Source?
Printable View
pressevent is like 14 oct or so, so that with availibility is 2 weeks away, and first likely is a limited number of cards with a lot more in November.
havent seen any offical info otherwise.
if they had postponed anything I bet we see a release from amd.
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showp...&postcount=621
yo boy look here and read :Quote:
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
This means that AMD HD 6000 will launch next-generation in October 12, but There something happened (We do not know about it) in the time launch. so they delayed to November ..... so What is funny about this ??:rolleyes:Quote:
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....
OOOOOOOOMG :eek:Quote:
the release date was never known
Radeon HD 6000 launch in late October
AMD to launch Radeon HD 6000 Series, "Southern Islands" on October 14, 2010
Radeon HD 6000-series 'Barts Pro' card to launch on October 18?
Speaking from of a user perspective
I wish both sides would delay the new offerings....what we need newer cards for?
Maybe its time to let the games/apps catch up?
WE dont need new ati cards that brown screen at every chance they can + around chrismas time would not be too late IMO.
Unless they just want a leg up on nv?
Of course they push their tech to the consumers as quickly as possible, to get more sales and to get more market share. And to widen their lead over Nvidia. More money for them, better cards for consumers. Everyone is happy. Except Nvidia, but they baked their own cake.
What could be the reason of this supposed delay? To build stock and try to prevent shortage? To launch HD67xx and HD68xx at the same time?
Barts was supposed to be HD67xx, and launch later half of October, followed by HD68xx in November. Could this be just some misunderstanding related to Barts being HD67xx or HD68xx? This is just like with HD4xxx, 480 SP or 800 SP, AMD is fooling the leaks with their slides.
So the older get cheaper.Quote:
what we need newer cards for?
For almost a year there was no competition, and prices WENT UP instead gradually going down.
Competition is great, GTX 460 768 costs almost the same as HD5770 in my country now, at last there is pricing movement.
ATIs new 6xxx models will make things even more cheaper on the whole.This time tho im buying right after the premiere :P.Waiting with 5xxx series got me nowhere.
having a month / 2 months old card, with 1 or 2 driver updates after release on shelves by Xmas is not a bad idea imho, in a marketting point of view.
And i might say that as a user i look forward to this new offer either to buy it or use the benefit of a price drop on 4x0 series.
my 4870x2 is getting old ^^
NordicHardware.se Google Trad
http://tof.canardpc.com/view/3332223...fca052b9b5.jpg
Hope that's not right ...
Correct : A little mistake from NH, HD5770 has 128-bit memory bus
Why not? If they fill the gap with 6850 and 6870 instead of 6830 and introduce additionally a wider 6900 series then it all makes sense.
Remember that Nvidia was targeting especially the weakest link (5830) and now AMD is introducing a richer product portfolio in that price range along with 69xx.
Why wouldn't it make sense? Who says that there isn't going to be faster chips in 69xx? It is about naming. If Barts is smaller than Cypress and much cheaper to produce, and AMD doesn't consider Nvidia a threat, then it makes PERFECT sense. They can sell loads of those chips for bargain prices, effectively cutting Nvidia out from the market with GTX 460 etc., unless Nvidia manages to do real wonders with GF110.
Besides, wasn't there a rumour that Barts/Cayman was pin-compatible with Cypress? So the HD5xxx and HD6xxx cards could use the same PCBs and cooling solutions etc. Which would bring down the manufacturing costs even more -> Cheap cards.
Nope. The performance of Barts or its efficiency (power) doesn't increase just because it has a bigger brother. Still, I'm not buying the whole "Barts is 6800-series", it will be too tight to squeeze in Cayman Pro/XT and Antilles (Pro/)XT in the 6900-series, at least if there is such a thing as Antilles Pro. That would make Cayman Pro the 6930 which sounds a bit lame to me.
On OBR's blog :
Quote:
- No manufacturer (I asked three) Radeon HD 6800 has the roadmap regonální allocation to stocks (obviously not made enough cards for the final launch) until November, entry (hard launch) is said to be deferred until the first week of November (review in October )
- Listed are also two cards the Radeon HD 68x0
- No new card, designated HD 6700 there ...
- The performance matches the name cards, do not worry ...as the successor to HD 5850/5870 performance with all the trimmings
- Life does not end Radeon HD 5000 will still be available as an addition to the portfolio next year, but will probably change their name and price:)
http://translate.google.com/translat...radeon-hd-6800
Well according to sweclockers the previous slide (900MHz core clock) are fake and this above would be correct with 850MHz and 960 SPs... With so many sources talking about 850MHz, 960 SPs etc it seems highly likely that this is more believable than the above big slide from chiphell.
Yea I agree it seems a bit strange, but we don't know about the performance for starters, could be the 4D shader array or perhaps other unknown changes could actually help a lot... but with those specs I have a hard time believing it would be faster than HD5850 for sure but then it doesn't make sense at all that it would draw more power either. NO company would be stupid to release such product. :D
Maybe HD6850 is on on par with HD5850 DX9/DX10 performance but with better DX11 support ? Idem for HD6870 and HD5870 :shrug:
I don't see HD6850 to be worst than HD5830 really ... To compete GTX 460 products, AMD needs a card that performs like HD5850 for less money IMHO
It's only stupid because of the naming really
If AMD released:
6750=> 110-120 watts(much less than 5830), same performance as 5830 - 140-160$
6770=> 150 watts, same performance as 5850 - 200-220$
Everyone would be joying.
It's the naming that makes it all seem wrong and lame.
Yes and no. If the 6870 is a slightly faster 5850 with no improvements in power efficiency and higher price then it's a really stupid move. But I don't think the guys over at AMD are that dumb. But I agree, what AMD "needs" is a GTX460-killer which they already have really - just price the 5850 a bit more aggressive and there you have it.
Also I think the X7XX-cards have a very good reputation as being cheap, effective and with good performance. This is what Barts seems to be aiming at too so it would make sense to name it that way.
early drivers also, expect a 20% increase over time.
then the naming scheme as far we know fits and works.
It all depends on how improved the shader efficiency and tess engine is really... if it is much better at DX11 than the 5xxx's, it can perform faster overall
Bear in mind that the architectural changes on the chips design have been set in stone way before AMD even heard about GTX 460. Though, it's easy to disable SPs for better yields and product differentiation, if it becomes necessary.
I think this is entirely about AMD rebranding their line to make more money.
Midrange cards being up priced one more tier and they are changing the 6770 to the 6870 series to justify what may be a 100 dollar price increase. I can see the 6870 being priced at $259-299 and people thinking its a good deal because the naming indicates better performance than the last generation but at the same time the pricing is lower and they think they are getting a better value. This allows cayman pro and xt to be priced at 399 and 499 respectively.
This allows AMD to increase its margins and will help them make big money for once. I can imagine AMD felt they price their last series too low and hence the card selling more than MSRP, so they want to raise the price of their whole lineup.
A little better translation.
Quote:
No manufacturer (I asked three of them) has Radeons HD 6800 in their roadmap, they are not going to be available until November (probably not enough cards has been made for the launch), actual launch has been probably delayed until early November (reviews in October)
- Two cards will be launched simultaneously - Radeon HD 68x0
- No cards with the HD 6700 moniker exist
- Performance matches their name, no need to worry, they are the performance successors of HD 5850/70
- Radeons HD 5000 will still be sold, they're going to cover the rest of the portfolio until the end of the year, what's probably going to change are their names and prices
- Many things have changed in the architecture, 3D features, new capabilities when it comes to video coding and handling the output (picture) not sure what the last part is about
- Some slides, that we've seen pop-up on the internet, even though photoshopped, show the whole picture, but you need to combine them and I'm not revealing which and what exactly
PS. I'm gonna show you blurred picture of the card tomorrow (it's from another presentation, which I've just got)
Please don't talk about this again.
Single card performance increases are VERY RARE in ATI's drivers. Their performance additions usually concentrate upon dual card / GPU setups.
People always expect magic to happen with driver revisions but for existing games, that almost never happens.
These reviews show something different.
Single card performance increases are VERY RARE in Nvidia's drivers..
Fixed the bias. We're even now. :)
link
really?:)
psssst - dont tell anyone! this one is real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111
Last official word I heard was the press event is still on for Oct 12 and with a hard launch on the 18th. Barts has had a little more than 2 months of mass production to get more than enough availability, especially since they pulled the launch UP from the 25th.
Cayman is still expected to launch in mid-late Nov.
Update for you:
NordicHardware
Tables and pictures in the source.Quote:
After weeks of speculations and false rumors we at NordicHardware have managed to dig up the most important details on AMD's new graphics card series, Radeon HD 6800. Targeting the mid-range segment AMD will launch Radeon HD 6850 and HD 6870 on October 18th.
Back in August we could confirm that AMD would stir things up by naming the mid-range series Radeon HD 6800. The GPU "Barts" is the successor to Juniper GPU of the Radeon HD 5700 series, but it is being moved up a notch. The list of specifications that was leaked at several sites last week said that Barts would launch as Radeon HD 6700, which made us wonder about the authenticity of the document. We have had it confirmed that our previous information on Barts and Radeon HD 6800 were correct, which we can now back up with detailed specifications and launch dates.
AMD Radeon HD 6850 (Barts Pro) and HD 6870 (Barts XT) will launch on October 18th (19th in some countries) and the new Northern Islands architecture is tuned and optimized for better performance per watt. We should not expect any revolutionary improvements over current models, but more on that soon.
<table>
Barts will bring at most 960 stream processors, which should be proof enough that this is a mid-range circuit, and not to play with the big boys. Little brother Radeon HD 6850 will settle for 800 stream processors and lower clock frequency, but AMD has also revised the texture units and efficiency of the stream processors, which makes the numbers a bit misleading when compared directly to previous generations.
Radeon HD 6870 will, according to reliable sources, perform better than today's Radeon HD 5850. Not to bad for a card that is intended to replace Radeon HD 5770, but at the same time makes the naming scheme a bit confusing.
Little brother Radeon HD 6850 will in turn be a bit slower than Radeon HD 5830, but consume a lot less power. This isn't all bad, but it will be confusing for buyers as the new mid-range model should outperform the lower ranked cards of the previous generation.
As we mentioned above, AMD has focused on performance/per watt with the new architecture. With the same 40nm technology it has refurnished and tweaked the Evergreen architecture and managed to find a lot of extra performance. The power consumption of Radeon HD 6850 will be well below 150 watt, around 120 watt according to our sources. While Radeon HD 6870 will be sucking well above 150 watt, which puts it on par with Radeon HD 5850, a card it should outperform with margin to spare.
The biggest reason AMD starts off the new family with Barts is the market focus. Radeon HD 6850 and HD 6870 has been trained to hunt down and kill NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460, the graphics card NVIDIA is building its volume sales upon. AMD has no strong competitor for GTX 460 today, but it hopes to change this with the Radeon HD 6800 series.
GeForce GTX 460 is also the reason for the confusing naming scheme. The GeForce GTX 400 series was built upon NVIDIA's GF100 GPU, but when NVIDIA launched GTX 460 with the stripped down GF104 GPU and still put it part of the GTX 400 series AMD saw no other solution but to follow and move up its mid-range cards in the hierarchy. On a positive note the coming Caymen series, to replace Radeon HD 5800 in the performance segment, will also move up the ladder to avoid any confusion within the own ranks.
<table>
AMD Radeon HD 6870 will according to sources to NordicHardware be a pure reference product that will be sold ready-to-ship from AMD to partners. In other words, packaging and stickers on the reference cooler will be the only difference at launch.
AMD Radeon HD 6850 on the other hand will be available in tailored suits from the major partners, which will hopefully result in some unorthodox solutions and cool third-party designs.
We don't have any concrete pricing to offer just yet, but considering AMD is countering GeForce GTX 460 they should appear in the $150-250 segment.
Enjoy.
//Andreas
how can perf per watt be better if its slightly better than a 5850, while consuming more power than a 5850?
so the name change is real? this doesn't make any sense, really.Code:AMD Radeon Evergreen 40nm (2009-2010) Northern Islands 40nm (2010-2011)
Mid-range Radeon HD 5700 (Juniper) Radeon HD 6800 (Barts)
Performance Radeon HD 5800 (Cypress) Radeon HD 6900 (Caymen)
High-end Radeon HD 5900 (Hemlock) Radeon HD 6990 (Antilles)
they have so many unused numbers from 1 to 5, why would they even think about shuffle the cards together at the very end of the range... i don't get it ;)
I believe that all the talk with efficiency improvements on NI have been about perf/mm˛ and NOT perf/W. 4+1 -> 4D transition supports this.
Well, for the third time, big fail from AMD's part with the naming. :down:
I don't see any benefits from the name change once you factor in then inevitable backlash from the core community. I'd rather they skipped to a whole new system vs reworking the current.
Bull shyte.
Yes, there are some performance increases that come along every now and then through driver changes but most of these are for games which weren't released yet when the original release drivers were used. Naturally, driver teams can't build in optimizations for games that haven't been released yet which is why there are sometimes large performance jumps soon after a game is released. But in my experience, most of the EXISTING games very rarely see performance bumps through subsequent drivers unless there was something wrong to begin with.
Many performance increases have NEXT TO NOTHING to do with drivers and EVERYTHING to do with the game engine undergoing SIGNIFICANT efficiency changes through patches. Dirt 2 & AVP:
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im...NCHMARK-13.jpg
http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/im...NCHMARK-14.jpg
a minimum spike could have been a fluke due to hard drive cache. thats why i would rather see a fps line chart like HardOCP does when comparing very little changes that are practically apples to apples.
20% figure as an average is impossible. Its closed to possible with a brand new architecture. Something like 50% only occurs when their are issues to begin with. Fermi is performing somewhere around 8% better and it is a brand spanking new architecture.
When techpower tested between launch drivers and 10.4 catalyst(the one that almost got wizzard to quit). There was only a 2 percent improvement. A complete average 20% is pretty much crazy impossible. I was saying 20% improvement with drivers for the GTX 480, and people were saying that was too high. I agree now, even with a new architecture, its hard to get that much of an improvement.
Considering that this architecture is all about making the cypress and older architecture and is heavily based on it, it should be really efficient from the get go.
Where did you get this 50% figure from, I would like to see it. I have never heard of such improvements outside crossfire or a freaky issue or a flaw which decreases image quality.
Or they pass on a good deal on a 5870 or 5850. Such a crappy naming scheme also really hurts the reselling of used cards. A $259 dollar 6870, makes it look like a 5870 has to be priced around 150 or so to be priced properly, even though it is the faster card.
If they think scheduling
Even that is high IMO. NVIDIA may have packed some increases into their latest driver stack but very few (if any) of them were geared towards the higher end cards. There were some issues with the GTX 460 performance which they addressed but otherwise, things once again stayed pretty much par for the course across the board.
I have yet to see a single driver release from NVIDIA OR ATI bring across-the-board, measurable improvements. The latest one from NVIDIA targeted 1920 / 4x AA performance on the GTX 460 which was admitedly lacking to begin with. The same goes for ATI's Catalyst App Profiles; they usually target very specific categories since overall performance was good to begin with.
20% across the board improvement to performance through drivers for existing games? No way. 20% in games that WEREN'T released when the architecture came out? It's possible.
I'll be alright with Barts being 6870 if Barts outperforms cypress. If it doesen't I'll be completely not-ok with it, and I will call them out. If Barts is slower in dx10/faster in dx11, I'll just be mildly disgruntled.
In any case, I hate the confusion that this barts-6870 rumour is causing. Makes it confusing not knowing what someone means when they say 6870. I'll be very pissed at NH and the other sites on board with the rumour if it turns out false.
IF the clocks and SP counts are correct for Barts,AMD succeeded in "milking out" around 25% increase in performance per SP vs Evergreen line(normalized clock Vs 5850).This is very good achievement and if Barts XT manages to beat 5850 then kudos to them.Looks like that Cayman will be ~1.5x faster than Cypress(1.25x IPC * 1.2x SP increase) ,if it is 1920SP or 2xBarts. Many "ifs" so far :D
Why? Because some of the features specifies a "tessellation unit" in singular?
I very much doubt that AMD didn't improve tessellation performance. I'm of the mind that the "leaked" benchmarks point to what we should see out of Cayman in regards to tessellation performance.
I don't think the problem is the tessellation unit but more than likely there is another bottleneck that they have addressed to improve the performance.
You are thinking short sighted.
If barts is named the 6870, the pricing of it has to be 259 most likely 299. No damn way will they allow the 6870 to be priced under 200 dollars. What does that do to cayman pro and cayman xt and why the name change to 69xx? It is to justify a higher price. Cayman will start at 399(it a substantially bigger chip and xt will probably hit 499-550. The naming scheme is all being changed to allow higher chip pricing.
If a 5770 was 1/4 the price of a 5970 and a 5870 was .66 the cost of a 5970. Look what it does to the pricing of antilles. Welcome to the 800 dollar graphics card.
Its really scary for the consumer because honestly, it been a while since such small chips(die size) were so expensive. Last time it happened, AMD and NV were doing some price fixing. Atleast with fermi, you know they have to sell it for so much because it is such a expensive chip to make because of size and yields. This could be really bad for the consumer as Nvidia takes a hit. In a worse case scenario, until Nvida responds, we have NV selling below cost to be competitive vs AMD raping us on chips, ala Athlon x2 vs core2 duo days.
Man, they will look at the performance of the competition and price the cards accordingly. Naming has nothing to do with it. Maybe $30 give or take, but just because they are named 6850 instead of 5750 doesnt mean theyl charge a :banana::banana::banana::banana:load more just because the name says so. If the 6870 is faster than the 5850, theyll price it at around 5850 levels I guess. If its slightly slower, no way will they charge a price higher than the 5850, let alone $299.
Yeah people will scream renaming, etc. But after what nv has done, this is nothing. Sure it still doesnt look too good, in fact its not good practice IMO, but if this helps them earn $$ let them earn it. They could have earned much more from the 5xxx if TSMC didnt muck it up so bad..
Nvm lets see how things pan out
Naming has everything to with pricing. Why would they bump everything up a tier? Just for kicks? If cayman is in the 69xx range, its to justify the higher price.
If these cards(barts) are named as the 68xx range, people will think they are the natural successor to 58xx range, and more willing to pay a higher price. Considering alot of people are still on 4xxx and gtx 2xx hardware. They might think this is a good deal, but they are getting the same price/performance as the generation of old.
AMD probably felt they priced their cards too low this round because their cards sold above MSRP and they want to collect that extra revenue rather than retailers. This raised pricing stops scalping because demand won't outstrip supply because of pricing.
Are you telling me you expect 6870 to outperform 5870? :eek: Not gonna happen. Cayman yes, Barts not very likely.
You haven't been around for long? 9800GTX? Willamette? And HD3870 was often slower than 2900 XT.
Besides, I don't think anyone says that 6xxx will be slower than 5xxx. What people is saying is that they are making some changes in the naming system, so a HD 6870 will be slower than a HD 5870, but, it's only because HD 6870 is the successor to HD 5770. The successor to HD 5870 is HD 6970, and that one will be faster.
I say we wait, cause only at the launch will reveal the final naming scheme. Although HD 5800 Series will probably get an EOL when the HD6000 Series launch, I think selling Barts as HD 6800 Series with roughly same performance as HD 5800 cards would be the worst marketing decision since nVIDIA rebranded the good ol' G92 trice.
I concur, so we should wait before we call it a naming shame. :rofl:
AMD had another bad quarter so maybe they try to squeeze a little extra with the inflated naming from the average gamer, but it could also very well be just part of the disinformation they release to cover the real facts.
1. since tseng labs
2. those weren't worse than what they replaced. anandtech: "On average, the Radeon HD 3870 gives us a 6 - 10% increase in performance over the more expensive, less featured, louder Radeon HD 2900 XT. Not bad for improvement over the course of 6 months."
3. that is exactly what he said, which is why I replied
The Willamette was actually a little faster, but only on code optimised for it, without SSE the P4 was very weak, alas it wasn't that much stronger with it. It only really found it's legs on Windows XP, which is why Intel have been more careful this time with AVX, they are making sure it's obviously faster, and the chip doesn't suffer when it's not used.
The 3870 vs 2900 doesn't count, X9X0 has been reserved for the highest end parts on the current naming regime, and ATI stopped making highest end single chips with the 2900. It's like saying that 6870 is slower than the 5970 and being upset about it.
9800GTX, no one can defend that... sorry.
Twice the triangle setup rate and two tesselation units vs. one. HD 5870 has faster memory access as those 5770s most of the time are accessing the same information at the same time.... at the same speed. And, ummm, even if the 5770 did magically double usable bandwidth you're looking at two 128-bit controllers using slower memory.
So, yeah, guess I'll just ignore that thing you said earlier about tesselation in 6xxx ;)
5000 series will be EOL in 5 months. There is no point in discussing it. What do so many SP's matter..? The stuff that constantly causes jitter in games is the thousands of textures being loaded and unloaded. Specially in MMORPG, or Guild Wars(2), etc..
A $159 AMD 6850 will be the defacto-standard for 24" gaming.
If price is right who cares the name ?
Well it won't happen if the floating around specs are correct at least, 960 SPs (60% less than 5870) and 850MHz core clock. Ofc there is the 4D shader array change and possibly other changes we don't know about yet but that there would be over say 35~40% increase in performance efficiency from internal changes I really have a hard time believing for Barts. I would be happy/satisfied if it can beat HD 5850 with such specs, that would be quite an accomplishment already with that amount SPs. :)
why?
any gamer playing at 1920x1080 or lower which is what 80% or so of gamers, dont need more powerful cards than that.
todays cards are enough for them.
so they buy a great performance card at the price range.
I look forward the 6900 series.
not confused by naming as it shows the low end is soon going away and the 200 level will be the decided cash cow.
Most buy those cards around there.
The 6800 series seems to fit there nicely.
That naming change just doesn't make any sense. It confused me for a minute, and I've seen generation after generation. Must be confusing for the average Joe....
So are they launching a new high end as well? Or just midrange cards?
When you put it that way, gamers don't need the HD 6000 series, nor half the current GTX 400 series at this point in time. ;)
Maybe the extra horsepower will come in handly when the Gen 2 DX11 games start getting released in H1 2011 but until then? Any additional performance is nothing more than window dressing which looks good in charts and not much else.
On the flip side of the coin, depending on the performance of these new cards, ATI could have the ability to put the screws to NVIDIA at the $175 - $250 price point.
my sisters kid still use a 8800gt.
a 4890 or similar is way good still.
dx11 with w7 and vista wont take off until Bf3 comes out and maybe some other game.
As developers scale the game to old hardware (sucky consols also), people really dont need more powerful hardware.
so if amd really wanted people to buy new cards they made sure some gamedeveloper made a dx11 cutting edge fun game people wanted to play and buy new hardware for.
I can build a budget system, for likely half the price or less with the same fps with old hardware as the new hardware dont bring much new to the table.
I use eyefinity, in any other case I wouldnt be upgrading my card.
I still use a 2 year old computer, 2 year?
sold my i7920 cpu to get a new i7950 but I dont get new performance.
some lower power and heat, but not by much.
The time has come for no return, people having a gtx460 dont need a new card, people having a 5800 series card dont need a new one, people having a 4800 series card likely dont need a new one.
I see a lot of people using old hardware, and have no incitiment buying new.
what does the new 6000 series bring us?
not much new.
For online gaming, it's usually better to overspec your card by one resolution bin.
IMO, video cards can't tread water like game development has been doing for the last four years. I'm actually quite happy that ATI is moving forward instead of saying "we have NVIDIA beat on perf per watt and could beat them clean on perf per $, so let's have a rest and wait for the Gen 2 DX11 games".
Regardless of the doom and gloom some people like to fling around, I am sure any upcoming series from ATI will be a step FORWARD rather than a step in the wrong direction. If AMD's graphics division has shown us anything it is that they have a great starting point for their refreshes as the HD 5000 series has for the most part been perfectly placed and timed. :up:
where did you get twice the triangle setup ?
one 5770 a stock is 13.6 gigapixel one 5870 at stock 27.2 Two 5770 are equal to one 5870.
The tessellation unit is the only advantage their.
A smaller memory bus isn't necessarily slower, because it's usually shorter then a bigger one.
i dont think it blurred enough, it looks like caymen starts with 4 on both the stream processors and the x4 in parenthesis. and 2 for RPEs
so RPE is AMD's GPC's.. it means twice triangle power twice tessellation power than previous 5xxx for barts..
I believe there is AMD obscure campaing going on. They release these "official" slides to different channels (that are known to leak) to blur the reality.
the 5000 series was really silent until their september showing. but it wasnt to hard to guess much, other than eyefinity
If this is true, it confirms my suspicion that Cayman isn't 2x Barts. See RPEs - it's pretty clear it says 1, 2 and 3 respectively. I guess that means Calisto has 160 SP's and Cayman 480 SP's, which kind of looks to be right. The TUs seem to scale like that as well, but ROPs for Cayman I'm not sure.
Then again, this must be leaked slide #755893, and doesn't even match AMD's usual style that well...
Depends on what game you're playing, obviously. Any FPS released in the last few years, yes. Same with RTS .. and MMOs as well. The point is that you want to be 60+ at all times, and it helps by having a card that will usually pump out 70, 80 average with chaotic situations dipping to 40 at the lowest.
yep. the sharpening filter in photoshop helps a little bit to guess the shape of the blurred numbers.
SPs look like either 400x4 (1600 total) or 480x4 (1920 total). the latter, 1920 SPs, fits the rumors we already heard. RPEs look more like a 3? can't get anything out of the ROPs and texture units though.
but what's the gpu name on the left?! 32 texture units and 14 ROPs are very well readable, and the name looks like it starts with an "C"? the only thing that'd fit from the codenames we know is Caicos - ...? :F
The texture unit count definitely don't scale with the SPs in those spec's.
1 RPE 32 TU 16 ROP 640 SP for Caicos?
2 RPE 64 TU 32 ROP 1280 SP for Barts. PRO or XT? Most likely XT?
3 RPE 96 TU 48 ROP 1920 SP for Cayman?
Does this make sense to people?
ha, time to trade up from my heavily OC'ed 5970