50% more performance seems rather low for all the improvement they did to cayman
antilles will have a field day with fermi
Printable View
50% more performance seems rather low for all the improvement they did to cayman
antilles will have a field day with fermi
50% more performance seems rather low for all the improvement they did to cayman
antilles will have a field day with fermi
You are lucky, here a GTX580 sell for 600+ dollars, and they are still not in stock ( not a single card in the biggers shops of switzerland, maybe a few have been delivered.... )...Quote:
Originally Posted by safan80
The NDA is not lifted yet ... the slides have been shown in October on the "Believe your Eyes Press conference " ( Bart Launch ), when the HD6900 launch was not pushed to early december .... it's just a site, who have leak those slides and at this time the launch of the HD6900 was normally the 22/11, it's why screen show "NDA 22/11" .Quote:
Originally Posted by Therk
Who knows? Don't get your expectations too high or you might get disappointed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
I rather drink another coffee and play the waiting game :)
by the pace this is taking that better be one big ass coffee mug (make it a bucket ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by FischOderAal
It seems the card is getting concrete with leaks regarding its specs. :yepp:
My expectation:
Cayman XT is around 40-45% faster on average over Cypress XT, priced @US$ 429-449. Cayman Pro is ~GTX 480 performance level or slightly faster, priced @US$ 349-359.
If it comes true, that would be quite an achievement considering they're still stuck on TSMC's 40 nm process. :up:
just read the page you posted on and take a look at the slides...Quote:
Originally Posted by Therk
NDA is pushed back to december 13th, the slides posted are leaks and not here due to an NDA lift...
Quote:
Originally Posted by FischOderAal
so with all that added hardware it wont have a chance to even beat the 5970 ... LOLL
cayman has a big change .. so i expect big things from antilles ... nothing else
Looks like Cayman XT will be around GTX 580, and Cayman PRO will be around GTX 480, no?
I believe XT will be priced between $400 and 450, which should also make Nvidia drop prices. After that, just think about the über performance you'll be getting out of $400. Incredible.
I think at this point we can at least rejoice that 6970 will be very competitive vs gtx580 and the difference will be much smaller than gtx480/5870. That means prices should see their way down very soon after Christmas Holidays.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurrdurr
I predict a good time to buy this will be mid January when supply picks up and holiday shopping spree is over.
But who can wait that long huh?
if cayman xt is competitive with the 580 it does mean that cayman pro would most likely be competitive with the 480 and 570 ????
I have no doubts about that. I think 6950 +25% on 5870 and 6970 +45% on 5870.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
That's both not what I said and not what I meant either. Just because something looks good on paper doesn't mean it'll be a beast. I prefer to be pleasantly surprised ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Semantics... AMD can't call Cayman their fastest GPU as they have Antilles on board, NVIDIA have nothing else so it's indeed their fastest GPU :DQuote:
Originally Posted by -=DVS=-
it's a FAKEQuote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
http://www.dinoxpc.com/News/news.asp?ID_News=20148
I don't get the translation, but how are they so sure it's a fake? Just cause they can reproduce it?
Awfully creative of them to have added Nov 18 2010 for sure though
Well, according to similar pics of Radeon HD 7980 and Radeon Uber-HD 10000 slides from here and corresponding info - its fake for sure!
http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbi...-11Nov-23c.jpg
Yes instance orgasmmmm and i do have many $$$
^^
LOL! Priceless! :rofl:
Lol. Fakes are getting better. :rofl:
These ones are real though?
If so it still confirms ~2x tessellation perf, 4 equal shaders vs 4 simple + 1 complex, power regulation features, 2GB, simultaneous kernels, and EQAA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
Even if we knew the number of shaders (or assumed 1920 is correct), TMUs, and clocks making a performance estimate would be very difficult because of the different shader layout. Different applications will have different performance increases on such an arch compared to Cypress.
It could easily be a situation where DX9/10 games see a ~30-40% gain (over a 5870), DX11 see 50-60%, and vantage/furmark/etc see 20%.
Just a bit of fun with numbers. Caymen uses 90% of the die area for 4sps that Cypress uses for 5sps. Check the slides if you doubt. I used barts as a reference.
Cypress 334mm2 1600sp 256bit mem
Barts 255mm2 1120sp 256bit mem
Caymen ???? 1920sp 256bit mem
GF100/GF110 550mm2 512cuda 384bit mem
GF104/(GF114) 368mm2 384cuda 256bit mem
Die area estimates just for fun. Yep they have long WAGgy tails.
Caymen 334mm2/(1600/5)*(1920/4)*.9=450.9mm2
Caymen 334mm2/1600*1920=400.8mm2
Barts 334mm2/1600*1120=233.8mm2
Better Barts 334mm2/1600*1280=267.2mm2 What if HD6870 is a cut down Barts?
Barts reference accuracy 233.8mm2/255mm2=0.9168
Better Barts reference accuracy 267.2mm2/255mm2=1.0478
Barts is a significant refinement over the previous evergreen products. In the HD6870, Barts generates about 93% of the performance of the HD5870 Cypress while using less than 73% of the shaders. The question is how much of the gain in efficiency came from modified sps and how much came from a redesign of the uncore? It does seem clear that Cypress was sp heavy. That is Cypress has more sps than it can effectively use. Barts is the result of examining the evergreen products and finding ways to more effectively use the whole of the gpu.
Caymen XT should have an effective 50% performance advantage over a similarly clocked Cypress excluding performance enhancements to the uncore. AMD is showing in the various slides that the uncore changes in Caymen are even greater than those in Barts. Another question,,, is 4d=5d? We do not know, though AMD likely does. It does seem that 4d must be at least 90% as fast as the old 5d and likely more. The reason is that AMD only gains 10% die area with the change. If they did not see a potential gain then making the change would be valueless. I believe 40% better performance than the HD5870 would be a rather conservative estimate for the Caymen XT (HD6970). Depending on how well AMD has addressed the bottle necks of the evergreen (Cypress) gpu it could be that the HD6970 will be 60-70% faster than the HD5870. Pricing will be commensurate with actual performance. Expecting anything else would be silly, AMD is not a charity.
Should not be more than 3 weeks and we will know.
Yes those are realQuote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
And I agree with your estimates.. DX9/10 is probably tapped out but DX11 should see some big improvements
:ROTF: they should have done presentation this way :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
I would be very happy if Antilles is 30% faster than my HD 5970, probably not to easy to achieve on reference card because of the PCI-e spec. Anyway 30% plus the extra 2GB GDDR5 and at least 2x better tessellation would be nice upgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
So maybe Charlie was talking about Switzerland when he predicted the paper-launch. j/kQuote:
Originally Posted by Lanek