picture says no...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesrt2004
(8+8+6)
Printable View
picture says no...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesrt2004
(8+8+6)
According to fudzilla : http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17851/1/
for nvidia Fermi GTX 470
So for GTX 480 the price is near 5970 or probably higher than this.this asus 5970 should be faster than GTX 480,Quote:
The safest guess is that it will be around 20 to 25 percent faster than the Geforce GTX 285, which puts it somewhere between the HD 5850 and the HD 5870.
Look here :
4870 > 250
260 core 216 > 4870
4890 > 260 core 216
275 > 4890 Reference
4890 Custom > 275
285 > 4890 Custom
4870X2 > 285
295 > 4870X2
so here i think
GTX 460 > 5830
5850 > GTX 460
GTX 470 > 5850
5870 > GTX 470
GTX 480 > 5870
5970 > GTX 480
GTX 495 > 5970
Huh ??
If 470 is between 5850 and 5870, 480 will be significantly slower than a 5970. What makes you think it's going to be priced higher than it?Quote:
Originally Posted by behrouz
Remember, Nvidia isn't looking to make a profit, that's why so little cards were produced, and that's why they can price it anything they want.
I used "Probably" so this is not Real.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Cost for making 5970 is more than GTX 480 so the profit of making GTX 480 is higher than 5970 because of heavy power consumption.
Look for 4890 & 5770.Price is near each of them but 4890 is higher in performance and power consumption and 5770 is newer than 4890, Of Course Slower than this , have DX11 & DirectCompute 5 & OpenCL.
it's nvidia so they'll lower fps for other GPU's in TWIMTBP games and market the shiz out of PhysX and 3D vision to justify the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Like AMD is trying to justify the price of 5770 and 5830 with currently useless things like DX11 or OpenCL?Quote:
Originally Posted by Helloworld_98
It's awesome how you can say "it's nvidia..." while AMD has been doing this for quite some time now, with a quite broad range of products
I suppose (on some of our behalves) hate for nvidia means that we don't really take notice of what ATi does anywhere near as much as nvidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
also ATi is more subtle than nvidia with dx11 than PhysX, c'mon, 7 slides just on PhysX?
Along with DX11 is ok to use to justify the price because you can't do it on other pieces of hardware and as we have seen it gives a visual advantage, whereas with PhysX you can do it on the CPU but nvidia optimizes it so little for x86 that it's unusable.
Pardon my French, but that's just childish!Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Invest in something $$$ billions, and not wanting to sell it for profit is fairytale excuse!
If they are going to step up to 8-pin+8-pin+6-pin I say screw dual-GPUs. I want 3 or 4 full 5870 (or 5890) gpus on one board. We know you can do it asus. :D
What for? That'd be hard to feed enough power and cool, plus CFX scaling isn't great, not to mention so many chips sitting on the card in a single PCI-E slot...Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
Haha no, I'm not saying they will never have any returns from their investment. The R&D investment was for Fermi and I am only saying that they won't see a ROI for this batch of GF100. Their designs haven't suddenly vanished, it just needs a little more time for respins and revisions for a high enough yield to be produced profitably - a couple of months later, Fermi will be making Nvidia money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
Surely this is just a theory but nobody would believe Nvidia could make a profit from a GTX 480 sold under $700 or something at this point, which they won't because the performance would be nowhere near justifying that.
2 reasons:Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
1. Because I want one. :(
2. To beat a dual fermi card.
Of course, this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstru
However, this is a very interesting card and my oh my that's a serious cooler.
Factory OC'ed to 825 meh not a big de- OH LOOK AT THAT COOLER
Ohhhh very interesting here :
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/02/...gtx480-scores/
Quote:
Getting back to the selective showings of the GTX480, there is a good reason for it. The performance is too close to the HD5870, so Nvidia will be forced to sell it at HD5870 prices, basically $400. The GPU isn't a money maker at this price point, and at best, Nvidia can price it between the $400 HD5870 and the $600 HD5970. The only tools left to deal with this issue are PR and marketing as the chip is currently in production.
Quote:
The end result is that the GTX480 is simply not fast enough to deliver a resounding win in anything but the most contrived benchmark scenarios. It is well within range of a mildly upclocked HD5870, which is something that ATI can do pretty much on a whim. The GTX480 can barely beat the second fastest ATI card, and it doesn't have a chance at the top.
Quote:
GTX480 is too hot, too big, too slow, and lacks anything that would recommend it over a HD5870, much less the vastly faster HD5970. Nvidia is said to be producing only 5,000 to 8,000 of these cards, and it will lose money on each one. The architecture is wrong, and that is unfixable. The physical design is broken, and that is not fixable in any time frame that matters. When you don't have anything to show, spin. Nvidia is spinning faster than it ever has before
GTX 480 Slower than 5970 ??? Nvidia price for this is between 400$ to 600$.
What the hell is going on ?
hahahah :DQuote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
Oh wa I see waht you did there. :lsfight:Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
So what kind of performance hit will 3D tish cause on fermi, or the 5800's for that matter?
Until about March 26, this question has no grounding and is likely dismissible.Quote:
Originally Posted by behrouz
...Quote:
Quote:The end result is that the GTX480 is simply not fast enough to deliver a resounding win in anything but the most contrived benchmark scenarios. It is well within range of a mildly upclocked HD5870, which is something that ATI can do pretty much on a whim. The GTX480 can barely beat the second fastest ATI card, and it doesn't have a chance at the top.
Quote:GTX480 is too hot, too big, too slow, and lacks anything that would recommend it over a HD5870, much less the vastly faster HD5970. Nvidia is said to be producing only 5,000 to 8,000 of these cards, and it will lose money on each one. The architecture is wrong, and that is unfixable. The physical design is broken, and that is not fixable in any time frame that matters. When you don't have anything to show, spin. Nvidia is spinning
This article was commented before, there are some true things in it but in majority is biased, not to trust. GTX 480 will be closer to 5970 than 5870 and GTX 470 will be closer to 5870 than 5850. :)
Ares if will not be limited editions to 1K like Mars probably is build to match future GF 104, but price vould be very high probably 800-900$.
I can bench that with GPU pots. These have a large enough pad/clearance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatalbert
http://chew.ln2cooling.com/LN2pots%2...g/IMG_2223.jpg
Save the aluminum comments as these things will likely coldbug long before alum is a factor with temps ;)
;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrea deluxe
There's a reason why title of this thread says "AMD's REAL answer" (although it's meant to point to recent Trillian the Fermi killer canard). Asus was the one who leaded way for AMD's custom 5970s with ROG ARES.
@chew
you can mount a pot even on the gpu on the right ? :eek:
2x8 & 6pin won't be a problem? Because I think it could be.
Nah should be fine. This pot design was raised quite a bit to avoid all obstacles and allow for heavy insulation. Problem is they are preety much app specific based on the core contact of 5XXX cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatalbert
I guess you missed the entire 295 Dual PCB launch, every card sold was at a loss on profits for NVIDIA. They simply released the cards to take the crown away from the 4870X2 after they had the GT200b which could operate at extremely low temps while delivering unprecedented performance in SLI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
any proof of that claim?Quote:
Originally Posted by LedHed
nice chew :D
hmmm ,they are 60 mm width ;)
http://www.techpowerup.com/?88367Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedjo
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...le-pcb-review/
Quote:
So why is this product replacing the dual-PCB version of the GTX 295 series then you ask? Well the answer is simple; cost control. The dual-PCB versions are being sold with little to no profit at all. And that's just not healthy business for any company.
sure like to water cool that monster :)
But what about the pretty heatsink that costs like 100$?! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by iboomalot
Seriously, though, they should probably sell these with waterblock + pump + 240mm rad pre-made solutions or something.
the picture in the OP is a render...
Its pretty common knowledge that most Nvidia cards are very expensive to produce, and for once again since the ATI 9700 / 9800, ATI are stomping all over Nvidias backside.
Speed of the product isnt the only thing that matters, price to performance is much more important to many people.
then how come S3 graphics isnt doing better? their flagship card is on par with HD4670.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
Minimum threshold for acceptable performance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
If S3 brought out a card to give ATI and NV a surprise I'd buy it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
I loved my old S3 Savage 4.
Sadly it's not their market area anymore.
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/scree...it-2010-02.JPG
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,7...nchmarks/News/Quote:
Asus Ares: HD 5970 done right - first benchmarks
At the Cebit Asus presents the Ares, a dual GPU card with two full-fledged HD 5870 GPUs which have access to 2 GiByte each - an overall VRAM amount 4 GiByte. This means that in contrast to the common HD 5970 the frequencies are not reduced. In difference to the Mars (Asus' dual GTX 285) the Ares won't be limited and is going to be produced and sold as long as there is a demand for the card. But given the expected price of 750 to 1000 Euros the card still transfers a feeling of exclusiveness.
In a first benchmark, 3DMArk Vantage Extreme, the card reached more than 14000 points in the Extreme setting (1920 x 1200 pixels 4x FSAA, a6x AF) - a real impressive results. For more details take a look at the pictures in our gallery below.......
Wow that is a monster. People will sell those 10 years from now at like 5000$.
Are the mars sold out yet?
People will probably watercool theirs, so one might think the gigantic heatsinks are of no use. But just think what you can tool with this HS... an entire motherboard maybe?
They should put a piece of paper in the box with an ID that allows you to register on their site. When you register the card, you get special stuff.. banners,wallpapers, you ansert a short poll with questions about your hardware preferences and your uses for it. Then you can access the stats, like 15% will cool it with ln2 at least once.... would be nice
Now beware. because this card is pretty beaten-up. Hold your tears : this card is WAY crooked
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/177...d5870grafi.jpg
It also is very high, and whoever said crap about the heatpipes being very small now needs to give apologies :
http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/1779/...d5870grafi.jpg
Finally, I wonder what the girl is thinking about... I can haz ares?
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/4...kkartedual.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by metalop1g
The card itself looks good, but the 8+8+6 is a bit much. I hope ATi may release a cheaper 8+8 card "as reference" which has lower ocing potential then this monster.
So since i can see no 5950 i assume its nt coming that can mean only one thing ATi will lower the prices of plain 5970 to counter fermi. :yepp:
I do hope the GTX 470 is what its said to be i would not mind a 8+6 hog as long as i get some results..
they still look like ~8mm pipes to me, can't be entirely sure, but the V8 in the background has 6mm pipes
How wide is the crossfire connector on the PCB? The pipe looks almost exactly half the width. I'm at work or I'd just measure one.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoonXX
What? no! lolQuote:
Originally Posted by FlawleZ
The angle is throwing you off, looks like a standard heatpipe. Very similar to what you would find on a copper TRUE.
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/scree...it-2010-05.JPG
I'm just glad that thing is shorter than the reference 5970. And a beast to boot!
Actually no, its not throwing me off.Quote:
Originally Posted by damha
Would you agree we're at roughly ~60* angle from the plane of the PCB? And obviously the heatpipe is a cylinder so from any angle its equivalent to seeing on a flat plane. So then, I transformed the perspective of the PCB 30* to simulate ~90* and then cropped the heatpipe as is without transformation.
Doesn't that look close to half the size?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...Z/heatpipe.jpg
This isn't real exact, but close enough for speculation. :p:
If you can wait until Saturday I'll get you as many pics of the heatpipe as you want. *lol*
Here's another shot:
http://www.guru3d.com/imageview.php?image=22588
Now that's exciting!Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Dan
Still think it looks like a standard heatpipe? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by damha
http://ic.tweakimg.net/ext/i/imagelarge/1267450338.jpeg
Damn, the card looks absolutely stunning. I'd love to have one. If not the price... :(
:eek2:Quote:
In a first benchmark, 3DMArk Vantage Extreme, the card reached more than 14000 points in the Extreme setting (1920 x 1200 pixels 4x FSAA, a6x AF)
id like to see them test it with just one gpu, so we can see the effects of 2GB vs 1GB
TRUE uses 6mm pipes, looks like pipe diameters are ~8mm (again, the coolermaster V8 cooling the proc has 6mm pipes)
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...-review-4.html
directly also compares thicknesses of 6 and 8mm pipes
Ok from that shot it is quite clear they are a bit bigger than usual. Still don't agree with the close to 50%, I'd say maybe less than 40% ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by FlawleZ
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17873/1/Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
:up:
http://www.fudzilla.com/images/stori...rujastruja.jpg
It looks pretty ugly design wise, though...Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
I think they are giving fermi too much credit in performance. They don't need three slot dual 8 pin monsters. Where did AMD idea of efficient chips go. At this rate with three slot coolers, they might as well slap 3 5870s on a card add 5 8 pin powers slots and call it a day.
Well if a single GPU Fermi is significantly faster than a 5870, to counter a Dual Fermi threat they have to give the cards as much juice as they can.
Of course this is taking into account Nvidia won't be seeking PCI-E certification for Dual Fermi. If it did, a dual fermi would be pointless. 250W Single vs 300W Dual - there won't be much of a perf. difference, plus the latter will be SLI
the guy that said, hey why dont we make the card a little taller instead of it being a foot and a half long should get kudos in my opinion. hopefully others will follow suit.
Maybe im just pessimistic but i dont think ati has to do anything to the 5xxx series for competing against Fermi.
Sure hope that one could get 5890 for decent price later though...
It kind of reminds me the GTX295 single PCB ... maybe it's the cooler :shrug:
480 will be 5-10% faster than 5870 if not less.
These lately nvidia benchs done at 2560x1600 shows an advantage but in vram not in power(the thing that matters). Why don't they put a 5870 2GB in that comparison.
Easy answer:
HD5870 2GB destroys fermi.
Well....
Figures from nvidia spermi (GTX 480) is not known.... Some say 3-5% (Example; Charlie from SemiAccurate, I spoke with him at Cebit), others say 20%.... THe vendors i have been talking with says tad less then 30% above HD5870.....
My thinking is just.... hmmm... nvidia spermi will be 3x GPU..... CFX is still 4 gpu..... So, I actually think Nvidias overhyped crap will suck the dust...
btw..... Nvidia is firing people from partners just because of their crap product and leaking details..... Nvidia had guards at what they say is fermi, at cebit.... you werent even allowed to see the backside..... I infact know 2 guys that has held the Fermi in their hands at Cebit.... So it was actually Fermi in the cases, however, no plexi glass for public to show.... I had a good time asking nvidia staff why they used hemlock for their demos.... for some reason they didnt consider it funny.... ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
They did?
Holy....
I personally don't think there is even a point to do a dual gpu fermi at 40nm due to the afforementioned power issues. The only viable option performance wise would be such a feat (350+watts if not more...) and I I don't see that happening. However I don't see Nvidia sitting idle. If they can do something to beat the 5970, they will do it. As far as when, how and for how much... who knows... ( the May rumours sound like total bull if you ask me )Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
From a technical standpoint I see a dual 470 with reduced clocks and low leakage cores being possible. This *might* match a 5970 in *some* rare cases but not likely enough to justify it ( eg they wouldn't hold the crown ) As far as low clocked 480s on 40nm? Good #%@$ing luck!
It will be interesting to see how things unfold in the coming months, that is for sure.
@ Jowy
M was just being a smart ass with them lol
If only it could fold....:mad:
:D See post #136 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
The thread title should be : AMD's REAL answer to AMD Radeon 5970 : AIB Custom 5970s ;)
My monitors max resolution is 1920x1080 I believe. Aren't these cards overkill for a monitor with that max resolution?
I'm not sure the word "overkill" exists on this forum. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by damstr
Haha yeah you have a point.
Lol, they are extreme overkill for that resolution. I'm at 1920x1200 too, have a single 5870 and didn't even see any need to overclock it.Quote:
Originally Posted by damstr
maybe now but dx11 looks to need alot more powerQuote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
i'm on 25x16 and this or two of the Asus 5870 Matrix look good
:rolleyes: Single 5870 can run Crysis or Stalker CoP at that res?Quote:
Originally Posted by annihilat0r
:rofl:
I've got a problem with Stalker CoP (my IQ settings don't stick for a reason, and I hate Stalker games anyway) and Crysis plays just fine with everything maxed out if you don't apply AA.Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidReactor
Don't get what you're laughing at like my card was 8800gt or something. :shrug:
I played through Stalker CoP at 1920x1200 without AA ( which is shader based only due to the renderer which in turn causes a huge performance hit with single gpu configs ) and without tessellation. It was quite playable but if you want to use both AA and tessellation, you need at least 2 5850s to be playable at this resolution throughout the game. The nice thing however is the DX11 renderer runs AND looks better than DX10 even without tessellation.
I wouldn't call a 5970 overkill for 1920x1200. You'll be able to run older titles with edge detect transparency AA and have nice performance, and play most newer games with at least 4x transparency AA. The 5870 can't accomplish this in everything. For the most part though, unless you like higher IQ (edge decect, transparency ), a single 5870 should do well enough. There are a few ( but not a lot ) of games that can't handle AA at 1920x1200 on a 5870.
As far as Crysis, I've played through both with my 4870x2 and 5870 multiple times and I felt the 5870 did a tad better interestingly enough. Played through them both with a custom very high config running the 64bit exe in DX9 with 2x AA. Plenty playable for single player. A 5970 will do the same feat at stock very high settings with 4x-8x AA ( until vram limitations set in potentially )
These custom 5970s will be nice for eyefinity at extreme resolutions (3x 19x12 or 25x16 ) where more vram and higher clocks will shine. A reference 5970 should be fine for a single display for the next while.
I dont see this as a real answer because i still think a normal 5970 will be more then enough to beat the GTX480.
I think 5870 OC cards with 950 core clocks and 2GB mem can come quite close to the GTX480 performance.
But never the less its nice to see AMD will give us even more performance. I know i want to try one of those 5970 with 850 core and 2x2GB mem :D
That Arctic Accelero Xtreme looks good ! It was super on the HD4870 X2. I know i want one of those :P
It may be necessary if dual Fermi ever comes out, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Astennu
It won't because of the huge power consumption of the GF100 core.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
If all the 512 CC are enabled, the TDP exceeds 300w, and we are talking about a single gpu...
The real answer with an unrealistic price. I will stick with my 4870X2 for now, unless i win the lottory.
Limited production cards are far from "the answer". I guess I'm just getting bored with all of the hype surrounding both camps.
I'm gonna do something I haven't done for a loong time and write +1 for the post above.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReverendMaynard
It smells on MARS(read problems). How they gonna call it? SNICKERS or BOUNTY?
I call BS on the 28% better in 3DMV Extreme. I doubt it's going to be more than 15% better in average over the non-SNICKERS version.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReverendMaynard
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,7...nchmarks/News/Quote:
In difference to the Mars (Asus' dual GTX 285) the Ares won't be limited and is going to be produced and sold as long as there is a demand for the card
In My Opinion thats a really big IF. With the currents rumors an pictures of the cooling, special cases (Elements V NV edition with special VGA airduct), Fan specs and the rumors about design + yield problems. I dont think we will see a dual fermi soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
And if they it might even be slower then 2x GTX470 in CF. Because they need to disable more SP's and lower the clocks to not exceed the 400 watt.
I guess they will have to wait for: 1: To fix 40nm and improve the design 2: 28nm.
Why ?Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
The Clockspeeds are 20% higher. And memory is 100% bigger. You dont know what the impact of the memory will be.
Maybe its the same as from the Radeon 8500 64MB > Radeon 8500 128MB i saw huge boosts in performance in all 3Dmark 2001 SE tests.
And a more recent example HD4870 512 vs 1024. Average 15% performance boost. Starting at 1280x1024 with a 10% boost.
So it might be possible depending on the resolution and the arcitecture of the RV870. Maybe it can utilize more memory capacity better.
So i think its possible to see 28% performance increase in benshmarks and games.
1) The clocks are not 20% higher. PCI-e, which is the interface connecting the two GPUs and the NB is clocked same. The core clock is clocked 17% higher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Astennu
2) You can count on one hand the games that in a very specific case(at certain scene when playing with everthing @max: resoultion, settings, AA and AF) can benefit from frame buffer larger than 1GB. There is no game yet that can utilze 2GB frame buffer at everything maxed out. I bet that in 95% of the games there would be no difference in perofrmance between the 4GB and the 2GB version of the card @same clocks.
3) Never compare single GPU scalling with multi GPU scalling. Just check the difference in performance between Asus MARS and regular GTX 295. MARS has more theoretical computing power compared to the regular GTX 295, but in reallity the difference was marginal.
4) I owned a systems with a 4870X2 on a Q9450@3.9GHz, and 2x4890, a GTX295, a 5870 and 2x5870 on an i7-920 @4.2GHz~4.4GHz. I did a lot of benchmarks and came to the conclusion that a dual-GPU performance never scales linear with frequencies, although the CPU bottleneck was basically avoided.
So, that 28% gain is a cherry picked result form a lot of benchmarks. And if that is the best, I guess the average will be at half of that at best.
I apologize if this has already been mentioned. There was some interesting info at the end of the article which seems to support the title of this thread....
Saphire's custom 4GB overclocked 5970...here.
Same clocks as the Asus but only 2 8pins. The board itself is smaller however (reference size)meaning it won't have potential clearence issues like the Asus ( which is a taller than reference pcb )
Their comment at the end is very interesting if true ( not to mention somewhat sad )
This might just be a premature comment on their part however if it is greeted with legitimacy... custom 5970s 1:1 with 480s? I take away two things from this, the first being less likely. 1) The 480 may compete more closely ( in price at least ; ideally performance as well ) to the 5970. 2) Availability will be as bad as rumored. Given the fact that the 5970 is already not an overly available part... custom overclocked premium models will be ever more so. That said though, I don't see AMD sitting ideally content with their partners designing higher performance solutions on their lonesome. We should be seeing a higher performance reference part sooner or later... ( Would love to see a 2GB 5890 at 1000/1300... )Quote:
Originally Posted by bsn
1: Who says the card is PCI-E limited ? And the Memory clock is 20% higher. Core clock is 17%.Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
2: I dont think 3dmark vantage scores are very specific. Normally 3Dmark does not scale well with higher clocks. I know normal scaling is not 100% with clocks 12% higher clocks mostly result in 8-9% higher fps. And i know there are no games that will use 2GB. Keep in mind the 5970 classic is not really 1GB !!. Because its a dual GPU card. CF and SLI in there current form dont have a shared memory pool. Every GPU has one GB. But because they both need to render the same scenes (only different frames) they both need the same information in there memory buffer. And because of that CF and SLI setups of 2gb effectively have 1GB.
So the 4GB effectively is 2GB. And there are no games that will use all of that at the moment but i think there will be games that go beyond 1GB. For one GTA4 needs more then 1GB to run maxed out. And i bet there are modern games that will show nice boosts when going from 1 to 2GB. But just like the transition from 512 to 1024 there will also be games that show almost no performance gain.
And i think you will see some difference between the 5970 2gb and the 4gb. I guess you could see 5-10% depending on the resolution.
and also do not forget eyefinity. Its possible to get resolutions up to 24 mega pixel. 6x more then a single 30" display. And thats the most important reason for the bigger frame buffer. I think vs dual screen there are quite a lot of people using 3 screen eyefinity with 3x22" you already have 5.7 mpixel vs 4.09 of a single 30" display. And yes i know people who use it do play games.
3: I'm not comparing single to multi gpu scaling i'm comparing a dual 5970 vs another dual 5970. Both multi GPU. I know there is a potential bigger lower gain when overclocking. But when you have GPU limited situation SLI and CF scaling are quite good (in modern games). I dont know about the mars but i know CF OC did help a lot for the performance when you where GPU limited. But there are not a lot of games that will max out a 5870 CF setup. Only really new games like Dirt II on DX11 mode can. Or when running high resolutions 2560x1600+.
Your not buying cards like these to play on 1280x1024. A single 5850 is more then enough for 1920x120 (2.4 Megapixel) but a 5870 is still a bit to slow for 2560x1600 in some more demanding games (24 Fps when running STO)
4: i agree with that. It also depends on the game and if it has good CF/SLI support. If it has good support you can see the scaling up to 95%.
And your GPU OC will scale just as well.
But if you meant with your reaction that games with bad CF/SLI wont scale well with the higher clocks you are correct. But when you compare it with a normal 5970 i think that i overall a 20%+ gain is possible. Because you compare dual vs dual and if CF is not working you will still have the clockspeed and memory buffer advantage. (deepening on the resolution because you need the gain of the 2gb per gpu buffer) on lower resolutions i guess it will be more like 15% gain.
But we will just have to wait and see how it will perform in the real world. There are already 3 vendors that will bring a 850-1200 4GB 5970 to the market. So i think we will some nice reviews when that time comes.
That gave me a good laugh. Thank you :DQuote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
Have you not seen the card from the OP? Who cares about 300W in such extreme cases?Quote:
Originally Posted by subaruwrc
I do. ;) Grab an IDE disk(and disconect every SATA drive you have), push the PCI-e clock to the max and do some benches. Then bring the PCI-e clock to stock and do the same beches again. Let us know the difference. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Astennu
3D Mark is almost useless benchmark for measuring real-world gaming performance. It can be used only as a meter when you compare two cards with same architecture, but with different clocks on the same CPU. That's why I call BS on the 28% better part and why I doubt that the tweakedd 5970 will be more than 15% faster than the stock in average.Quote:
2: I dont think 3dmark vantage scores are very specific.
Different types of graphics cards act differently. If the VGA has plenty of VRAM bandwidth then upping the VRAM clocks will add no points to the result, but if the VGA is bandwidth hungry you will se almost linear scalling in performance with only increasing the VRAM clock. The best example for that is the 8800GT. It's bandwidth starved.Quote:
Normally 3Dmark does not scale well with higher clocks. I know normal scaling is not 100% with clocks 12% higher clocks mostly result in 8-9% higher fps.
Theoretically it has 2GB on board, but in reallity it is exactly a 1GB card.Quote:
Keep in mind the 5970 classic is not really 1GB !!.
I perfectly understand that.Quote:
Because its a dual GPU card. CF and SLI in there current form dont have a shared memory pool. Every GPU has one GB. But because they both need to render the same scenes (only different frames) they both need the same information in there memory buffer. And because of that CF and SLI setups of 2gb effectively have 1GB.
That's why I was talking about 1GB vs 2GB frame buffer(or reference 5970 vs tweaked 5970).Quote:
So the 4GB effectively is 2GB.
I don't think so. IMO there would be no gain at all in 99% of the cases.Quote:
And i think you will see some difference between the 5970 2gb and the 4gb. I guess you could see 5-10% depending on the resolution.
BINGO! I forgot eyefinity :yepp: There these tweaked 5970's are going to shine! So, it will be the card for those who will buy a pair and at least 3 30" monitors.Quote:
and also do not forget eyefinity. Its possible to get resolutions up to 24 mega pixel. 6x more then a single 30" display. And thats the most important reason for the bigger frame buffer. I think vs dual screen there are quite a lot of people using 3 screen eyefinity with 3x22" you already have 5.7 mpixel vs 4.09 of a single 30" display. And yes i know people who use it do play games.
OK, because you menitoned single Radeon 8500 64MB and single Radeon 4850 512MB. These cards have nothing common with a card like the 5970(the stock and the tweaked).Quote:
3: I'm not comparing single to multi gpu scaling i'm comparing a dual 5970 vs another dual 5970.
Yeap. We'll wait and see. :DQuote:
But we will just have to wait and see how it will perform in the real world. There are already 3 vendors that will bring a 850-1200 4GB 5970 to the market. So i think we will some nice reviews when that time comes.
They are not going to be running huge production on that card, there isn't and never will be a huge market for upper echelon cards like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_d
Ok there will be a difference but i think it wont be so big. Also see this test: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/A...press_Scaling/Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
Its a Single 5870. Do do see some difference but its not major when moving from 8x to 16x. So 8x per GPU should be enough.
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/HD_587...rfrel_1920.gif
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/HD_587...rfrel_2560.gif
ok i totally agree there 3dmark is crap and is nothing close to the real worldQuote:
3D Mark is almost useless benchmark for measuring real-world gaming performance. It can be used only as a meter when you compare two cards with same architecture, but with different clocks on the same CPU. That's why I call BS on the 28% better part and why I doubt that the tweakedd 5970 will be more than 15% faster than the stock in average.
That is true. But the case of the 5870 and 5970 its quite balanced. I did some tests with 850 MHz core and only 1000 MHz mem. Then you see a drop. But when you have 750 Core and you upp the memory from 1000 to 1200 the boost is really small. And with the 5970 OC they increase both almost 20%.Quote:
Different types of graphics cards act differently. If the VGA has plenty of VRAM bandwidth then upping the VRAM clocks will add no points to the result, but if the VGA is bandwidth hungry you will se almost linear scalling in performance with only increasing the VRAM clock. The best example for that is the 8800GT. It's bandwidth starved.
BTW: the 4850 is also bandwidth starved
I know the architectures are different and there i a chance you will not notice anything. The HD4870 1024 was 15% faster then the 512mb. But the 4850 on the other hand was not faster at all. It did had halve the bandwidth of the 4870 that might be the cause. But as far as we know the 5870 had enough bandwidth. Core speed boosts do a bit more then mem speed boosts. So far i have not found any card in the HD57 tm 59 series that is memory bandwidth starved.Quote:
That's why I was talking about 1GB vs 2GB frame buffer(or reference 5970 vs tweaked 5970).
I don't think so. IMO there would be no gain at all in 99% of the cases.
OK, because you menitoned single Radeon 8500 64MB and single Radeon 4850 512MB. These cards have nothing common with a card like the 5970(the stock and the tweaked).
And i dont say it will be 25% faster but i wont be surprised if i is looking at the past there are multiple cases where a bigger framebuffer did give a nice overall boost. I for one never expected that the 4870 1024 would be 10% faster on 1280x1024. I thought you would only notice it at 1920+. But this was not the case.
I suggest a new plan for ATI. Dont release any new 5000 series cards, but focus on pushing out their next gen DX11 cards A.S.A.P.
With no competition and still not paid off(I'm talking about the money invested for research, development and marketing) Radeon 5000 series, that would be the smartest plan if their goal is to bankrupt. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
I think they are already working on it...Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
I doubt making 5xxx took really so much resources, they used nearly the same arch as before, plus tessellation is nothing new for ATI.Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
They have enough 5xxx chips out already (if not too many). Time for something new.
I seems they are. so far there is no indication of a RV890. We know they will allow HD5870 OC moddels with 900-950 clocks and also 5970 with 850 clocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavv
Depending on the performance of the GTX480. That boost could be enough to stay competitive.
I think (if there are no unexpected problems) AMD Will be able to release the HD6xxx series this year.