1 00:00:00,480 --> 00:00:09,280 At long last, here is my performance review for the GTX 570, which I never 2 00:00:05,680 --> 00:00:11,519 did one for, as well as AMD's new Radeon 3 00:00:09,280 --> 00:00:16,080 6T900 series graphics card. So, that's the 6T70, which I have on my test bench 4 00:00:14,320 --> 00:00:22,400 right now. I'm running Battlefield Bad Company 2 for my uh my sort of pre 5 00:00:20,080 --> 00:00:26,640 premeditated run through that I do on all of the cards to get you guys some uh 6 00:00:24,640 --> 00:00:32,880 Fraps recorded results. So, I have the 6T970. I have the 6T950 here. I've also 7 00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:40,320 got on the GeForce side, the green side, the GTX 570 as well as the GTX 580. And 8 00:00:36,640 --> 00:00:44,559 then I've included in my graphs the 6870 9 00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:47,280 as well as a Hawk Edition GTX 460. So, 10 00:00:44,559 --> 00:00:54,960 that should give you guys some uh some sort of a a measuring stick against a 11 00:00:52,000 --> 00:01:00,399 performance series card. So, like a 460 or a 6870 versus one of these enthusiast 12 00:00:57,920 --> 00:01:06,080 grade cards, including the sixtyn00 series as well as the GTX 500 series. 13 00:01:04,239 --> 00:01:11,680 So, the games that I'm going to be showing today are Metro 2033, 14 00:01:08,720 --> 00:01:17,439 Battlefield Bad Company 2, uh 3D Mark 11, which is not a game 15 00:01:13,840 --> 00:01:20,799 technically, as well as, uh the Heaven 16 00:01:17,439 --> 00:01:23,840 benchmark, and I will be running all of 17 00:01:20,799 --> 00:01:26,159 them at 1080p. Oh, yeah. Crisis 2. and 18 00:01:23,840 --> 00:01:32,240 running at fairly high detail settings. That means I have enabled anti-aliasing 19 00:01:28,080 --> 00:01:33,840 in all tests. And the idea was to really 20 00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:40,400 stress these cards. So, at the settings I was running in Metro 2033, actually 21 00:01:36,240 --> 00:01:42,880 both the 6870 and the GTX 460 uh are 22 00:01:40,400 --> 00:01:46,880 were what I considered a fail. Um like it was 14 frames per second. I could 23 00:01:45,280 --> 00:01:52,320 measure frames per second, but it was just too choppy, completely unplayable. 24 00:01:49,280 --> 00:01:55,200 So anyway, stay tuned for boring charts 25 00:01:52,320 --> 00:01:59,520 and graphs and uh other things coming soon. So other than straight 26 00:01:57,759 --> 00:02:03,600 performance, let's talk a bit of a feature comparison between the green 27 00:02:01,840 --> 00:02:07,520 team and the red team for this particular generation of products. So 28 00:02:05,759 --> 00:02:12,000 there's a few different things that are similar. First of all, these are both 29 00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:16,959 direct X11 graphics cards with beefy tessellation performance, support for 30 00:02:14,160 --> 00:02:21,440 all the latest standards and all of that noise and hoo-ha. Okay, so they are both 31 00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:26,640 feature complete. Now, we have had times in the past when one company actually 32 00:02:23,840 --> 00:02:31,599 has a more advanced product than the other. For example, AMD was ahead of 33 00:02:28,879 --> 00:02:35,840 NVIDIA for DirectX11 and NVIDIA was way ahead of AMD for DirectX10, but we're 34 00:02:34,000 --> 00:02:40,080 not in a situation like that right now. So, the feature differences that we 35 00:02:37,840 --> 00:02:44,800 actually run into are some different things. So, first of all, AMD has their 36 00:02:42,319 --> 00:02:48,879 iinity technology. You can see they have a good number of outputs on the back of 37 00:02:46,800 --> 00:02:55,920 their card. two DVI, two mini DisplayPort, one mini rather, one HDMI, and 38 00:02:53,440 --> 00:03:00,959 that is what enables AMD as well as some special configuration of the card to run 39 00:02:57,599 --> 00:03:02,720 up to four displays off of a single card 40 00:03:00,959 --> 00:03:06,480 with affinity. So that means you could do three displays with your crosshair in 41 00:03:04,959 --> 00:03:10,319 the middle middle peripheral vision and then you could have like your uh your 42 00:03:08,560 --> 00:03:14,239 chat on another screen above it or whatever you want to do or you can even 43 00:03:12,159 --> 00:03:20,000 run just three displays off one card for triple HD resolution off of one card. 44 00:03:17,280 --> 00:03:26,159 Now to counter that NVIDIA has their NVIDIA surround which isn't quite there 45 00:03:24,319 --> 00:03:30,879 compared to iffinity because you do need two cards. So, if you run SLI on any 46 00:03:29,120 --> 00:03:35,680 supported GPU, which includes anything back to, as far as I know, the GTX 200 47 00:03:33,280 --> 00:03:39,599 series, you can run two monitors off the top card, one monitor off the bottom 48 00:03:37,200 --> 00:03:43,840 card, and you can get surround gaming, but it doesn't run off one card. Now, 49 00:03:41,760 --> 00:03:48,159 NVIDIA also has a couple other features, including their 3D vision. Okay, so I 50 00:03:46,799 --> 00:03:52,000 have the glasses up here, and this is actually a 3D vision ready monitor, so 51 00:03:49,840 --> 00:03:59,519 you can play in stereoscopic 3D. Mind you, AMD also has their competing HD 3D 52 00:03:55,040 --> 00:04:00,879 now. So, while you have to 53 00:03:59,519 --> 00:04:06,720 bear in mind that both of these approaches are slightly different, with NVIDIA, you're bound to certain 54 00:04:04,799 --> 00:04:10,959 standardized components, including the glasses and the displays. The AMD 55 00:04:09,439 --> 00:04:14,080 approach is a little bit different in that you are not bound to a standard. 56 00:04:12,879 --> 00:04:18,799 There are a bunch of different ways to go about it, but not all of them are 57 00:04:16,239 --> 00:04:23,120 created equal. Finally, last but not least, we have CUDA and PhysX on the 58 00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:27,680 NVIDIA side, as well as full support for direct compute on the AMD side. So, 59 00:04:26,000 --> 00:04:31,440 these are both a couple of competing standards, and it really remains to be 60 00:04:29,759 --> 00:04:36,160 seen which one is going to emerge as victorious. So, you kind of have to uh 61 00:04:33,840 --> 00:04:40,080 pick a road and walk down it at this point and hope you made the right 62 00:04:37,520 --> 00:04:44,560 choice. So, that is my feature summary. They both Oh, yeah, of course. They both 63 00:04:41,840 --> 00:04:48,560 support uh SLI, Crossfire, multiGPU configurations. Well, they don't support 64 00:04:46,080 --> 00:04:51,759 both support SLI. This one supports SLI. And they don't both support Crossfire. 65 00:04:50,160 --> 00:04:56,720 Only this one does, but they both support uh two-way and 3-way GPU 66 00:04:54,160 --> 00:05:00,320 configurations except on their performance grade cards. So, that is on 67 00:04:58,720 --> 00:05:04,240 the enthusiast grade cards, support up to 3-way. But you can see both of the 68 00:05:02,560 --> 00:05:11,199 performance grade cards I have here, that is the GTX 460 as well as the 69 00:05:07,280 --> 00:05:12,960 Radeon 6870 only have a single multiGPU 70 00:05:11,199 --> 00:05:18,240 connector each. So, those ones only support two-way multi-GPU 71 00:05:15,759 --> 00:05:22,639 configurations. Graphs to come. Crazy Russian also 72 00:05:20,800 --> 00:05:27,600 brought to my attention that the Radeon 6000 series also supports adaptive 73 00:05:24,880 --> 00:05:33,440 anti-aliasing. And I missed one feature that they both have, and that is support 74 00:05:29,680 --> 00:05:36,240 for HDMI 1.4A, which enables you to play 75 00:05:33,440 --> 00:05:39,639 back 3D Blu-ray with supported software and display. 76 00:05:54,080 --> 00:06:00,000 So, in conclusion, I'm not really going to declare there to be a winner because 77 00:05:58,479 --> 00:06:05,360 I think it's a bit of a mistake for graphics card reviews. Um because what 78 00:06:03,280 --> 00:06:09,919 happens is these guys are both so competitive, AMD and NVIDIA, that as 79 00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:13,120 soon as the market condition changes, they'll both be adjusting their 80 00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:17,759 strategies and their pricing structures in order to compete better with each 81 00:06:15,199 --> 00:06:21,199 other. So all you really need to do is look at the performance. And I do 82 00:06:19,520 --> 00:06:25,120 recommend checking out written reviews in addition to any video reviews you 83 00:06:22,960 --> 00:06:28,800 might see because quite frankly a lot of the written reviews have a lot more time 84 00:06:27,280 --> 00:06:33,520 spent on crunching the numbers and getting into the nitty-gritty of the 85 00:06:30,960 --> 00:06:37,520 technology. So check out for example the review on hardware that is 86 00:06:35,039 --> 00:06:43,280 www.hardkconnects.com. The GPU review guy over there is a total 87 00:06:40,000 --> 00:06:44,720 guru. So please do check them out. And 88 00:06:43,280 --> 00:06:50,560 so, yeah, I'm not going to declare a winner because what you really have to do is whether you're watching this video 89 00:06:48,000 --> 00:06:54,639 right now or watching it 6 months down the road, you can look at these cards 90 00:06:52,800 --> 00:06:58,319 and compare them in terms of their performance, but you also have to bear 91 00:06:56,319 --> 00:07:01,840 in mind the price. So, you'll have to just see what are the prices at that 92 00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:06,720 time and how do they stack up against each other when you factor in the bang 93 00:07:04,000 --> 00:07:10,960 for the buck aspect of the equation. So, thanks for checking out my Linus Tech 94 00:07:08,160 --> 00:07:15,680 Tips review of the GTX 570 as well as the Radeon 6900 95 00:07:13,919 --> 00:07:20,479 series. And don't forget to subscribe to Linus Tech Tips for more unboxings, 96 00:07:17,199 --> 00:07:20,479 reviews, and other videos.