AMD good job on 6800 series, complete fail on 6900 series. drawing close to 570 is PATHETIC. thats all I have to say.
2x 6850 is a much better deal than Cayman any day.
:banana::banana::banana::banana:.
Printable View
AMD good job on 6800 series, complete fail on 6900 series. drawing close to 570 is PATHETIC. thats all I have to say.
2x 6850 is a much better deal than Cayman any day.
:banana::banana::banana::banana:.
I still say that we must wait for the 10.12 drivers, hope Im not mad xDQuote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
How'd you conclude that. Based off 3dMark? :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Why don't you wait for actual games?
sigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aten-Ra
Thank you for that. That would explain why some shader compute synthetics show it being barely better than a 5870
Actually perf./mm^2 is much much better with Cayman. Even though it's a bit larger chip(380mm^2?) than Cypress,card based on Cayman XT (6970) should be 1.3-1.5x faster than 5870. That's a whole other level of perf./mm^2 when compared to ~530mm^2 Fermi. Mind you both are made on 40nm process node.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
That guy appears to have a retail sample. I doubt he's a reviewer. If AMD didn't provide working drivers for the retail samples in the box, that's total fail.Quote:
Originally Posted by WintersSC
As he had a gtx 480 before, I doubt he had those old driver in and just popped a new card in over the gtx drivers.
If AMD is not including working drivers in the box then AMD has reached a whole new level of stupidity to try to maintain secrecy. This is one or two week's before and NV couldn't respond if they wanted to. As someone else said, it takes months to change speeds on a cards.
Hopefully this is not the case and people do not need to download drivers to get the real performance out of a 6970. Because we know a lot of people just buy out of the box and don't bother to update.
If this is what the card performs like with broken drivers(we can extrapolate alot from crysis and vantage), then there is no wonder there was a delay. It could also explain why such old drivers were put into the box. They needed to work hardcore hard to get faster drivers and delayed it till mid december.
So AMD is now putting driver discs into AIBs retail boxing???Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Edit- That driver is obviously working or he wouldn't be using the card...
I don't really care how each performs relative to the size of the dye. I only care about actual performance of the card. I do hope AMD pulls an upset here. I am || this close from ordering a GTX 570 off EVGA's site.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
An unbiased review should be about WHAT IS not WHAT MAY BE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
What about an autoupdate option and just disable 10.12 from the servers until they're offically released in retailers.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
This is probably not the case but it happens with other hardware/software (SC2 I think).
One thing to consider is that there may be a Powerplay issue with these drivers, ie throttling under high load conditions.
I haven't seen any screenshots of the actual GPU load from this guy.
anyone here has an account there ?
curious about gpu load..
no high end gamer cares about perf/watt. Every high end gamer will have a decent psu and case and all gamers care about is perf/dollar, or even more importantly is perf/pci lane. They will always stick whatever is faster in their pci lane and they couldnt care less if it runs hot or not. Its the fps on the screen they care about and Amd needs to start pushing more out of their chips especially if they have the headroom for it. The best they can do within 300w is what they need to do and not this perf/watt bull:banana::banana::banana::banana:. That is only relevant for mainstream players and htpc users.
Another thing to consider is that maybe AMD didn't make a card based on your expectations but rather based on their own goals.
As interesting as these new screenshots are, they don't tell us the whole story. There are so many unknowns that it is laughable to conclude anything as fact yet. Piling on more speculation isn't going to clarify anything.
So why don't you wait 3 days for actual #'s? 570's arent magically going to go up in price overnight :rolleyes: And if you're lucky, they may even go downQuote:
Originally Posted by xBanzai89
ye we can tell ourselves that but how many times before this much info has converged right before release and turned out to be wrong? almost never.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
info leaks at this point are 80% true and if several sources are leaking 1600 shaders and gtx570 performance, thats whats likely to come. And talking about synthetics, if we looked at vantage alone I would ignore it but all benchmarks show similar results. When was the last time a card from any camp did mediocre in synthetics and awesome in games? There may be a difference, but it is often not so substantial that would put the card in a different level.
I think at this point wishing for magic drivers and miracle game performance is straight up denial or wishful thinking. Were looking at a competitor for the 570 and thats the truth. 580 will reign supreme as single chip and Amd will throw antilles against it but it will not be as attractive as 5970 was one year ago. Back then it had no competition so people cared less about xfire issues. It will not be the case this time. Many will still take the 580 over antilles for being single chip.
/end rant
and this coming from an Amd customer since 2007
recent info only leads to one thing : F A I L U R E
hopefully not.
Good thing no one uses only 3dMark to review :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by migunani
Edit: there are some seriously ridiculous people here.. first some ridiculous expectations, then a few 3dMark scores and its doom and gloom - scores I already explained about synthetics - and scores from a guy who refuses to show a comparison with the 480 or even a GPU load screenshot /sigh
^THISQuote:
Originally Posted by xBanzai89
^THISQuote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Nice to see that at-least 2 people have common sense
lets get real here. why do you buy a graphics card? to play games (or run benches if thats your type of thing) you don't buy a graphics card because it is eco friendly or because it has a smaller die size... for example lets say we have a card that uses 50watts under load and has a die size of 1MM X 1MM (impossible i know) but only has the performance of a 5750 but is being sold as a high end card at a high end card price point... how many people are going to by it? nobody! cuz if it can't game for the price your paying whats the point...
to be honest I had really hoped for more out of Cayman then what we are seeing now, and the whole argument that Cayman only performs bad in Synthetics is weak. as bad as 3DMARK is it still gives a general idea on how games perform and there are a few games that fit right in line with the numbers it puts out. the biggest thing that concerns me are the heaven numbers, yes it is way better then the 5870 and almost as good as the 5970 but for a 6970 to be slower then a GTX 570 after all the effort they put into Tessellation improvements is a little depressing. lots of people are quick to discount heaven as another synthetic but just remember that in 2011 there is a good number of games that will be using it's engine (about 5 games I think but i could be wrong) so the performance of heaven is extremely relevant IMO.
However I am going to give AMD the benefit of the doubt and wait for the hardware Canucks review before I make up my mind. i just think that so many people hyped it to be the next R300 which it obviously won't be... now all we can hope for it that it won't be the next R600:(
To save our A$$, we need to list some more excuses if this failure turns out to be true.
actually he's been benching with the 480 now:Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
http://translate.google.com/translat...768017-27.html
None the less, AMD has lost a vary valuable marketing tool. If AMD cards become a nonfactor on HWbot, then alot of people won't buy them(benchers).Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
I benched just as much as I gamed before so it is a real significant factor for me.
I don' think it's doom and gloom if they are priced right then it can be a decent product. It's just this being xtremesystems, people expectations for this card were sky high, when they don't come off as close to matching expectations. The dreams of 30-40% faster than a gtx 580 are gone and all that is being left is a sobering reality. It doesn't have to be bad if we control our expectations before hand. My prior performance expectations were realistic compared to most people on this board, I got caught in the hype a bit. But I still feel this card can be a good card if priced right.
If this card is priced at around 400 dollars, we can thank the gtx 570 and 580. Maybe spurs will get to stay on this board too, but because the 6970 performed well below expectations .
With regard to not caring about performance per $ I have to disagree.
I consider myself to be a pretty high end gamer but I do care about prformance / watt as well as outright performance.... that is probably why I still have a 5870 in my rig and have not jumped on a 580 :D
....anyway roll on the 15th so we can safely let this mostly useless thread die :yepp:
pretty much in line with 480 in those sentetics :up: hope in game perf. is much betterQuote:
Originally Posted by Loque
http://twitter.com/carstenspille
:shakes:
who is that guy and what is he trying to tell ? lol i missed the point is he pissed at amd cause of the leak or something ?
That's nice but he's comparing it in synthetics still. I'm saying real gamesQuote:
Originally Posted by Loque
Yes, a lot of people bench equal if not more than they game, but that's where unrealistic expectations come in - a 1920 SP card would absolutely kill performance wise, but a 1536 SP card means that for benching, where raw SP counts do matter, it's not going to provide as big a boost over Cypress - whereas for games, it can matter moreQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
But I think the entire "zomg Cayman = fail because it is lower in 3dMark Vantage" is ridiculous - what if it sucks in 3dMark but is comparable to the 580 in gaming?
We're only getting 3dMark benching which isn't giving us anything about gaming
And yes, HWBot is big, but again... for gamers, how many follow it based off that? They're going to see the benches for teh games they care about. If enthusiasts are a small enough niche, then the hardcore benching crowd is even smaller. I don't think that hurts AMD as much as you think - indeed, look at how many people ridicule Fermi for being a benching queen w/r/t Heaven
This fight has become less interesting. The crowds are really dissapointed and are ready to go home. Looks like the RED CORNER is going to throw in the towel. hopefully second wind coming to the RED Corner and give a good fight. A good fight = everyone wins. If not, See you in the NEXT FIGHT!
so many drama queens in this thread, lol. every rumour is a reason enough for this card to be "fail", people making their minds up already even though no actual review has been done and no one is 100% sure on what the spec are...
only 3 days left, chill the f*** out
:confused:.... ooooooooookkkaaayyy :rofl::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by migunani
that's what i asked myself as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by eric66
and why is he mad at amd? the guys over at the hardwareluxx forums bought the card from a regular shop (for a reasonable 395€ btw) - atleast that's what they said.
how is it amd's fault when some random retailer sends out these cards before the official launch date :confused::shrug:
I think AMD didn't expect the gtx 580 so soon. None of us did, look at the initial gtx 580 rumors and we all thought it was a joke and FUAD was just trying to get attention. I think this card was meant to go against the gtx 480. Performance was a chief concern but AMD also knew it didn't need sky high performance and would just need to beat the gtx 480 in heat and power consumption, while taking it in performance to some extent. The gtx 480 was a disaster when its cons were taken into account. Basically AMD just needed to make a decent card to make an excellent card when compared to the flawed gtx 480. I think this was a far more realistic interpretation of what was to come.
Some people were expecting an 80% performance jump on the same node when the prior generation of chips were already 333mm. That's completely unrealistic(unless AMD wanted to double the size of their chip). I know the card isn't released but leaks and specs are indicated something far less than what a lot of people anticipated.
This card probably isn't a fail card itself. It just fail for the fanboys because they don't get to huff that that NV is screwed and last gen. I think it's should be a lesson for them, don't be so crazy optimistic and be so vocal about it. In addition, don't attack anyone else if they don't share your supremely optimistic point of view because you might look foolish in the end.
Well FUD (not sure anyone should trust him anyways with AMD stuff) said the chip was the biggest AMD ever done - and R600 was 420mm^2Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Turns out its 389mm^2, which is proof that Fud either doesn't have a source and makes $h!t up, is an idiot, or a combination of both (most likely) - and so expectations need to change.
A 430mm^2 1920SP Cayman probably takes teh crown easily - a 390mm^2 1536SP Cayman probably won't.
The 580's release was definitely earlier than people thought, although the 580 seems to be in short supply in a lot of countries, so maybe it was indeed rushed out earlier by Nvidia to steal the thunder regardless of stock, esp. since the 6900's apparently are in good supply and were stockpiled for some time
GTX580 is a very minor refresh... No reason for it not to come out 6 months after GTX480. Just activate a few more shaders, sort out the TDP with a limiter chip, and do very minor performance tweaks = voila!
and apparently thats all it took to ruin amds one year project cayman.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
GF110 = GF110b... a'la GT200 -> GT200bQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Both lowered power draw, heat, improved yields (at least w/ GF110 we see it improved functional units)
I don't think it surprised AMD as much as people think though - after all, a 512SP Fermi was due last year. The timing might have surprised AMD a bit, but I don't think the overall card + performance did as much.
Again though, we don't have any gaming #'s yet - the Unigine benchmark for 6970 is below the 570 and 580, but it is VERY close to the 5970 - and we know the 5970 performs in game much better than the 570 and just above the 580. So what does that tell us about the 6970? TBA
Stop being so emotional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
How did it ruin it? Do you have concrete evidence Cayman's gaming performance is going to be like its 3dMark results? Where are you getting this conclusion? Seriously?
And cut the cache and HPC/GPGPU things that made G100 a power hungry chip to make a G110 a more gamer-oriented gpu.
I don't think the gtx 580 is that good of a card, it just looks fantastic compared to the gtx 480 as would the current leaks of the 6970 would. Sorting out the TDP and heat issues was a big victory for NV because that what was preventing NV from making the gf100 any faster and what was preventing them from making a dual card. The gtx 580 still isn't the best with power, but it is no longer the joke of the industry that can be poke fun of like AMD commercials have shown.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Reviewer/editor at PCGHQuote:
Originally Posted by eric66
No clue why he's pissed at AMD though - that sounds like a retailer :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing up
They used a Vapor-Chamber to make it look cooler. It certainly is, but no one would be impressed if they used the same 480 heatsink.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I will ask :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Loque
Source for this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
As far as I know it's even faster for folding than GTX480.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
http://www.anandtech.com/Show/Index/...eforce-gtx-580Quote:
So what makes GTX 580 faster? We’ll start with the obvious: it’s a complete chip. All the L2 cache, all the ROPs, all the SMs, it’s all enabled. When it comes to gaming this is as fast as GF110 can be, and it’s only through NVIDIA’s artificial FP64 limitations that double-precision computing isn’t equally unrestricted.
I mixed GF104, bad memory.
Looks like AMD may have got caught with their pants down by Nvidia. :eek:
Maybe they never planned for 6970 to be a monster chip but rather address some weak points eg. "tessellation" and to remain within similar TDP of 5870, since we are still on 40nm. From synthetic benchmarks we see they compromised in some areas to increase others.
They said it would be the new R300...
If you are so confident about the price/performance info we have at the moment don't let me stop you from deciding to buy or not right now. I'm not saying that the info is necessarily right or wrong - only that it is probabilistic, not hard facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
I don't believe in the magic drivers theory. Being a new architecture there may indeed be some significant driver improvements eventually. But that generally takes months to materialize. As for a differential performance increase in synthetics vs games, I hypothesized such a difference over 2000 posts ago based solely on the transition between 5D and 4D shaders. There are plenty of reasons why that analysis might be very wrong. But writing it off on the basis of not having happened before is a simple logical fallacy. As for the rest I am simply saying we don't have the whole picture. How do they clock? How do they perform in HPC apps? How do they perform in the specific games you play? These are open questions that could affect the purchasing decisions of many people here.
I must admit I would be disappointed if the benchmarks so far are indicative of overall performance in everything. But that's a flaw in my expectations, not a rational analysis.
I have been an ATI customer on and off since, IIRC, 1993. I don't see how that's relevant.
You are right I am being hasty about benchmarks. My frustration comes in fact from the decision of Amd to add so little smds to the architecture. I just get the feeling if they wanted to make a 1920 shader they could and it would dominate but instead they chose a cheaper smaller die that will once again compete on perf/watt mostly. that was a big letdown for me but I will try not to whine about it anymore my bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
you are right and Ill wait for a full review before making any more comments. I suppose a lot of things will be different on 15th. I mentioned that I was a customer because it seems that come dec 15 if cayman dissapoints a lot of amd customers will try to shine many bright lights on it but I think as a customer its better to criticize when criticism is due than to spin a positive side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
But anyway I wont be buying this generation as I am planned to replace my system with either bulldozer or sandy bridge and by then wel have 28nm cards finally. Just felt like voicing my opinion.
oh my good.. some decided already by "facts"
really useless thread .. most useless in all time history
Dammit! I'm out of popcorn!
Dimitriman, look at it this way. It is perfectly reasonable to be disappointed if they suck in trustworthy reviews. And we only have to wait a few days to see if that is the case or not.
We can look at these early leaks and think about the implications without getting emotionally worked up over it. Spending the next 4 days riding the emotional roller coaster won't change the product but will have an effect on you.
*walks to the store, buys seveteen chocolate bars, goes back home, sits and waits till dec 15th*Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
:rofl:
I don't understand why there is a need for so much negatives, gloom and doom about Cayman and AMD in this thread, most time from the same people always negative. Is it because the Cayman was over-hyped by few posters? Don't blame AMD for that.
It's a AMD thread so maybe we can pick some positives for example:
I don't think it's going to be paper launch as some of the Nvidia fanboys predicted.
I don't think the HD 6970 is going to be slower than GTX 570 as the FUD calculated and some fanboys were defending as real news.
Why not wait for the real reviews from few unbiased reviewers, usually not much good news come from some of the German sites.
According to rumors the Cayman is about 25% smaller die size, so AMD has the luxury to adjust the prices to reflect the performance if needed. For the majority of the buyers the performance value ratio is still most important even for most members on this forum.
Hopefully in January we will get the real AMD flagship card, the HD 6990.
For now, the last year HD 5970 is still the performance leader, so that's not too bad.
PS
I hope there is nothing wrong about being little positive about AMD in this thread.
Stop preaching your 5970 , not everyone cares or wants to deal with crossfire issues. And no its not a performance leader of single GPU segment.
I have serious doubts about the logic behind this 25% smaller die rumor. It sounds like people are just taking the difference between 5 shaders and 4 shaders without any other factors. It doesn't take into account increased "uncore" logic per SP, the fattening of the remaining shaders, and other non-SP changes like concurrent kernel execution and expanded tessellation units. As I said a long time ago, in a galaxy far far far away, I'd guess the architecture change is ambiguous or detrimental to die space per SP. The idea is to reduce idle execution units, which wastes power, not necessarily the overall size of the chip.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinz68
And I wish people would stop preaching to me about how horrible dual cards are. I like my 5970 just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
i do :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
at 25x16 cf/sli is still a must
but so far it looks like i'll add a second 5970 insteed of two 6970's
Well to bad , but this is not 5970/6990(Antilles) thread , its 6970 a single GPU Cayman, no need to bring multi gpu debate here they don't compare to each other. Apples and Oranges don't mix.
just says "AMD Cayman info":welcome:Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
and Antilles is just two Caymans
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_d
:welcome:Quote:
Well to bad , but this is not 5970/6990(Antilles) thread , its 6970 a single GPU Cayman, no need to bring multi gpu debate here they don't compare to each other. Apples and Oranges don't mix.
This thread needs more nerd RAGE!
Relax and get a life, it's about AMD HD 5970, wish it was mine. Most reviewers agree it is the fastest graphic card and people buy Graphic Cards not GPU. It's not any secret that AMD strategy since HD 3870 is to have smaller die size and dual GPU as flagship and it looks like since the HD 4*** series it's not too bad strategy for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
Doesn't mean because I have HD 5970 in my signature I can't comment on it? Since it is my second dual card I probably know little more about it than you do plus I said, "is there something wrong about being little positive about AMD on this AMD thread?" I hope not but after your reply I'm not so sure about it.
If you bother to read most review, most agree that Crossfire is at least as good as SLI and off course having such on one card is big advantage.
I have a life thank you very much. And so far neither you or other trolls disputed fact that you don't compare A. 2xGPU to B. 1xGPU different product segments and claim A is fastest of AB segment. All you and other trolls did was go from my main point and introduce irrelevant stuff like
I never compared SLI to Crossfire its the same thing and it is not the issue here.Quote:
most agree that Crossfire is at least as good as SLI and off course having such on one card is big advantage.
Hey i never said it is not fastest graphic card :eek: hell ya its fastest card but from different segment . "Most users" agree single GPU card is alot less of a hassle. And lets not start pulling random % out of our asses.Quote:
Most reviewers agree it is the fastest graphic card
You need to read some reviews your self , they explain how one Graphic Card differs from another. Clearly not everyone is blind and know about MGPU issues and SGPU advantages.Quote:
people buy Graphic Cards
So you can make a distinction between two separate cards but not one with two or one GPU :confused: Single GPU card has as much advantage as single graphics card with MGPU over two separate ones.Quote:
If you bother to read most review, most agree that Crossfire is at least as good as SLI and off course having such on one card is big advantage.
So now we went from "Graphic Card" discussions to company strategies :shrug: speaking of witch "AMD promotes Cayman as the new R300 " here is your reason for AMD bashing. Why would you be positive and praise them for being so conservative.Quote:
It's not any secret that AMD strategy since HD 3870 is to have smaller die size and dual GPU as flagship and it looks like since the HD 4*** series it's not too bad strategy for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
Wow... i've seen some stuck up people... but you take the cake :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
If the 6970 performs better than GTX 480 (~110%) and is about 30-40% more expensive than $239 that the 6870 was launched at, i'm buying! A lot of people i know would too, and i'd wager a handsome sum to say that a lot of people globally would do the same. Just take a look at DX11 marketshare. It is mostly nvidia's flock (read sheep) which will have a problem admitting that this makes more sense, as it is cheaper, cooler and better value given the features like eyefinity and 7.1 96khz/24-bit audio over hdmi. Honestly, as a potential purchaser of 2 cards (for 2 systems) in THIS month... i'm rather keenly looking forward to the pricing of the 6970/6950/6870(may be a downward price review)... my :banana::banana::banana::banana: is big enough! thank you :P no need for extra inches :rofl:
Sincerely, i believe if AMD prices it closer to GTX 570, then Nvidia is fukked... cause Nvidia couldn't potentially drop prices a lot, with the given costs. I agree costs would have improved, but... it is still a BIG chip...
Also, it is what you can buy for your money which matters more me thinks... good on them those who bought 5970... it still is the fastest card out there... when launched for a little more than GTX480, it made good sense for those with the money to spend... It is still faster than the GTX580, so i don't see any downsides to having fastest card for about a year and then some :P similarly, the antilles will also be an exceptional value, given the CF scaling now.
No offense but that statement just sounded very fanboyishQuote:
Originally Posted by tifosi
Well... we try and avoid the 'f' word :P Sincerely... i've been hearing all this malarkey about dual gpu vs single gpu... but if i get more for my money, why-ever would i complain? I'm an indian and we are notoriously stingy with our money... see 'red white and brown' by Russell Peters for more :PQuote:
Originally Posted by waway625
You want to know... i'm currently using a 7900GS... kind dear admins, please don't ban me here at Xsystems :D Used 4870 for sometime... i'll simply buy whatever offers me more bang(read value) per buck. However, OT but, i don't support what Intel (No AMD/ less AMD, or compiler :banana::banana::banana::banana:) does, nor what Nvidia (TWIMTBP) does..
EDIT: For your benefit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdE2TEj38d0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6NoY...eature=related
Honestly it looks like AMD is playing safe and it might bite them in the ass. They needed cards at least on par with what nvidia has to offer at this moment not expensive slow ones. And come January the GTX560 will come and pipi all over the 6870 and probably take a swing at Cayman Pro. I hope they are well underway with the 28nm transition because the 40nm second coming is a bit of a letdown.
so much drama for a single user-test without any comparison to other cards is quite sad...
LOLL i love the last couple of days before the end of the nda :D
If the 6970 can't walk on water, I will be very disappoint :(
That said, if the 6970 is indeed priced similarly to the GTX 580, it will have to outperform it. Just look at the 6800 series vs. the nVidia cards it was aimed at. Though the enthusiast market is smaller than the PC Gamer market, failure of the 6900 series to perform against their nVidia counterpart after having a significant leg-up on them in that sector could prove disastrous for AMD.
3 more days and all this will be over.
amd aint doing dmg control, results are not accurate.
If that switch is a TDP limiter, then I imagine reviewers will try both modes. The question is, does it need extra cooling to use it? Maybe the results are accurate, but not the full picture?Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
Two suggestions:
Stop with the tags before you dig a hole.
Stop the personal insults.
BTw, the Bulgarian site testing the 6950 said that it was 30-40% best case faster in >1680x1050 vs. the 6870 in games, and supposedly goes up with resolution/AA. The quote was later removed. 30-40% better is close to 570 territory.
If true, then where's the 6970 actually perform in game?
either it is tdp or for bios or both.(might be tdp turn on in driver also)Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
amd seems to add a updated version of power tune to the new cards, so who knows if they even in current drivers have such activated at all.
3 days...
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=263520 ???? cat 10.12 no good ????
Maybe we should just ask the guy posting these results to show us the manual.Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
Of course you can compare the cards, most review do without any special segment, maybe Google can help. The single most important reason to use 2 GPU is to have fastest Graphic Card.Quote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
Yes there is a HUGE advantage to have 2 GPU on one card instead having to buy two cards. Here are just few, less power consumption, less heat, some mobos can't run 2 cards, even on my not exactly cheap mobo I would have to run them site by site, again more heat. The most important is the cost since the dual GPU cards cost less than 2 cards.
The bottom line is, selective post replying always goes on with never ending arguments. Maybe you should go read one more time here.
Here is your reply to my post, there sure was not need for it
My post was about "why all the negatives, gloom and doom" about AMD in this thread.
I only made that post after so many repeating post about AMD sinking ship and about the big trouble AMD is in because of Cayman.
Instead of replying to all the negative post and sometime out right troolls I responded with a single post trying to point out few positives not exclusively talking about HD 5970. Is that so bad in AMD thread? Do you really thing it is trolling? Do you know what trolling is?
You decided to ignore all and make selective reply going on with even more negatives. I can safely bet that most people using the HD 5970 wont agree with you, but you who doesn't have any knows better.
The ONLY way to have the most powerful graphic and gaming solution is either with dual card or multi card SLI or Crossfire, for me single card is better way.
I don't want to go on about this any more lets just say we disagree but next time please read and don't make selective personal attack post, there sure was not need for it. My last post on the subject. You want to talk more take it PM.
Increases the max voltage voltage by ~20%, no cold bug, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
Max board power is 250w without hardmodding which seems like a few have already done.
Tesselation is fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
within 5% of 5970.
question is, are that also in games, if so, then it trade blows with 580.
if not, well...it dosnt look good for amd.
perception rules.
or the guy is hired by Nvidia to do dmg to amd.
happens.
Seems better then the previous drivers, benchmarks did improve by a bit!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
We should just wait for the release to see the real deal instead of hearing so much negative feedback..Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
I noticed some people believe Cayman is going to really bad in synthetics benchmark but much better in games.
The new 3DMARK11 is probably going to be used most often.
Here is the "Ducati750ss" HD 6970 3DMARK11 Extreme 1920x1080 bench "score X1776 points" on AMD platform probably not with the latest driver.
On Xbit benchmarks the GTX 580 "scored 1947 points"
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/9...1premtotal.png
That makes the HD 6970 -8.78% slower than GTX 580 in this synthetic bench.
Maybe better driver and same platform can at least narrow that difference, anyway the best is to wait for the real reviews from unbiased reviewers, coming soon.
+11Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny87au
Um...Your comparingQuote:
Originally Posted by Heinz68
1920x1200 6900 score
to
1920x1080 GTX580 score
The difference is about 10% more pixels for 1920x1200.
Those who this post was referenced to, might want to take heed. Admins already cleared out a bunch of useless tags this week for this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by STEvil
Admins can also see who added the tags.
And the personal insults is a vacation-able offense if I'm not mistaken.
Please keep it civil guys.
Fully supported GPU-z SS from @Ducati750ss:
http://www.abload.de/img/gpu-zneuvxuk.jpg
Maybe he just wrote it down wrong, cause of what i know entry, performance and extreme tests are predefinedQuote:
Originally Posted by 96redformula
HD6970 or HD6950?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hicksetto
Secondly, is the switch on the card on or off?
Yup, that screenshot did me in, I've lost all hope.
Sorry and thanks, it was my typing error, ducati used the same 1920x1980 resolutionQuote:
Originally Posted by 96redformula
I just corrected it.
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads...-Z_v0.4.9.html
where does it say gpu-z 0.4.9 surports 6970
HD6970... No clues about the switch yet... If you know German, you can ask him @:Quote:
Originally Posted by 96redformula
http://translate.google.com/translat...768017-30.html
Here:Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_d
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=136218
And I asked him about the flick the switch, he responded with:
Translated
As long as I do not know what is, I press the not .. LOL
Can make the subsequent owners like [smiley here]
No clue wtf the last part means, but he's being a little... wimp not flicking it.
Test build. Here you go:Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_d
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=136218
ok thanks i looked but didn't find it:)Quote:
Originally Posted by nascasho
WT...:eek::confused::eek:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 96redformula
@Ducati750ss said:
"The switch also changes nothing in the Performance." :confused:
He just stated:
"The switch also changes nothing in the Performance.Keine idea for what that is."
:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by bill_d
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/7462/gpuzsupport.jpg
He just didn't put it in the release notes.