Test Setup and 3D Mark VantageTest Setup
Doing comparisons with non-DX11 cards does make the HD 5750 seem a bit more drab than it really is. I guess that is the price of having the first DX11 parts out and having no competition. I have tried to use as many diverse applications as possible which rely on DX9 and DX10 functionality, and what DX11 applications I use have the DX11 functions disabled to get a more accurate comparison of performance. Remember, this card can run current DX11 applications comfortably with high quality settings and decent resolutions (such as 1920×1080).
The business end of the card. Note the solid chokes and polymer caps that provide power to the GPU.
The card was at first more than a little unstable when installed. I received this card near the middle of December, but in my particular test bed it was not stable with the Catalyst drivers of the time. Instability ranged from applications crashing to the OS just locking up. Later Catalyst versions seem to have stopped the instability.
I compared the Asus HD5750 to a reference NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT 512 MB (65 nm G92) and a reference AMD HD 4870 512 MB.
AMD Phenom II X4 965
4 GB OCZ DDR-3 1600 Platinum memory @ DDR-3 1333 18.104.22.168 timings
Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P Motherboard
Seagate 7200.10 1 TB HD
Lite-On 4X BD-Drive
Corsair 750TX Power Supply
Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit
Catalyst 10.1 Hotfix
Dell 3008 WFP
3D Mark Vantage
The first stop on any video card review is usually the latest number from 3D Mark. This at least gives us a decent baseline for where the strengths and weaknesses of a card may come from.
Overall the HD 5750 scores well against the older GeForce 8800 GT, but by a similar margin the HD 4870 scores better. Otherwise, looking at raw frame rates the HD 5750 is closer to the HD 4870 as compared to the 5750 and the 8800. Where things get interesting is in the more advanced feature tests. The new DX11 shader units on the HD 5750 seem to be much more efficient at complex operations than the older HD 4870.