Sapphire 5970 Toxic Review
Introduction and Technical Specs
Published: 5th August 2010 | Source: Sapphire | Price: around £800 |
Introduction
A little while ago we took at look at the Asus Ares and discovered that whilst it was absolutely a thing of immense power and desirability, it was also fiercely expensive. So what do you do if you want a product that has phenomenal power, a certain exclusivity but wont require you to sell a kidney to obtain one?
Sapphire have always been one of the premiere ATI partners and have been producing premium versions of each generation of ATI GPUs. Anyone who has been around the hardware scene for a while will know how highly the Toxic variants are thought of, and so when we discovered that Sapphire were going to bring out a Toxic version of the already excellent 5970, we couldn't wait to get our hands on one.
The HD5970, for those of you who need a little memory jog, is ATIs twin GPU behemoth and at the time of release was the fastest single card available. It did however have one small drawback. To get the card to fit within the ATX specifications and ensure that the reference cooler could handle the heat of two GPUs whilst still being only a dual-slot solution, ATI had to keep the core speeds quite low.
Sapphire have dispensed with the standard cooler and so does it allow for greater clockspeeds and finally unleash the performance the 5970 has promised?
Technical Specifications
| Specifications | |
| Output | 2 x Dual-Link DVI 1 x Mini-DisplayPort |
| GPU | 900 MHz Core Clock 40 nm Process Technology 3200 x Stream Processors |
| Memory | 4096 MB Size 512(2x256) -bit GDDR5 4800 MHz Effective |
| Dimension | 310x118x61 mm Size. |
| Software | Driver CD |
Absolutely. If you'll cast your mind back to the 5970 speeds you will notice that Sapphire have managed to get a 175 MHz increase in core speed and around 200 MHz faster on the memory. An absolute quantum leap forward in speeds compared to the standard design.
Time to take a look at the card in all its glory.
Most Recent Comments
Wow. I'd love one of those for my system! I didn't expect it to overclock THAT well!
By the way, I see the award images have changed? (atleast for the performance award?) I like it, looks nice
Quote
By the way, I see the award images have changed? (atleast for the performance award?) I like it, looks nice
QuoteYes indeed the awards have all been updated to match the new OC3D logo. If you think the performance one is lush, wait til we bring the others out.Quote
great review but I really can't understand why in crysis warhead the asus ares kicks the ass of the toxic in the minima and average FPS even in stock clocks - what's going on here guys? 
Quote
QuoteCouple of things explain that. Firstly the Toxic had a few less CPU clocks to handle the Physx, and the Toxic is a 5970 whereas the Ares is twin 5870s.
So the CPU will account for most of it, and the tiny extra theoretical grunt of the Ares gives us the few extra. If you look back at the Ares XF results you'll see that Crysis is pants no matter how much hardware you have. So really take it with a pinch of salt.Quote
So the CPU will account for most of it, and the tiny extra theoretical grunt of the Ares gives us the few extra. If you look back at the Ares XF results you'll see that Crysis is pants no matter how much hardware you have. So really take it with a pinch of salt.Quote
Hmm. Is it me or does that cooler either -
A. Completely rip off the Arctic Accelero Xtreme
B. Use an Arctic Accelero Xtreme.
'cos from where I am sitting it has to be one or the other.Quote
A. Completely rip off the Arctic Accelero Xtreme
B. Use an Arctic Accelero Xtreme.
'cos from where I am sitting it has to be one or the other.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VonBlade
If you look back at the Ares XF results you'll see that Crysis is pants no matter how much hardware you have. So really take it with a pinch of salt.
|
It's not just OC3D. Every website is "Crysis this, Crysis that". Seriously, the game is old hat now (and I'm not saying that at your or to you, just saying it in general).
Do the manufacturers (in this case Sapphire) suggest that you use Crysis?Quote
We use a range of games, some people might play Crysis and want to know what cards play it best. Metro is heavily green team weighted too. Just the way it is and we will always use what ever is POPULAR
The cooler is an AC unit.Quote
The cooler is an AC unit.Quote
Ah OK cheers Tom. I thought it looked like an AC Not a bad thing, best cooler for large cards ever IMO.Quote
Not a bad thing, best cooler for large cards ever IMO.QuoteAm I reading the Crysis bench properly? How comes the Stock out performs the overclock @ Maximum for the toxic?
Also I like to see bench's for Crysis as I find it very easy to compare real performance, I use it like a control of sort, to gauge GPU real world performance, much more useful than synthetic benchies!Quote
Also I like to see bench's for Crysis as I find it very easy to compare real performance, I use it like a control of sort, to gauge GPU real world performance, much more useful than synthetic benchies!Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CRiMiNaLNiNJa
Am I reading the Crysis bench properly? How comes the Stock out performs the overclock @ Maximum for the toxic? Also I like to see bench's for Crysis as I find it very easy to compare real performance, I use it like a control of sort, to gauge GPU real world performance, much more useful than synthetic benchies! |
Sometime the results can be a bit strange, just the way it is dude, maybe crysis didnt like the overclock. Without spending hours researching every result we'll never know.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tinytomlogan
Sometime the results can be a bit strange, just the way it is dude, maybe crysis didnt like the overclock. Without spending hours researching every result we'll never know. |
*stop making your replies bold*Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by silenthill
This is just a suggestion I noticed some of the websites and magazines dont put the maximum FPS they say it doesnt reflect the true performance of the graphic card because most important in game play is the minimum and average FPS which actually shows you if you can play the game between 30FPS and 60FPS which is considered (very playable) and also the maximum FPS behaviour is very strange when overclocking the GPU so why dont you scrap the maximum from your benchmarks to avoid these kinds of issues I know the maximum FPS shows the muscles of the GPU but its not really true performance. *stop making your replies bold* |
PS - stop bolding your replies.Quote
"The biggest compliment we can pay, and it is a big one, is that if this had arrived before Ares we'd have looked at that differently"
But the Toxic DID arrive before the Ares. You can see the date on this review is April 22nd; over 2 months before the arrival of the Ares.
*LINK REMOVED*Quote
But the Toxic DID arrive before the Ares. You can see the date on this review is April 22nd; over 2 months before the arrival of the Ares.
*LINK REMOVED*Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Telltale
"The biggest compliment we can pay, and it is a big one, is that if this had arrived before Ares we'd have looked at that differently" But the Toxic DID arrive before the Ares. You can see the date on this[/url] review is April 22nd; over 2 months before the arrival of the Ares. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tinytomlogan
With us matey, we had not tested it. |
I still don't 100% get the difference between your everyday 5970 and the ASUS Ares.... looking at the specs on AMD website it looks to me as if the 5970 has just double the specifications of the 5870..
sorry about my ignoranceQuote
sorry about my ignoranceQuote
holy thread revival batman
a normal 5970 is basicly 2 5870 chips underclocked to 5850 speeds
where was the ares, toxic and so on are full on 5870 chipsQuote
a normal 5970 is basicly 2 5870 chips underclocked to 5850 speeds
where was the ares, toxic and so on are full on 5870 chipsQuote
CSS Valid
Continue ReadingQuote