The original source is the driver? :shrug: :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
Printable View
The original source is the driver? :shrug: :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampsa
1gb vs 2gb
i think it does make a diffirence but not on reso's lower as full hd.
try playing on full hd with some eye candy on, or better yet 30" naitive reso.
its true its not a whole lot faster in most games but its the diffirence between playable and slideshow.
and if i have to choose i'd go for the playable instead of the slideshow, even if it means paying up to 20% more.
"full HD" as you say is 1920x1200 ; 30" LCD goes higher than that ;)
Here us my 5 cents, ATI/AMD usualy gives some range of devids to all cards based on same chip, for example rv770 - 9440 9441 9442 9443 (4870 4870x2 4850 4850x2 cards).
so, lets look
"ATI Radeon HD 5800 Series" = ati2mtag_Evergreen, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_6898
"ATI Radeon HD 5800 Series " = ati2mtag_Evergreen, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_6899
"ATI Radeon HD 5900 Series" = ati2mtag_Evergreen, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_689C
"ATI Radeon HD 5900 Series " = ati2mtag_Evergreen, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_689D
same devid range for all 4 cards - 6890-689F, so all four is rv870 based cards.
5900 is hemlock, and no need for any 3dparty confirmations :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
you mean 1920x1080 ;)
and yes i know 30" goes higher, i own one. 2560x1600 wich results in
30" = 4096000 pixels
full hd = 2073600 pixels
you've got 80,24% more pixels
so i'd def. go for the 2gb instead of the 1gb, just to be on the safe side
a image wich displays a lot of reso's
So um there 2 missing? 8,9,-,-c,d were is a,b?Quote:
Originally Posted by netkas
689A
689B
Definitely hemlock. Hemlock is coming pretty soon so its likely to be in the inf file more than a future unannounced card.
So, so far Hemlock is only confirmed to exist, correct? Nothing was said about release or anything?
no, but iirc 23rd of October is the rumoured release date.Quote:
Originally Posted by punkrockpolak
Is there a chance in hell ATI/AMD would put a 512-bit bus on the 59xx series? it sure seems like it could make use of it
not quite possible, but is possibleQuote:
Originally Posted by Arkangyl
256bit for each card is in theory 512bit, but also since you have to copy every texture, its cut right back in half.
I doubt it, higher clocks is a lot cheaper to do than a larger bus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkangyl
Wasn't it shown that my core i7 gaming rig is no better than a slow athlon 64 at microsoft word?
Its the same comparison... Ones clearly better... but has no performance increase... why? Because the worse one (1gb or in this case athlon) can more than adequately handle it.
You have to use tests that actually push BOTH machines or subjects to the limit to really see which is better
It should be Hemlock , it supposed to be release by the end of this month , meaning 2 weeks :D
I thought we knew this back in Aug... Shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=179
Looks like ATI is dropping the X2 like nV did with GTX295. So Hemlock is prolly HD5950 and HD5970 for 5850X2 and 5870X2 respectively.
Surprise 384bit memory bus anyone :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by SubZero.it
No seriosly that would be awesome. Also 1GHz+++ core clocks :up::up::up:
Rename?Quote:
Originally Posted by jmke
The 5870x2 has not been released. Not really renaming :p
That would automatically mean Cypress had 48ROPs.Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidReactor
So 384bit is very very very likely a negatory.
man they should play this out longer, Nvidia would...unless.............. ati is scaredQuote:
Originally Posted by chispy
could be a exciting winter
perhaps ATI wants to change naming scheme, we already have:
5750 - 5770
5850 - 5870
5950 and 5970 will be the top level X2 cards and 5650 - 5670 low power entry level
I don't know if ATI will ever come up with an overclocked 5870 (5890?) as usual because the bandwidth is the current bottleneck and will be hard to overcome
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/d...ics_Cards.htmlQuote:
Traditionally, identifications for different graphics cards based on the same chip are similar: ATI Radeon HD 4800 graphics cards based on the RV770 chip have 9440, 9441 (Radeon HD 4870 X2), 9442, 944C, 9443 (Radeon HD 4850 X2) device ids, whereas ATI Radeon HD 4800 boards powered by the RV790 chip carry 9460 and 9462 identifications. As it can be seen, the combination of the first three symbols in dev id describes the actual ASIC, whereas the fourth symbol describes the actual implementation (including speed-bin and/or the number of ASICs onboard).
Considering that ATI Radeon HD 5900 has “689x” identification, whereas the Radeon HD 5800 carries “688x” id, the actual ASICs should be different, unless AMD changes the identification scheme that has been used for many years.
Funny how first nvidia had 9600/9800s like old atis, and now ati has 5900s
If their is going to be a 5900 series, then ATI is on a roll. We need specs and benchmarks already.
And yes, this time we need a bigger memory bus, anything that is higher than 256 bit and over 300 is fine with me.