AMD intros sub-$100 Radeon HD 6670, 6570 cards

This, I believe, rounds out the Radeon HD 6000 series. Originally scheduled for a first-quarter release, AMD’s new Turks graphics processor has made its official debut on two new budget cards: the Radeon HD 6670, which starts at $99, and the Radeon HD 6570, which you’ll find priced at $79 and up.


The Radeon HD 6670 and 6570, respectively. Source: AMD.

These two models complement the $55 Radeon HD 6450 that came out earlier this month—though, as their pricing suggests, they’re less pruned-down in terms of computing resources. AMD has also implemented support for four-display Eyefinity configurations, whereas the 6450 only supports up to three monitors. Otherwise, all the features you’d expect in 6000-series Radeons are there, from DirectX 11 support to the UVD3 video decoder and stereoscopic 3D capabilities.

Looking at raw specifications, one gets the impression that the two newcomers will fall a wee bit behind the Radeon HD 5770 (which can be found labeled as a Radeon HD 6770 in some pre-built systems) on the performance scale:

  SPs GPU

speed

ROP

pixels/

clock

Textures

filtered/

clock

Memory

data

rate

Memory

interface

width

TDP
Radeon HD 5770 800 850 MHz 16 40 4.8 GT/s 128 bits 108W
Radeon HD 6670 480 800 MHz 8 24 4.0 GT/s 128 bits 66W
Radeon HD 6570 (GDDR5) 480 650 MHz 8 24 4.0 GT/s 128 bits 60W
Radeon HD 6570 (DDR3) 480 650 MHz 8 24 1.8 GT/s 128 bits 44W
Radeon HD 6450 (GDDR5) 160 750 MHz 4 8 3.6 GT/s 64 bits 27W
Radeon HD 6450 (DDR3) 160 625 MHz 4 8 1.6 GT/s 64 bits 20W

That’s interesting because the 5770 can be had for as little as $109.99 at Newegg right now—only a $10 step up from the 6670’s starting price. When we brought this up with AMD, we were told that the firm is emphasizing the Radeon HD 6670’s lower power consumption, which is purportedly an important trait in international markets like China. In other words, those looking for high frame rates will probably wanna grab a 5770, but users and system builders putting together small, cheap, low-power machines might find the 6670 more appealing.

AMD may enjoy a bigger profit margin on the 6670, too, because that card has a smaller, cheaper-to-manufacture GPU. For reference, the Juniper chip inside the 5770 packs 1040 million transistors, while Turks has 716 million, and the 6450’s Caicos GPU packs only 370 million. All three chips are manufactured by TSMC on a 40-nm fab process.

As for the cheaper Radeon HD 6570, that model provides a middle ground between its big brother and the 6450. Two middle grounds, actually, since AMD is offering it in variants with GDDR5 or DDR3 memory, the latter having substantially less bandwidth.

So, there you go: two new Radeons to flesh out AMD’s new sub-$100 product family. I can’t say I’m all that excited about these, but I can see the appeal for folks seeking low-power solutions for multi-monitor productivity or very light gaming. Here’s hoping we’ll see versions with passive cooling or at least bigger coolers with large, quiet fans, though. Part of the appeal of low-power GPUs is quiet cooling, but as we found with the Radeon HD 6450, small fans can actually make entry-level cards louder than pricier, more power-hungry alternatives.

Comments closed
    • PRIME1
    • 8 years ago

    I thought Llano was supposed to destroy this market.

      • Kurotetsu
      • 8 years ago

      It might, but its not going do so instantaneously. Its going to take a while for Llano-based systems to become common (well, once its actually released). Until then, there’s going to be a market for low-end discrete graphics.

    • anotherengineer
    • 8 years ago

    Hmmm I was hoping the 6670 was going to be a “barts” derivative.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      From a cost standpoint that doesn’t seem possible. Huge die, alot of it disabled, for under $100? Seems wasteful. I guess if they had a bunch of nearly-50%-defective units, but otherwise no way.

    • Hattig
    • 8 years ago

    Do these have the same efficiency improvements like Barts had over the previous generation – i.e., doing more with less?

    The 480SPs might not be far off 800SPs if this is the case.

    I look forward to seeing a review – lots of people game with this level of card. It would be interesting to see it compared to older generation mid-level cards too.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      Well, according to the Guru3D review, the 6670 is a considerable improvement over the 5670, but still doesn’t catch the 5770. I can only guess, because the review doesn’t say, but performance (which is mostly in the 40-50% improvement range at higher resolutions) does seem to indicate there’s something under the hood that’s been improved.

      [url<]http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-6670-review/3[/url<]

        • derFunkenstein
        • 8 years ago

        And here’s Anandtech’s review. It shows significantly smaller performance deltas, and their test suite seems to be using newer games.

        [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/show/4278/amds-radeon-hd-6670-radeon-hd-6570[/url<] [quote<]Architecturally, Turks is very close to Redwood. Compared to Redwood it has 6 SIMDs instead of 5 SIMDs, giving it 480 SPs and 24 texture units versus 400 SPs and 20 texture units on Redwood. The ROP count remains unchanged at 8 ROPs, while the memory bus is still 128 bits wide. Of course being a Northern Islands GPU, Turks implements all of the common improvements we see with NI: UVD3, improved texture filtering, HDMI 1.4a (e.g. Blu-Ray 3D), a revised tessellation unit, and DisplayPort 1.2 support.[/quote<]

          • Palek
          • 8 years ago

          The photos of the HD 6670 in the Anandtech and the Guru3D articles show a completely different card from the one above. TR’s photo features a full-height card with a single-slot(?) cooler adorned by a larger fan. The other two sites show a low-profile card with a two-slot cooler sporting a small fan (booo!). Did TR get the wrong PR photos?

          [EDIT] It appears that the low-profile double-wide HD6670 is just a reference design from AMD. Here’s hoping there will be original designs with larger/quieter fans and a more up-to-date output port arrangement. (Seriously, why bother with analogue any more?)[/EDIT]

    • ShadowTiger
    • 8 years ago

    Awwww! The little GPU has a ribbon on it’s vga connector! how cute!

      • dpaus
      • 8 years ago

      Yeah, I can’t believe that that’s less expensive than an angle-cut PCB, but I’ve been out of that business for years…

      • SonicSilicon
      • 8 years ago

      It’s a low-profile compatible card. You just detach the ribbon from the PCB connector, remove the full height bracket, and put on the low profile bracket. Now you have a low profile card without the expense or hassle of hunting down a specific, different model.

      (You could, instead, remove the D-Sub from the bracket and attach it to another low-profile to put in a side slot, if you need VGA.)

        • dpaus
        • 8 years ago

        Good point; I didn’t think of that angle.

    • tazpa
    • 8 years ago

    5750 would have been a good addition to the table. Here (in Finland) 5750’s cost about 10% less than 5770’s, and with a moderately lower tdp but without such obvious drop in the specs as 6670.

    • Anvil
    • 8 years ago

    At the very least, these will serve as a guideline for the exact same GPUs that AMD is shoving into notebooks. Good stuff all around, even if these cards are just above the line where they’re being eaten by onboard GPUs.

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 8 years ago

    “When we brought this up with AMD, we were told that the firm is emphasizing the Radeon HD 6670’s lower power consumption…”

    lol says the company about to include a rough equivalent in their CPUs that may not even cost $100, sans the power sucking card. It’s amazing how far out of their way they’ve gone to dodge a legitimate update to the Radeon 4800 class of cards, which have proliferated in the $100-150 range for several years now. 4850, 4870, 4770, 5750, 5770, 6790…

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      I’m hoping that Llano will do some sort of “crossfire” with these cards, like the 760G did with the Radeon 3450 and 3470s – except more upscale. That could really make low-budget gaming builds even more possible. A $100 Llano CPU with 400 Radeon cores + a $80 (?) 6670 with 480 could be fairly potent.

        • dpaus
        • 8 years ago

        Not to mention difficult for either Intel or Nvidia to compete with

          • derFunkenstein
          • 8 years ago

          Exactly, good point.

        • SonicSilicon
        • 8 years ago

        [qoute]Select models will support TurboCore technology along with a hybrid graphics technology that will allow the GPUs of select A-series APUs to assist a discrete graphics card in graphics processing, when paired with a Northern Islands (Radeon HD 6000 series) discrete graphics card.[/quote]

        [url<]https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/AMD_Fusion#.22Llano.22_.2832nm.29[/url<]

    • jackbomb
    • 8 years ago

    HP’s been using the HD 6570 in a few of its PCs for a couple of months now. Different card?

      • MadManOriginal
      • 8 years ago

      Nope, AMD just finally released them as retail cards…they’ve been OEM-only for a while now.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 8 years ago

    The 6670 GDDR5 really isn’t that bad as a successor to the 5670 and is an OK card for older games reading the reviews that actually make sense by testing games other than the latest blockbusters at low resolutions. Like most all sub-$100 cards though it’s a tough sell being stuck between older discounted cards (or used cards) that are cheaper and as fast or faster and just a few tens of dollars more for a much better performing card. I would honestly consider a passive one.

      • Palek
      • 8 years ago

      One thing the HD 6670 has going for it over the HD 5670 is that the HD 6670 reference cooler appears to feature a larger fan than the one found on the single-slot HD 5670 reference design, so it [b<]should[/b<] be quieter and/or more effective. Now, if the HD 6670 cooler is confirmed to be a single-slot design (it's not entirely obvious from the photo), then I could be buying one of these very soon! (Yes, I'm that guy who keeps going on about single-slot designs for his Shuttle cube machine.)

      • swaaye
      • 8 years ago

      2900 -> 3870 -> 4670 -> 5670 -> 6670 have been a very gradual progression of similar specs. I had a 3850 and a 4670 until recently but am out of that bracket now. Whether it was worthwhile to upgrade is another question. 😉

    • homerdog
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]Two middle grounds, actually, since AMD is offering it in variants with GDDR5 or DDR2 memory[/quote<] I'm guessing the table's right and it's DDR3.

      • Cyril
      • 8 years ago

      Oops, typo.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This