# ATI Radeon HD 5830 Specifications Surface



## btarunr (Feb 23, 2010)

AMD's new performance graphics card that targets an upper-mainstream price-point, the Radeon HD 5830, is slated for February 25. A set of company slides sourced by IT168.com shows the GPU's specifications are in tune with what we expected. The HD 5830 is based on AMD's Cypress 40 nm GPU. It has 1120 stream processors, a 256-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, 16 ROPs, 56 TMUs, and clock speeds of 800 MHz (core) and 1000 MHz (memory). The memory bandwidth on the card is 128 GB/s, on par with that of the Radeon HD 5850. The core clock speed is slightly higher, too. 

With a GPU of these specifications, AMD targets the market price-range of $200-$250, where there's room for a DirectX 11 generation graphics card to be positioned between the Radeon HD 5770 and Radeon HD 5850. The maximum board power of the card is slightly higher than that of the HD 5850, but we think that's because reference designs - if there are - might not use high-grade digital PWM circuitry. That typically shouldn't affect overclocking headroom a big deal.



 

 

 




The Radeon HD 5830 further has 1 GB of memory, and supports ATI Eyefinity technology. With the same display controllers as on the Radeon HD 5870, the card can support up to six physical displays. AMD's add-in board partners should be able to release non-reference design graphics cards right away, so you wouldn't have to wait any further for a PCS+, the VaporX, or the IceQ+.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## fochkoph (Feb 23, 2010)

About freakn' time!


----------



## Maban (Feb 23, 2010)

Only 16 ROPs? Disappointing.


----------



## jaredpace (Feb 23, 2010)

From these specs I can say this card is horrible compared to a 5850.  Should be called a 5805 at most


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Feb 23, 2010)

failsoup


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Feb 23, 2010)

This is about what i expected.  Not sure why every one is so mad.  I think it is a good fit for those who want good power, but don't think the 5770 is cutting it.

Why is the power usage rating higher than the 5850?


----------



## arroyo (Feb 23, 2010)

Because core is overclocked from 725 to 800MHz and probably ATI used cheaper parts in PWM section.


----------



## theubersmurf (Feb 23, 2010)

Binned 5850 dies?


----------



## El_Mayo (Feb 23, 2010)

I'm guessing they don't want it to have better priceerformance than the 5850


----------



## afw (Feb 23, 2010)

Its expected to perform the same as HD4890 .... but whats with the price ???  ... :shadedshu
you can find 4890 for less that $200 ... 

anyways ATis on a roll  ....


----------



## Imsochobo (Feb 23, 2010)

afw said:


> Its expected to perform the same as HD4890 .... but whats with the price ???  ... :shadedshu
> you can find 4890 for less that $200 ...
> 
> anyways ATis on a roll  ....



Its faster than 4890.

Memory performance is the same.(slightly higher)
Shaders. 1120 vs 800, rofl.. and higher IPC, meaning higher 

Rops and texture units is the same as 4890, atleast rops.
Core clock is almost the same, this is like a GTX280 if i should guess.

4890 is just slightly faster than 5770 so dont see a point of making something as fast as 4890, has to be slightly faster than that again


----------



## Reefer86 (Feb 23, 2010)

it will be intresting to see the price point im thinking about £170 - 180 due to the 5770 being at £120 and the 5850 being £220


----------



## theorw (Feb 23, 2010)

FAIL...An OCed 5770 @1000-1030 will be really close on performance.2 5770s will destroy 5830...


----------



## jagd (Feb 23, 2010)

It has 16 rop but also pixel fillrate under 5770 .It will be interesting to see how it will perform under actual games vs 4890 and 5850 .But i guess 5850 will still be best price/performance card.


----------



## cbupdd (Feb 23, 2010)

pictures: http://vga.it168.com/a2010/0222/852/000000852052_1.shtml


----------



## alwayssts (Feb 23, 2010)

Wow, with specs like that they must be using darn near every Cypress die, because that is indeed some very weak sauce.  Better be cheap.

Also, it explains why Fermi must REALLY be screwed with a chip 2/3 larger (552.25mm2?).

Comparatively speaking, think of a RV770 or Juniper/5700 with 560 shaders, 8 ROPs, 28 TMUs, when the lowest RV770 we ever saw was 640sp/32TMU and still 16 ROPs.   That's terrible.  

Clockspeed is likely higher to make up pixel fillrate.  Also, the TDP is in accordance with the clockspeed of the chip, and disabled units have never really (unlike nvidia when they've shut down part of the bus) lowered TDP on ATi chips.

Also, it explains why Fermi must REALLY be screwed. (again for effect)

I thought we'd get a card to match up against GTX275/280, instead we get a card that matches up against 4890 with some extra flops for DX10/11 features, but skimping on the fillrate that seperate the midrange from the performance section.

Suddenly, $199 makes a LOT more sense.  I'm going to go out on not even a limb and say ROPs are going to bottleneck that thing up in many TWIMTBP games.  Heck, it's got lower fillrate than 4890.  Hell, it's got lower fillrate than 5770!

I was expecting 16 ROP and 960sp on the 128-bit Northern Island, but this is pushing it.

You're an ugly card, 5830.


----------



## Imsochobo (Feb 23, 2010)

jagd said:


> It has 16 rop but also pixel fillrate under 5770 .It will be interesting to see how it will perform under actual games vs 4890 and 5850 .But i guess 5850 will still be best price/performance card.



Yeah, 5850 is really, superior to any other card, i bought one, and i cant say i regret, going another one when i cant run full AA at max res anymore 
5850 will run all ur games at max 1920x1080, as im playing on the 42" tv/projector i dont use the 30" anymore.
So dont really need more than the 5850 at the moment


----------



## Zubasa (Feb 23, 2010)

jaredpace said:


> From these specs I can say this card is horrible compared to a 5850.  Should be called a 5805 at most


The problem is the 5850 is now the 4770 of the HD5k series.
It is simply too fast if you look at that compare to the 5870.



theorw said:


> FAIL...An OCed 5770 @1000-1030 will be really close on performance.2 5770s will destroy 5830...


The 5830 still out perform any 5700 at stock clocks 
What makes you think that a 5830 will not overclock just as well (if not better) than the 5850?


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 23, 2010)

Zubasa said:


> The 5830 still out perform any 5700 at stock clocks
> What makes you think that a 5830 will not overclock just as well (if not better) than the 5850?




I thought the same, 1ghz 5830 would beat 1 ghz 5770.


----------



## Assimilator (Feb 23, 2010)

Ouch... I was expecting 5830 to be a cut-down 5850, not *neutered*. That said, it may very well be an excellent clocker, but on the other hand, why bother if you can get a 5770 which will probably perform almost as well and has lower power requirements? As others have said, 5830 will need to be cheap to sell.

Also, given these specs, I reckon 5830 was never on ATI's roadmap to start with; rather, it is a solution to the problem of large numbers of defective Cypress dies manufactured by TSMC.


----------



## gumpty (Feb 23, 2010)

Assimilator said:


> Also, given these specs, I reckon 5830 was never on ATI's roadmap to start with; rather, it is a solution to the problem of large numbers of defective Cypress dies manufactured by TSMC.



I remember seeing some leaked ATI document on here after the 5870 & 5850 launched that inferred that there'd be three 5800 series GPUs, so I think it has always been on their roadmap. Most likely they have some forward-thinking engineers on board that predicted the situation you describe.

EDIT: Nope, I was wrong - it indicated three 5700 series.


----------



## Zubasa (Feb 23, 2010)

gumpty said:


> I remember seeing some leaked ATI document on here after the 5870 & 5850 launched that inferred that there'd be three 5800 series GPUs, so I think it has always been on their roadmap. Most likely they have some forward-thinking engineers on board that predicted the situation you describe.
> 
> EDIT: Nope, I was wrong - it indicated three 5700 series.


They might need a card to fill in the gap between the 5750 and the 5670, although the price difference will get narrower over time.
Maybe a 640SP card that sits somewhere near the 4770 performance.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Feb 23, 2010)

since we have not got any performance tests, why are you prejudging this card, think a bit before you post. do you know how this card is going to react in the real world?


----------



## chaotic_uk (Feb 23, 2010)

how come it uses more power under load than the 5850 ?


----------



## [Ion] (Feb 23, 2010)

chaotic_uk said:


> how come it uses more power under load than the 5850 ?



Higher clock speeds


----------



## wolf (Feb 23, 2010)

24 rops would have made more sense to me given they still kept the 256 bit bus and a fair few sp's from that lovely cypress core this chip started with.


----------



## Athlonite (Feb 23, 2010)

yeah up the ROPs 16's ok for entry level but a performance card even though it's ment to be a little brother of the 5850 should atleast have 20~24 ROPs otherwise it just looks like the 5770's slightly older twin who learns to walk then run before the other


----------



## Wshlist (Feb 23, 2010)

*power*

Did you guys notice that power spec:
HD5850 151Watt
HD5830 175Watt

So that would mean there will be more noise, especially if they try to skimp on the cooler's material costs.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Feb 23, 2010)

theorw said:


> FAIL...An OCed 5770 @1000-1030 will be really close on performance.2 5770s will destroy 5830...



Fail, the 5830 can OC too.  That is not a comparison.


----------



## El_Mayo (Feb 23, 2010)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Fail, the 5830 can OC too.  That is not a comparison.



an HD 5830 is a better buy for someone with only one PCI slot and wants performance inbetween the 5770 and the 5850
obviously


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Feb 23, 2010)

I almost feel bad for the 5830.  It is going to get crap for being the middle child.  It will always be "Not enough of an improvement over the 5770" or "Not as good as a 5850".  We are talking about a cart that I said 2 months ago would be released at $225 and I am going to stand by that.

In addition to what El Mayo said, this is just the beginning.  And improved cooler systems will be introduced to the 5830 and I think a decent factor OC (set price around $255) will give the 5850 a run for it's money as the best bang for your buck.  Also, this will have to prompt so price adjustments once benchmarks are done depending on how much better than the 5770 it is.  If not so much, price may come down to $215, more than expected the 5770 will go down $15 to $25.  Either way it is a win.


----------



## El_Mayo (Feb 23, 2010)

TheLaughingMan said:


> I almost feel bad for the 5830.  It is going to get crap for being the middle child.  It will always be "Not enough of an improvement over the 5770" or "Not as good as a 5850".  We are talking about a cart that I said 2 months ago would be released at $225 and I am going to stand by that.
> 
> In addition to what El Mayo said, this is just the beginning.  And improved cooler systems will be introduced to the 5830 and I think a decent factor OC (set price around $255) will give the 5850 a run for it's money as the best bang for your buck.  Also, this will have to prompt so price adjustments once benchmarks are done depending on how much better than the 5770 it is.  If not so much, price may come down to $215, more than expected the 5770 will go down $15 to $25.  Either way it is a win.




they can't lose
if people think, "not enough of an improvement over the 5770" they'll have to pick up the 5850
if not, they'll buy the 5770, or even two
they're not exactly gonna run to nvidia right now are they


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Feb 23, 2010)

If those figures are correct, the power/performance ratio isnt too good. The 5850/5870 looks like a better price/performance and power consumption/performance offering.  This is a nasty "SE" edition, for those with long memories. FAIL in my books


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Feb 23, 2010)

Looks dissapointing with 16 ROP's and higher power consumption than a 5850, along with less OC headroom.


----------



## OneCool (Feb 23, 2010)

Wshlist said:


> Did you guys notice that power spec:
> HD5850 151Watt
> HD5830 175Watt
> 
> So that would mean there will be more noise, especially if they try to skimp on the cooler's material costs.




Yeah I noticed that too.It has to be a typo.I see no reason it should be pulling more max wattage than a 5850


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 23, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> Looks dissapointing with 16 ROP's and higher power consumption than a 5850, along with less OC headroom.




Why less overclock headroom?

could potentially overclock like a beast, the cards arnt even out yet


----------



## MKmods (Feb 23, 2010)

Im surprised, the 5850 is going up in price so it looks like the 5830 will be in the 230-250 range. But the specs of the 5830 look like a $179-199 card.

This dosent make much sense to me.

Once its released it will be interesting to compare to a 5850 and 5770


----------



## Polarman (Feb 23, 2010)

I was expecting something a wee bit better than that.


----------



## jaredpace (Feb 23, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> Why less overclock headroom?



Because it's the same chip as the 5850 and 5870, shipping from the factor at 75mhz faster stock clocks than a 5850, with less robust power management.


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 23, 2010)

jaredpace said:


> Because it's the same chip as the 5850 and 5870, shipping from the factor at 75mhz faster stock clocks than a 5850, with less robust power management.




it uses all the same stuff as 5850 I hear, just cards that didn't quite make the cut to be 5850s.


Should over-clock greatly me thinks  


With the less rops etc it should produce less heat so have extra headroom there too.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Feb 24, 2010)

Is it just me or due the stats for the 5830 look....well..... wrong.  The math would suggest they just took the 5770 figures and adjusted them based solely on the new clock speed and increase in Texture units.  And it seems to me like the 5770 was used to base them assumed figures on because it has the same number of ROPs.  I checked and it really doesn't seem like the additional Streaming processor units were included in these figures.  If this is true, it would explain the "increase in power use" but lower pixel fill rate.

I am going to call BS on these figures and wait for the cart itself to be reviewed here at TPU.  I think we are all in for a treat.


----------



## Lionheart (Feb 24, 2010)

I have a feeling that this card is gonna be ROP starved.


----------



## rodneyhchef (Feb 24, 2010)

I hope we don't see a repeat of the 4830 with this - here in the uk before the 4830 was released you could get a 4850 for ~£100 but after it was released the prices of the 4850 were bumped up and the 4830 was sold for around ~£100 instead. :shadedshu I would've thought 192bit and 24 ROPs would have made more sense than 256bit and 16 ROPs but I guess time and benchmarks will tell...


----------



## Wshlist (Feb 24, 2010)

OneCool said:


> Yeah I noticed that too.It has to be a typo.I see no reason it should be pulling more max wattage than a 5850


Run at a higher core, 800 vs 725, so I don't think it's a typo, it's how they decided to make it land between the 5770 and 5850 I guess.


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 24, 2010)

Would that tiny overclock make that much of a difference in wattage though?

As I don't think it would.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 24, 2010)

If ATI wants to sell these, then they need Daddy AMD to take over and make them unlockable like the CPUs! Can you imagine how many of these would sell if you could unlock it to a 5850 or at least close (with a simple bios mod)?


----------



## chaotic_uk (Feb 25, 2010)

Wshlist said:


> Run at a higher core, 800 vs 725, so I don't think it's a typo, it's how they decided to make it land between the 5770 and 5850 I guess.



i say it's a typo , the 5770 only uses 108w under load . are these not a stop gap between the 5770 and 5850 ? , some of the figures do not add up as they are worse than the 5770 and yet use more power


----------



## Nick89 (Feb 25, 2010)

theorw said:


> FAIL...An OCed 5770 @1000-1030 will be really close on performance.*2 5770s will destroy 5830*...



In 3 games out of 100 that you would actually play. Cause crossfire and SLI are both gimmicks.

OMFG whats THAT? I have two 4870's in my system specs!!! HOLY CRAP! how could he say such things!?!?! SURELY he's not suggesting Crossfire and SLI are both worthless and have no performance gains in most games, am I?


----------



## MKmods (Feb 25, 2010)

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17806/1/


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 25, 2010)

MKmods said:


> http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17806/1/



Such nice coolers on a sub par card makes baby jeebus cry.


----------



## DonInKansas (Feb 25, 2010)

btarunr said:


> With a GPU of these specifications, AMD targets the market price-range of $200-$250,



You know, where the 5850 was when it originally launched.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 25, 2010)

DonInKansas said:


> You know, where the 5850 was when it originally launched.



Haha, yeah, but the exorbitant prices confirm that the 5850 kicks ass 

Maybe ATI figured Nvidia would snap into gear and release fermi


----------



## Nick89 (Feb 25, 2010)

TheGuruStud said:


> Such nice coolers on a sub par card makes baby jeebus cry.



You know what else makes baby jeebus cry? Gimmicks.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 25, 2010)

Nick89 said:


> You know what else makes baby jeebus cry? Gimmicks.



It's just   You can buy the good card and not receive such a cooler, but the redheaded step child does.


----------



## theorw (Feb 25, 2010)

Zubasa said:


> The problem is the 5850 is now the 4770 of the HD5k series.
> It is simply too fast if you look at that compare to the 5870.
> 
> 
> ...



i was proved RIGHT wasnt i?
Only 5% difference on STOCK speeds from 5770 means 2 5770s WILL pawn 5830 for 50EUR more and the satisfaction of XFIRE


----------



## pantherx12 (Feb 25, 2010)

Hell get a 5770 with a decent cooler and they do 1ghz core speed anyways ( taking them up to very similar performance levels) 

5830s are like the lottery I guess lol you could get an epic one but you could get an awful one.

( In the UK 5830s could be worth it as if you buy online you can rma the item within 14 days just because you don't like it, then just buy from another shop, repeat until you get an epic one!)


----------



## theorw (Feb 25, 2010)

pantherx12 said:


> Hell get a 5770 with a decent cooler and they do 1ghz core speed anyways ( taking them up to very similar performance levels)
> 
> 5830s are like the lottery I guess lol you could get an epic one but you could get an awful one.
> 
> ( In the UK 5830s could be worth it as if you buy online you can rma the item within 14 days just because you don't like it, then just buy from another shop, repeat until you get an epic one!)



U can do the same here except u cant buy from another shop...
But what i do is OC a card then if it wont OC nice i RMA it (bios flash...ahem) to a maximum of 3 times and if i am lucky i find one that OC well


----------



## DonInKansas (Feb 25, 2010)

theorw said:


> i was proved RIGHT wasnt i?
> Only 5% difference on STOCK speeds from 5770 means 2 5770s WILL pawn 5830 for 50EUR more and the satisfaction of XFIRE



If you look at any review, CF 5770s will run with a 5870.  5830 never stood a chance.


----------



## Athlonite (Feb 25, 2010)

almost makes me want to buy one just get the cooler for my 5770 LOL


----------



## Nick89 (Feb 25, 2010)

theorw said:


> i was proved RIGHT wasnt i?
> Only 5% difference on STOCK speeds from 5770 means 2 5770s WILL pawn 5830 for 50EUR more and the satisfaction of XFIRE



There is no satisfaction from Xfire, I know cause I use it. And 2 5770's will get their ass's kicked most of the time because the performance increase with Xfire is non existent in most games except those that support crossfire properly. 

A lot of PC games don't support crossfire properly because a lot of them are console ports these days.


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 25, 2010)

Nick89 said:


> There is no satisfaction from Xfire, I know cause I use it. And 2 5770's will get their ass's kicked most of the time because the performance increase with Xfire is non existent in most games except those that support crossfire properly.
> 
> A lot of PC games don't support crossfire properly because a lot of them are console ports these days.



But on the other hand...the console ports are POS and the graphics suck, so you don't need a fast card


----------



## Nick89 (Feb 25, 2010)

TheGuruStud said:


> But on the other hand...the console ports are POS and the graphics suck, so you don't need a fast card




You ever play GTA 4 PC?


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 25, 2010)

Nick89 said:


> You ever play GTA 4 PC?


 
Yeah, it looked...okay. I know it was limited b/c of hardware, but that's probably the only game that doesn't fall in line with console ports being easy to render. Bioshock 2 was a massive let down in texture resolution. It was almost depressing. Pretty water effects and blurry walls. Screw consoles.


----------



## zithe (Feb 25, 2010)

TheGuruStud said:


> But on the other hand...the *console ports are POS* and the graphics suck, so you *need* a fast card



Fixed.


----------



## Nick89 (Feb 26, 2010)

zithe said:


> Fixed.



And you only need a fast card because they aren't optimized.


----------



## Meizuman (Feb 27, 2010)

There is no way I would consider buying one to replace my 4850... I checked for prices in Germany , and 5830 was *only* about 15-30€ cheaper. This is madness.

Also the prices of 5830 are 235-249€ whereas 5850 goes for 265-300€

5770 is also faster un OC'd in some few titles. 4890 is faster by a margin. U can still get 4890 for about 200€ or lower (used) so I really can't justice buying one.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Feb 27, 2010)

5850 prices went *UP* on the egg, bumboclaat man


----------



## zithe (Feb 27, 2010)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> 5850 prices went *UP* on the egg, bumboclaat man



Cheaper ones are out of stock.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Feb 27, 2010)

zithe said:


> Cheaper ones are out of stock.



I wonder why ...


----------



## MKmods (Feb 27, 2010)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> 5850 prices went *UP* on the egg, bumboclaat man


it looks like Nvidia cards may be so expensive ATI felt the need to raise the prices on all their cards...

The ATI stuff seems a lot more $ than they were a few mos ago
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102879
FTL!

(I thought there was an article a while back that mentioned ATI and Nvidia working together to keep prices up)


----------



## TheGuruStud (Feb 27, 2010)

MKmods said:


> it looks like Nvidia cards may be so expensive ATI felt the need to raise the prices on all their cards...
> 
> The ATI stuff seems a lot more $$ than they were a few mos ago



Retailers jackin prices more than anything, IMO. The prices jump as soon as the demand does.


----------



## zithe (Feb 27, 2010)

MKmods said:


> it looks like Nvidia cards may be so expensive ATI felt the need to raise the prices on all their cards...
> 
> The ATI stuff seems a lot more $$ than they were a few mos agohttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102879



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131344&cm_re=5830-_-14-131-344-_-Product

I like that deal better.


----------



## MKmods (Feb 27, 2010)

LOL, I would like it even better if it was $199.

also are those cards the same length as a 5870? (I thought I read in one of the things that the 5830 was built using messed up 5870s)
If so that would make it too long to be useful to me.


----------

