AMD Cayman info (or rumor)

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-12-2010, 01:37 AM
96redformula

What seems to be really scary is that he posts that the HD6970 is consuming more power than GTX480.....
12-12-2010, 01:41 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borden

http://bbs.expreview.com/data/attach...yt7tfec8ee.jpg
http://bbs.expreview.com/thread-38497-1-1.html

hmm

35% faster in Metro2033 puts it above GTX 580 according to Anandtech, and 44% faster in Stalker COP puts it around if not above GTX 580 as well. Guru3D seems to corroborate those #'s.

For that matter, AvP is faster according to techpowerup. For Lost Planet 2, according to Tom's, 6970 is at 5970 levels, though that one's so heavily Nvidia favored nothing non-Nvidia is close

Like I said, pay attention to the game benchmarks more than what 3dMark is spewing out
12-12-2010, 01:43 AM
96redformula

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

hmm

35% faster in Metro2033 puts it above GTX 580 according to Anandtech, and 44% faster in Stalker COP puts it around if not above GTX 580 as well. Guru3D seems to corroborate those #'s.

For that matter, AvP is faster according to techpowerup. For Lost Planet 2, according to Tom's, 6970 is at 5970 levels, though that one's so heavily Nvidia favored nothing non-Nvidia is close

Like I said, pay attention to the game benchmarks more than what 3dMark is spewing out

I read the graph as in xx% better at tesselation, not in framerates or gameplay, but I could have just misinterpreted it.
12-12-2010, 01:44 AM
Tha Last Meal

Quote:

What seems to be really scary is that he posts that the HD6870 is consuming more power than GTX480.....

You mean HD 6970 :)

but this is bad man :down: , I have a bad feeling about this card HD 6970 :shrug:
12-12-2010, 01:46 AM
WintersSC

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

hmm

35% faster in Metro2033 puts it above GTX 580 according to Anandtech, and 44% faster in Stalker COP puts it around if not above GTX 580 as well. Guru3D seems to corroborate those #'s.

For that matter, AvP is faster according to techpowerup. For Lost Planet 2, according to Tom's, 6970 is at 5970 levels, though that one's so heavily Nvidia favored nothing non-Nvidia is close

Like I said, pay attention to the game benchmarks more than what 3dMark is spewing out

Look at the botom, seems pheik...
12-12-2010, 01:48 AM
easyrider

I do

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4097/gpuzneuvxukz.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
12-12-2010, 01:48 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96redformula

I read the graph as in xx% better at tesselation, not in framerates or gameplay, but I could have just misinterpreted it.

That's what I thought too, but look at the graph.... tessellation rate is consistently > 1.5x, usually over 2x, so why would they do that tessellation graph then show tessellation in games not doing so?

And it's neck to neck with the 5970 in tessellation in Unigine so the 69% performance sounds about right
12-12-2010, 01:48 AM
flopper

Han solo " I got a bad feeling" strange, it feels I never see her again.
Trust him.
Its all in the force.

mixed bag, likely bad optimized drivers as far.
maybe crossfire will suck for a year then.
12-12-2010, 01:54 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96redformula

What seems to be really scary is that he posts that the HD6870 is consuming more power than GTX480.....

6970 is supposedly rated at 190 typical / 250 max, so in some situations, I wouldn't be surprised if it got close to the 480 - but I bet overall average is a different story, much less firemark

Quote:

Originally Posted by WintersSC

Look at the botom, seems pheik...

He's done that to every slide /shrug
12-12-2010, 01:57 AM
ilkkahy

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

Good thing no one uses only 3dMark to review :rofl:

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

I think you posted good stuff so i wanted to remind you that these factors dont go unnoticed by everyone. Most people that agree with you just dont have reason to write about it here.

I think expectations to Cayman from some people are just dumb. Why would amd all the sudden throw that well working "sweet spot" -strategy to trash bin? To please five enthusiastic gamers who wants amd to make huge cost-inefficient chip that would rape GTX580?

My guess about that "turbo-boost" button is that its dual-bios switch. In a way it can works as turbo-boost if other of the bioses has been updated to more aggressive clocks. This way one could update "reserved slot bios" with less risk and switch to primary bios if something goes wrong. I think there motherboards that has this feature? But this is just a wild guess as i dont really know anything about bios-stuff :)
12-12-2010, 01:59 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilkkahy

I think you posted good stuff so i wanted to remind you that these factors dont go unnoticed by everyone. Most people that agree with you just dont have reason to write about it here.

I think expectations to Cayman from some people are just dumb. Why would amd all the sudden throw that well working "sweet spot" -strategy to trash bin? To please five enthusiastic gamers who wants amd to make huge cost-inefficient chip that would rape GTX580?

My guess about that "turbo-boost" button is that its dual-bios switch. In a way it can works as turbo-boost if other of the bioses has been updated to more aggressive clocks. This way one could update "reserved slot bios" with less risk and switch to primary bios if something goes wrong. I think there motherboards that has this feature? But this is just a wild guess as i dont really know anything about bios-stuff :)

Thanks. Love the avatar too :up::ROTF:

It's apparently a dual BIOS switch - one which raises max voltage and is meant to avoid the cold bug. Interesting that they decided to put it in a reference card
12-12-2010, 02:02 AM
Hicksetto

HD6970 RE5 Benchmark posted!

8xAA 1920x1080, all max 16xAF

http://www.abload.de/img/6970re5dban.jpg
12-12-2010, 02:02 AM
WintersSC

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

He's done that to every slide /shrug

Ouch :doh:

FFS hicksetto, just for 1 second xDDD
12-12-2010, 02:03 AM
bill_d

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

Thanks. Love the avatar too :up::ROTF:

It's apparently a dual BIOS switch - one which raises max voltage and is meant to avoid the cold bug. Interesting that they decided to put it in a reference card

most waterblocks are for the reference card to start anyway
12-12-2010, 02:03 AM
96redformula

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

HD6970 RE5 Benchmark posted!

8xAA 1920x1080, all max 16xAF

http://www.abload.de/img/6970re5dban.jpg

Um is that good, bad....RE5 bench people translate please :).
12-12-2010, 02:04 AM
WintersSC

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96redformula

Um is that good, bad....RE5 bench people translate please :).

Didnt say anything XD

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/369...rd/index5.html
12-12-2010, 02:08 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by WintersSC

Bad.

*cough* 8xAA 16xAF *cough*
12-12-2010, 02:15 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96redformula

What seems to be really scary is that he posts that the HD6970 is consuming more power than GTX480.....

Someone just mentioned the 480 in his review was undervolted to 0.963V
12-12-2010, 02:16 AM
kite7

5870 Crossfire 8xAA and 16xAF scores 109FPS on RE5 Fixed benchmark

GTX 580 8xAA and 16xAF scores 117FPS on RE5 Fixed benchmark

According to this http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=...0&postcount=19

Not too shabby at all
12-12-2010, 02:17 AM
WintersSC

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

*cough* 8xAA 16xAF *cough*

GTX 580 bench didnt use filters or? I dont see that condition in the screen :confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by kite7

5870 Crossfire 8xAA and 16xAF scores 109FPS on RE5 Fixed benchmark

GTX 580 8xAA and 16xAF scores 117FPS on RE5 Fixed benchmark

According to this http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=...0&postcount=19

Not too shabby at all

My bad, sorry!
12-12-2010, 02:18 AM
96redformula

@Ducati750

Quote:

Depends. Resident Evil hab ich jetzt mit der gtx480 gebencht und komme auf 101FPS, die 6970 hat 109FPS. Resident Evil, I just benched with the GTX480 and come to 101FPS, which has 109FPS 6970.
Bei meinem F1 2010 Bench ist die 6970 21% schneller als gtx480. On my bench, the 6970 F1 2010 21% faster than GTX480.
Bei 3DMark11 Extreme ist die 6970 auch schneller. In 3DMark11 the 6970 Extreme is faster.
12-12-2010, 02:18 AM
kite7

Quote:

GTX 580 bench didnt use filters or? I dont see that condition in the screen

I'm sure they didn't enable AA or AF for that RE5 bench because they did a separate test in their review labeled "High Quality AA and AF"
12-12-2010, 02:23 AM
WintersSC

Quote:

Originally Posted by kite7

I'm sure they didn't enable AA or AF for that RE5 bench because they did a separate test in their review labeled "High Quality AA and AF"

okey! Im new in this world xD
12-12-2010, 02:23 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96redformula

@Ducati750

See what I told you guys? so much doom and gloom.. and 6970 is awfully close to the 580

Also, for reference, the Computemark score of 454 sounds bad compared to the 580

http://h-5.abload.de/img/6970computemarkxmc9.jpg

But look at what the 5870 scores:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100606/gpu-...80-vs-hd-5870/

238!

The 6970 scored 90.7% higher than the 5870 in the same compute bench!
12-12-2010, 02:27 AM
WintersSC

Oh god, this seems to be good, despite the 10.11 drivers...
12-12-2010, 02:30 AM
zerazax

I don't think the drivers will be that big an improvement - not yet at least, there's definitely room for improvements. Look at 5870 before and after.. big difference

But so much of the bad news wasn't looked at in context... when compared to the 5970, the 6970 is quite close..
12-12-2010, 02:30 AM
Hicksetto

@Ducati750ss stated his benchmarks:

GTX 480 / HD6970

RE5
101 / 109

F1 2010
56 / 68

3DMark11X
X1650 / X1798

3DMark11P
P5017 / P4939

Heaven2.1
687 / 644
12-12-2010, 02:40 AM
FischOderAal

The load on the GPU is at 99 percent during the benchmarks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducati750ss

Auslastung der GPU liegt bei 99% bei den Grafikbenches.

http://www.hardwareluxx.de/community...3-post809.html
12-12-2010, 02:41 AM
Sn0wm@n

now lets wait for pricing ... and news on antilles :D
12-12-2010, 02:46 AM
kite7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n

now lets wait for pricing ... and news on antilles :D

Didn't someone from some uk forum say that they will be priced like the HD5800 somewhere in this thread? If the HD6970 is going to be $399 then I'd like to see how nvidia will respond to that. Remember what happened when HD4800 series came out and surprised nvidia with the pricing? Bam, price drop nvidia and everyone wins. We can only hope it'll be like that again :D
12-12-2010, 02:47 AM
informal

According to latest techpowerup performance summary here, Cayman XT needs to be around ~25% faster than Cypress,on average,in each resolution,in order to match 580GTX. That's just 25% folks,it's very doable.
12-12-2010, 02:51 AM
Olivon

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

According to latest techpowerup performance summary here, Cayman XT needs to be around ~25% faster than Cypress,on average,in each resolution,in order to match 580GTX. That's just 25% folks,it's very doable.

That's more 35-40% informal :(
12-12-2010, 02:52 AM
Hicksetto

http://i56.tinypic.com/dqjc6e.jpg
12-12-2010, 02:56 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

http://i56.tinypic.com/dqjc6e.jpg

Just for reference w/ a 5970:

5970 / 6970

3DMark11X
X2510 / X1798

3DMark11P
P6906 / P4939

Heaven 2.1
671/644

And for ComputeMark, 1920x1080 Extreme, 6970 vs. 5870: 454 vs. 238

If those 3dMark scores ain't proof that they're very shader biased...
12-12-2010, 02:58 AM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olivon

That's more 35-40% informal :(

Um ,no.
all resolutions :
5870 90
580 112 => 112/90=1.25x

1024x768:
5870 87
580 104 => 104/87=1.19x

1280x1024
5870 89
580 111 => 111/89=1.24x

1680x1050
5870 89
580 113=> 113/89=1.27x

1920x1200
5870 91
580 115=> 115/91=1.26x

2560x1600
5870 92
580 116 => 116/92=1.26x

As I've written,25% is very doable in games . End users could care less for Synthetic benchmarks.
In the end,we get smaller chip that performs on par with 40% larger chip,while costing the same or less.
12-12-2010, 03:05 AM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by kite7

Didn't someone from some uk forum say that they will be priced like the HD5800 somewhere in this thread? If the HD6970 is going to be $399 then I'd like to see how nvidia will respond to that. Remember what happened when HD4800 series came out and surprised nvidia with the pricing? Bam, price drop nvidia and everyone wins. We can only hope it'll be like that again :D

i meant local e-tailer pricing .. newegg.ca ncix etc...
12-12-2010, 03:07 AM
Hicksetto

From @Ducati750ss:

Vantage High

GTX 480 = H13354

HD6970 = H14743
12-12-2010, 03:18 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

From @Ducati750ss:

Vantage High

GTX 480 = H13354

HD6970 = H14743

Get him to do P and Xtreme

Seeing the 5870 get quite a boost in 3dMark Vantage over its life from drivers, 6970 could end up a lot higher than people think
12-12-2010, 03:23 AM
kite7

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

Seeing the 5870 get quite a boost in 3dMark Vantage over its life from drivers, 6970 could end up a lot higher than people think

Probable indeed, HD5870 gained almost 3000 marks from the day it was launched to now but really in the end all I'm concerned about is in-game performance :)
12-12-2010, 03:54 AM
hurrdurr

bottom line is, 6970 is slightly slower than GTX 580
12-12-2010, 03:59 AM
waway625

Just a quick comparison with RE5 benchmark. I dont know how much advantage the i7 950 gives though

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g2...9-56-50-02.jpg
12-12-2010, 04:10 AM
waway625

RE5 variable benchmark 8xaa

http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g2...8-20-28xxx.jpg
12-12-2010, 04:13 AM
Florinmocanu

RE5 likes I7 more than Thubans, but it seems they are about on par (GTX 570/6970).
12-12-2010, 04:17 AM
eric66

Well it looks better in games must admit it but still expected more
12-12-2010, 04:32 AM
kite7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florinmocanu

RE5 likes I7 more than Thubans, but it seems they are about on par (GTX 570/6970).

RE5 favors i7 heavily. Phenom II X4 and X6 perform the same on RE5, those additional 2 cores don't help.

From here , it can be seen i7 performs a lot faster than Phenom cpus at RE5
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=22167&all=1
12-12-2010, 04:36 AM
Hicksetto

According to @Ducati750ss, these are today's last benches from him:

Bad Company 2:

GTX 480 = min 42 , max 124 , avg 77,0

HD6970 = min 25 , max 130 , avg 70.4
12-12-2010, 04:40 AM
eric66

lol that last one puts 6970 behind 5870 i think :ROTF: hope its some kinda joke or something it took amd 1 year to release this thing ? wow
12-12-2010, 04:49 AM
Gaul

RE5 same setting

6850 def
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/1333/re2f.jpg

6850 @ 1025/1150
http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/9852/re1m.jpg
12-12-2010, 04:53 AM
eric66

'Don't get your panties in a twist folks.

We'll get real numbers on launch. Any leaks currently is meaningless as its running on drivers not even meant for Cayman. Unless someone actually has hold of the official launch drivers, cayman is running crippled in everything.

So far the only leak with un-crippled bios 6970 with 1920sp on gpu-z has it performing > gtx580. But the guy wouldn't reveal anything else.'

hope its true ...
12-12-2010, 04:58 AM
xdan

Quote:

Get him to do P and Xtreme

Seeing the 5870 get quite a boost in 3dMark Vantage over its life from drivers, 6970 could end up a lot higher than people think

Here is the performance score...
http://forum.lab501.ro/attachment.ph...8&d=1292150833
Under the GTX 570 score....
http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/...tage_p_gpu.jpg
12-12-2010, 05:21 AM
waway625

Quote:

Originally Posted by xdan

Here is the performance score...
http://forum.lab501.ro/attachment.ph...8&d=1292150833
Under the GTX 570 score....
http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/...tage_p_gpu.jpg

GTX 570 @ stock + Core i7 950 @ 3.7Ghz

vantage

3DMark Score
25841.46 3DMarks
Graphics Score
...21606.09
CPU Score
62734.18
Jane Nash
64.95 FPS
New Calico
61.57 FPS
AI Test
3235.9 operations/s

3dmark 11

3DMark Score
X1701
Graphics score
1540
Physics Score
7992
Combined Score
1794
GraphicsTest1
7.85 FPS
GraphicsTest2
8.03 FPS
GraphicsTest3
7.45 FPS
GraphicsTest4
4.74 FPS
PhysicsTest
25.37 FPS
CombinedTest
8.34 FPS
12-12-2010, 05:27 AM
Nintendork

Without 10.12 it's useless to post more "leaked benchmarks". This will be hell if we continue for 3 days more. As for now, I'm more interested in chip/pcb nude pics.

The 6970 vs 480 powerconsumption comparison of hardwareluxx was done with an undervolted 480.
12-12-2010, 06:07 AM
SpuTnicK

http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbi...daten_pic3.png

Source
12-12-2010, 06:11 AM
cold2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

Um ,no.
all resolutions :
5870 90
580 112 => 112/90=1.25x

1024x768:
5870 87
580 104 => 104/87=1.19x

1280x1024
5870 89
580 111 => 111/89=1.24x

1680x1050
5870 89
580 113=> 113/89=1.27x

1920x1200
5870 91
580 115=> 115/91=1.26x

2560x1600
5870 92
580 116 => 116/92=1.26x

As I've written,25% is very doable in games . End users could care less for Synthetic benchmarks.
In the end,we get smaller chip that performs on par with 40% larger chip,while costing the same or less.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/3369/94408007.jpg

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/g...ating_mit_aaaf
12-12-2010, 06:29 AM
informal

Sorry,i trust techpowerup more.
12-12-2010, 06:49 AM
Dami3n

From Catalyst 10,12:

AMD Radeon 6950 - HD 6900 Series "= ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI \ VEN_1002 & DEV_ 6718
AMD Radeon 6970 - HD 6900 Series " = ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_6719

Is the german user testing a 6950?
12-12-2010, 06:57 AM
DarthShader

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpuTnicK

Source

Review sites trying to generate hits, compiling info from the internets. :rolleyes:

That theoretic peak performance table is hardly insightful either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

Sorry,i trust techpowerup more.

You should look closely at the choice of benchmark's used there. Pick a SLI/crossfire review to see the issue at a more exegerated level.

While their review can be used to compare relative positions of cards, or to look for driver problems, it's unreliable for direct percentage comparisions of cards, because the result differences are flattened. I hope W1zzard will update the choice of benchmarks to a more 2011 level soon, cause I like their overall methodology.

That computerbase.de table isn't a reliable indicator either, since it compiles only 4xAA results, which is a "best-case" for nVidia. At noAA and 8xAA the differences are a bit smaller.
12-12-2010, 07:05 AM
Dimitriman

I feel that many people were right to call to question AMDs ability to deliver Antilles with 2x 1920 shaders and it seems like AMD chose to castratre Cayman in order to be able to build and deliver Antilles. Personally I would not have cared if Antilles were 2x 1536 shaders while Cayman was 1920, Cayman had to be a good card so that Amd could escape the position they were in vs the 400s but instead they chose to be at the exact same spot as last generation. If you look at these numbers and they are true, nothing has changed, the 6900 series will be in the exact same position as the 5800 series were all of 2010 without the added 6 month glory time.
12-12-2010, 07:09 AM
TheBreezyBB

Let's just hope that the card ( 6970 ) isn't slower than the GTX580 and @ the same price. This alone would make the card Utter failure IMO!!
12-12-2010, 07:12 AM
eric66

I't is when you don't know what conditions they were testing under, whether the drivers fully supported the card etc....

You will only find this out on Wednesday.

Andy '

hmm now i start to think that this german guy doesn't have real cayman drivers .....
12-12-2010, 07:18 AM
TheBreezyBB

I'm actually waiting to decide on what to get in January.
12-12-2010, 07:37 AM
zalbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

Fully supported GPU-z SS from @Ducati750ss:

http://www.abload.de/img/gpu-zneuvxuk.jpg

Ok, so 1536 shaders it is then. The number is a bit disappointing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borden

http://bbs.expreview.com/data/attach...yt7tfec8ee.jpg
http://bbs.expreview.com/thread-38497-1-1.html

I think we've seen a part of this slide before. I think the gains are nice. The question is, is it faster than GTX570 or not? Seems pretty close. I like what I'm seeing! :up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

Also, for reference, the Computemark score of 454 sounds bad compared to the 580

http://h-5.abload.de/img/6970computemarkxmc9.jpg

But look at what the 5870 scores:

http://www.geeks3d.com/20100606/gpu-...80-vs-hd-5870/

238!

The 6970 scored 90.7% higher than the 5870 in the same compute bench!

I suppose it's just optimised for Nvidia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

http://i56.tinypic.com/dqjc6e.jpg

Still loses in Heaven? Odd...
Other than that, looks somewhat decent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

According to @Ducati750ss, these are today's last benches from him:

Bad Company 2:

GTX 480 = min 42 , max 124 , avg 77,0

HD6970 = min 25 , max 130 , avg 70.4

Very bad min fps. :(
Hopefully 6970 will be ahead of GTX480 min FPS wise, this is one area where 5870 was seriously lacking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpuTnicK

http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbi...daten_pic3.png

Source

They should have boosted ROPs more. Other than that, looks more balanced than GTX570. :up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dami3n

From Catalyst 10,12:

AMD Radeon 6950 - HD 6900 Series "= ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI \ VEN_1002 & DEV_ 6718
AMD Radeon 6970 - HD 6900 Series " = ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_6719

Is the german user testing a 6950?

No, he is not. Let's wait for the reviews...
12-12-2010, 07:41 AM
Nintendork

Ducati750ss failed hard. All the nvidia gadgets installed and who knows what.
12-12-2010, 07:44 AM
blindbox

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dami3n

From Catalyst 10,12:

AMD Radeon 6950 - HD 6900 Series "= ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI \ VEN_1002 & DEV_ 6718
AMD Radeon 6970 - HD 6900 Series " = ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_6719

Is the german user testing a 6950?

I raeged if that's true.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...eply&p=4662941

EDIT: Removed oversized image. Post below describes the true situation I hope.
12-12-2010, 07:45 AM
cold2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dami3n

From Catalyst 10,12:

AMD Radeon 6950 - HD 6900 Series "= ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI \ VEN_1002 & DEV_ 6718
AMD Radeon 6970 - HD 6900 Series " = ati2mtag_NICayman, PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_6719

Is the german user testing a 6950?

DEV_6719 = HD 6950

DEV_6718 = HD 6970

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/7106/18817250.png

Source

http://www.arabhardware.net/forum/sh...postcount=1633
12-12-2010, 07:49 AM
andos

lolz.

Look in description.

http://www.czechcomputer.cz/product.jsp?artno=84725

http://www.czechcomputer.cz/product.jsp?artno=84726
12-12-2010, 07:50 AM
TheBreezyBB

Forget that Seems that this wasn't the case.
12-12-2010, 07:51 AM
badboy18187

Like few people have said, until trusted sites actually post their reviews, I won`t believe in any of these leaked "real" benchmark numbers.BTW, I`m sorry if I missed it, but did AMD disclosed the fact that HD6970 has only 1536 SP`s?
12-12-2010, 07:52 AM
Nintendork

The mod of that forum says Ducati doesn't even have a 6970...
12-12-2010, 07:52 AM
-Sweeper_

if cayman XT (250W TDP?) cant beat a fully spec'd GF100 I'll be really disappointed

lets just wait a few more days..
12-12-2010, 07:53 AM
zalbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by hicksetto

fully supported gpu-z ss from @ducati750ss:

http://www.abload.de/img/gpu-zneuvxuk.jpg

6718! So, is it 6850 that he is testing with a 6870 sticker?! O.o
Then again the VRAM clocks appear to be too high for 6850 part...
12-12-2010, 07:58 AM
cold2010

6950/6970 GPUz 0.5.0

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/2383/bhefyu.png
12-12-2010, 08:11 AM
Hicksetto

From now on @harry97 started to compare HD5870 vs. HD6970 with the same card!

http://www.abload.de/img/69704mxh.jpg

http://i54.tinypic.com/103fqsz.jpg

http://3dmark.com/3dmv/2791306

http://3dmark.com/3dmv/2791228

Keep in mind @harry97's resolution is 1680x1050!
12-12-2010, 08:17 AM
Hicksetto

HD6970 vs. HD5870

RE5:
http://www.abload.de/img/5870wcb1.jpg

http://www.abload.de/img/6970qeqs.jpg

Unigine Heaven 2.1:
http://www.abload.de/img/6970_uni6dnx.jpg

Table:

http://i55.tinypic.com/332t3zt.jpg
12-12-2010, 08:29 AM
TheBreezyBB

So the Texture Fillrate on 6950 is the same as the one in Ducatis750ss photos! interesting!!
12-12-2010, 08:37 AM
Hicksetto

Newer build of 8.79.6!
RC2 Dated December 7

HD6970
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/150976

HD5870
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/137734

http://i55.tinypic.com/1zdq8eq.jpg
12-12-2010, 08:45 AM
kaktus1907

Quote:

Originally Posted by cold2010

6950/6970 GPUz 0.5.0

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/2383/bhefyu.png

I've never seen this before at DonanımHaber :confused: and i am pretty active there..
12-12-2010, 08:49 AM
SpuTnicK

Does anyone has a link to GPU-z 0.5.0?
12-12-2010, 08:52 AM
Oliverda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nintendork

The mod of that forum says Ducati doesn't even have a 6970...

:rofl:
12-12-2010, 08:54 AM
-=DVS=-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hicksetto

Newer build of 8.79.6!
RC2 Dated December 7

HD6970
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/150976

HD5870
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/137734

http://i55.tinypic.com/1zdq8eq.jpg

SO Ducat does have a 6970 , harrys numbers add up to his with slight margin of variation, is harry using thuban also ?
12-12-2010, 08:59 AM
FischOderAal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nintendork

The mod of that forum says Ducati doesn't even have a 6970...

I kinda doubt that. Could you provide a link?
12-12-2010, 09:02 AM
cold2010

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaktus1907

I've never seen this before at DonanımHaber :confused: and i am pretty active there..

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpuTnicK

Does anyone has a link to GPU-z 0.5.0?

maybe confidential :D
12-12-2010, 09:05 AM
SpuTnicK

Quote:

Originally Posted by cold2010

maybe confidential :D

How come I have never thought of that ;)
12-12-2010, 09:05 AM
Olivon

Quote:

Originally Posted by FischOderAal

I kinda doubt that. Could you provide a link?

+1 :yepp:
12-12-2010, 09:34 AM
Borden

Remember, this Ducati750ss boy is benching with PowerTuner ON (0%). It means GPU clock is floating around 700~880MHz to always stay under default power. Tell him to change power limit via CCC Overdrive to maintain clock straight @880MHz and Cayman will show you what it's capable of.
12-12-2010, 09:39 AM
Nintendork

And what about the slider?
12-12-2010, 09:45 AM
Olivon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nintendork

And what about the slider?

Slides are OK but you don't answer about ducati doesn't have the card ...
12-12-2010, 09:45 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nintendork

The mod of that forum says Ducati doesn't even have a 6970...

Lol

Would be epic troll if his device # was wrong
12-12-2010, 09:51 AM
RaZz!

Quote:

Originally Posted by -=DVS=-

SO Ducat does have a 6970 , harrys numbers add up to his with slight margin of variation, is harry using thuban also ?

yes.

Ducati750ss: 1055T @~4,2ghz
harry97: 1095T @~4ghz
12-12-2010, 10:00 AM
Nintendork

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olivon

Slides are OK but you don't answer about ducati doesn't have the card ...

It seems they also fall with that 6718/6719 confusing data info. The one that supposedly comes with the "cat10.12" and exchanges 6718 for 6950 instead of 6970.

Remember the "class of it's own" thing? If real and the 6950 performs equal or slower than 5870(since 6970 is only a bit faster) that doesn't make any sense.
12-12-2010, 10:08 AM
-=DVS=-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borden

Remember, this Ducati750ss boy is benching with PowerTuner ON (0%). It means GPU clock is floating around 700~880MHz to always stay under default power. Tell him to change power limit via CCC Overdrive to maintain clock straight @880MHz and Cayman will show you what it's capable of.

In german forum someone asked him this "google translation"

Quote:

Posted by Kudd3l
To the owners of the HD6970, did you really once dealt with the new Powertune function?
When the HD6950 as it is so that the typical gaming power of 140W is set to Powertune, PowerTune maximum power lies with 200W.
Meaning, it is quite possible that it the HD6970 with the handbrake on and thus not bencht with the maximum possible performance.
Would be nice if you could make a few screenshots of the Powertune function where you can see the settings, if that's even possible at all in the driver version.

And Ducats response.

Quote:

Posted by Ducati750ss
Sounds even logical, but as I said, the card runs at 880MHz while the benches and 99% load. Und wenn man sich meine Verbrauchswerte anguckt, muss die auf voller Leistung laufen. And when you see Staring at my fuel consumption must be running on full power. Because PowerTune harry97 can only watch the same times. In my old CCC I've seen nothing like this, watch when harry on it pulls like the new one.

So according to Ducat card doesn't throttle on core clocks , its quite possible none of the games force the card to throttle and performance is what it is.
12-12-2010, 10:15 AM
Olivon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nintendork

1. It seems they also fall with that 6718/6719 confusing data info. The one that supposedly comes with the "cat10.12" and exchanges 6718 for 6950 instead of 6970.

2. Remember the "class of it's own" thing? If real and the 6950 performs equal or slower than 5870(since 6970 is only a bit faster) that doesn't make any sense.

1.BS

2."Class of it's own"
Until GTX 560 comes more than one month later ...
12-12-2010, 10:20 AM
-=DVS=-

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/8751/69701jlz3.jpg
12-12-2010, 10:35 AM
Borden

Quote:

Originally Posted by -=DVS=-

So according to Ducat card doesn't throttle on core clocks , its quite possible none of the games force the card to throttle and performance is what it is.

Well, according to this Vantage test I can see a low FPS in Perlin Noise due to clk drop
12-12-2010, 10:44 AM
halfwaythere

So basically you're getting an 470 and 480 in AMD flavor with less heat and power consumption. Isn't that what everybody wanted? :)

Oh wait nvidia just launched the 570 and the 580. I have to say the 570 is and will be a phenomenal deal.
12-12-2010, 10:46 AM
96redformula

Quote:

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

Oh wait nvidia just launched the 570 and the 580. I have to say the 570 is and will be a phenomenal deal.

Yeah, that GTX 570 is looking better and better by the day.
12-12-2010, 10:50 AM
eric66

meh this benchs mean nothing without cayman special drivers
12-12-2010, 10:54 AM
-=DVS=-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Borden

Well, according to this Vantage test I can see a low FPS in Perlin Noise due to clk drop

Or it could be side effect from different shaders 5d vs 4d :shrug: Perlin Noise is not exactly a GPU burner.
For reference stock 480 gets 90+ , 5870 175+ , 6970 146+ .
12-12-2010, 10:56 AM
jeanjean15

Quote:

Originally Posted by 96redformula

Yeah, that GTX 570 is looking better and better by the day.

Only 1.2 gb of memory isn't enough to be futur-proof . :(
12-12-2010, 10:57 AM
zalbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

So basically you're getting an 470 and 480 in AMD flavor with less heat and power consumption. Isn't that what everybody wanted? :)

It better have just as low price, then. Which means 6970's price @ 570's price.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeanjean15

Only 1.2 gb of memory isn't enough to be futur-proof . :(

Can still get GTX480, it's just as inexpensive as GTX570 here. :p:

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:36 PM.

XtremeSystems