i heard nothing till h1 for NV other than some low end crap like the 108Quote:
Originally Posted by Hey Zeus
i heard nothing till h1 for NV other than some low end crap like the 108Quote:
Originally Posted by Hey Zeus
that looks like an awesome piece of photoshop work
edit (which fails when you notice the vertical lines of different shades of white background...)
That is one good looking FAKE!!!
i'm sorry but it's not even a good photoshop :pQuote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
that's definately a fake. just look at the pattern of the gpus. both gpus have exactly the same shading and texture.Quote:
Originally Posted by initialised
makes me wonder why these people don't put more effort in modifying copied parts - it always seems like as if they want people to see it's a fake :shrug: especially since everything else in this fake was done pretty well.
lol there are no vmods on that Homoshop
next...
http://tof.canardpc.com/view/f33d36a...02f8312a47.jpg
Dirt II 1920X1200 AA8 AF16
960= 6850
1120=6870
VR-Zone
The numbers for GTX 460 768MB and 1GB are very wrong....
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/5809/dirt2t.jpg
http://www.guru3d.com/article/ecs-ge...lack-review/12
Guru3D got 53 FPS for the 1GB and 46 FPS for the 768MB.
Settings:
Baja Iron Route 1
8x Anti-Aliasing
16x Anisotropic Filtering
All settings maxed out
I never played Dirt 2, but is there anymore demanding levels then this?
You're right pals ! Numberz doesn't seem accurate concerning GTX 460 :shakes:
not to sound dumb. but is it possible they forgot to turn on dx11 in that test guru3d?Quote:
Originally Posted by xBanzai89
the bottom chart which has 5000 series cards shows the 5850 just ahead of all 460s, which i though would have demolished it with tessellation on
heres from TPU which DOES NOT have dx11 enabled
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Zotac/GeFo..._1920_1200.gif
notice that in this with 4x AA vs 8x,
the 5850 is 77fps vs that one being 64
and the 460s are 58-61 vs 46-62 (alot of cards compared in the guru3d article)
im under the impression guru3d did not turn on dx11 settings. otherwise it somehow seems like it was "free"
Palit Sonic Platinium GTX 460(800/4000) scores 61 FPS .
We will see but Ati can do that much magic, i mean you think that a 960SP card will equal an 1440SP( 6850= 5850? ) , and 1120SP = > 1600SP( 5870) ?
I don't think so.
I think that 6850 performance will be between GTX 460 768MB an 1GB closer to 1gb version( between 5830 an 5850), and 6870 will be above GTX 460 1GB an slightly above 5850 more or less, so between 5850 and 5870.
1900X1200 DX9 and DX11 :
http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/66f...19da21c915.jpg
So DiRT2 has SLI issues? GTX 295 loses to HD 4890?
Anyway, the drivers from GTX 460 launch reviews were 258.90, than was 260.63 added some more performance and today Nvidia launched another driver 260.89(WHQL this time), probably because of 6850/6870 launch....
http://www.nvidia.com/object/win7-wi...ql-driver.html
Quote:
Version: 260.89 WHQL
Release Date: 2010.10.18
GeForce GTX 460:
Up to 19% in StarCraft II (SLI – 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF Ultra)
Up to 15% in Battlefield Bad Company 2 (SLI – 2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 12% in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat (2560x1600 noAA)
Up to 9% in Aliens vs. Predator (1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF – Tessellation on)
Up to 7% in Metro 2033 (1680x1050 noAA – Tessellation on)
Up to 11% in Dirt 2 (SLI – 2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 12% in Crysis:Warhead (SLI – 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF Gamer)
Up to 13% in Far Cry 2 (2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 12% in H.A.W.X (SLI – 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF SSAO Very High)
Up to 5% in Just Cause 2 (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 22% in Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena (1920x1200 noAA)
Up to 5% in 3DMark Vantage (Extreme Preset)
count the odd number of memory chipsQuote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
wow thats interesting chartQuote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
5850 went from 63fps to 55 (highest settings before/after dx11)
460 1GB was 81 to 55
thats a massive drop. and i thought the opposite would have been true
To all Quoted: If the reviews aren't using the same CPU... it's not apples vs apples.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdan
Quote:
Originally Posted by xBanzai89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
LeComptoirQuote:
Intel Core i7-975XE (HT & Turbo Off)
DFI LanParty DK X58-T3eH6 (bios 422)
G.Skill F3-16000CL9T-6GBTD 3 x 2 Go @DDR3-1333 (6/6/6/18)
Western Digital Raptor 150 Go (OS) / Samsung F1 500 Go (Jeux)
Samsung SH-D163B
Corsair TX-750W
Whats your point?
Guru3d used Core i7 965 @ 3750 MHz
and we dont know whats used in the 6870/6850 vs GTX460...
Try to find if results are possible or not ... Nothing more :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
I don't see how that card can preform better, with the same amount of tessellation units as 5870 or perhaps a bigger one ?
where's the heaven 2.1 benchmarks ? lol
Four crossfire connectors and 17 memory ICs? That's not even a very good photoshop.
90% of the Dirt 2 numbers I have seen in reviews seem to be incorrect due to the use of the early stand-alone Dirt 2 benchmark, improper implementation of forced DX11 or using an old version of the game engine (patches have increased performance quite a bit).
id rather trust a review by an outstanding members of the community then some tech forum ... unless its an outstanding member of the community who posted the results for that forum
People need to STOP talking about SP equivalency when ATI just re-did the architecture/shader arrangementQuote:
Originally Posted by xdan
http://www.chiphell.com/thread-130471-1-1.html
Power Color HD6870 1GB ￥1799
Sapphire HD6850 1GB ￥1499:):):):):):)
Futurepowerpc.com has listed the EAH6850 @ 213.36
http://www.futurepowerpc.com/scripts.../1GD5&REFID=FR
6870 @ 265.39
http://www.futurepowerpc.com/scripts...870/2DI2S/1GD5
So i'm hoping for 199.99 and 249.99 at Newegg
250 for a 6870 doesnt seem so bad .. and the 5800 did come out at around 350 iirc ???
6870 is an overclocked 5830? :down:
yupQuote:
Originally Posted by HelixPC
just like DDR3 is overclocked DDR2
not reallyQuote:
Originally Posted by HelixPC
Whats the status on ATI's drivers? Have they gotten that debacle straightened out?
They are very good for mainstream games, less popular stuff might not work perfectly, however.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hey Zeus
I have no problems with their drivers. Also, since the arrival of the propietary Linux drivers, AMD drivers are as good as Nvidia for penguin lovers.
Main game i play is BC2. Probably going to go with a pair of 6870's just to see how they compare to my 460'sQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Being as good as don´t mean they are actually good @ linux (tearing problems, for instance); but undoubtedly, ATI drivers for Windows, at least for Windows 7 x64 are good, updated monthly, their crossfire profile works, extended desktop works like a charm (through S-video, DVI or HDMI). No major problems at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
Of course!Quote:
Originally Posted by HelixPC
...aside from the shader structure, tesselation unit, output display, cooler and everything else a GPU consists of.
The 6870 is also a G92 8800gt.
It's also a 9800XT in a Halloween costume.
I think HD 6870 WILL BE Better than GTX 460 1GB around 13%
AND HD 6850 WILL BE Better than GTX 460 1GB around 6%
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
But it's a fact that HD6970 is just a faster Voodoo 3 3000...
Nono, u got it wrong, It was nVidia who bought 3Dfx. So Fermi is just faster Voodoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi64
HD6k is just faster RAGE 3D!
not same drivers, ram speed, OS, driver settings etc etcQuote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
comparing FPS results between sites without looking into the test setups is FAIL.
Very useful information, thanks alot, you must be full of information, what else can you tell me? are AMD Phenom II and Core i7 the same as well? thanks in advance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
http://sites.amd.com/us/tfeevent/Pages/information.aspx
Someone's in Taipei the 19?
Agenda:
http://sites.amd.com/us/tfeevent/Pages/2010-agenda.aspx
9:15-9:40
"Northern Islands" Graphics Technology Briefing
Matt Skynner, Corporate VP and General Manager
Graphic Product Unit Division, AMD
12:45 - 2:15
Eric Demers, CTO, Graphics Division
Northern Islands Architecture Deep Dive
4:00-4:15
AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series Marketing
Casey Gotcher, AMD
* Product Positioning
* Product Brands
* APP Software
* Demand Generation for Radeon 6000 Series
* Q&A
BFBC2 works like a charm on my 5850; 1920x1200; 4xAA and 16:1 AF; everything on MAX @ 60-80 fps without any hiccups (campaign is around 10-20 fps slower... :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hey Zeus
you'll also notice that loading time on AMD cards is a bit faster than on nvidia (5-10 seconds if you have a proper HDD/SSD, it used to take some 30-120 seconds but this was fixed one month after the game release!)
You deserved it, 400+ posts in a thread and you drop a line as welcome as a fart in a elevator.Quote:
Originally Posted by HelixPC
WHAT?!?!?! I thought there was nothing faster than my onboard S3 video chip...Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi64
Sapphire HD 6850
http://img.donanimhaber.com/images/h...b1_dh_fx57.jpg
:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconyu
On a serious note, I really hope the 6870 at least matches the 5870. I actually think it will, but lets wait and see, reviews should be out next week hopefully
According to the Chief Editor at SWECLOCKERS.COM review will be up Friday am CET.Quote:
Originally Posted by LightSpeed
NDA on pictures and specs ends tomorrow morning CET.
did you play game, gtx460 768 MB has 40fps Japan level 1920x1200 16x/4x and 42.3 London level, results depend on testing levelsQuote:
Originally Posted by xdan
and 90% don`t change car name settings that were the same cars in benchmark.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
Anyway GPU Benchmarking Process hardwarecanucks sacks big way,BC2 incorrect, AVP incorrect,FC2 incorrect (benchmark),JC2 incorrect,Metro incorrect, this way never will have 100% repeatable test
and this is why I usually only take reviews from you guys, hard and anand as anything with serious weight.Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL
¿First leaked benchmark?
Dirt 2 DX11
http://www.dvhardware.net/news/2010/...6800_dirt2.jpg
Around the rumored 20%~ advantage for 6870 over 460 1GB.
Battleforge SLI vs CF
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3...forgebench.gif
http://www.dvhardware.net/article46004.html
Posted about three times I think and quoted loads of times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
Seems like some of the new cards should be using 4 VLIW structure according to guys at Beyond3d.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...postcount=3404Quote:
It means that there is one member of a future GPU line from AMD which has indeed 4 slot VLIW units.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...postcount=3410
Why do i suspect that these new "renamed" parts will be much competitive to its older, replaced brothers in real games than in 3DMark bench ? In 3DMark bench the old card shines for their abundant of raw shader power, but i sense this new gen chips employ better efficiency that free many bottlenecks in older gen chips to achieve better real world gaming performance. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by LightSpeed
A little more info and some nice pics.
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1444/1/
Still no decent benchmarks or pricing though...
If I'm buying, I'm buying the card that has no manufacturer's sticker on top.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
http://www.legitreviews.com/images/r...6850_angle.jpg
Don't screw this beauty up, manufacturers.
WOW!!! what a tool for graphics designers, no more "painting rocks" this is one of the reasons Physx is most likely going to go out of use, not opened source outdated code
You can always peel the sticker off. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
So what about those B3D rumours, that Cayman would be 4 VLIW and Barts 5 VLIW? How that would affect performance.
Physics and tessellation are separate technologies, and not mutually exclusive. Tessellation doesn't alleviate the need for a physics library.Quote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
GPU accelerated Bullet physics (open source) is what they are using in that demo, according to the slides.
Quite a bit. If barts has 5 way shaders, that means it has 224 shaders(which is a weird number). How much of a tweak can they get out of a 5 shader architecture to directx 11? 5 shaders sounds alot more like cypress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
What is true? The 5 shader thing is also being mentioned in fudzilla for barts? I hope Fud can atleast get it right 3 days before launch.
If cayman has 4 way shaders and 1920 shaders, it would have 480 real shaders.
aww 6850 has thecraptacular blower form the 5770 series...
at least 6870 kept the 4870/90 5850/70 5970 model which is inaudible @idle :)
[img]
http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/8...t7t42tbc8t.jpg
http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/7...ke7o96z9h6.jpg
http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/8...e2qggtc6ce.jpg
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/9...uqm55rr5ra.jpg
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/8...puulboduoy.jpg
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/2...1fwstjgbgt.jpg
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/9...e8uvbwbu99.jpg
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/5...mgpvbvprvg.jpg
Why do they compare it to the 5850 in one, then the 5870 in another image?
Looks very nice. Improved AA, up to 2 tessellation perf. using a smaller chip (imagine Cayman)!
Barts SEP:
6850 Barts Pro $179
6870 Barts XT $239
Probably cos it sounds better if they beat the 5870 in tessellation. However, from what I know, the tessellation is the same in 5770 as 5870 so...Quote:
Originally Posted by CedricFP
So the 6xxx series are supposed to be 35% cheaper. Is this going to happen? :nono: :ROTF:
Interesting, so they really went for 14 SIMD's? Weird, since 1280 would be a more round number (320x4 or 240x5). Actually, that makes it still confusing, since it can be 14 x 16 x 5 or 14 x 20 x 4.
The improved perf/mm^2 and perf/W is certainly welcome, especially on 40nm, as is the tesselation improvement
Looks like a big change was that each row of SIMD engines has its own ultra-threaded dispatch processor & caches
If those prices at $179 and $239 are true... then more than 35% cheaper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
We're talking GTX470/5850 performance at $239 and > GTX 460 1GB performance at $179. Nvidia's margins are going to be in a world of hurt
Amd compare HD6870 with HD5850 for general performance "in game" and power, and with HD5870 for tessellation performance.
Yes, +35% performance/mm^2, HD6870 vs HD5850, but don't forget 900Mhz vs 725Mhz.
seems that AMD is going to make quite a money with these new series:clap:
...maybe thats what they were really after with the 68xx series,not so much to best the 5870.
I have strong reason to believe that Barts is 5VLIW and Cayman 4VLIW.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
I tought it was obvious as Cayman is the part to get perfomance crown.Quote:
Originally Posted by AAbenson
Average price of the reference HD 5850 memory at 4.0 = $260, not taking the rebates into account. This is the same price AMD started last year at launch. So I would assume 35% cheaper than $260. So $260 - 35% which is $91. $260 - 91 = $169.Quote:
Originally Posted by zerazax
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...E&PageSize=100
Is this going to happen? :nono: :ROTF:
Looks like the 6950/6970 and 6990 are going to be the official names
From that slide too, they played the 6950 > 5870 pretty clearly (though you shouldn't take too much stock in relative placements, I suppose). But that's good news, since that seems like the 6970 will be a 5970 performance in single GPU form... and lord knows how much power the 6990 will have.
Market prices and the card's relative performance are going to dictate that of course. The 5850, it turns out, was pretty underpriced on release (as was the 4800's). And AMD isn't exactly a charity here, and since Nvidia isn't doing much to compete, it ends up that AMD gets to dictate where they stand this roundQuote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Those last slide are interesting, AMD stating HD6850 being anywhere from 10 - 60% (~25% avg) faster except for Vantage obviously compared to GTX 460 768MB, so it should be like 10~15% faster in avg compared to 1GB version which would be in-line with my own speculation.
HD6870 being 25~30% avg faster than GTX 460 1GB, that is enough to put it around GTX 470 levels / in-between HD5850 & HD5870? With some OCing we're prolly looking at HD5870 performance or slightly above it which would be fairly acceptable for a ~$250 card.
YepQuote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/9...nbwu5bg1n5.jpg
Also, a key slide as to why the naming scheme changed. ATI pretty much decided Cypress couldn't cover the markets, so it was split in two. Antilles is going to be a beast :shocked:
http://www.chiphell.com/data/attachm...hwcszvt7ov.jpg
I suppose this is the explanation AMD gives for the renaming. 5800 wasn't in the "sweet spot", like 4800-series. So 6800 would now be in the same category as 4800-series, which really was relatively small and cheap and battled against GTX 260.
Hopefully at least some1 is able to make a review of the following cards GTX 460 1GB, HD6850, GTX 470, HD5850, HD6870 and HD5870 with some OC results incl as well for Barts, that had been perfect.
Yeah it makes sense, though its not renaming. Kind of like how the 3800's were intended to fight the non-GTX cards, and the 4800's targeted the 260's, the 6800's are back to targeting the 460/470.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantsu
Of course, that makes it interesting because that means that AMD has decided to go ahead and fight for the single GPU crown again with Cayman and the 6900 series...
Hey, these bench items are different between two slides, even the bench settings are different. Cherry pick results??:)Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Why would they include FarCry2 then for example? I think this time it looks quite fair.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeiT.235
What renaming!Quote:
Originally Posted by pantsu
Did we have a naked HD6850 yet?
http://www.abload.de/img/radeon6850-10-950x633k5rm.jpg
More pictures:
http://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php...0106b0995.html
I have seen these slides before. :rofl:
By the slides, 6850 30% > 460 768MB, 6870 25% > 460 1GB.
460 768MB = $179 + 30% = 6850
460 1GB = $229 + 25% = 6870
Okay, so why will AMD release the 6870? The slides show that 6850 > 460 1GB, maybe for the GF112.
Beating a dead :horse: :ROTF:
AMD's slides are so hilarious. :ROTF:
I guess this goes to show you, 3dmark scores aren't really indicative of anything.
If i read this slide correctly, THERE WILL BE NO RENAMING, 57x0 will retain its name.
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/870...pwwpbktq8t.jpg
This looks like a rather profitable lineup if you ask me, especially since NVIDIA doesn't have anything to counter it with for quite a while. HD57xx series staying as the lowend / lowcost series that should be very cheap to manufacture and a strong and complete lineup from Barts to Antilles which Nvidia will have no response for other than doing pricecuts which will hurt their margins even more. Looks like it sux to be Nvidia atm.
Very pretty. Would be nice to run it naked :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by FischOderAal
I agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by RaV[666]
Does this chip have any parts disabled? I know all the rumors were putting it at 1280 SP is all. Never heard much of anything for a 1120 SP part till now. Fud (I know I know) said it was still a 5D part. I don't know where the hell he pulled that one out. I haven't seen anything stating that yet.
From the slide i put above we can estimate cayman performance too.AMD did positioned them accordingly, 5870 is ABOVE 6870.
6970 is looking to be same amount lower than 5970, so it should be a bit faster than 480 but not much.512SP version MAY match it.
Those performance slides are good example of how people can be manipulated by simply cutting the 0-0.8 part from the bottom and visually it seems like 6870 is about 100% faster than GTX460. If Geforce would be notably faster in any bench it would ruin this scheme totally. You can naturally leave those kind of benchs away from the slide.
Nevertheless it seems that 6870 and 6850 will be excellent products if the price is right :yepp:
More
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/3116/70001e.jpg
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/7409/10004a.jpg
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/8382/20004w.jpg
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/6076/30004.jpg
http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/7376/40003p.jpg
http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/8409/50003.jpg
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/5441/60003.jpg