Printable View
Barts has 5Gbps chips, just because you underclock doesn't mean they are cheaper. They are underclocked more than likely to save TDP since clocking them higher doesn't offer any substantial gains in performance, or at least not as much as core clock.Quote:
Originally Posted by saaya
Edit- Also remember, AMDs word for this release is efficiency.
Efficiency is one thing LordEC but performance is another thing. Barts needs to kick GTX 460 in the nuts :DQuote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
It should.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Was just reminding people that raw numbers don't mean anything if you aren't using them efficiently.
We are agree. If you look at size mm^2/performance, AMD did an excellent job with HD5K, especially regarding Fermi derivatives :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
edit : DX11, Tesselation need some improvements though
the gap between the 6870 and whatever 69x0 is the lowest they go with, might have been to small with full speed memory.
i just hope it overclocks VERY well.
Yeah, Barts supposedly does overclock VERY well :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
so where's the 6970 leaks ? :D
Give it about a month.Quote:
Originally Posted by antiacid
Are they all left of the decimal and on the same line ? :D j/k I'm glad you're doing well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
SO the barts and XT arent better then the 5870? Anyone have any idea where their releasing the HD68XXX series??
Should be, at a minimum, very close in performance. New rumor is that Barts is actually performing like an early rumor, around GTX480 levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny87au
From the info I have heard, Barts IS the 68x0 series and will be launching Oct 18th. Cayman will be sometime in mid-late Nov.
That would totally ruin nvidias day. Seriously, with that few shaders taking on the 480gtx is a bit of s stretch it would make Cayman near invincible.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
oh... antilles????
:D
Just per se Antilles sound like the big daddy.
i don't freakin believe Bart will be in GTX 480 performance territory, even the fanATic in me isn't crazy enough to put much weight on that rumor, my nVidiot side still instills some dose of reality in my mind. Bart i@ ~HD 5850 performance is very much believable, Bart getting close and at times surpass HD 5870 is still somewhat probable, but Bart the 260-280 mm^2 chip surpassing GTX 480 the 530 mm^2 behemoth ?? That would be totally earth shattering in 3D graphic.
Barts Xt will probably get close to the 5870 in overclocking since the stock clocks are a tad small. I think AMD will leave a decent oc headroom since the GF104 clocks really nice even at stock volts and cooling.
As I posted in the other thread... Note, that all the numbers assume the actual 4+1 -> 4D transition with only 98.5 % loss in performance.
Barts Pro will have some 960 SPs. At 850 MHz core clock it can achieve maximum theoretical of ~2 TFLOPS, or something along those lines.
Barts XT will have some 1280 SPs. At 850 MHz core clock it can achieve maximum theoretical of 2.67 TFLOPS, or something along those lines.
Barts XT would need 863 MHz core clock to surpass Cypress XT's 2.72 TFLOPS shader performance.
Barts XT would need 952 MHz core clock to achieve 3 TFLOPS.
Cayman with 1920 SPs at 850 will hit 4 TFLOPS. :) Give it 952 MHz for core and it will go 4.5, and 1058 and it will go 5 TFLOPS. Single chip. At 40 nm.
But again, note that real world performance does not scale linearly with shader power, so the gains won't be as big as the raw numbers would suggest. Or, at least the performance boost is not because of raw shader performance. We do not know if they've done changes to tesselation unit. Since people say that it's the weak spot in DX11, I'd guess they would focus some effort there too, bringing the performance up even more.
Barts XT with 3 TFLOPS(should be able to get it to ~950 MHz, no?) + more advanced tesselation unit = GTX 480 will cry. :)
Oh, and chip sizes should go up a bit, but Barts XT should be smaller than Cypress XT etc. AMD's already unbeatable Perf/mm˛ should be up by some 20-25 %.
Tesselation is not a weak spot in amd current 5000 serie, it has enough and more power for todays games and next years games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
the only time it is low on power is extreme tesselation in a syntetic software benchmark, and ask yourself, do we see that level of tessealtion in any games ever?
Maybe 10 years from now..maybe.
so the 5850 I got still going good for 10 years without an issue.
But I do hope they got some good processing power in the upcoming series,
my eyefinity setup requries more.
If I played with one screen, then not.:yepp:
10 years? that's mighty optimistic...
yes Evergreen tesselation capability isn't horrific, but it must be admitted that the tesselation performance doesn't scale well as the architecture expanded, such as from Juniper to Cypress, because of one size fits all philosophy. Now, nVidia's tesselation approach is rather excessive for todays games, but one must acknowledge how well it scales with its distributed tesselation processing & extraordinary strong + multiplied geometry performance. With the latest rumor of RPE approach, i think ATi is somehow following nVidia's method (though perhaps only in philosophy, the detail must be quite different considering the overall architecture differences), let's say strengthening tesselation & especially geometry performances without going overboard & excessive.
yes we do Merto 2033. 1 game at least. it's like the crysis of DX11 lolQuote:
Originally Posted by flopper
the biggest problem for ATI is that the tessellation units are = in terms of performance from 5670 = 5770 = 5870.
crossfire over comes this problem by using more units together. when your limited by number of cards that doesn't help
From what I've seen the 6,000 series are showing is the unit is better, or more of them in the single gpu. vs 5000.
if the 5770 is this big, imagine a 6870 on 40nm... unless 5770 is aiming to be the new 8800gt and compete with 460gtx
if 5870 to 6870 gets the same sp increase, it would go against everything amd has been going for the past couple years
its all rumors right now ... and amd might be sending different news to see who's leaking stuff .. so until i have legit numbers i wont believe anything ...
Have you ever seen a graphics card which allow to play games for 10 years ? Seriously ?Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
Wasn't his point that the level of tesselation in synthetic benches wouldn't be seen in real world games in 10 years? It was from a tesselation perspective he thought it would do 10 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
thx and correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
People still play CS, its a game 10+ years, cards released then can still play that game.
if you look at the market, today we can play games with a phone, that previously was high end computer.
wow still plays and its 5+ years old.
software dont get so much better, a videocard as the 5850 still be good 5 years from now.
tesselation wont have caught up then.
People belive in myths, and lack facts for their beliefs and decisons,
any game produced the last 10 years havent fully utilized the computer enough, software is lagging behind, only game in years that has been though is crysis, one game.
software is lagging a lot, when did dx11 become, or dx10.1?
its been years and still we might see one or two games using those, a little.
BF3, is supposedly a dx11 ground up, its being released 2011, likely summer time.
Now, that game and let say 2 more might be dx11 the coming years, when is that in combination with tesselation be stretching a 5850 card enough?
Most play 1680x1050 or 1024x768 and some even use 1920x1080 which has become standard nowadays.
so, a few years to upgrade screen, software to get enough functions for dx11 and tesselation etc...
5 plus years development for a game engine etc...
Result is, a card today is pretty much what you will need for years to come.
I like new hardware, or else I wouldnt upgrade to the new series.
I understand your POV flopper, especially regarding DX 10 and DX11 stuffs but my good old TNT2 16MB can't handle Crysis.
10 years for a card maybe, but not for a gamer :D
The longest time I've used same gfx card was when I bought a GF4 Ti 4200 64MB in 2001 and used it for 4 years until 2005 and the only game it wasn't able to run just before upgrading was BF2. I think 4 years is already unusually long lifespan for a gfx card.
I've got a TNT2 32mb.. might play farcry.. slowly.. haha :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
slow works ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
CPU is at a treshold now, we wont get much more in regards of cpu to gaming, as the game have to have a balance between the different aspects of information flow.
How much is software lagging in games?
might be up to 4 or 5 years, as the development cycle and since they make them for console, due to piracy, we wont get new hardware to consoles until next generation xbox, so we speak say 5 years to next gen console?
so, software until then will be made for todays hardware, with ease until then.
anything else would suprise me much.
BF3 is made for pc with dx11 but they know it will sell a ton of copies or else they wouldnt have design it that way.
people still buy bf2.
Depends on what type of gamer you are though. Those are older older games.Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
When they eventually make 3d gaming good or when they make eyefinity or surround vision more practical with thinner bezel monitors, your going to need top of the line to really get the most out of the newest games.
Additionally the bottleneck of gaming right now is consoles and when new consoles start coming out in 2012-2013, your going to see something way more powerful than a 5850 in them by then. If game makers continue what they have been doing, sacrificing computer performance for console performance, your going to have pretty crappy performance on that 5850.
The sad fact is the software only degrades in terms of coding quality. Since designing awesome looking games takes a lot of $$$ and resources these days, most games look like they were released 2-4 years ago. But the hardware market doesn't stand still, so there are more and more computing resources available and thus there's less need for optimisation of gfx engines. Sad, really.
by code quality im assuming you mean how few bugs.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
but seriously you have to give them credit. games are quite complex software systems. they are almost a simulation of our own world with everything from AI, physics, graphics, etc and on top of that they have hundreds objects with various properties interacting with each other. it's not simple.
code quality can mean performanceQuote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
ask the guys from crytek, and how they're remodeling cryengine to be played by much less capable hardware, now those guys are finally spending more resources developing the code. Since the efficiency was really poor when compared to the hardware requirements. And there never was any improvement since cryengine2...Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Lets hope that crysis 2 can break the stigma of poor coded game engines,