Game Benchmark: Far Cry 2
The Far Cry 2 results mirror our synthetic 3DMark numbers except that the new Radeon HD 5450 seems to have no advantage over the 4550. Thsi is despite the 50 MHz core speed advantage and 100 MHz memory speed advantage. If anything, the new card is a couple frames slower than the older 4550.
The results are mostly academic in this title but it is notable that the 5450 can perform on the razor's edge of playability at medium settings 1280x1024 as long as the shadow map resolution is lowered. Of course, we can't help but notice that the Radeon HD 4650 is a vastly superior gaming card. The GeForce G 210 is unplayable across all resolutions.
7
Comments
Sponsored
What a terrible opening paragraph! You slated the 5000 series because it wasn't as big an advancement as the 400 series!
1280x1024 is 5x4
1024x768 is 4x3
1280x960 is 4x3
Sexy heat sink albeit at the cost of losing an expansion slot.
As much as you don't like it, I think this is a fantastic card. Perfect for HTPC users right down to the fact it's half height (I believe I mentioned half height cards when these were first announced). Very attractive price point especially given savings on a sound card. Full marks to AMD for this one.
Hmm..how long before this card is effectively replaced by the next IGP? Got mixed feelings about it, to be honest..it's neither good nor bad, it just exists. Tough call buying this one.
The lower end of the 5000 series is a bit disappointing. I'm not convinced the 5450 is worth it for an HTPC given it's high price (>£50) in the UK - especially since a 785G motherboards is around the same price. I was holding out for the 5570, but it must sit between the 5450 and 5670 in price (~£60?) with performance somwhere between the two. The 4650 at
Ouch, Ouch, poor lil' blighter didn't like those benches much. I'll forgive it if the UK price is loooooooow. I do love the passive cooling!
However, aspect ratio of the screen isn't the pixel ratio, it's physical width and height. For example, if I run 1280x1024 on my monitor then it is 16:9 (and horribly stretched).
Not what the article implied though...
So what we've got here is a DirectX 11 card which doesn't have enough power to play DirectX games... If this was a Nvidia card you would have ripped into it no end, I really think Toms is getting ATI Bias; maybe theres some form of agreement here we don't know about.