task. At any rate, Sapphire tells me it's Aluminum.shiggz - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Any idea if this card can handle MPCHC "sharpen complex 2" without stuttering on 720p files?andy o - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
I think you mean "when ESVP is enabled" here:"it looks like AMD is hardcoding their drivers to disable certain post-processing features when ESVP is disabled"
andy o - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Ryan, I don't think this is such a big deal:"In our testing we didn’t notice any obvious playback issues with the 5450 or 5570 when we had ESVP disabled, but we’ve seen enough forum posts of this feature magically fixing poor video playback performance that we’re not confident enough to recommend disabling this feature. It’s something we think should be left enabled, at least for the time being."
I don't think there's any "magically fixing" for those people was probably done because of ESVP disabling post-processing features and nothing esoteric, so I think it's safe to assume that this aggressive disabling of feature by ESVP on these drivers is a bug, and you can safely disable it, and just enable some post-processing options you want, as long as you don't get choppy video or have issues with A/V sync.
I don't see how ESVP could affect smooth video playback more than what was explained by AMD (seems the forum user I mentioned on the 5450 thread was right about what it does). Once you have all the video frames showing in sync (no dropped frames), there's nothing more to make the video smoother besides using more post-processing to interpolate video and show it at higher refresh rates (which is clearly not happening here, and it would require a 120 Hz monitor at least.
juhatus - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Remember that AA absolutly kills this card? So whats the point showing it on the big table-results.How would it compare to other sub-100 cards without AA?
knowom - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Most cards bottleneck more with AA turned on and people tend to prefer having AA turned on as opposed to off when possible.juhatus - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
3870 uses its shaders to do the AA, hence the bad AA results.16ROPS 256bit memory and ~400shaders shouln't compare too badly to this card without AA.
OCedHrt - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Per your numbers, the 5670 is 15W, not 25W, more under load.jigglywiggly - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
This card is fail.Pino - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
It´s perfect for me.I just play Day of Defeat Source and TF2, and I have a Dell Vostro 200 a low profile chassis, with a limited 200W PSU.
knowom - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
Pretty much the GT 240 basically wipes the floor with it in terms of performance, power, and noise. I don't see any real selling points on this card even DX11 and Eyefinity don't seem too viable on such a castrated card performance wise.Get the GT240 instead or spend the extra $10-$20's on a better performance card or save yourself a $10-$15's on the quieter and more energy efficient one is what it boils down to.
mczak - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 - link
I think that's a bit harsh, though really the review was harsh I think in fact it was a bit unfair.- the lower power draw of the gt240 has no connection to reality. All other reviews (some of them measuring power draw directly, some at the wall) show the hd5570 has a quite a bit lower power draw than the gt240 ddr3 under load (at idle it's a wash), not to mention the gt240 gddr5 (or HD4670) which are even a bit higher. I strongly suspect either something was wrong with the sample card or measurement error (or rather, not keeping the setup consistent).
- the RE5 numbers are very puzzling, and I'd say they are just bogus. Toms also tested this game, and the HD5570 just behaved like in any other title (that is, close to HD4670) there. Seems a lot more believable.
- the comparison to gt240 gddr5 seems a tad unfair. Now AMD thinks this should be compared to gt220 which isn't really useful, but it seems to me that price-wise it will be really the same as the gt240 ddr3, not gddr5 version. Granted, that's probably only a 10 dollar difference but when talking about 80$ cards this does make a difference.
bombacan - Monday, April 5, 2010 - link
when compared to 4670, there is no improvement on neither performance nor power consumption.besides its more expensive and doesn't have a fanless version atm.avhenrik - Saturday, May 15, 2010 - link
I am not a specialist, but check out how rage3d gets smooth deinterlacing with a simpler card (HD 5550) here: http://www.rage3d.com/reviews/video/sapphire_hd555...They combine adaptive vector deinterlacing with other post processing, giving nice results. Have you tried that on the 5570?
hybrid2d4x4 - Thursday, August 26, 2010 - link
It's probably too late to ask this as this article/thread probably never gets checked anymore, but what PSU was used in the review?I'm assuming that it's the standard 750W or higher rated unit that's used for most VGA reviews... but wanted to know how much savings there is to be had by using a low-rated, high-efficiency PSU more suited to a low-power HTPC build.
nfarnham2001 - Monday, December 27, 2010 - link
Okay, I have an HP a6203w desktop with a Bestec 250w PSU. I am looking for an average cheap replacement to the very crappy nvidia 6150se nforce 430 graphics. I am basing my choice off of the fact that video cards without power connectors use the 75 watts of the PCI slot, and since my full system is stock besides 2 more gigs of ram, I figured it could hold it. Professional opinion?dendy - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
I was working on the study of the Radeon HD 5570 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M for <a href="http://www.bestdealscomputers.net">my blog</a> .... and look for performance comparisons between the two. Is there someone can help?dendy - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
http://www.bestdealscomputers.net ... that is my blog.