Memory overclocking is like... soo the next best thing after GPU. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mean Machine
And fan set to auto.....bro, you are a competitive overclocker, WTF!!!! :shrug:
Printable View
Memory overclocking is like... soo the next best thing after GPU. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mean Machine
And fan set to auto.....bro, you are a competitive overclocker, WTF!!!! :shrug:
by the time you want to look that in depth towards high res gaming in SC2 online you will already be dead :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokinhow
£200 for 6870Quote:
Originally Posted by E30M3
£270 for 5870
(Based on OCUK prices)
5870 is very slightly faster, but price diffrence is huge.
Cant wait to see the new performance 6970's which is the real sucessor to the 5870.
very true :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
but this is the only MLAA x MSAA x SSAA comparsion using a real game that I found :up:
I posted 3 threads from the first page of the ATI forum with people have driver problems. But I don't think this was directed at me none the less your not reading through all the posts. The irony once again being nobody has come up with concrete examples that there isn't "famous driver issues". I hardly think our members our stupid despite suffering issues with their cards. Fanbois calling others fanbois really.... Goes on and on in here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teemax
AMDs GPU division doesn't get hit with GloFo charges. The numbers speak for themselves. Not sure what numbers you're using to conclude that they're raking in profits due to small dies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
Of course you missed the cheaper and improved part? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by E30M3
69xx will come soon for the geeky types without GF's. *j/k*
Gee, thanks for the insight. Now, if you're so bored with the gpu release, why are you posting or even reading about it? Must not be too boring, or are you just trolling for responses?Quote:
Originally Posted by E30M3
easy just compare nvidias desktop division profits (excluding quadro) and compare to that of amd and you will see how well amds model is doing. all this ignoring the fact that amd is releasing new products at least 3 months faster than nvidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
All I gotta say is Xfire scaling :shocked: :clap:
sweet 6870 x2 is gonna be one heck of a 500$ setup !!
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
totally agree
Maybe they are thinking about this right now.
Stutter, as per definition, means that something is not constant. So, its totally possible for a single gpu to have MS as long as the frames it outputs are not evenly distributed among time, causing effectively microstuttering.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
The problem is that reviews tend to only focus on what happens from second to second without getting into it at all, and then we start with problems because I just don't wanna have a 20% more average frames if those aren't even, because the gaming perception will suffer, a lot.
:up::up: Yup, their reviews keep improving everytime a new product launches, to the point its one of the only webs I care to look at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Keep it up.
It was just for the review, it was meant for more normal people. If I was allowed to, I'd mount my pot on it right away, but I'm not allowed to for several reasons. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstru
:lol: finally the news section quieted down, now until the next hyped product, wait.... it is coming in a few days :ROTF:
I know man, I'm just pulling your leg :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mean Machine
I see...Ok than lets try Tom's which uses 260.89 WHQL.Quote:
Originally Posted by cold2010
BC2 8xAA
Dirt 2 8xAA
Seems to show the same story, 6870 offers better 8xAA performance when compared with the 470 :up:
well, have you seen any nVidia fangirl not trolling Radeon threads? :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Humminn55
I've said it a million times...Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
Stock is stock. When you go to the store and buy a product, take it out of the box, install it, turn on your pc, install the driver... Whatever it runs at WITHOUT you tinkering with it is stock.
If companies choose not to make overclocked AMD cards, that's their fault(not AMD's, but the partners). It's practically easier to find overclocked NVidia cards than it is reference ones these days, and roughly the same price too. You almost have to go out of your way to buy a reference clocked(which is what the 675mhz gtx 460 is, REFERENCE clock, not STOCK...STOCK IS OUT THE BOX CLOCKS!) GTX 460 these days, and I guarantee if you find one at your local shop there's 3+ sittin next to it that run at 750mhz+.
Then again, I'm also all for AMD partners to start pumping out some high clocked versions of AMD's cards. Sadly, the few that do it play extremely conservative.
Considering you can walk into the store and buy one of those cards at those exact clocks without having to do anything different then buying any other card, they are fair for comparison...
(basically, if anyone here works for any of AMD's partners, tell your boss to start selling higher clocked AMD cards :up:)
All this said, I don't quite know how I feel about this launch. The key point of calling this a new "generation" was suppose to be improved tessellation, and while it is better in that aspect than the 5870, it falls short when you turn up the heat on it(high tessellation levels) and still loses to the GTX 460 in this department.
Yes, it's nice that it does take less power(of course it does, it's a lot less shaders), but the number scheme really throws me off(why would you release a card numbered as a successor when it's technically slower?), and honestly I'm getting tired of seeing releases with similar performance numbers(even if it is cheaper).
I mean, people are acting like it's so amazing to see it happen, but we've seen it happen more times than I really care to remember. NVidia 6600GT was(for $200ish) equal to the 9800XT(which was the top-o-the-heap before it). 7600GT faster than the 6800ultra before it(which wasn't just a $500 video card, but was practically impossible to find). The 4850 was roughly equal to the 8800gtx(which launched at $649!!!), and finally the GTX 460 is roughly equal to the GTX 285 in performance. Am I the only one who remembers the Geforce Ti 4200 or Radeon 9500/9600? The 8800GT anyone?
Fast forward to now, where we see the trend stop. We see a "next generation" mid range that's named after last generations high-end and can't even match that generation? So, unlike almost every generation that I can remember in the last decade we see a new mid-range that trades blows with a last generation mid-range, and people are actually acting like this is a big deal? Then using the answer "oh, but it's on the same node, no die shrink!"... What does that have to do with you...The consumer? It wouldn't matter if it was 28nm or 110nm to the consumer(well, outside of power usage and heat...) if you wish to get technical.
I'm sure someone will call this biased, but if you truly think it through I know you'll see where I'm coming from on this. I'm trying to find the merit in this, I really am... I mean yes, it's nice they're doing it with less power usage(although, I can bet less than 10% of the people here can actually tell me how many watts their system uses), less die space, but these are things that they are sacrificing performance to succeed in, and at the same time doing so in a matter that will only lead to confuse customers who happen to be less tech savvy than us.
Basically, long story short, I'm not calling it a bad card... I just have higher expectations for a "next generation" part than this.
Isn't AMD cards faster in those two titles anyway, or is my memory just bad? I'm not trying to start an argument with you on that one, I'm just curious... Any other numbers from other titles?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
I think you got confused due to the names of the cards.I'm sure you are aware of this ,but let's recap : Barts is not the Cypress' successor,it's Juniper's successor.AMD chose the name in order to not endanger Juniper's sales(by naming it 6700).Cypress is slowly going away.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
The card,based on Cayman XT, that will be a true(market segment) successor to Cypress is coming in a ~month or so.It will be a great performance uplift,on the same node. This thing will be fulfilling your high expectations,I'm sure.
except all of the examples you mentioned above happened after a node transition.
this card is on schedule and on the same node as previous generation. and this after the entire 32nm fiasco that put the whole industry at a slower pace. processors included.
so yes i am very impressed by this launch.
So bloody what? Why do people keep babbling about die sizes and profit margins? It's pure fanboi stupidity, rooting for the companies to make more money instead of buyers getting better deals. As consumers, we should only care about the price/performance we get. If the companies are in a price war, so much the better. Besides, Quadro is where Nv makes its money, and JHH ain't starving to death any time soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
I am a solid and concrete of the non-existence of ATI driver issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Glow9
My last NVIDIA card was an 8800GTS. After that, it was a whole ATI streak, for the simple reason that you get more performance per $ out of ATI cards.
I've had an HD 4870, HD 4890, HD 5850 with fairly frequent driver update. And I'm still waiting "desperately" for a driver issue to rear its head.
Just to jog your memory, the last driver fiasco that I remember was NVIDIA's driver burning up cards from a faulty fan control code. Personally, I had my XPS 1530's motherboard burned from the overheated NVIDIA GPU a few months after warranty expiration. You seem to have a selective memory when it comes to GPU issues, driver or not ;)
The "ATI driver issue" mantra is getting really old. Time to get a new theme, don't you think?
What do people care about all this fanboy nonsense and who's the better company or who makes more profit.
We're consumers, and we should buy what's the best for our price range.
If you only have £199 to spend your best choice is a GTX 470 or 6870 now. So it depends on what games you play.
Why buy a 6870 is it's slightly better with 8xAA in only one of the games you play, when the 470 is slightly better in the vast majority.
Heat and power consumption isn't that big a deal to most people here, but sure it plays a part.
The same applies to drivers, I usually have a habit of Owning NV-AMD-NV-AMD. I found that both have odd driver problems and both companies fix them.
It all just comes back to what's best for YOU at YOUR price range. I don't see why people are making a big deal out of this.
I agree.It all comes down to price/performance ratio and this is all end user should care about.Everything else (profit margins,costs etc.) should not be the concern of the customer but the concern of the companies that make the products.Quote:
Originally Posted by Periander6
Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
I'm not trying to rag down on this, I'm just telling it the way I see it.
The way I see it, if Nvidia doesn't step up to this soon, the price of Antilles is going to feel like this...Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEQc8n-844k
Performance, 6870 = 470 but 470 can be 50% overclocked.:sick:Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
@ techPowerUp! 6850 review:
(http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6850/)Quote:
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon...s/gpuz1120.gif
One major issue with the sample I received was that it came with 1120 shaders enabled. The HD 6850 specification requires 960 shaders. Unfortunately neither HIS, nor AMD could provide help with getting the board fixed so I had to reconfigure the shaders on my own. If you see other HD 6850 reviews on the web that show surprisingly high performance, please ask the reviewer to check fillrate or using GPU-Z. I know of one other site who received a Sapphire HD 6850 with 1120 shaders enabled, so the problem might be more widespread.
lol, the BIOS of these cards would make wonders. :lol:
Just so you know, we really spentquite some time trying to unlock 2 HD 6850 samples to HD 6870, but we didn't have much luck :(
LOL, a down clocked 6870 in a 6850-box are going to rewires? Probably it's just an innocent mistake, but it could mess up all results, anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by RSC
Hmm, you are seeing it wrong then I'm afraid. Compare these cards to 5770s not 5870s.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
An "innocent mistake" that happened at least twice and with different branded cards (one HIS and one Sapphire)? Sure and we also believe in Santa Claus, right? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
Can SKYMTL confirm or burry this please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
I just tried to politically correct, you know. ;), but who knows. This GPU-business looks like money-business it these days, so anything is possible. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by RSC
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ego
Like I said what's best for you. Not everyone overlocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Although I had my 470 arrive in the post today, I like to overlock so for "me" it's be best choice.
Given it's selling for 189.99 at OCUK, it's a complete bargain for me. Given I can get it to match the GTX 480 probably.
Which is a massive increase over a 4870x2 where only 1 chip was working for the past month and now that it completely died :D
Here in Portugal, right now, you can get a Gigabyte GTX470 Super OC ~30€ cheaper than a 6870.
I am starting to feel the same way about the word fanboi that Movieman feels about the word Fermi :(
All understood, OCUK has a great offer for the 470, only £174. I must resist :cord:Quote:
Originally Posted by N19h7m4r3
*blocks eyes and cuts up credit card*Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
But the 470 doesn't have HDMI 1.4, or 1.2 DP, nor does it function effectively with windows aero, or open standards like the AMD does...Quote:
Originally Posted by RSC
But like u said, it's $30 cheaper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lokinhow
impressive most impressive.. since mlaa cost cheap i wonder how amazing it looks with mlaa + 4xmsaa faster and more beautiful than ssaa
innocent mistake ROFL ..... wow thats just shady as hell.
Four times, so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by RSC
I usually don't agree with you, but I entirely agree with you on this one. What kind of price are you expecting?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
I was expecting with the low quantities, something around 749 MSRP with actual street price well past 800.
U don't see too clearly...Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Before this release, u couldn't have this type of performance for $179 bucks.
techPowerUp!, ComputerBase.de and... what were the other two sites?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
Yeah well, that doesn't exactly tell the whole story now does it, considering AMD will also have two generations of cards with full stacks in the time nv takes to fill one generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by trinibwoy
[edit]
make that 3 generations
The Sapphire card in question uses a custom BIOS that is tailored for their cards' fan speed profiles, etc. You may also notice their "HD 6850" sported a 900 MHz hot clock as well. To me, this seems to be a manufacturing error on their part. Whether or not it was fixed for actual retail card rollouts has yet to be seen....Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
The HIS card is a question mark since for all intents and purposes it is based off of the reference design I believe. I had a friend send me a dumped BIOS from one of his samples and I failed to "unlock" any of my HD 6850 samples.
Both of my HD 6850 cards have the reference speeds and SP counts.
i threw together a few numbers which have perf/price, but price includes electricity costs. basically for every watt i add 15c per year, and i plan to keep the card for 1.5 years. a 6850 stock would be 32$, and a 470OC would be 67$. so in the end its looking quite interesting. these new 6800s have a better total price to perf ratio at stock, thats better than 5850s and 470s when overclocked.
when all things are maxed out, these can edge out the 460 when OCed in total cost to perf aswell. but its very close. a 460 is an incredible deal for people who plan to OC, and looks like it would have won if the energy cost wasnt holding it back just that hair. all in all, both options are great. and its about damn time 2010 became a worthwhile option for so many of us who were unhappy for the first half of the year.
www.extrahardware.cz and www.diit.czQuote:
Originally Posted by RSC
thank you for the reply mate at least we know the performance of 6850 is not inflated and it is indeed as good as the gtx460 1gb stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
DilTech might have a point in that the only great difference between this and the competition is power consumption.
It's blah for the XS crowd, but AMD needed a 460gtx contender. Bart isn't a big deal to people who wipe their butts clean with dollar bills. For gamers on a budget,casual gamers and AMD, Bart is a plus in their books no matter how you slice it. Well.. it might not be all joy and sunshine for AMD because it will undercut 5770, 5850 and 5870 sales. But those cards have been out forever and stale inventory is always a concern with a new product. If AMD handled the release correctly it might not harm sales at all. 5870/5970s are the only cards that will be available until Caymann arrives and 5770/5850 should be EOL by now.
The only group negatively impacted by the release of Bart is nvidia & co.
I wonder how many more are out there...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
I see very clearly... Pretty much every other generation we've seen a mid-range that matched the year before's TOP card... Now we get one that saves you $20? I got my 800 mhz palit gtx 460 for about the same price here, and it performs pretty much equally to what we see out of the 6870, which is more expensive...Quote:
Originally Posted by Xoulz
What am I missing here?
I just fail to see how one can be so praising of AMD on this one... Some are the same ones who blasted the GTX 460 when it released when it pulled off the matching(and exceeding) of last generation's high end. So someone fails to keep up with the norm and it's suddenly impressive?
As for the "1120" shader issue on some of the reviews, I'm not too surprised. I'm just glad it's a small scale issue and not like what we saw with the x800 launch(for those who are forgetful, in that launch ATi sent every reviewer different clocked cards, to figure out what clockspeed they needed to compete with the 6800).
didnt you also see the 400s have worse efficiency than the 200s in practically every way for gaming? its only because they were on a new node that it was better than before. if they shrunk the 200 series onto 40nm it would have been like a 460 from the start, without the same yield issues, and 6 months earlier.
an architecture change that offers a atlesat 20% better perf per mm2, and 10-20% better perf per watt, is a very good upgrade. you seem to be stuck on the naming or the price, both of which have zero to do with the architecture and everything to do with simple management choices set for certain reasons they decided on.
You can also get 6850 CF with ~ 470 power consumptionQuote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
:rolleyes:
6850 & 6870 are great and all, but what really matters is... ANY NEWS ON CAYMAN YET? :p:
a 6970 for <=400€ would be great!
.... the gtx 460 1gb used less power than even the GTX 260. It actually uses less than the radeon 4850(and doubles it easily in performance a lot of the time). The GTX 470 and 480's issue had nothing to do with what it can do for gaming and everything to do with the amount of transistors they had to add for those workstation type improvements. That's why the GTX 460 does what it does, they took those changes out of it. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
This is exactly my point. We have practically always seen a scenario where a current gen high end is matched by a next-gen mid-range. This is one of the VERY few times that hasn't been the case, THIS is why I'm not impressed. No arguing about power consumption, or "oh it's a smaller die on the same node" is going to matter to me one bit, because in the end they sacrificed performance to make that happen.
Now, does anyone have something logical to add to this discussion? :shrug:
the launch date of the 460 is much closer to the 6800s than the 5800s, which do you think its really competing with?Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
i see your edit:
there are ONLY 2 things which really let you get double the perf with every new release. architecture and process.Quote:
This is exactly my point. We have practically always seen a scenario where a current gen high end is matched by a next-gen mid-range. This is one of the VERY few times that hasn't been the case, THIS is why I'm not impressed. No arguing about power consumption, or "oh it's a smaller die on the same node" is going to matter to me one bit, because in the end they sacrificed performance to make that happen.
the 4870 to 5870 was 2 fold increase because it got 50% smaller from process changes, 0% from architecture, and is much bigger.
was the 9800 twice as fast as the 8800? how about 3870 vs 2900,
you just need to stop worring about the simple naming convention and be happy with the price to perf changes that gradually change across time. what was the biggest jump you ever saw?
Then it's at least six websites:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
techPowerUp!, ComputerBase.de , HardTecs4u.de, pcgameshardware.de and your two.
But i think they're all Sapphire Cards beside the HIS card from techpowerup!
I guess someone forgot the R580, which was on the same process as the R520 but had 3x the shader power... No die shrink needed, it just came out the gates swinging.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Biggest jump in recent memory, i think we'll ALL agree on, was the 8800GTX hands down. Ironically enough, that was the last time I bought a high-end card too... go figure. The following year, we had a $200 card(the 8800GT) that was pretty close to it performance wise, and they were both from the same series. :up:
The 2900 to 3870 most of us all knew was a sham. AMD wanted to, as quickly as possible, get away from the HD 29xx name because everyone related it to bad performance. NVidia then had to follow suit with the 98xx because because people will automatically think "oh look, new series of cards, it has to be better than the last series". I will tell you this much, I didn't buy anything from either series that "generation"(which, lets be real here, was NOT a new generation), but it WAS a situation that was initially forced by AMD.
The key issue with the name is, they're actually trying to swindle customers(much like NVidia did with renaming the G92 or going further back ATi did with the x600 that was really a 9 series card) by changing up the name scheme. I mean, it's not like it's a bad card per-say, but in comparison to the cards that THEY named them to be the successor(going by their OWN names, quit telling me about cayman, tell AMD that), there's no excuse for performance lower than that point. If it's such a smaller die in comparison, they should've used some of that die space to incorporate enough shaders TO over-come last gen. ;)
It's like we're always reminded... We are the minority, the well informed hard-ware buyer. If you knew how many people buy on name alone you'd probably laugh yourself to tears, then cry yourself to sleep from laughing so hard. As such, I do see things like this as a big deal(much like I didn't like the renaming of the G92, but at least it's performance never got WORSE) because it's mis-leading to the population... Do you have any idea how many people there are who constantly buy the next generation cards without knowing anything about them?
They're going to see that the 6870 is out, know they have a 5870 in their computer because that's what their buddy told them when he built it from them, and think this card is an upgrade... Man will he be in for a surprise, no?
Of course, I'm sure someone will come up with a good excuse for that situation too, no? :confused:
we already had the argument for the naming from a dozen other pages of posts in half a dozen other threads.
a few things are already in question, first is xfire compatibility, a 6700 is only compatible with 6700s. the only exception is the duel gpu cards which were given the name 5970, before then was the 3870x2, 4850x2, 4870x2. so duel gpu cars usually went into the same group, and it seems the 6990 is trying to do that again. SO if the top end cards are all called 6900s, 6800 is a perfect place for the gpu right below it. no need to skip that one completely simply because perf numbers dont match perfectly with the old generation.
theres also the question about chip size, that all things under the x800 were between certain sizes, and anything above that was a x900, and everything below that was an x700.
or theres power consumption ranges which is the same idea as chip size
in the end any buyer who goes out and buys a 200+$ gpu, a year after they just bought a 400$ gpu, deserves to a slap in the face if they dont spend a few seconds to research it. they have family or friends to help, or they can simply google it.
would people get mad is the 2011 model had less torque than the 2010 model? but had better MPG and more room and the same horsepower.
to summarize. since the reason for the name choice is unknown, picking the worse case scenario and acting like its a fact is probably just not very nice. there is no proof to back up any of the ideas, so just be happy with conspiracy, and no need to feel threatened or inferior (not saying you are)
Discrete cards. 'Nuff said.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
People who buy discrete graphics cards and install them themselves... Either way, GJ AMD for delivering yet another solid product during these hard times. Nvidia can't keep up. :up:
I'd be mad if I bought the 2011 model for torque, but of course gas milage adds up to a lot more money per year than electricity in my area, where adding roughly less than a standard lightbulb in power draw means pretty much nothing in terms of money spent per year. As such, it's not quite as relevant as it may have seemed when typing it out. Good idea for an analogy, but a bit on the extreme side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
The name thing ticks me off because I am that "friend" you mentioned that these guys who don't research it themselves call on to do the job. I was hoping for a clear cut card to advise anyone who has me build them a new christmas PC(I get a lot of these people, trust me), and now I can't say there is one. I've already had 2 people ask me(they were shopping together) "hey, I saw ATi's new cards when I was at microcenter buying ink cartridges, should I buy one for you to put in my system, and then I get to explain to them that the 6870 is slower than their 5870 and they say "what's the *#%$ point?".
Either way, I say you and I just agree to disagree. We clearly won't see eye to eye on this, and the more it drags on the more it's just going to make it seem like we're "overly enthusiastic" about the side of the argument we're on. :up:
As I always said there will MAYBE be 30 days of confusion.
6970>6870 = 350$ vs 250$
My 85 year old grandma can tell which is faster and which is better than my previous 350$ card.
I guess some people need SOMETHING to criticise.
my trick is to tell people to simma down and wait a few months. theres ALWAYS a reason to wait a few months, even if its better prices. if they cant, it better be for a good reason.
I dont think "nvidia cant keep up"..Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Why make gpu and spend milions to dev one chip for such small performance gains.
Price drop was smart strategic move.
We here dont talk like: old cyrix686 cpu vs celeron300(huge diference)
We talk abaut same fps graphics nvidia vs ati wery small diference (same score)
Now THIS we can agree on. :up: :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I'm one of the biggest "sit and wait" advocates on this site, but we all have friends who just have to have the newest toys.
Only reason I got my GTX 460 was because someone wanted my 4850(to crossfire with his) and made me an offer I could refuse, and I got it for a STEAL. Reason I had the 4850? Someone wanted to buy my 8800GTX to SLi it, and I actually made money on that deal. If it wasn't for these occurrences I'd still happily be using my old 8800GTX. I'd have liked these cards to be beasts, if for nothing else, because someone wants me to build them a system with a 460 1 GB wants to buy mine, and it would've been a solid chance for a free upgrade.
None the less, looking forward to Cayman(whatever AMD decide to name it, I'm done speculating that) and seeing what it brings to the table. If they price it right and release it before I build that PC, it may still end up in my system. :up:
A lot of people actually do buy a card at best buy and have them install it there... Yes, there ARE people that are that computer illiterate. I remember when my buddy chris bought a radeon 9800pro over the x800pro because "the number was higher". Luckily, he brought it to me to install, and I MADE him take it back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
the naming actually makes sense if you look at performance per watt...however, most gamers just look at performance.
same deal with 9800gtx vs 8800gtx
i might have to ebay my 4850xfire when caymen comes out. my new case is good for one card, and one big card only, so its time to indulge. and a 4850 is still a very worthwhile card, even if i get just 50$ for each.
I'm not really pulling for either side to win I like draws when it comes to hardware. So I agree as well that wait and see can work very well in ones favor. Nobody with a 48xx and above or 27x and above needs to buy anything till Christmas time where they will get to make the best possible purchase decision.
You do realize prices go up holiday season.. I'd wait until boxing day :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
I'm waiting for Bulldozer and Sandybridge for my next system purchase when I'll do a full upgrade... Or a big market collapse.
Well the hype is dead but this thread is still interesting to read through
PS: All the "AMD drivers suck and Nvidia has less problems"= tech world version of Obama birthers and flatworlders
Having essentially 5870 performance for $100 less isn't exciting? The 68xx series 'mid end' slot almost directly into the old 58xx series. That's a mid-end high-end exchange.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Well now that we know what they little guys are I am awaiting the freaks of GPU power.
Personally, seeing how powerful the 6870 is compared to my current 5870, I'm really tempted to give my fiance my faster (and much cooler running) 5870 to replace her current 4870. Then, I'll get 2 6870's and slap them into my system.
5870= roughly $370 currently
2x 6870 = $520, but you get a 80% performance gain!
Talk about breathing new life into my system without breaking the bank!
I do want to wait for Cayman to hit the market though. That should shake up the GTX 480's current spot.
Lets just put it this way. Barts XT is rated at 151W and is between 5850 and 5870 performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Pistol
Cayman XT is rated at > 225W and is larger than a 5870's die and has more architecture changes/add-ons.
Cayman XT is going to be a beast...
A mid to high-end exchange is the 4850 matching the 8800gtx. Or the GTX 460 beating the GTX 285... Or the 6600GT matching the 9800XT... Or the 7600GT beating the 6800Ultra. Again, don't get me started on the 9500/9600 from ATi or the GeforceTi4200 and it's sheer abilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
I mean, there's models of the GTX 460 that match a GTX 470 in performance out of the box. We've had the ability the match the $350 price range at $200 for awhile now.
So no, I'm still not excited, because frankly this card isn't doing anything we haven't already seen since the summer. I just expect more out of a "next generation" part I suppose. Either that, or I'm getting to the point that I am no longer easily impressed. I'm just use to next gen mid-range cards that actually meet or BEAT the pre-existing high end.
Not as good as the 5870s but not far behind, fail thing is though they only come in 1gb cards.. Im gonna wait for there high end gpu's next year!Quote:
Originally Posted by cegras
Patience, fun times next month. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Barts is good and all, but it's the same old performance. Love the enhancements AMD did though.
true that, lets see how nvidia and amd battle it out with there high end products!! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
Hopefully the battle will be so fierce that we'll see the 6970 for only $349 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Johnny87au
:::edit:::Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvese
That would remind me of the days before the 8800GTX... Remember the x1900xt/x1950xt? Practically identical performance to the x1900xtx/x1950xtx for only about $300.
Competition needs to happen for a 6970 at 350 or less. Barts is bigger than juniper and is 80 dollars more expensive than it and in a couple tables is the new midrange(replacement for same area as juniper). Cayman is rumored to be even bigger than the 5870 and the price of the 5870 was 399, so I am expecting something around 500 dollars.Quote:
Originally Posted by DilTech
Juniper is exactly half Cypress, so if Cayman is double of Bart (2240 SP 112 TMU 64 ROP 512 bit @500 mm^2 2 GB VRAM), and score 16.000-17.000 3DMark Vantage Xtreme, i think US$ 500 price tag is well worth every centz of it. Oversimplification at its best form, i thought this forum members aren't that ignorant ? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Your pessimism and negativism toward AMD graphic division is just more and more amusing by day, LOL. :ROTF:
US$ 249 at the very least for Bart --> debunked
US$ 500+ for Cayman --> Interesting huh ? One month isn't such a long wait i presume, LOL. :D
hahaha u made my day! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvese
Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
First off, this is simply a rude post. Are you trying to get in a flaming war with such a smartass post?
I might slightly pessimistic(which in this case is saying AMD is acting like a business rather than a charity) but I tend to layoff the personal attacks unless it is provoked. I think the only thing I called you is optimistic and I have always left the provoking smiley faces out.
249 is close enough to 239 honestly, I think your kind of splitting hairs on that one. The more optimistic people were thinking barts xt was going to be 199.
I'm not allowed to have pessimistic speculation about AMD(and I remember you were talking about the freedom of speculation), but everyone including their dogs are allowed to have it for NV? Heck I am probably more pessimistic about NV than AMD lately. I said I am likely to buy antilles even if it comes out at 650 or 700, I like AMD cards as the one I am using currently is an AMD/ATI card. It seems like your singling out my pessimism to one company to make me something I am not.
I been talking about NV being completely :banana::banana::banana::banana:ed until they make a new architecture. I think my pessimism for NV graphic division is just as strong if not stronger.
I don't think 499 is really that pessimistic about Cayman. There are a lot of rumors that suggest it is biggest chip ever for AMM. The price of AMD midrange has jumped and the cayman series in general has a new moniker(the 69xx series) to likely justify the new pricing(as barts was shifted so it could be priced higher).
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/1278/roadmap.jpg
I think this old chart gives us alot of hints about pricing as it's we take in the name shift into account it was accurate for Barts.
That being a barts xt being around the 5830 price(which was 239 at launch).
The chart also suggest cayman is going to priced higher than the 5870.
The pricing for the 6870 is fair for what it is and its not really a huge bargain considering they could have sold it for much lower considering the chip size. I think AMD knows they have the momentum, and as a result, this round is all about making money.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
The gtx 460 only picked up 5.5% and it was basically the best priced/best performing champ. To me, this is a sign NV has lost alot of respect and as a result, AMD doesn't have to be nearly as kind with it pricing. People I think right now prefer the AMD name more than the NV name. It already has 80+ percent of the directx 11 marketshare and since AMD is selling pretty much only directx 11 cards, its more than comfortable with the marketshare it has because it is the dominant shareholder. It doesn't need to worry about pricing their cards aggressively for strong competition because as the gtx 460 has shown, even when the competition has better pricing/performance, the AMD brand is selling better. The stronger branding of nvidia has allowed NV to survive for a while(post g80) and make money, but for directx 11, has really been AMD round, they know it and I think unless their is competition, they are going to cash in like they won the lottery.
If you make inferences about last generation and the supply and cost of the 5870. It makes little business sense to sell cayman xt for 350. They are going to have just as little quantities, no competition is in site unless gf100 really surprises and it for marketing reasons is armed with the new 6970 name to make it seem like a bargain compared to the 5970(cayman won't be $700 dollars).
This might make AMD sound pessimistic because they kind of sound like dicks for pricing, but they are a business and I think any company, especially a company so in need of money, is going to do whatever they can to make it.
Honestly, holy epic dogs poop. Cayman scoring 16,000-17,000 in vantage xtreme is far far to optimistic. And alot more unreasonable than what you consider me being pessimistic. A 5970 scores 13,000 and this is the same node they are making cayman on. No wonder you consider what I say pessimistic when your so ridiculously optimistic.A 5970 black edition that cost 1000 dollars only scores 15,5k.
Cayman doesn't need such a score to be priced at 500 dollars, it just need to significantly beat the gtx 480 and consume less power(this is a given) doing it. Both are very achievable. I think it's amazing to also think that I wouldn't consider performance for AMD to price their card 500 dollars and simply label me is ignorant, that just an insult. I can start seeing the leak score of x12000 being true now and that type of performance can already command a 500 dollar price tag and perhaps a bit more. The more this competition get's lopsided, the closer cayman xt will creep from 450 to 600 dollars(which I think is the absolute max they can charge for the top cayman). There could be cheaper cayman(maybe a low clocked a decent amount of shaders disabled for 350-400) but the top cayman is going to be pretty expensive.
I feel compelled to add my two cents, especially after wasting six hour of test time and scrapping my entire Sapphire Radeon HD 6850 and CrossFire reviews because of sample 'doping'.
1120-Core "Fixed" Radeon HD 6850 Review Samples Shipped to Media
I'm not going to say it was intentional, but the mere fact that nobody at Sapphire or AMD said anything despite being told of the problem a week before launch is rather alarming.
Cayman XT will probably be around 75-80% of the speed a 5970 is. That being said, a dual chip solution based on Cayman Pro or Cayman XT will be extremely fast, and it will probably be a Tessellation monster as well. Just seeing the improvements in tessellation performance on the 6850 and 6870 is great. They're now at least competitive, even if Nvidia still has the edge. Overall performance is better than the GTX 460 though. The 6870 is also faster in Far Cry 2 than the GTX 460 AND the 5870!!! That's a game that has always favored Nvidia cards, and somehow, ATI has created a card that is simply stunning on that game... Now, I'm not suggesting anything, but perhaps we will see similar performance gains in other TWIMTBP titles. If so, there is seriously good reason for nvidia to be shaking in their boots at the moment.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon...6870-review/16
Remeber, this is the game that Nvidia used to demo it's first Fermi cards. The 6870 runs away with it compared to the GTX 460 and HD 5870. Plus, the HD 6870 is only 7 frames shy of the GTX 295! What did AMD do to make these cards perform so well on this game? Even the lowly 6850 beats the HD 5870!!! :shocked:
Phew, long post there mate ? Appreciate the effort, but so much pessimism can only take you so far, let's just say it's very very irritating.
Why i call you "somewhat" ignorant -not making direct, personal accusation right ? You make a STRAIGHT analogy beetween Northern Island pricing structure vs Evergreen one, spesifically beetween Juniper vs Bart MSRP launch prices and their correlation with & implication toward their bigger brothers, Cypress and Cayman. Well fella, they will certainly NOT be exactly comparable, since Bart doesn't exactly replace Juniper in AMD's market segmentation:
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articl...dP4f_1_2_l.gif
Fact that the competitive nature of DX 11 scenery has changed, nVidia now have competing products, affecting AMD pricing structure & strategy to some degree. Bart WILL NOT be an exact half Cayman like Juniper was to Cypress, the 40 nm process & AMD graphic div. own principle won't allow that. Yes, when launched, Cayman might stand up there on its own as the king of the hill of GPU chip, doesn't mean AMD will have all the leverage to price it at such unacceptable level of US$ 500+ like you suggested & believed. On its launch day, Bart XT is already priced reasonably @US$ 239, and one month from now, with the advent of AIBs in house designed board, getting it to US$ 219-229 level won't be all that difficult (if TSMC 40 nm production permitted). While Cayman will be AMD fastest single chip, it won't be its highest end product, there WILL be a dual Cayman for Antilles card later on.
Even the optimist of fanATic doesn't think Cayman will be more than 50% faster against Bart, pricing it @US$ 500+ has very little merit in it, and the way AMD priced Bart cards recently, your pessimism is just so unfounded, and clearly can be regarded as an annoying negativism toward AMD. Just look at the slide, Cayman will only move upward a little against Cypress segmentation speaking, a drastic launch price jump from US$ 379 of Cypress to US$ 500+ Cayman will simply be a total fail on AMD part, should that scenario really happen. US$ 500+ Cayman XT value in the mass market will be wiped by crossfire Bart XT or SLI GTX 470, creating animosity among its follower+destroying the goodwill created in the past, and nVidia will have a field day for their marketing dept.
AMD won't forever be supply constrained by TSMC 40 nm process, AMD has performance & cost leadership when HD 5870 launched vs GTX 285, yet your unfounded negativism didn't happen back then when AMD was actually being supply limited with Cypress chip for HD 58xx generation. AMD can easily priced HD 5870 @US$ 449, HD 5850 @US$ 359 and still lead the price/performance contest against GTX 285, didn't happen, did it ? You forget the nature of AMD graphic division ever since ATi was bought by AMD. Their focus is beating nVidia strong market domination in graphic market, especially in consumer graphic where it has the most chance in achieving that goal. Their very competitive pricing strategy wasn't based on charity, LOL, but the longterm viability & survivability against its nemesis demand it that way. AMD might just reach parity in overall discrete graphic market & quite dominant in DX 11 market with their headstart entrance, but nVidia is still the have of graphic industry, with its great finance situation, strong R&D, and super profitable professional graphic market domination.
Pricing Cayman XT @US$ 500+ will not be in AMD's best interest and i don't think they would be as foolish or evil as you pictured in your posts. Perhaps expecting it under US$ 400 is too much optimism for your taste, but US$ 429-469 is a very very fair pricing suggestion for Cayman XT, if the opinion comes from people that bear no negativism toward AMD. Personally, i believe Cayman XT launch price will be doubled of Bart XT street price at that moment.
Okay, if you find my assesment of your unbalanced negativism toward AMD insulting, i apologize. But i will put my credibility where my mouth is. If Cayman XT was launched for US$ 500+ like you suggested, i will stop posting in XSys forum for straight SIX months from the moment the official, correct info announced. If not ? Well, then perhaps i shouldn't apologize so early. Later . :cool:
I will be waiting to see the resolution of this more than the anticipation of the release of cayman, however I don't think you will stop posting anytime soonQuote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
I know the 460GTX beats the stock clocked 6870 when overclocked (FERMI scales very well with clocks). And I know the 6870 overclocks very well. My question is, how well does the 6870 scale when overclocked?
Supposedly the biggest gains come from opening memory bandwidth
@tajoh, ati/amd would never use a non-symetric buss they would have to change from a direct access to a token ring model to do that and that would defeat the purpose of changing the buss to wider in the 1st place, it will ether be a 256 or a 512bit
also with the 68xx was it ever confirmed the scalier count per physical shader to be less than 5
Don't you think that chart is already showing cayman to be more expensive than cypress? $500 dollars or 479 is not that unreasonable a price. Nvidia does it and they have to because their yields are so bad and their chips are so large.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
I still don't see why raising the price to maximize profit is considered really that pessimistic about a company? Its simply natural, especially if supplies are limited and the demand is there(its Christmas time pretty soon). I think your mistaken my pessimism for being pragmatic.
I think your thinking too much of AMD good will. Much of the value pricing they have had lately has been to do lately with strong competition. Any business will take advantage of another if they show signs of weakness in a competitive market. I think AMD is in the perfect position to do that.
Lets get this straight, your calling me ignorant and think I am using simply juniper/cypress pricing scheme as my only evidence. WTF,I have presented so much other evidence.Tables, charts, rumors of chip size, naming, competition conditions, history and yes, barts xt pricing(this was the first time a rv940 part was named and priced like this). You simply ignoring this evidence is by definition .......
There are so many signs that cayman xt is going to be more expensive than cypress and this is ok, they are a business. However me as the consumer, I would rather pay less than more. If I was a stock holder, I would want them to charge more.
My original response was to someone saying the 6970 was going to be 350 dollars. Your personal thoughts are cayman xt is going to be priced double barts xt or $478. I said the price is going to be around 500 dollars? Your estimate is closer to my 500 dollar price than this person 350 dollar price and because of this 22 dollars your going ballistic when your own guts are far closer to what I am suggesting. Don't you think my suggesting pricing of a 6970 at 500 dollars is more likely than the 6970 at 350 dollars, given the charts and size of cayman?
"US$ 500+ Cayman XT value in the mass market will be wiped by crossfire Bart XT or SLI GTX 470"
Two 5770 outperformed a 5870 and it didn't stop the 5870 from costing more than two of those cards by about 100 dollars(with scalping) and I am not sure how long NVidia wants to sustain a 250 dollars gtx 470. Not to mention $379 was not the bargain your making it out to be for the 5870. The gtx 295 was 499 and the 4870x2 was 399. Pricing it at 449 would have made the reviews substantially less favorable, as some reviewers were clearly not very impressed like anandtech. A 80 dollar price jump would have turned the positive reviews into meh ones, and the meh reviews into negative ones.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3587
"The easiest kind of product for us to write about is the kind that’s clearly superior to its competition. The hardest kind to write about is the kind that’s stuck in the middle. For the 5870, we have the latter case."
AMD/ATI already has the dominance in the market(80%+). That older directx 10 market share doesn't matter anymore because they no longer sell those cards. They don't need to put up crazy aggressive pricing, at this point because they already accomplished the gain market share thing.
Nvidia priced their cards crazy expensive(600+) when they had the lionshare of the market. It might be difference market conditions, but something around 500 dollars is possible as people were paying 700 dollars for the 5970 and they were still sold out.
Honestly, if you think of me as pessimistic. Why don't you get so annoyed when you read NVidia pessimism which I regularly do, yet you don't seem to notice as much. There is 100x times more on this board and honestly its far more pessimistic in general. (people want nvidia to go bankrupt, a couple people wanted the CEO to die and people get happy when they make bad products).
Quote:
Originally Posted by StAndrew
good question, but until reviewers do a complete review of stock OC cards,or OC vs OC ( and not stock 6870 vs 875mhz GTX460 as many review ) or user report it for us, it will be not easy to respond it ...