youu got a good point; it wouldn't make any sense to place it so close to 6870 :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Printable View
youu got a good point; it wouldn't make any sense to place it so close to 6870 :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Would be funny if all this SP speculation all turned out to be wrong and it turns out to be 2k+ just like how everyone thought the 4800 series would have 480 SPs :ROTF:
First of all, i didn't came up with this 20 percent figure.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
Secondly, read this carefully
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/14763Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvese
Why we can't really predict anything.
I hope so...I'm only waiting for the 6970 because I'd like a very powerful futureish proof single GPU card...on paper it sounds like a side grade to the 5870 :SQuote:
Originally Posted by Yvese
1 week untill official press conference right?
All these high end cards will be future proof until Crysis 2(hopefully) comes out.Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggo0
I can't wait for another game(even though, crysis wasn't such a good game), that doesn't compromise working on low end hardware and is even tough on fast hardware.
Not like metro 2033 either, because that game really doesn't raise the bar compared to anything that has come out.
Crysis is still one of the best looking games today;especially with outdoor environments and in game models. The game came out three years ago and games have yet to look better even though hardware is 3-4 times more powerful. Its kind of annoying that we need to use things like 3d and eyefinity to make use of our cards for most games. I just want something that looks fantastic on one screen and I don't mind if it runs 50fps and the best setting cannot be enabled on a 6970 or gtx 580 or antilles for that matter. These type of games don't appear often enough anymore and I want a game that is graphics wise, ahead of its time. Even better if it achieves such frame rates not from bad coating, but just crazy graphics.
Its kind of a tragedy that it is being made for consoles, but hopefully it won't be the consoles this generation and hopefully the next.
I hope Cayman is 2160 shaders and is fast as stink, because I would be nice if one of the company got 2 gpu performance out of 1 GPU this generation on the same node. NV not going to due it with respect to their cards(it might match a 5970) because they don't even have one out, so we can only count on AMD for this. Cayman is impossible to predict though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I agree with you on your views. The main reason I'm looking at a 6970 is because I want a card that will drive 1920x1080 sucessfully, with AA and good frames. The 2x 4850's I have now barely can, the 512mb is limiting, and I'd also like the card I get to last for about a year or so (maybe in a year, I can grab another and Crossfire them).
Granted a GTX460 or a 6870 will be more powerful than my 4850 cfx, and not to mention no scaling issues, but that would only be a side grade. Not knocking Crysis but I've never been a fan of it - so I'm not to concerned with how it runs. If it looks pretty and runs at 30fps you can consider me happy.
Now to break the boredom of lack of news, I have a pop question for all the ATI/AMD fans, be you die hard or not.
-Who over here actually knows (since before I asked this question) what the name A.T.I. stands for?
Array Technologies Inc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATI_Technologies
Internet is my friend.
I didnt, but i do now....
Neither did I, that was a real eye opener :D
I remembered looking up what it actually stood for but I wasn't able to find it last time, so I quickly forgot about looking it up again.
Now I know what it stands for. :ROTF::rofl:
And we also have ATIC (Advanced Technology Investment Company) the abu dhabi partner of AMD for GloFo.
You guys have concluded that 6970 will be 30 percent faster than 6870 due to a Fudzilla article, but 6970's 6 plus 8 pin power setup indicates TDPs in excess of 225W.
Considering 6870 is 151W, Cayman's "performance / watts" would have to have gone down MASSIVELY compared to Barts; in order for 6970 to just be 30 percent faster than 6870.
I'm still going with 60 percent faster than 6970 and 50 percent faster than 5870.
I never trust Fudo. I'm guessing the rumors are way off or AMD sent off early samples that were hamstrung. Based on 8 + 6 pin and guessing around 1920 SPs with over 32 ROPs. 35%-40% over a 5870 and average 10% over a GTX 580. Sweet spot is out the window this time around based on it being originally designed for 32nm.
Really ?? HD5870 has a 6-pin and an 8-pin but only 188W TDP.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
The 6-pin and 8-pin show us the max power the card can draw from the PSU and not the TDP.
Maybe you need to check that again. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aten-Ra
Yes my bad, 2x 6-pin for 5870 and 188W
Did you forget about 6950?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aten-Ra
My assumption, HD6870 2*6pin, just little under 150W. HD6950 2*6pin ~190W and 6970 8pin + 6pin ~230W.
50% more power than 6870, alteast 50% more performance than 6870, note also, that would put 6950 to 20-30% more performance than 6870.
1120/5 -> 224SP, 224/0,96*1,5*4 -> atleast 1400SP for Cayman XT for 50% more performance. 0,96 is modifier for 4 wide SP is less powerful than 5 wide SP. And we can assume it wont be smaller than Cypress was. So it is very feasible to assume atleast 50% more performance than 6870 even if 4 wide to 5 wide performance ratio is as low as 0,84 at same clock as 6870. Add to that larger core than cypress and little less clocks, say 850MHz. Still it will keep 50% more performance than 6870 very feasible.
So I will except no less than 50% more perfromance than 6870.
IMHO, AMD will not enter the highend segment again if they can't produce a card that atleast maintain on par efficiency (performance/watt) compared to its latest mainstream offering (Bart) or even its predecessor, Cypress. :yepp:
EDIT:
I think 30% higher would be minimal & a rather pessimistic view (faster than GTX 480 but slightly slower than GTX 580), 40% higher would be pretty good & quite realistic view (slightly faster than GTX 580), while 50% higher & up would be plenty optimistic & viewed through red colored rose glass (though if it truly happens, i will gladly eat my crow served cold), all over HD 5870 in average performance. :)
Erm, you're forgetting power consumption / performance isn't a linear relationship. The higher you go the more inefficient and more leaking. Especially when we go over 200W territory. Cayman will probably not have the same performance efficiency as Barts, a 50% increase in power consumption may only translate to say 35~40% better performance for example unless architectural improvements are made in which the rumored shader arrangement might play a good part in, but the cards arrive quite soon anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
HD5870 was more power efficient than HD5770 in terms of performance/watts. Sure what you say might be the case, but just pointing out that it doesn't have to be the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Well Juniper vs Cypress isn't a good direct comparision, my point was if you take the same card with same specs, only add more SPs or other units and perhaps add higher clocks too, then you'll get more inefficiency (performance won't improve as much as power consumption increases). Need internal changes if you want to improve efficiency as well. And before some1 counters with this, sometimes only rearranging the components could help too if there's a bottleneck somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
Yep, but as far as I can see Cayman vs. Barts is a much bigger difference than Cypress vs Juniper in terms of general architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD