Latest News Posts

Social
Latest Forum Posts

Sapphire Radeon HD 5550 Ultimate
Bookmark and Share

sapphire_hd5550_050710.jpg
Print
by Rob Williams on May 10, 2010 in AMD-Based GPU

This past February, AMD quietly launched the Radeon HD 5550 alongside the much more touted HD 5570. At about $10 less than that card, the HD 5550 is an unusual breed. To help put all of the pieces together, Sapphire sent us its “Ultimate” edition of the card, which uses reference clock speeds, but features a very effective passive cooler.

World in Conflict: Soviet Assault

I admit that I’m not a huge fan of RTS titles, but World in Conflict intrigued me from the get go. After all, so many war-based games continue to follow the same story-lines we already know, and WiC was different. It counteracts the fall of the political and economic situation in the Soviet Union in the late 80’s, and instead provides a storyline that follows it as if the USSR had succeeded by proceeding with war in order to remain in power.

Many RTS games, with their advanced AI, tend to favor the CPU in order to deliver smooth gameplay, but WiC favors both the CPU and GPU, and the graphics prove it. Throughout the game’s missions, you’ll see gorgeous vistas and explore areas from deserts and snow-packed lands, to fields and cities. Overall, it’s a real visual treat for the eyes – especially since you’re able to zoom to the ground and see the action up-close.

Manual Run-through: The level we use for testing is the 7th campaign of the game, called Insurgents. Our saved game plants us towards the beginning of the mission with two squads of five, and two snipers. The run consists of bringing our men to action, and hovering the camera around throughout the duration. The entire run lasts between three and four minutes.

World in Conflict might look innocent enough, but the frame rates prove that it’s almost as hardcore as Crysis Warhead, being the second title to dip below 10 FPS at 1080p.

Graphics Card
Best Playable
Min FPS
Avg. FPS
NVIDIA GTX 295 1792MB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 8xAA, 16xAF
40
55.819
NVIDIA GTX 480 1.5GB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 8xAA, 16xAF
39
53.714
ATI HD 5870 1GB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 8xAA, 16xAF
38
45.200
ATI HD 5770 1GB CrossFireX
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
38
49.335
ATI HD 5850 1GB (ASUS)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 4xAA, 16xAF
29
40.581
NVIDIA GTX 285 1GB (EVGA)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
34
49.514
NVIDIA GTX 275 896MB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
36
46.186
ATI HD 5830 1GB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
31
42.543
NVIDIA GTX 260 896MB (XFX)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
23
39.365
ATI HD 5770 1GB (Reference)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
28
37.389
NVIDIA GTX 250 1GB (EVGA)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
24
32.453
ATI HD 5750 1GB (Sapphire)
2560×1600 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
23
31.769
NVIDIA GT 240 512MB (ASUS)
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
22
33.788
ATI HD 5670 512MB (Reference)
1920×1080 – Max Detail, 0xAA, 16xAF
21
31.872
ATI HD 5570 1GB (Sapphire)
1920×1080 – Medium Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
51
79.790
ATI HD 5550 1GB (Sapphire)
1920×1080 – Min Detail, 0xAA, 4xAF
32
46.390

Moving to medium settings in this game didn’t help us out too much, so we had no choice but to move to minimal levels. At that point, the framerates sky-rocketed, and unless you’re truly fussy, the game still didn’t look too bad.