If this is true I get the impression that these naming schemes were designed for their APUs.
Printable View
If this is true I get the impression that these naming schemes were designed for their APUs.
Performance is ok considering it's 40nm and they don't want to do an Nv. Naming scheme is damn awful though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dami3n
dont worry, i was already corrected for my miss-thinkingQuote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
and i do agree that the names should have all been shifted down one level, and just drop the lowest level the currently have and make that a little more powerful. honeslty, who would care that a 62x0 is 2x stronger than 52x0 for a little higher cost
Those cards should be phased out soon since there is no longer needQuote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
for the uber cheap dedicated cards with consideration we're getting into an
era when IGPs are going to take over that market segment. My .02, you
might disagree :shrug:
OMG i bet none of you guys answering to the 3D Center chart has read the google translation of the article :rolleyes:
The whole chart is based on a thread at pcinlife.com.
3D Center consider them a unreliable source, as you can see if you read the article.
A very reliable source for a change is David Hoff, director at AMD. Techradar.com had the chance to do a small interview:
http://www.techradar.com/news/comput...ristmas-717388
The important things:
Quote:
"It's certainly more than changing a sticker," he said with a grin. "I wouldn't say it's an absolute, complete from the ground up new architecture .It's a nice, different architecture."
Quote:
He confirmed that it wouldn't just be the high-end card hitting the shelves by Christmas either. It wont be the full lineup, but we will see multiple SKUs of the card with the complete range following very quicky.
Yes, I did :DQuote:
Originally Posted by johnieboy
^^ it was a hard read when everything is in a sucky translation and a few words not translated at all.
This is apparently legit picture. Sampsa said @ muropaketti that his source has Barts PRO who confirmed this picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Borden
one thing i gather from this thread:
with each release AMD manages to spread even more confusing fake information to mask their real plans :(
with 3870 they simply held off die size and clock speeds; 4870 they spread wrong information about SP count (480 vs 800), die size and memory and on 5870 every single rumour was proven to be at least partially wrong but we new everything about the naming scheme...
with the expected change in architecture i think that everything we learned so far is at least 90% wrong; we have no idea about efficiency, amd never talked about its new improved archiecture, we have no clue about model numbers and positioning, power consumption is in the dark as well, clock speed rumors (especially on memory) are wild guesses at best and shader count is unknown too thanks to the arch changes :shakes:
i have to give amd credit for hiding their real intentions and performance like no one else in the industry does and i think that every speculation right now is based on wrong information and only there for pure entertainment :yepp:
any rumors about release date yet ???
It's also there to show who squeaks. Because they give an info to a company and a different info to another, like they did with eyefinity project.
This way, they know who broke the NDA.
"WE'VE SPENT A fair bit of time over the last month pondering the upcoming Radeon series from AMD. Specifically, the card which is rumored to be the 6770 is of interest. Sure the bigger cards get the crowns and bigger fanfare but this should be a card that most of us are more likely to buy given the price ranges.
The 6770, or Barts, has been rumored to have a 256 bit memory bus. This seems to break Radeon tradition in this price category. A 128 bit bus is simpler, takes up less die space and saves a little on the PCB. Keeping costs down is a definite AMD/ATi strategy as of late. A few dollars here and there really makes a difference on these cards. Why would AMD want to increase costs? Is a bigger memory controller really going to make a worthwhile difference? Many are saying no, Barts doesn't need twice the bandwidth of Juniper. Does it? Lets examine."
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/09/...islands-barts/
18th of october for Barts PRO & XT whole lineup released next year, some other cards in this year tough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Since people seem to have confused SI with NI, could it be that the lost shader isn't a change we'll see in HD 6xxx?
Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
maybe the confusion was created because of the announcement about tsmc's cancelation of the 32nm node so it created an hybrid shader design rumor ... but it seems like its really a re-organisation of the shader layout from what i understood from severals thread on the subject
dont take it as gospel ... its my understanding of how those rumors started and what it is now closer to the release of the product
Its a balancing act. They might be able to pull off a fairly cheap 256bit PCB for a core that doesnt use a lot of power and come out with a GPU that gets performance close to a 5850 or 5870, kind of like the 5770 closed in on 4870/4890 territory.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
I'm gonna wait a few more weeks until buying into any of this renaming/specs hype. It's been a fun read though.
If I could make up numbers:
Barts Pro - GTS450 Price 5830-5850 Performance
Barts XT - GTX460 Price 5870 +/- a tad performance
:D
If we're gonna speculate I'm guessing:
Barts Pro - ~GTX460 1GB performance or like ~5% better in some cases, $199
Barts XT - Same/slightly above (3~5%) HD5850 performance in avg, $249~259
Yeah, That's my bet too RPGWiZaRD :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Barts Pro - GTX 460 1 GB
Barts XT - Full GF104
Cayman Pro - GF110/102 (GTX 470 replacement)
Cayman XT - GF110/102 (GTX 480 replacement)
Something like that ...
I think it will be like this too.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Something tells me the 5850 performance is true because apparently partners that had the card confirmed such performance.
I am slightly more pessimistic and think Barts xt might perform a tad worse than the 5850 if the specs on the leak slide is true. Somewhere along the lines of 5 to 10 percent worse.
Is the 4 D shader rumor debunked if that slide is true? Where did this rumor come from. I think Charlie sources are not bad when it comes down to the chip level(tape out dates and chip sizes), but when it comes to performance and specs, he is not accurate at all.
I think the barts parts are going to be expensive this generation because the cards seem so huge(the pics atleast) compared to prior generations.
I think this generation will be more about AMD cashing in on weak competition than really providing a serious improvement. If the size of the die is correct, which is along the lines of 380-400mm. I can see 480-640 shaders being added without any new technology being added and giving it enough power to beat a gtx 480.
Yea I'm with you on this, it depends a bit which source I look at what I expect of it, ranging from like 0-10% worse performing to 0-5% better performing. :p With the specs in the slide I'd say pretty much on par with it or a few % below it. But time will tell as usual, just fun to see how close u get to reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I guess we see better fps and performance from dx10.1/dx11 games than dx9 and dx10 with the new series.
Looking forward its just a few weeks now.
Its legit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...122c-2010.aspx
Poor GTX 460s 128 bit bus.:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian
Man Theo should do some fact checking before he publishes his articles. If he can't even get the specs of current products out, I don't know how he is going to be taken seriously with future products.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebluemeanie1
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed that.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebluemeanie1
New rumor from Chiphell (info from Mindfury of B3D forum).
http://www.chiphell.com/thread-125814-1-1.html
Basically:Quote:
PCB非公的有的已经做出来,有的刚刚layout完,10月估计原厂卡上市,随后11月没准就能看 到非公 了,总得来说的确非常顺利,PRO搞定GTX 460,XT搞定自家的HD5850,10月终于有值得够买的显卡了!!nApoleon 发表于 2010-9-25 10:32
Barts Pro is faster than GTX460
Barts XT is faster than HD5850
Info came from Napoleon, a chinese info leaker who's quite accurate regarding to ATi's products in the past (info about 800 SP RV 770 & Cypress die size for instance, all way before release time, IIRC).
So, the landscape is going to be like this ? HD 5870 > Bart XT > HD 5850 > Bart Pro > GTX 460 1 GB ? :shrug:
Bart XT ~ GTX 470 for 60% power consumption and die size ?? Priced @ US$ 199 it WILL be a killer, 8800 GT effect from the red camp instead ! :shocked:
if Barts XT is called 6870, the naming is still fail
The naming might be a fail if the rumor is true, but if it's priced right, i don't think the masses would care, those rebranded, same design G 92 made and is still making lots of money for nVidia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Looks like I won't be upgrading to next gen then .. putting my money into a tablet!
Just picked up a discount 5870 off ebay, happy to cut my wattage draw compared to a 4870x2 and retain the same performance ;)
I'd seriously consider a dual Barts Pro setup if the leaked numbers are correct.
i'm still pretty skeptical about the rumored naming scheme. recent news from "credible" sources only mention codenames, not a single use of product names.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
why is that?
Isn't it overkill if 960 NI shaders is comparable to 1440 Evergreen shaders (speculate a little, I know clocks are different)? That would be a 50% performance jump if they're competing at equal number of shaders.:shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
That's for 67xx series too. Wonder what 68xx brings. If this is all true, ATi has some wonder engineers and chip architects :clap:
If Napoleon leaked infos can be trusted, then the slide might be debunked since it doesn't support Napoleon earlier info regarding 4D shader array arrangement in Northern Islands. Bart is more likely to be a 1280 SP chip rather than a 960 SP one claimed in the leaked slide, and Cayman would be a 1920 SP chip, just up to 50% expansion, not a double mainstream sized chip like Cypress used to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
A 1280 SP Bart XT chip in 320*4 arrangement, with its supposed 4D array as efficient & performing as good as 5D array in 1600 SP Cypress (320*5), one can understand if the performance will get close to Cypress XT, should the clock quite be comparable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I totally agree but according to the leaked chart, it will cost the same as the 5850 does now but with better performance.
Name = fail, card = ok.
Next generation cards should retain the new name structure. It's a 1 generation naming kink where the cards are slid up a number to satisfy perceived epeen purchases.
A little insidious imo, a way of getting existing 5 series owners to upgrade when they wouldn't if they saw the 6770 brand
It's wise to speculate that barts XT will quite probably have higher min fps than the 5870, areas where it performs better and others, less.
As long as it's cheaper the the 5870 and sticks to the 230 euro price, it's win
That's the midrange.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
It's like this:
Cayman dual gpu card > 5970 > Cayman XT > GTX 480 > Cayman > GTX 470 > 5870 > Barts XT > HD5850 > Barts pro > GTX 460.
Although Barts takes the 6870 name, there will be a replacement for the 5870 which is the real 6870 we expected. Just with a 69xx name.
Graph says single chip Cayman XT = 130% of 5870. Seems decent.
I doubt Barts XT will be much faster than HD 5850 if it really is faster, probably sth like 5% in average, anything more and it would seem like magic unless the floating around specs are inaccurate (yes I've already taken 4D shader array into account). And why do you think they'd price Barts XT @ $199 if it's faster than HD 5850 or maybe around GTX 470 levels in best case and being a lot better in power efficiency. Even a $249 it would be a very interesting, I think Barts Pro is more likely to enter $199 price if it beats GTX 460 then that would also be an interesting pick, $199 Barts Pro and $249 Barts XT sounds much more likely to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
Barts XT is very interesting to me as I seem to have a dying GTX 280 here (clock stability has decreased a lot), I'd gladly wait for Cayman but don't think my GTX 280's gonna survive that long and I like the idea about Barts XT drawing much less power than my GTX 280 and still offering a significant performance boost and DX11 support, all that for something that's most likely gonna cost $250 or less.
Maybe the cheaper cost of producing barts gpu's allows them to knock down the old stock prices of 5850's and let barts fill the gap where the margins are bigger at the same price.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Clearing the 5 series cards cheaply would screw up the landscape for the 460 and shift the marketshare back to ATI in the midrange. Repairing the poor ATI brand image through bribery before shifting to AMD lol
Yea right, since when did NVIDIA or AMD start pricing new cards in relative to their manufacturing cost? If there's any gains they happy take that extra gain themselves straight into the pocket that the customers have to know nothing about and what does it matter really if the customers are happy to pay the price that seems fair compared to the rest of the available products? Just saying $249 would be an aggressive price already if those rumors are true, compare to for example HD 5850 being sold for 259 - $299. It would also force price drops on NVIDIA, GTX 470 couldn't be sold for 299 - $349 any longer that's for sure. ;p
Prices don't come out of thin air.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
It's a factoring of covering manufacturing and tertiary costs with as much markup as the company can get away with whilst retaining a large enough consumer base to buy enough units.
On top of this, the company must think of future protection through a process calls "back end sales".
Back end sales could be locking people into buying a second matching gpu for GPU pairing or manipulating them into brand loyalty.
Before you cry foul, realize that ALL business success stems to back end sales through habitational buying. From mcdonalds to printer paper, the money lies in building a list of repeat customers.
Without this, you end up with pressure sales to fuel the company.
No one likes pressure sales and they come with greater risk of returns.
Just as noobs buy macs, noobs buy nvidia. ATI want that cash, they want the mind commitment from customers to swing to ATI.
What is the real cost of offloading older hardware for a $25% markdown (still in profit) whilst replacing the same price segment with an even more profitable product?
Marking UP the 6870 would reduce sales on that and increase on old stock.
Expect the 230 euro price to translate to the $250 you predict but this wouldn't last long. I'd give it till february before one or both products get hammered down.
Staggered price plan. Release @ premium, gain on mainstream.
Remember the can of whoopass?
That was years ago.
Edit: Pre-empting. It's oem that's the repeat buyers. :p
They want commitment from them. Perform well, price good with congruence = oem commitment
If ati debut weaker products at vastly higher prices. Oem's will be wary.
One can hope for ~GTX 470 performance level & US$ 199 tag price (pointing my index finger to my nose), doesn't mean that the wishes will be granted though. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Perhaps my thought is based on the idea that Bart chips will be the backbone of HD 67xx line ups, not believing those rebranding rumor out there. As such, it would be rather hard to swallow if the prices of the new x7xx series goes up double time compared to the current price of HD 5770. :shrug:
Yes, the performance warrants the cards higher price as you suggested, but if the cards want to be called mainstream part, US$ 199 price tag would be seriously attractive and in sync with perhaps the biggest, profitable segment of the market (remember nVidia GTX 460 presentation slide, the pawning slide ? LOL :p:).
We just have to wait and see how things unfold. One thing for sure, my suggested tag price is more customer friendly than yours, hahaha. :D
Wait for Cayman bro, that should be the right successor of your ageing GTX 280. It would be an impressive spectacle if you pair a Cayman and your old GTX 280 as PhysX accelerator card in Ge-Deon configuration, hehehe. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
You can pick up a GTX470 at Newegg for about $250 AR. I don't think that hoping for a $200 product with similar performance in a month is too much to ask for but with ATI gouging I'm not sure that will be happening any time soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by spursindonesia
I would love to pick up a replacement for my GTX280 but I want more of an improvement in performance at the same price that I paid over two years ago.
Nice thanks flopper :up:
http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/527...dd5e2e42c9.jpg
If true, numbers seems very good ...
oh my looks like 5870 is about = 6770.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
makes me think 6870 should be insanely powerful.
also disappointing me that I just got 5870 2gbs a month ago :/
so the 6770 is going to be better than the 5870?
No. But it will beat 5850.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leopold Butters
might be that a 6870 equals 5970 stock?Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
seems a single gpu might be a good deal for the eyefinity setup I got.:yepp:
deffinatly a good improvement on paper ... now let's wait and see if the change on paper can be felt in real life
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimBy
and you know this from facts??? i doubt it ...
Yeah I was thinking the same thing. haha, But I know i'd end up crossfiring them and I'd rather have the 6870x2, one less WB to throw into my loop. It would be great if the 6870 = the 5970, but I won't get excited yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by flopper
the specs definately fit between the 5850 and 5870. so, if AMD did the right optimizations, can we expect the 6770 to perform almost like the 5870?Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
if this'd really be the case, the 6870 will be a monster :eek: (considering that they did it just by tweaking their cypress architecture on the same fabrication process)
the question is, how big is the die and power since its still on the same 40nm.
the 460 is destroyed though.
if the price it good.
maybe its time for a dualcard this time.
Do you guys think the 6870M will be about as fast as a 6770? Does that mean that laptops using 6870M CF will be roughly equivalent to 5870 CF?
Yeah right RaZz!Quote:
Originally Posted by RaZz!
It's possible that Barts XT performs really near than Cypress XT with best tesselation capabilities. Prices, TDP and availability will be good to know though but 67X0 is maybe a future GTX 460 killer :shrug:
Oh well looks like it's fake.
It's a fake :DQuote:
Originally Posted by SimBy
doesn't look like that completely to meQuote:
Originally Posted by Leopold Butters
the texture fill rate on the 5870 is still higher 68 vs 57.6. The pixel fill rate is the same at the same clock.
If the roumers about the 6770 is true it sound like a rly nice card! I just bought a XFX BE 5850 for 50% off (200$, normal cost here in denmark is 400$ Oo) and i dunno now if i should keep the card or wait for this :o decision decisions!
I just had a though what if this die is 50% smaller then cypress ?
it looks to be about 20-25% less shader's and TMU's for about the same level of performance
looks kinda dumb that Barts was given slow memory, only 1ghz and 1.05ghz GDDR5
i hope thats due to low voltage memory to give it a lower power consumption, which means super overclocking available for us.
at least this naming scheme makes more sense than the last one posted
none of that barts being the 6850/70
I'm not sure about the slide either. I mean, Barts XT has 1280 shaders. They're 4D, so that might make them take more space than 5D shaders too. Add a 256 bit bus and to me it seems impossible for AMD to maintain HD5770's die size. What does that mean for the HD6870? And, just as importantly, what about the dual GPU card? Would they still be able to squeeze that into 300W?
The only way I see this slide could be true is for the high end chip not to have twice Barts' shader count... Which actually may make some sense given the gap seen between the HD57x0 and HD58x0.
i love those rumors thread ... they always provide some good lulz
Not fact but I'm 99% sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Die size should be quite a savings over Cypress, think around 20-25% smaller. So that is quite small for something that handily beats the GTX460. These are the spiritual successors to Juniper, they are not trying to keep it at the same size nor at the same current price...
Given that 5.0Gbps GDDR5 is still used, id say memory overclocking should equal or beat Cypress, depending on tweaks to the memory controller.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
If slower memory is eventually used, that would be a different scenario.
On a side note, IIRC Barts will use Hynix. What did the ref 58xx boards use? I forgot :p:
if die size is really that small then we can deffinatly say that its not a rebrand .. especially if it beats out the gtx460 .. but why go smaller ??? easier to be profitable ????
Lower cost and better yields. WinQuote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
You can only hope plain rebrands in the mobile parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron_Davis
mobility HD5750 --> mobility HD6650
mobility HD5870 --> mobility HD6770
*No high end card
Mobile parts require die shrinks to launch faster gpu's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LightSpeed
i hope they price these aggresively so i could get something decent without breaking the bank
It's always the most exciting time for hardware nerds before anything concrete is released.
Even if it's good info, the fun is in not knowing. :)
I think barts will very likely be more than equal to the 5850.
The 4770 was better than the 3870 and the 5770 was equal to the 4870.
I dun get your example...shouldn't it be:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
mobility HD5870 --> mobility HD6870
where
mobility HD5870 = desktop HD5770
and
mobility HD6870 = desktop HD6770
??
Too hard to look at previous page ? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
Too hard to verify the riemann hypothesis?
http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/kimon/Riemann/formula2.gif
One thing sure is that's more easy to read previous page :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides
his picture is in better resolution, and on this page, which saves us time. im happy with itQuote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
EDIT, ahhh damnit, i posted and now made a new page, lol
All I really care about is Cayman Pro.. and hope it's significantly lower clocked than XT ! :yawn2:
That table looks legit and not exagerated tbh.
from the specs it seems 5870>6770>5850>6750>5830
just sold my 5770 :D:up:
That slide seems a little too good to be true. :shrug:
This has not cutout lower part. There is powerconsumption in it.
http://resources.vr-zone.com/newvr/i...936/6700ch.jpg
so 114 W for Barts Pro and 146 for Barts XT.
so Pro a bit over 5770 and XT under 5850.
Ofc the logo has to be covering some of the data. But looks like 134.4Gbps, 146W, 23W. Quite good efficiency here if Barts XT is really gonna perform slightly better than HD5850 with slightly less power consumption. They already had great efficiency with 5xxx series so getting a further improvement on 40nm would be nice and very bad for Nvidia. Just imagine if Cayman XT would (and probably will) beat GTX 480 with around 200W TDP.
In this slide it's once again 6700-series instead of 6800, so most likely at least one of them is faked. Most of the info on these slides are way different. I'd certainly want to believe this newer slide though. Which is probably why it's a fake. :D
146W for the 6770.Quote:
Originally Posted by Florinmocanu
The 6870 must drink power or be gimped like the 480.
The ideal scenario for AMD/ATI regarding Cayman I think would be like 176W for Cayman Pro and 199W for Cayman XT and Cayman Pro would be slightly ahead of HD5870 and XT slightly ahead GTX 480. They could choose make it a 240-250W part for another extra say ~15% performance probably but that's not what ATI has focused on lately but performance/watt and it wouldn't either make sense as this is probably the last series that's just based on the previous, I expect to see more changes for their 28nm part and then it makes more sense to strive for a bigger leap in performance. A 10% perf lead over GTX 480 at significantly lower TDP would be an instant win in my book for this series, let's not speak about dual-gpu solutions...
the entire renaming scheme was based on 1 chinese source then afterwards everyone just picked up that name but there has never been any oficial amd source claiming a rename. so i would say this slide looks right and i dont think amd will modify its naming scheme that has lasted 5 generations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantsu
Assuming these charts are legit, that CaymanXT is also clocked at 900MHz, that CaymanXT has 50% more functional units (aside from memory controller and ROPs), and that cayman GDDR5 is spec'd at 1600MHz (just a guess on my part), here are some potential specs on Cayman based of the Barts chart
900MHz
1920SPs
3.456TFlops
96TMUs
86.4GTexels/sec
32 (possibly doubled up to 64) ROPS
28.8GPixels/sec (57.6GPixels/sec if doubled up)
1600MHz GDDR @ 256-bit
204.8GB/s memory bandwidth
Should be somewhat close, assuming that the Barts chart is correct and cayman is generally 1.5x Barts.
AMD to delay the launch of Radeon HD 6000 series
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100927PD228.htmlQuote:
AMD has recently postponed the launch schedule of its next-generation Radeon HD 6000 series GPUs (Southern Islands) from the original October 12 to November, according to sources from graphics card makers....
Meh if this is true I hope they release both Barts and Cayman at same time.
AMD Radeon HD 6800 Series Overview official
Up in the morning, the first thing is that this document is the official a few days ago to AMD, I ignore you NDA
Quote:
AMD Radeon™ HD 6800 Series GPU Detailed Feature Summary
AMD Radeon™ HD 6870 GPU Feature Summary:
GDDR5 memory interface
PCI Express® 2.1 x16 bus interface
―Eye-Definition‖ graphics
o Second generation graphics with full DirectX® 11 support
Shader Model 5.0
DirectCompute 11
Programmable hardware tessellation unit
Accelerated multi-threading
HDR texture compression
Order-independent transparency
o Image quality enhancement technology
AMD Eyefinity multi-display technology1
AMD EyeSpeed visual acceleration3
o AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing (APP) technology
OpenCLSupport
DirectCompute 11
Accelerated video encoding, transcoding, and upscaling2
o UVD 3 dedicated video playback accelerator
o Enhanced Video Quality features
Advanced post-processing and scaling
Dynamic contrast enhancement and color correction
Brighter whites processing (Blue Stretch)
Independent video gamma control
Dynamic video range control
AMD HD3D technology
o Stereoscopic 3D display/glasses support
o Blu-ray 3D support
o Stereoscopic 3D gaming
o 3rd party Stereoscopic 3D middleware software support
AMD CrossFireX™ multi-GPU technology5
o Dual GPU scaling3
Cutting-edge integrated display support
o Integrated dual-link DVI output with HDCP
o Integrated DisplayPort 1.2 output
o Integrated HDMI 1.4a with support for stereoscopic 3D
o Integrated VGA output
Integrated HD audio controller
o Output protected high bit rate 7.1 channel surround sound over HDMI with no additional cables required
o Supports AC-3, AAC, Dolby TrueHD and DTS Master Audio formats
AMD PowerPlay™ power management technology
o Dynamic power management with low power idle state
o Ultra-low power state support for multi-GPU configurations
AMD Catalyst™ graphics and HD video configuration software
o Certified drivers for Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows XP
o AMD Catalyst™ Control Center - AMD Catalyst™ software application and user interface for setup, configuration, and accessing features of ATI Radeon products.
o Unified Graphics display driver - AMD Catalyst™ software enabling other PC programs and devices to use advanced graphics, video, and features of AMD Radeon™ products.
Quote:
AMD Radeon™ HD 6850 GPU Feature Summary
GDDR5 memory interface
PCI Express 2.1 x16 bus interface
―Eye-Definition‖ graphics
o Second generation graphics with full DirectX® 11 support
Shader Model 5.0
DirectCompute 11
Programmable hardware tessellation unit
Accelerated multi-threading
HDR texture compression
Order-independent transparency
o Image quality enhancement technology
AMD Eyefinity multi-display technology
AMD EyeSpeed visual acceleration
o AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing (APP) technology
OpenCLSupport
DirectCompute 11
Accelerated video encoding, transcoding, and upscaling
o UVD 3 dedicated video playback accelerator
o Enhanced Video Quality features
Advanced post-processing and scaling
Dynamic contrast enhancement and color correction
Brighter whites processing (Blue Stretch)
Independent video gamma control
Dynamic video range control
AMD HD3D technology
o Stereoscopic 3D display/glasses support
o Blu-ray 3D support
o Stereoscopic 3D gaming
o 3rd party Stereoscopic 3D middleware software support
AMD CrossFireX™ multi-GPU technology3
o Dual GPU scaling
Cutting-edge integrated display support
o Integrated dual-link DVI output with HDCP
o Integrated DisplayPort 1.2 output
Quote:
6800 planned Oct. 19 release, the original 6870 production early August was going quite well (we visit it its own calculation of Distribution), the end product, 6900 Series is scheduled for release in November. First burst so much, next time be adjourned to the......
Gotta love Google Translate.
Also, I don't think it will be delayed yet(event is still on?)... and I also find it funny that no clockspeeds or shaders were given.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100927PD228.html :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian
AMD HD3D technologyQuote:
Originally Posted by cold2010
o Stereoscopic 3D display/glasses support
o Blu-ray 3D support
o Stereoscopic 3D gaming
o 3rd party Stereoscopic 3D middleware software support
:eek:
AMD HD 6000 delayed ?? :shocked:
http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/2530/0047g.jpg
Is that really new? Looks to me, like they just named something, that was already in there to make it look better. They still don't offer their own solution and are hoping, someone will do it for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frontl1ne
Looks like we'll have plenty of leaks and time to speculate still if the release is delayed to November. Damn you AMD!
AMD have 3D-support already, but the 3rd party solutions all seem to suck in one way or another. I hope they'll bring something usable this time.
the release date was never known, so those who comment on the "possible" delay and there cosmetic comments didn't even know when to expect it.... now I call that funny :D
I kinda thought when they mentioned "AMD HD3D technology" that it was their own 3D tech, hence why I was surprised :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vardant
No delay.
2 weeks to go.