I'm curious how these new HD6800's will do in HPC applications, when compared to their older HD5800 brethren.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
I'm curious how these new HD6800's will do in HPC applications, when compared to their older HD5800 brethren.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
More details
http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/3818/52336032.jpg
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/452/69589182.jpg
http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/8362/54856429.jpg
http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/7854/99182439.jpg
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/1975/73647999.jpg
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/6118/75516365.jpg
http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/3299/76784917.jpg
http://itbbs.pconline.com.cn/diy/11992068.html
Tonight Performance:D
lol this is not good HD 6850 Temperature 77c...... and with FurMark :shocked:(85-90) :eek:
hopefully the HD6870 cooling works better... looks more like HD58xx cooling and that worked great (+ I love the design of it :D).
I lol'd at the bracket comparision though, 2C improvement YEA RIGHT!
What, you don't think changing the exhaust bracket to letters XFX has at least 2C Difference!? :ROTF:
Looks like nice cooling solutions, but I'll wait for the reviews.
I'm glad XFX is looking for ways to improve upon the crappy old design that's been used far too long. Also looking forward to the single slot design...I've always dreamed of 4 way crossfire with medium to high end cards. Usually the single slot ones are really weak value cards.
58xx reference coolers were cool, quiet and had huge reserves for some overclocking sessionsQuote:
Originally Posted by Baron_Davis
and i don't see the point in single slot cards unless you want to CF a µATX system
lol, glad I don't use aircooling. I can't stand noise like I used to, 31db 4400RPM :rofl: must be joking :ROTF:, more like 55db. :eek:
It's allways nice to have the option. Some of us use the PCI or PCIe slots that are lost when you Crossfire.Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
Finally the Vapor chambers we've all heard about for so long is implemented. Can't wait to see performance reviews on stock cooling.
But i like orange! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by paulhamm
They were cool if u jack the fan up which makes them loud like any stock cooler. The 5850/5870 reference coolers are nothing to write home about. Infact I'd say they're pretty crappy. Almost all stock coolers are pretty crap. They're quiet at idle and loud on loud and they OC pretty bad unless u got lucky and got a sweet card. I'm def not surprised XFX is tryin to figure out better ways to cool the new ATI cards. If the reference design was so awesome, they wouldn't waste money on stuff like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
Single slot is good cause u can run 4-way CF with a sound card, which u cannot do on any board with 2 slot coolers.
i hate to say it but its going to come down to the *** **** driver.
The 5770 had oneQuote:
Originally Posted by kadozer
SO far they look good. I'm looking to go air again for my next build, which will by no means be high end again.
So come on 6870, outperform my old 4870x2 and be nice cheap and quiet and I'll get you my little pretty thing.
:D :p: ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
About the scaling.. maybe, maybe not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
Profiles would be dependent on ATi.. er AMD as they always have been. The chip would only be functioning as a PCI-E switch so only basic lucid drivers (at the most, if at all) would be required.
wow.. 2C
Hooray for XFX logos!
we'll see aircraft shaped like them soon
sapphire vapor-x had them; 5770 had one (although the VC cooler completely sucked); 5870 and 5970 had vapor chambersQuote:
Originally Posted by kadozer
@Baron_Davis: all dual slot aircoolers suck under load (that's why i use watercooling) in terms of noise OR temperature; all i say is that the amd stock coolers on 5850 and 5870 were better than almost every dual slot aftermarket cooler and custom design (only one better than the stock coolers is the sapphire vapor-x); additionally most custom PCBs sucked compared to the reference cards (voltage control)
and if a ref. cooler is inaudible @ idle (which was the case with 5850, 5870and 5970) and has reserves that allow overclocking to over 950mhz it's great (this was the case with 5850, 5870 and 5970), if you want it to be quiet @load you have to look at triple-slot designs or watercooling...
Its rather expensive, I hoped 6870 would replace 5770 in price :)
Why would it be called 6870 then? x770 has its own price spot. Its basically getting x870 back to price range where it belongs to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mech0z
Where do you get the price from?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
It is a bigger silicon area than HD5770, and has more expensive cooling. It is the same process, not an shrink. So there is no way they would cost the same, especially with Nvidia uncompetitiviness. And HD5770 had an initial MRSP of US$ 170.
Because it's not a high end card.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
Remember, Juniper will be renamed to 67xx.
NeweggQuote:
Originally Posted by eXa
I was a little off before, because I had our prices and I didn't think they will overcharge us so much...
If that’s the prices these cards will be listed at where you’re living, give me a call and I’ll buy them for you and send them to you by TNT / FedEx. Cards will be sold for $189 and $215 respectively where I live... :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
Not even close........
The 6850 will be listed at $ 189
The 6870 will be listed at $ 215
According to the Chinese site prices are closer to 250$ and 300$ respectively. And the SP count seems to be lower at 800 and 960.
Could be, I saw it at B3D. All I have are the launch prices in my currency and it's really hard to make an estimate from that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Halford
If you think that was too high, you don't even wanna know, how much they will really cost over here.
Those prices would destroy any hope for nvidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagleclaw
I have a hard time believing them too, not only are they really low, but also too close together. The margins would probably be non-existent.
I doubt those prices are correct. As I said before, it makes no business sense to release refreshed 5850/5870's at HALF the price. Either the cards will be slower than expected, and keep the cheap price tag, or they will be faster and be closer to the 58xx series.Quote:
Originally Posted by geo
If a miracle happens and ATI magically sets the prices above, then Nvidia will do big time price cutting, which is also good.
While i dont believe this prices too (makes no business sense for AMD) ,why do you say that ? Barts supposed to be 230mm2 , nvidias GF104 (aka GTX460 cards) are 330mm2 die size.Youre saying Nvidia losses BIG TIME on every 460 out there ?Quote:
I have a hard time believing them too, not only are they really low, but also too close together. The margins would probably be non-existent.
As i see it ,those prices are totally doable, however due to weak competition ,i doubt that they will be true, probably around mid way between those and 58xx series ATM stand at.
I have a weird feeling, that NV has much better contract with TSMC, than everybody thinks. Also GF104 is not fully fledged chip, but Barts probably is.
Actually, there is some confusion on how big GF104 actually is, with claims ranging from 330-380mm2. Seeing as GF106 is 240mm2, a 330mm2 GF104 makes very little sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
I don't understand ... the 6870 -6850 are in the new serie 6K the same line of the 5770 was for the old.... why will you they have the price of the top range ? they are designed for compet with the GTX460 .. with performance higher of the 5850... but it's a new series ... if 6870-6850 have performance of the old 5850-5870 and so the same price, what will happend with 6950-6970-6990? they will sell the 6970 @ 700 dollars and the 6990 @ 1200 dollars ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron_Davis
Price are fixed by the place got thoses cards in term of performance on the series + competition prices .. They are not based on perf vs old series... or we had pay 2x more for top gpu's with all new series... gpu's will cost 3000dollars so ...
6870 = middle class gpu's = ~ 5770 prices ... (official launch price, not the price you find right now in shop ... here you can find shop who sell 5770 @165CHF (short stock), this make 170dollars )
6970 = Enthusiast, high class gpu = ~ 5870 prices..
All in all its bigger than barts for sure.Quote:
Actually, there is some confusion on how big GF104 actually is, with claims ranging from 330-380mm2. Seeing as GF106 is 240mm2, a 330mm2 GF104 makes very little sense.
So TSMC gives better prices to a contractor with bigger and harder to manufacture chips which sells less units.Well, maybe.Quote:
I have a weird feeling, that NV has much better contract with TSMC, than everybody thinks. Also GF104 is not fully fledged chip, but Barts probably is.
As to the second part of the phrase, what that even means ? Barts is gonna be mid end chip just like GF104, cayman and GF100 on the highend.Could you elaborate ?
Thats wishfull thinking, and for one, bart cards cost more to produce, bigger die, 256bit bus, more complex PCB.Quote:
6870 = middle class gpu's = ~ 5770 prices ... (official launch price, not the price you find right now in shop ... here you can find shop who sell 5770 @165CHF (short stock), this make 170dollars )
6970 = Enthusiast, high class gpu = ~ 5870 prices..
The fact that Barts is 230mm^2, possibly > 100mm^2 smaller than a full GF104, and that it should compete/beat the GF104, ought to tell you where ATI can price this
As I said, it does not make business sense for them to release a 5870 equivalent for half the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
If the price of the 6870 is let's say ~$300, then the 6970 would be around ~$400-$450 or what the 5870 was when it came out (the cheapest 5870 now is still ~$400), and the 6990 would be around $600-$650, which is what hte 5970 was when it came out (and the 5970 is still around $650 even today).
Depends on what Nvidia's prices are, and what its real competitoin is, and what AMD's goals are
If they want to crush Nvidia in market share, they release Barts XT at < $250 and Nvidia gets wiped out at the lower end... if they want to milk profit margins, then they price it closer to $300
But pricing Barts at 5870 levels defeats the purpose of releasing it to compete with the 460
This is why the price will be quite a bit lower.
PRO vs 460, XT vs 470/480 then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagleclaw
Barts is meant to fill in the gap that the 5830 could not fill between the 5770 and 5850. So the most likely pricing is going to be right in between there, with the Pro lower and the XT higher in that range, so that should be a good estimate
I dun see how Barts competes with 460. It more like annihilates it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagleclaw
Well, 8600 GT wasn't a highend card, and that didn't stop it being priced at US$ 200+. The difference is, while Bart would be at worst half of Cayman & performs quite handsomely (around last gen top end single GPU card), G84 was a quarter of G80, the performance sucked bad yet nVidia had no problem putting it as their midrange card. OTOH, i think ATi would give better value, performance/$, in this gen compared to the last, while the card is still made in the same process node, something that isn't easy to pull, compared to spewing FUDs out of people's rear.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
You tell us nothing but FUDs throughout the ordeal. But it's okay, we'll see the truth in the end. I hope you'll be man enough to admit your wrong prediction is things unveiled not the way you described. I know i will give AMD their fair share of lashing & scolding if these new gen cards turn out to give less value compared to last gen & if they pull a renaming BS over HD 5770. Resegmenting & realigning the name for this new gen, while confusing and could be annoying, will not bother me at all if it's priced all right & the performance is satisfying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
Now, that's quite surprising, but we'll see. A card based on 230 mm^2 chip shouldn't cost all that high (GTS 450 says so), so the pricing will reflect the products positioning & performance in the market, plus the saving/added value for customer with this new gen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagleclaw
While i don't know the truth either way, the price is very much within reason with the variable that we know, chip size, VRAM capacity, PCB design. Whether it will give the right amount of performance for the price it commands, the market will be the judge. Like some other members comment, this chip certainly brings added efficiency while still built in the same process node (IF the performance leaks are correct), now it's up to AMD how much saving that they would put into their own coffer, and what portion goes to the consumers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron_Davis
GF 104 is 367 mm^2 mm by people who has broke the card and measured it themselves. Judging from GF 106 & GF 108 sizes, i think they're correct & more believable.Quote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
Yes, i also thought that indeed nVidia has better contract, but how significant & extensive it is, we can't really tell. One thing for sure, AMD will have the pleasure of market choices beetween TSMC vs GloFo, being an ordinary, unpreferred costumer of TSMC, something that nVidia won't have with their preferred status.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
And also yes, GTX 460s weren't full fledged chip cards, but we haven't seen the imaginary full fledged product in the market, have we ? Until then, it's nVidia's duty to prove that creating such product is feasible & doable within technical & economical constraint, outside that, just the noise of fanbois blabbering & forum bantering.
You're right buddy, though with the resegmenting & name realigning + market competitive environment + still built using the same process node, we can't expect the exact same price structure compared to last gen cards. Can we expect the added value, performance/$ for the consumers ? yes, i think we could.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanek
i really hope on lower prices.. i dont mind if 6xxx series are slightly faster. I want lower price and more OC capability ;)
same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
its really funny when you look at reviews showing last generations parts as the leader in price/perf. i like dx11, just not enough to drop 300$ to see only 20% better performance than what i have now, which is still worth 200$
AMD might not have a choice on pricing, the PCB is more expensive and the US Dollar is crazy weak, even the Australian Dollar is touching 1/1 on the US dollar now.
What we are forgetting are also the R&D costs for AMD compared to Nvidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
I'm not saying that I can afford and like costly VGA's, but it seems to me they AMD is lately spending more on product development then Nvidia. What I have in mind is the fact that Nvidia already has problems competing with HD 5000 and AMD is launching HD 6000. What did McVidia do in their prime time?
Rename, re-brand and cash-in on the same architecture. I guess its time for AMD to make some money on their graphics division? :shrug:
that is not why they are releasing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagleclaw
they price things to make money. that is it.
not to compete with nvidia. not to take sales from nvidia. not to beat nvidia.
they price things to make lots of money.
and a new product with new features that is roughly the same performance of an old expensive product, guess what that means. that means no low prices, geniuses. that means something like $250 and $300.
If they decide to take it easy then nvidia will have a chance to come up with things to kill amd. now is the time for amd to go full speed ahead and kill nvidia while keeping customers happy and gaining market share.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadov
I don't know about lately. They spend 210 million last quarter and AMD spent 369 million for both their CPU division, GPU division and whatever else they may have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadov
Man, I can't believe you have such optimism from AMD, it's extreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
Picking the side that appears the most in AMD favor.
The 6870 is as fast or faster than 5870.
The 6870 will be priced at 200 dollars.
Their is nothing wrong with the renaming.
How can you have such unwavering optimism?
AMD is going to price these to make max profit and that means barts xt is going to be higher than 215. The only way bart xt get near 200 is if it performs much more similar to the 5850 than the 5870 and even then, AMD is still more likely to price it at 250. The european leaked priced seem to indicate a 250 price.
klsdflakfhlkasfhalksfhaflskkdfslksdklsghlksgdsdkgl klsdgQuote:
Originally Posted by ripken204
does nvidia RnD go to things like TWIMTBP involvements? or is it strictly silicon and nothing elseQuote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I wonder how the 6870 will compare to a gtx470? Mine doesn't clock well....
actually it is highly unlikely that ATi spends more on R&D. nvidia's R&D expenditures are almost as much as ATi's revenue and nvidia's revenue is still ~3x that of ATi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadov
Yes you are correct.
My "guesses" were based on a bread crumb trail I have been following.
Your numbers could be spot on and mine could be way off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
please release these cards so i can stop following this discussion...
:rotf:Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:-...llence.jpg&t=1Quote:
Originally Posted by generics_user
Gotta love ashens
Is there some new info ? What parts have been REnamed ?Quote:
Their is nothing wrong with the renaming.
Was away from this thread for one day and it's already filled 2 pages with speculation/crap. :D
OK since I got here I may throw my final estimates as well b4 they show up in US:
Pricing:
HD6850: $199
HD6870: $249
HD6950: $349
HD6970: $449~499 (lack of availability can drive prices up a bit)
HD6990: $649~699 (lack of availability can drive prices up a bit)
-------
Performance:
HD6850: ~10% average advantage above GTX 460 1GB non-OC versions
HD6870: ~GTX 470 performance / in between HD5850 & HD5870
HD6950: ~10% ahead of HD5870 in avg
HD6970: 10~15% slower than HD 5970 in avg / 10~15% faster than GTX 480
HD6990: 30~40% ahead of HD5970 in avg.
The most logical guess I can make.
So they are releasing the 6xxx series to continue to let GTX460 eat into their sales? Lets face it none of these features are worth upgrading over for the mainstream user. At those prices AMD won't be putting any pressure on GTX460 and despite rumors (the charts posted recently) will just continue to compete with GTX470.Quote:
Originally Posted by bamtan2
These prices will make GTX460 (and GF104 in general) life much easierQuote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
My guess will be $140-150 for 6850 and $180-199 for 6870
I want the industry to move forward technology speaking, and bring more value to consumers, so yes if that's extreme optimism for you, so be it. I had as much optimism in the past, it rewarded nicely in ATi R300, nVidia G80, and Intel Conroe cases, didn't happen so nicely in ATi R600, AMD Phenom I cases, but i'm a positive person in this matter, i'll leave it at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Why should i pick any side unless they give the best benefit for me as CONSUMER ? I'm not in any way related to AMD, and my allegiance in graphic accelerator changes from time to time, depending which IHV gave me the best value for my hard earned $$.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
The sentence " The difference is, while Bart would be at worst half of Cayman & performs quite handsomely (around last gen top end single GPU card)" that you interpreted as saying Bart XT will be as fast nor faster as Cypress XT, well, it was your own negative perspective that took control. "Around" doesn't mean EXACTLY as fast or faster, does it ? It can be overall slightly slower while as fast in some scenarios that favor this new gen cards. Are we in the same boat now ? I'm not that optimist somehow.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
LOL, where do you get that impression ??? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
The COST means the cost for manufacturer to built this product, okay ? GTS 450 has 240 mm^chip & 1 GB GDDR5, but nVidia happily sells it at US$ 129 price point. AMD can price the card as low as GTS 450 if they want to, but i don't think they will.Quote:
Now, that's quite surprising, but we'll see. A card based on 230 mm^2 chip shouldn't cost all that high (GTS 450 says so), so the pricing will reflect the products positioning & performance in the market, plus the saving/added value for customer with this new gen.
The price will reflect its performance, AMD's strategy in product positioning against competitor, and their long term strategy for gaining market share, which is very important in this graphic accelerator bussiness (TWIMTBP, PhysX, features blocking craps should tell you exactly about this). I don't have a particular faith regarding the cards price, but i do share the thought of other posters saying that the chip & cards is slotted at AMD's weak price segment & it will be marketed mostly as GF 104 derivatives competitor. If Bart XT is around HD 5850+ performance, i hope AMD will price it at US$ 229 at most, while Bart Pro is priced accordingly (how far it's crippled against its bigger brother & how it fares against competitor).
This is BS, read again !Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
And regarding Bart chip as the base of HF 68xx cards, that's not renaming, how can you rename something that doesn't have a name to begin with ???Quote:
.....I know i will give AMD their fair share of lashing & scolding if these new gen cards turn out to give less value compared to last gen & if they pull a renaming BS over HD 5770.
Quote:
Resegmenting & realigning the name for this new gen, while confusing and could be annoying, will not bother me at all if it's priced all right & the performance is satisfying.
How can you have such unwavering pessimism ? Especially against a party that has been quite generous in the past (RV 770) and delivering better value for consumers compared to competitor ?? AMD has built a decent reputation as good value provider for graphic card lately, i think they DESERVE the goodwill until proven otherwise. And no, you can't really use Evergreen strong pricing structure throughout its lifetime, considering all the factors & environment that affected it (fact was, HD 5850 AND 5870 was priced LOWER than GTX 285 at its launch while beating it convincingly, that wouldn't have happened if AMD is such a greedy bastard like one that is living in your head).Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
They want to make profit, sure, ain't no charity to begin with. But do they also want to gain market share for long term strategic goals ? I think they do also. I don't have a firm grasp of what exactly the price is, but i do think it would be totally a FAIL case for AMD if they won't address their clearly chink in the armor, 150-250 US$ market segment, while having such a potent weapon as a small yet efficient Bart in their arsenal.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Regards. :)
The GTX 460 768MB has been selling for $169. The HD6850 has to be 20% faster to match. The HD6870 seems right at $229. Still knowing how greedy AMD is, I would say your prediction is quite right.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Updated my post with performance speculation to give better idea of my pricing guesstimate:Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
ATi knows what AMD knows... shared R & D.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
Profit isn't just factored by how much margin you can extract out of a product, but also by how much units you can sell to the market. Pricing Bart cards skyhigh will yield nothing, especially for their longterm well being, if GF 104 cards continue to be the best value provider for mainstream gaming market. This is quite the truth, especially if AMD has cost leadership over its competitor and the supply is more forgiving compared to what was happening with Cypress based cards in the past.
Companies are greedy, it's still capitalism world that we're living in. But calling AMD greedy, wow, what can we call nVidia then ? Fermi has to fail so hard for 'em so they were forced to price GF 104 crippled cards so nicely for us consumers.
Fermi will rock on, once it gets to a smaller node. But the whole company is trying to hold it together, until then.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
If AMD releases the HD 6850 @ $179 (just in time for the holiday buying season)... Nvidia's stock will drop significantly. But I believe almost everyone understands this, save a few.
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/2595/msi68702210.png
Looks cool :D
A bit ugly with the red. I want to see the Sapphire Vapor-X one (that should come later).
Damnit, just lost the pic, but Chiphell had a 6870 vs. a GTX 460 1GB and the 6870 scored on Vantage H11xxx whereas the the GTX 460 scored H95xx. Somewhere around 16-17%. GPU score it was like 9xxx vs. 10xxx, roughly 18% advantage for the 6870. So I'm guessing the 6870 being somewhere between 5850 and 5870 is about right?
Q2 2010 nVidia revenue was 811,208Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
Q2 2010 ATI revenue was 440,000
So nVidia's revenue is actually less than half of ATI's now.
It's probably going to increase to 2x for Q3 again. Almost half of that revenue for nV is the professional market, the consumer market is in freefall.
3DMark Vantage
Gpu scores only
GTX 460 vs HD 6870
Performance preset
12636 vs 15800
High preset
8803 vs 10430
So 18% advantage in High and 26% advantage in Performance for the HD6870 over the 460 1GB.
We need some HD6850 love.
Gpu clock 915...
it seems op used old nvidia driver 258.96.. you know 260.89 improves around +500-1000 points for gpu score..
just look at gpu scores
258.96
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/4...1602324922.jpg
260.52
http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9...0902562856.jpg
edit: images already posted
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
Yep thanks to those who found it
If 6870 is really ~20% faster than GTX 460 1GB and is priced < $250, that would just crush
yo boy this card from ASUS is Overclock
ASUS HD 6870 OC CORE CLOCK : 915MHz
AMD HD 6870 reference CORE CLOCK : 850MHz
http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/1323/80069543.jpg
the Compare with GTX 460 and HD 6870 Must be Without Overclock;)Quote:
Performance preset
12539 vs 15800
High preset
8803 vs 10430
TBA:
We need to remember HD4870 480SP and then magically 800SP.
The third one... "Single slot fansink"Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha Last Meal
I think a few rumors are getting more solid as more leaks coming. Bart chip seems to be 230 mm^2 in size, having 256 bit buswidth, and the full fledged chip with its optimal clock is having ~GTX 470 performance. That's quite a success from technical standpoint, increasing efficiency within the same process node. Now it's up to AMD whether they will make the right tactical pricing decision, so the cards will be a mass success & strengthening their longterm viability.
XFX line pics
http://www.ixbt.com/short/images/201...04-575x320.jpg
http://www.ixbt.com/short/images/201...05-575x271.jpg
http://www.ixbt.com/short/images/201...06-575x278.jpg
http://www.ixbt.com/short/images/201...03-575x316.jpg
http://www.ixbt.com/short/images/201...04-575x461.jpg
http://www.ixbt.com/short/images/201...onhd685005.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha Last Meal
so what if its a stock oc card .. its still a stock card ... to wich we will use to interpret the numbers
Look at the XFX card photo.
960 SP's
Not 1280.
850 core vs 900.
The asus card is OC'ed from 900 to 915 with more SP's.
yeah, you know your pr rocks if nobody knows your launching a product... wait what? :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
i really dont like how ati is keeping it quiet about their new parts... its too quiet...
i can understand it to some degree to make it harder for nvidia to counter, but i doubt that it actually makes a difference...
and a product preview is really useful for customers and a company, i mean intel and amd are actually embracing this and seeding early samples and previewing it officially... all the while ati goes back to how pr was done 10-20 years ago, what product, there is no product, who told you there was a product? :para: :rolleyes:
single slot 6870 = HOT
http://www.contactmusic.com/pics/m/p...on_5071011.jpg
Those leaked XFX/ASUS things don't confirm anything about clocks/SPs
Which tells me that AMD has really kept things secret REALLY well
edit:
nApoleon at Chiphell (http://www.chiphell.com/thread-130336-1-1.html) says:
Also says that in real world gaming, 6850 is a bit faster than gtx 460Quote:
HD5850 X7285
HD5870 X8958
HD6850 X6682
HD6870 X7715
GTX 460 X6921
GTX 470 X7831
GTX 480 X9864
Should have specified the version, real world gaming has been more of a Nvidia field. It will be great if that comes to be true.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
I like the TBA on each core and memory speed on XFX slide..
Guys.. The 6870 is just a 5770 with a 256bit bus correct or am i totally off?
new shader layout + 3d and blu ray encoding decoding stuff added ... + with the agrresive pricing it would be a good purchase and anyway there seems to be some other higher end model to be introduced later that are suited candidate as high end gpusQuote:
Originally Posted by Hey Zeus
so i wouldnt call it the same card with a bigger bus
Thanks BroQuote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Anyone else not digging the 1 Xfire connector on that XFX model? PLEASE tell me the reference will have 2 Xfire connectorsQuote:
Originally Posted by Dezmen
They're crippling it on purpose like Nvidia did with the 460.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hey Zeus
Not sure why exactly i should buy one then other then curiosity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron_Davis
Is there any ETA on the 475 or 495? I've been out of the loop