New rumor about ATI Southern Islands

Printable View

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

10-10-2010, 02:02 PM
kuroikenshi

Quote:

Originally Posted by tajoh111

Man, I can't believe your trying to put a positive spin on this renaming. NV gave an excuse which turned out to be somewhat true in the end for its renaming scheme, the board partners wanted it which I suspect is true, because if smaller companies like bfg have nothing to sell, they will go belly up, which sucks. It nonetheless the renaming still did suck.

Ok, piece of newsflash for you, Hot and straight from my valued source The English Dictionary.

Apparently it says that in order to rename a name has to be assign to it on the first place and then changed.

Oh wait, I just recall you're not part of the marketing team, in fact you have no ties to Ati to confirm anything in regards to the card, all you go by is rumors.

See, what Nvidia did was in Fact Textbook renaming.
E.g. If I am a car manufacturer and I build a car and give it a name, (ford fiesta) and then I put better rims on it and call it (ford monaro), and then straight after I put a bodykit on it and call it (gt40)..... its still the same card regardless of the headroom for improvement.

Its awesome to see you troll against Ati.. I mean AMD, but seriously you haven't even got a leg to stand on when you put your argument like that.
10-10-2010, 02:10 PM
Behemot

OMG another "5 pages per day" thread? Could mods copy the known proven and high-likely-to-be-true informations into the first post please? I really don't have time to read the whole thread this time...
10-10-2010, 02:24 PM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredpace

So the 4D shaders rumor might not be true. Maybe they saved the VLIW-4 design for the next gen (what the real NI @ 32nm should have been) codenamed S.I.??

To get the increase in performance, it must be a fully redesigned scheduler and front end. Compartmentalized into RPEs. Maybe this new front end was supposed to go with the 4D shaders on 32nm for the original NI concept. Like SA wrote in April when they had 'codenames mixed up' : "a newly redesigned front-end with a mildly revamped Evergreen shader." That would mean it's really VLIW-5.

Oh well, lookin forward to finding out! Exciting! :)

Either way, if the 800/960 SP's rumor for Barts is putting it @ 5850/5870 levels.... imagine double that for Cayman or 4x that for Antilles would be like :eek:
10-10-2010, 02:39 PM
Jowy Atreides

Quote:

Originally Posted by tajoh111

This is completely not valid because they have tonnes of room as it is as I have shown in my example.

6870 indicates better performance than 5870 and may decieve

Even if the 6870 is slower than the 5870, it is still a substantial upgrade.

How? Because it can output display to 5 monitors for a start.
It will have better figures for minimum FPS, better tesselation, some new features.

Lower price point.

Get over the naming shift, straws are being molested.
10-10-2010, 02:46 PM
ToxAvenger

If the 6870 is really the replacement for the 5770, but performs at or near the 5870, that pretty damn amazing. I don't see how anyone could complain about that. The rearranging of the naming convention seems odd to me, but I'll wait and see how the whole lineup naming ends up before I start condemning it.

If AMD was actually doing a rename, the 5770 would become the 6770 (or 6870), with little to no changes to the actual GPU.
10-10-2010, 02:50 PM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by kuroikenshi

I tend to agree with the statement you just made snowman, as well as the statement made by your teddy bear, I believe they're both correct, valid and accurate, as well as farkin cute

thank you :D
10-10-2010, 05:21 PM
tbone8ty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Behemot

OMG another "5 pages per day" thread? Could mods copy the known proven and high-likely-to-be-true informations into the first post please? I really don't have time to read the whole thread this time...

i agree
10-10-2010, 07:04 PM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

i agree

its a rumor thread so until nda's are off we wont know officially so you will have to wait just like i have to
10-11-2010, 01:26 AM
generics_user

How long until the NDA gets lifted?
10-11-2010, 01:39 AM
Aten-Ra

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerazax

Either way, if the 800/960 SP's rumor for Barts is putting it @ 5850/5870 levels.... imagine double that for Cayman or 4x that for Antilles would be like :eek:

If BARTS has 960 shaders (4+1) 900MHz, 48 Texture Units and 256bit memory with 32 ROPs it will have 90% HD5850s performance.

If CAYMAN will have 1920 Shaders (4+1) 900MHz, 96 Texture Units and 256bit memory with 48 ROPs then at high resolutions with AA enable will be 10-20% more than HD5870.

All those in DX-9/10 Games, in DX-11 with tessellation enable 6xxx series will be 50% more than 5xxx.
10-11-2010, 01:58 AM
Mech0z

If you say the new cards can take 5 displays, will it then be able to do 3 displays that do not run DP? I dont want to get DP screens, they are so rare still that you have almost nothing to select from :/
10-11-2010, 02:06 AM
generics_user

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aten-Ra

If BARTS has 960 shaders (4+1) 900MHz, 48 Texture Units and 256bit memory with 32 ROPs it will have 90% HD5850s performance.

If CAYMAN will have 1920 Shaders (4+1) 900MHz, 96 Texture Units and 256bit memory with 48 ROPs then at high resolutions with AA enable will be 10-20% more than HD5870.

All those in DX-9/10 Games, in DX-11 with tessellation enable 6xxx series will be 50% more than 5xxx.

barts has a different shader setup (3+1 or 4+0); performance / shader is supposed to be increased!
10-11-2010, 02:12 AM
zerazax

Quote:

Originally Posted by generics_user

barts has a different shader setup (3+1 or 4+0); performance / shader is supposed to be increased!

Right, the architecture change means you can't directly compare the SP's unit for unit, but it does seem to be much more efficient... and if the tesselation engine is improved, its DX11 performance should really pull ahead of the 5xxx's
10-11-2010, 02:15 AM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by generics_user

How long until the NDA gets lifted?

about 5 or 7 more days
10-11-2010, 02:18 AM
Johnny87au

lets hope these smash the 480s!!
10-11-2010, 02:19 AM
Aten-Ra

Quote:

Originally Posted by generics_user

barts has a different shader setup (3+1 or 4+0); performance / shader is supposed to be increased!

Well, I believe they will use the same 5-way VLIW shader architecture (4+1)
10-11-2010, 03:03 AM
Olivon

Quote:

Originally Posted by generics_user

How long until the NDA gets lifted?

According to Tweaktown, that's october 22 :shrug:
10-11-2010, 04:18 AM
3Deye

http://gpudesign.bafree.net/wp-conte...10/10/6850.jpg
http://gpudesign.bafree.net/wp-conte...0/10/68503.jpg

http://gpudesign.bafree.net/amd-radeon-hd-6850-picture
10-11-2010, 04:20 AM
kuroikenshi

yeah mate check the thread, it has already been posted
10-11-2010, 04:36 AM
it_is_me

don't know if this was posted somewhere else, but there're 'preliminary' results of Radeon HD 6870 and HD 6850 in 3DMark.
great caution advised.

quote different from the ones in this thread, huh?
10-11-2010, 05:08 AM
Calmatory

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aten-Ra

Well, I believe they will use the same 5-way VLIW shader architecture (4+1)

What makes you think so? ..apart from the fact that 800 SPs don't quite add up. However, if the 4+1->4 transition turns out to be false for Barts, then what differs it from Juniper?
10-11-2010, 05:12 AM
RPGWiZaRD

Quote:

Originally Posted by it_is_me

don't know if this was posted somewhere else, but there're 'preliminary' results of Radeon HD 6870 and HD 6850 in 3DMark.
great caution advised.

quote different from the ones in this thread, huh?

Those results you posted above are from pconline site and is for Barts and the other is for Cayman XT in case they aren't fake.
10-11-2010, 05:36 AM
spursindonesia

Quote:

Originally Posted by it_is_me

don't know if this was posted somewhere else, but there're 'preliminary' results of Radeon HD 6870 and HD 6850 in 3DMark.
great caution advised.

quote different from the ones in this thread, huh?

Are we talking about HD 6870 "Bart" or HD 6870 "Cayman" ? ;)
10-11-2010, 06:50 AM
Aten-Ra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calmatory

What makes you think so? ..apart from the fact that 800 SPs don't quite add up. However, if the 4+1->4 transition turns out to be false for Barts, then what differs it from Juniper?

I believe BARTS will be a 12 SIMD x80 (5-way VLIW)

Barts XT = 960 shaders (900MHz) with 48 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 32 ROPs
Barts Pro = 800 shaders (800MHz) with 40 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 16 ROPs

They will replace 5770 and 5750, Barts XT will have 90% performance of 5850 and Barts Pro will be like 5830.

CAYMAN to be a 24 SIMD x80 (5-way VLIW)

Cayman XT = 1920 shaders (900MHz) with 96 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 48 ROPs (not 32)
Cayman Pro = 1760 shaders (750MHz) with 88 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 32 ROPs

They will replace 5870 and 5850, Cayman XT will be 10-20% faster than 5870 at high resolutions with Filters on like 1920x1080 4x AA in DX-9/10 games. 50% more performance in DX-11 games
10-11-2010, 07:04 AM
-Boris-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aten-Ra

I believe BARTS will be a 12 SIMD x80 (5-way VLIW)

Barts XT = 960 shaders (900MHz) with 48 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 32 ROPs
Barts Pro = 800 shaders (800MHz) with 40 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 16 ROPs

They will replace 5770 and 5750, Barts XT will have 90% performance of 5850 and Barts Pro will be like 5830.

CAYMAN to be a 24 SIMD x80 (5-way VLIW)

Cayman XT = 1920 shaders (900MHz) with 96 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 48 ROPs (not 32)
Cayman Pro = 1760 shaders (750MHz) with 88 Texture units and 256 bit memory with 32 ROPs

They will replace 5870 and 5850, Cayman XT will be 10-20% faster than 5870 at high resolutions with Filters on like 1920x1080 4x AA in DX-9/10 games. 50% more performance in DX-11 games

Sounds pretty much like my expectations, not sure about the 48 ROPS though. But one thing, if Barts XT is so close to 5850 despite the much lower number of shaders, then Cayman XT should be more than 10-20% faster in DX10. I agree on 50% faster on DX11 though.

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