Yeah and I want to get High end cards for $200!Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
But really, $350 for a high end card is way too low. Spend some more.
Printable View
Yeah and I want to get High end cards for $200!Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
But really, $350 for a high end card is way too low. Spend some more.
so i forget about 9800gtx and wait for hd4870?
definitely imo, if anything, if the 4870 doesn't perform like you want, the g92 8800gts is available for like $170 from ECS, just buy 2 and sli them for 9800gx2 performance
And if the new value is 350$? Killer perfomance, but it's not marketed as high-end. Will you buy it? :rofl::rofl::rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
... :hm:
You're right, but still a 500$ vga won't do great in crysis. i was lucky last year that i couldnt have cash to buy 8800gts 320gb and bought 8600gt. i tought it was a killer card and its priced at 400$ in that time. But now it's bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: in crysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
That's why i don't want to buy just a high end card i want something can handle the 2009 games at least for medium settings. so it's really confusing but i have feeling that the prices will be awesome which will be acceptable for poor people like me :yepp:
I Wanna laugh but i can't :down:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
you can try again later
Don't worry, the one that is laughing is me :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
I will laugh when I buy better vga card than yours :up: and it should be a mid-range but performs better than a high-end :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
Here is some more info, this time from the E n C of Nordic Hardware
As always take it with a pinch of salt. "Which adds flavor in most foods" LOL I kid, I kid...Quote:
asic name: rv770
revision: a12
board no.: 102-B50102-00
engine clk: 625mhz
memory manufacturer: qimonda
memory type: gddr3
memory config: 16Mx32
memory no.: HYB18H512321BF-10
memory clk: 990mhz
vddc (core voltage): 1.13v
mvddc/q (memory voltage): 2.03v
tdp: 114w
performance rv670xt +80%
+80% over the 3870 would be amazing...
I just noticed, you have a 8600GT. Now I understand. That's VERY frustrating :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
Please don't think that 8600GT of yours is mid-range because NVIDIA says so. Any of the real mid-range cards would completely destroy that POS.
my laptop has one :D
what do people think will i be able to run a 4870 with a 2900 in CFX?
8600 aws mid range back in 2006 or so. Byt hey, we are in 2008! Just like GeForce 9600 is mid range now, but not in 2010. ;)
sourceQuote:
We said we wouldn't reveal the final core clocks, sources told us not to, and we haven't, but since the core clock of Radeon HD 4850 core clock leaked elsewhere we though we might share the rest too. Radeon HD 4850 will sport a core clock of 625MHz and GDDR3 memory operating at 2GHz. Radeon HD 4870 has a core clock of 725MHz and GDDR5 memory running at 3.92GHz. Both cards have 256-bit bus memory, but thanks to the high frequency of GDDR5, the bandwidth is identical to that of 2GHz GDDR3 over a 512-bit bus.
Last we heard, RV770 has 480 shader processors, not 800, but there are also some stories going around that there might be some substance to the rumors of RV770 having 800 shader processors. Only 480 of them would be for the graphics though, while the remaining 320 is for physics. We can't confirm this so take it with a pinch of salt.
4850 625/2000
4870 725/3920
96v5 shaders = 480SP ??
We will see soon enough...
What? G80 was launched in November 2006 and R600 in May 2007 if I remember correctly. The so called mid-range cards of the new unified architecture from both ATI and NV were pure crap since the very beggining, I'm talking about HD2600 and 8600GT/GTS. In most of the cases worse perfomance than their predecessors. Don't you remember all those noobs buying 8600GT and HD2600XT to replace their 7600GT or 1950PRO because of marketing and/or DX10 and then realizing what a stupidity they did?Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Final specifications?
http://www.hardware-infos.com/news.php?news=2075
HD 4870 w/ 1 TFlop. :up:
The specifications of the HD4870 looks excellent except the memory interface which is 256bit. In addition, the price is good 349$Quote:
Originally Posted by Tienar
The specifications just look very, very wrong.
But not wrong when comparing to 9800gtx' specs & priceQuote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
Why ?Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
4hgz memory on the 4870.... sign me up for two
Because i say so! :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by whocaresbg
9600s aren't so bad(overrated parts IMO but still not too bad)Quote:
Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR
AMD start is 180$ to 250$ or even 300$Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
nvidia is about 350$ to 500$.
AMD's GX2 is going to be 400-450$ ;)
regardsQuote:
RV770XT fan gets pictured [FUD]
Dimensions, as well
The RV770XT and RV770PRO cards will have different coolers. This doesn’t come as a real surprise and it looks like the RV770XT will have a dual slot cooler and the RV770PRO cooler is significantly smaller, and the card is likely to be single slot.
What we can confirm now is that the RV770XT card cooler will have a 1.25 inch diameter, at least this is the diameter of the fan hole. The fan itself will add some more size to the whole fan component of the cooler, 1.25 inches translates to 3.175 cm.
The cooler will be 9.218 cm (3.629 inches) tall and the length from the front bracket to the center of the fan is 17.345 cm (6.828 inches). The whole fan itself will be a bit bigger than 20 cm and the card will be even bigger, but we don't have the right measurements.
We scored a picture of a fan with the new logo inside.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2...70xtfanvb5.jpg
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...=7388&Itemid=1
You do realize that 256-bit at 4Ghz memory (GDDR5) is the same as a 512-bit bus at 2GHz memory (GDDR3)? That's more than enough..Quote:
Originally Posted by ihatbs
these info dribbles are pretty amusing.
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/2...70xtfanvb5.jpg
I wonder if AMD will announce an USB version of the 4870.
http://www.visiontek.com/images/3870x4.jpg
link
:p:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
:p::p::p::p::p::p:
Source; http://www.hardware-infos.com/news.php?news=2075
translated page; http://translate.google.com/translat...F8&sl=de&tl=en
Hmmm... same rumored specs from over a month ago?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
they might be the same rumored ones but atleast now there's some backbone to the source. These specs look real, what I'd like to know is what type of architecture they use. It can't be the exact same as the r600
Separate shader domain?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
Clockspeeds?
TDP?
Possible but not very confirmed IMO.
Well the core clock speed matches the ES that w0mbat mentioned on B3d
TDP is possible - they're on the premium 55nm process from TSMC which is supposed to be better than the one used on the RV670 and should help TDP - and those clocks on the RV770PRO would certainly lead to lower TDP's
Separate clock domains aren't out of the question either. Although there isn't proof this is authentic, the math at least adds up, which is much better than what other sources have rumored so far
"The RV770 Pro GDDR5 has been dissolved due to internal competition."Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
there was a HD-4850 with GDDR5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FischOderAal
internal competition?
yes, too many similar product lines are bad for a business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin_Unknown
One product will steal sales of another from the same comapany
HD4850 GDDR5 running as fast the HD4850 GDDR3 or the HD4870...Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin_Unknown
look's like the finnal spec.
Isnt the final spec, cause its fake.Quote:
Originally Posted by madcho
I know you know more, but this looks like a really good fake if true.Quote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
So, tell us the truth :DQuote:
Originally Posted by w0mbat
prolly smth about the clocks not being final
lower clock speeds, but optimized shaders?
More unofficial benches OC Workbench
http://my.ocworkbench.com/bbs/attach...1&d=1211041890Quote:
In 3DMARK06, Radeon HD 4870 will be 32% faster than 8800GT, 22% faster than 9800GTX and 12% faster than 4850.
LOL @ beautiful graph!
Those aren't benches. And last I checked there was more than a 10% difference in performance between the 8800GT and 9800GTX. ;)
Ugh for the last time guys, read or at least look through the thread before posting the same useless graphs/links. Besides, that's a performance ESTIMATION chart, not an actual result
Thx, and why should we read through 33 pages of posts when you can clarify this for us in a single post.. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
?!?!?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoasthandle
What is with the 2X increase in Mem speeds between 4850 and 4870 0_0 !!!! :confused::confused::confused::eek::eek::eek::eek: :eek:
Perkam
Unlike GDDR4, GDDR5 actually improves memory speed A LOT. As in, GDDR3's 2000 effective is GDDR5's base...
Not only the fight between the GT200 and the RV770 (we reported) is interesting. We could bring out some information about the coming RV730. What sounds very interesting is the the 256Bit memory interface. In the high end area nothing special, but for the middle class the newest sensation.
The 600 MHz and the 500 MHz core clock is for us a little to less, propably the values are from a engineer sample or AMD think they can win some performance with the higher memory bandwith.
We can not garantee that these are the final specifications!
source; http://www.ati-forum.de/general/news...pecs/?29c56f82
Wowser 512mb on the RV730?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
R870 is 40nm with 2000sp?
http://www.pczilla.net/en/post/16.html
:yepp:
256-bit is a giveaway...Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeywoman
//Andreas
so andreas any idea why they went with 256 bit with the midrange last generation but are giving 256 to even the lower end this generation?
"We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA."
http://www.pczilla.net/en/post/12.html
Any input on this? BS?
If they are relasing R700 in few months and not now, I'd suppose it has some problems. Drivers, design problems or anything else. Though I am not surprised at all if GT200 beats R700.
Economics and GDDR5.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
Last gfx card based off R600 architecture, Then I'll wait for R900, which will again bring the glory of ATI premium graphics:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by mao5
Afraid that ATI will be dead and gone if they don't come up with something really good very soon. If the Nvidia 280/260 is as powerful as rumoured, ATI is in big trouble. Only thing make them stay in business now is fanboyism and the fact that ATI got a free ride with Intel - Intel chipsets rock (and have CF support) and Nvidia chipsets (680/780/790) suck donkey balls...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuker_
ps. apart from that ATI graphics is a lot better in BF2 which is the one and only game I play...
InfernolQuote:
Originally Posted by Origin_Unknown
Rob Halford,
Actually...
Performance of high-end parts means absolutely nothing for the GPU-companies for what comes to economics.
Attachment 79044
Revenue != Profit. A 8800GT and a 9800GTX basicly cost the same to make. Yet nVidia is scoring quite alot more money on the later in profit. If it wasnt worth it X2 and GX2 and GTX was dead now.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
OH NOES!!!!
HD 4000 series will get GDDR5 Qimonda memory :shocked::down:
Source
Shintai,
Dunno what you're going on about - ofcourse the profit from single 9800GTX is greater than of a 8800GT. But you can be sure that the sales volume of 9800GTX (~$300) is totally insignificant compared to 8800GT/S ($175-200) thus the latter brings more profit in the end of the day. Unless you can post some numbers...
Selling G200s @ $500 (or w/e) will be very, very bad business for nV... On the other hand, HD4870 will retail at much lower price thus more people will buy it. Volume is what matters.
So you think that the one who holds the PERFORMANCE crown is the winner? You think that the one who has the FASTEST card will win? Not at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Halford
Actually, again, ATI vs. Nvidia isn't same as AMD vs. Intel. ATI can actually deliver competitive products in the same price range. They might not hold the FASTEST card, but hey, how many people actually BOUGHT the GX2/X2 SLI/CF system? Aye, 10. How many bought 8800 GT/HD3850? Aye, 10,000. :rolleyes:
There is a crossover point. The issue is not mainstream would generate more. But to say enthutiast aint highly profitable is wrong. AMD would want to be there aswell, but they cant really.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
A 8800GT is more like 150-180$ and the 9800GTX 290$.
Asume the production price is about equal. Maybe add 10$. Then it depends what nVidia earns on a 8800GT. If the GT gives 10$ profit and the GTX 120$ profit you would quickly need a alot higher revenue. For Intel the 1499$ chip cost the exact same to make as the 266$ chip. Enthutiast part of the game is basicly like milking a golden cow. Its free more or less with extremely high profit.
Oh, and the ATI part still doesnt make any profit.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...4&d=1211372607
$150-249 :up:
QFT :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
And to repeat some old info. nVidia didn't make much profit per card on the 8800gt. They tried to sell those card @ ATI price levels while RV670 cards where so much less expensive to produce (almost 50% smaller die size).
They sell more cards than AMD. And nVidias financial figures shows otherwise :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
Another example btw. 9800GX2. Now thats a heavy profit card. Maybe as much as 250$ or more profit per card.
Ok, i'm a bit confused now :p: What do you mean? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
what figures?Quote:
And nVidias financial figures shows otherwise
where?Quote:
shows
AMD(ATI) losing money and nVidia is basicly shovelling in truckloads of money in profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by ownage
must be all those gx2's they selling :p:;Quote:
AMD(ATI) losing money and nVidia is basicly shovelling in truckloads of money in profit.
no, but i think it's because nvidia trumps 3xxx series. in mainstream & performance segments mainly.
and 4xxx will probly be trumped by nv also, boring as that is. spose ati will cash in on 4xxx for a while.
but amd making a loss could be good for that company as they can right off losses against tax :lol: - it's actually a machiavellian plot to avoid paying taxes :nuts: amd makes heaps of revenue, and mysteriously their running costs still show large losses. AMD is actually a non-profit organisation and im sure there are plenty of tax exemptions that way :rolleyes:
im not trolling, but the amd financial situation is rather bizarre to me :confused: pardon me if this has been explained before :shrug:
there is profit sure, but there is bread and butter revenue from a customer base. no customers = no revenue OR profit. AMD has a lot of revenue, but the profit loss situation is ..............? in the fickle hands of the customers ultimately.
i spose amd want to turn a profit, but somehow i think it will be in the mainstream and performance segments rather than the high end, that can achieve this. the fact that nv invariably trumps any high end offering that amd brings forth doesnt help amdati
i havent seen discrete gcard sales figures from amd or nvidia, so i dont know what im talking about really :p
Well in short. After all investment etc. nVidia makes about 500million in cash profit a year. ATI makes about 30million in loss. nVidia is even having a bigger quarter revenue than ATIs yearly.Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
nVidia uses 1billion in R&D. Thats almost ATIs entire revenue.
but total revenues for each company in the discrete gcard market is...?
i'll take a guess then that nvidia's revenues/turnover of units is much higher than amdati's, but i havent seen any figures of total revenues for nvidia , but how does it break down ...like there are chipsets, discrete gcards, the cpu side of amd, etc.Quote:
nVidia uses 1billion in R&D. Thats almost ATIs entire revenue.
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ:NVDA
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AMD
AMD:
2007 total revenue: 6.013billionQuote:
Total Revenue 1,505.00 6,013.00 5,649.00
Gross Profit 628.00 2,262.00 2,793.00
Operating Income -264.00 -2,865.00 -47.00
Net Income -358.00 -3,379.00 -166.00
2007 net income: -3.379billion :lol::confused:
NVIDIA:
2007 total revenue: 3.068billionQuote:
Total Revenue 1,153.39 4,097.86 3,068.77
Gross Profit 514.84 1,869.28 1,300.45
Operating Income 202.98 836.35 453.45
Net Income 176.81 797.64 448.83
2007 net income: 0.448billion :lol::confused:
wtf?
do amd losses go into gold plated rolls royces for all empoyees or something? wtf?
and yet the figures show that amd had twice the total revenues vs amd in 2007:rolleyes:
Sounds quite interesting. May I ask a source?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Hello Perkam, i will explain you.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
The 4870 is one of the highest models. Because of that it has en memory clock of 3920mhz.
The 4450 is a lower model, therefor it is a bit slower. Thus having 2000mhz memory clock.
Not convinced yet?
Check out these differences!
4870
4750
:rofl:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix....&p=irol-IRHomeQuote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/I...06_643,00.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
well if you comapre cpu+gpu business of amd to the gpu business of nv alone, no wonder that amd has a bigger revenue.
yeah, still no idea how graphics/chipsets amdati compare to nvidia for total revenues.
nor why or where all amd's money goes...ie expenses ie expensive ie not profitable, whether cpu or graphics or both.
ie they must have a very large overdraft facility :lol: or other creative accounting methods.
because 6 billion in revenues is a lot of $$, and i would surmise that there are some fat cats getting very rich in the amd camp. despite the creative financial statements.
Financial analysis takes more than quoting a few numbers m8.Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
Not to mention, you should be applauding ATI for being able to compete with Nvidia on the same level, despite having revenues 1/3rd the size of Nvidia's.
Perkam
took me 1 min to find:Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
year end 2007:
Graphics
Net revenue: 903 Million$
Operating income (loss): (100) Million$
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...Financials.pdf
1st Quarter 2008:
Graphics
Net revenue: 203 Million$
Operating income (loss): (11) Million$
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...Financials.pdf
Somewhere on XS someone linked to pdf files of the financials to show that ATI is still losing money & nVidia is making it by the shedload. Search is your friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by adamsleath
I don't think we will see 256-bit with lower-end cards. They don't need the bandwidth.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
GDDR5 is a bit extreme for low-end, don't you think ? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
//Andreas
I was thinking GDDR5/256bit for highend vs a 512bit/GDDR3-4.Quote:
Originally Posted by NH|Delph1
Then I completely agree with you, makes no sense using 512-bit and GDDR5 :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
//Andreas
3 weeks to go and no solid info?
Great job hiding the cards.:shrug:
Isn't the rv730 low end? Or is that the rv710, in which case, what is the rv740?Quote:
Originally Posted by NH|Delph1
What a coincidence. BF2 is the game I play the most too. Games like bioshock come and go but BF2 stays.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Halford
basically anything that uses the valve engine (which I belive BF2 does since its a steam game) runs extremely nicely with ati cards, which will also help them out.
But the way I see it, gt 200 is designed if anything to scare intel, which I bet it will until larabee comes out and even still larabee won't be able to compete with ati and nvidia's high end no matter how big intel's R&D fund is. The first generation is always generally a test to see how well certain aspects work, in the case of g80 and core 2, both performed above and beyond expectations, while the r600 and k10 while very modular, did not perform up to their expectations. I wouldn't be surprised to see a second/third generation larabee that can out perform the gtx 280 though.
So in short, gtx 280 will spank the rv770, but the rv770 was never meant to compete with it anyways. What'll be key is how well the MCM design works out for the r700 and how well the card scales (hopefully they won't need that bridge chip anymore as that definitely added costs and heat to the 3870x2)
wrong, BF2 uses a custom game engien made by dice.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
Distribution over steam dosen't means that it uses the source engien.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
No the BF2 engine is designed and programmed by the "engineers" at DICE IIRC. The engine features ugly looking bump maps and large environments. On the contrary, the Valve source enigine features nice looking bump/normal maps but tiny, tiny little low-poly environments
I wonder how larrabee will fare against nvidias/atis offerings at the time of release!
At best, they'll offer a good "performance" competitor imo, but that's just my opinion. Intel has far more capital to put towards R&D than either ati or nvidia, but I'm not sure how much good it will do for them to design an x86 gpu
I think larrabee will be worse at raster rendering than the competitors offerings, but when ray tracing finally becomes available in games it will kick ass.
Even tho thats highly likely. Remember Intel can use its own foundries and design the chip and process to the max performance. Plus a lead. Imagine Larabee on a High-K metal 45nm process today. Inferiour product on a better process can change the tide.Quote:
Originally Posted by AliG
I like how I give XS a crash course in ACC and now everyone is a pro...
fixed, play EP2 and call it again tiny tiny. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuker_
thx for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
for 2007, out of $2.262 billion gross margin AMD spent $1.847 billion on R&D
& graphics accounts for less than 1/6th (@0.903bn) amd total revenue for 2007...compared to nvidia's 3+billion...
so that's nv total revenue 3X amd graphics rev.
which could translate (on a per $ basis) into for every 3 nvidia cards sold, 1 ati card is sold :D, more or less.
Quote:
AMD official press release on employing GDDR5
AMD (NYSE:AMD - News) today announced the first commercial implementation of Graphics Double Data Rate, version 5 (GDDR5) memory in its forthcoming next generation of ATI Radeon™ graphics card products. The high-speed, high-bandwidth GDDR5 technology is expected to become the new memory standard in the industry, and that same performance and bandwidth is a key enabler of The Ultimate Visual Experience™, unlocking new GPU capabilities. AMD is working with a number of leading memory providers, including Samsung, Hynix and Qimonda, to bring GDDR5 to market.
Today’s GPU performance is limited by the rate at which data can be moved on and off the graphics chip, which in turn is limited by the memory interface width and die size. The higher data rates supported by GDDR5 – up to 5x that of GDDR3 and 4x that of GDDR4 – enable more bandwidth over a narrower memory interface, which can translate into superior performance delivered from smaller, more cost-effective chips.1 AMD’s senior engineers worked closely with industry standards body JEDEC in developing the new memory technology and defining the GDDR5 spec.
“The days of monolithic mega-chips are gone. Being first to market with GDDR in our next-generation architecture, AMD is able to deliver incredible performance using more cost-effective GPUs,” said Rick Bergman, Senior Vice President and General Manager, Graphics Product Group, AMD. “AMD believes that GDDR5 is the optimal way to drive performance gains while being mindful of power consumption. We’re excited about the potential GDDR5 brings to the table for innovative game development and even more exciting game play.”
The introduction of GDDR5-based GPU offerings marks the continued tradition of technology leadership in graphics for AMD. Most recently, AMD has been first to bring a unified shader architecture to market, the first to support Microsoft DirectX® 10.1 gaming, first to lower process nodes like 55nm, the first with integrated HDMI with audio, and the first with double-precision floating point calculation support.
AMD expects that PC graphics will benefit from the increase in memory bandwidth for a variety of intensive applications. PC gamers will have the potential to play at high resolutions and image quality settings, with superb overall gaming performance. PC applications will have the potential to benefit from fast load times, with superior responsiveness and multi-tasking.
“Qimonda has worked closely with AMD to ensure that GDDR5 is available in volume to best support AMD’s next-generation graphics products,” said Thomas Seifert, Chief Operating Officer of Qimonda AG. “Qimonda’s ability to quickly ramp production is a further milestone in our successful GDDR5 roadmap and underlines our predominant position as innovator and leader in the graphics DRAM market.”
GDDR5 for Stream Processing
In addition to the potential for improved gaming and PC application performance, GDDR5 also holds a number of benefits for stream processing, where GPUs are applied to address complex, massively parallel calculations. Such calculations are prevalent in high-performance computing, financial and academic segments among others. AMD expects that the increased bandwidth of GDDR5 will greatly benefit certain classes of stream computations.
New error detection mechanisms in GDDR5 can also help increase the accuracy of calculations by indentifying errors and re-issuing commands to get valid data. This capability is a level of reliability not available with other GDDR-based memory solutions today.
http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=278539
Quote:
Quote:
'Final' Radeon HD 4800-series specs, launch details leak out
German website Hardware-Infos has obtained (translation here) what looks like an official document with "final" specifications, pricing information, and launch details for AMD's next-generation Radeon HD 4800-series graphics cards. This information echoes the June 18 launch date we heard last week, but it says both the 4850 and the 4870 will come out on the same day.
The Radeon HD 4850 will apparently feature 480 stream processors, a 625MHz core speed, an 825MHz shader speed, 512MB of 1143MHz GDDR3 memory, and a 114W thermal envelope. The faster Radeon HD 4870 will also have 480 SPs, but with an 850MHz core speed, 1050MHz shader speed, 1GB of 1935MHz (3870MHz "effective") GDDR5 RAM, and a 157W TDP. Both cards will also feature 256-bit memory buses and 16 raster operators, just like existing Radeon HD 3800-series models, but with twice as many texture mapping units (32 instead of 16).
Hardware-Infos says the Radeon HD 4850 will launch at $249 and the Radeon HD 4870 will be $349. If recently leaked performance numbers are accurate, the 4850 may be in the same playing field as Nvidia's ~$300 GeForce 9800 GTX.
http://www.techreport.com/discussions.x/14763
regards
Not quite true... The Pentium D on 65nm didn't surpass a 90nm A64 x2. The Prescott didn't surpass the 130nm A64's either. Nor did the R600 surpass the G80. We also saw what happened with the RV670 vs G92.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Process can help you do more in a single chip, or lower power consumption, but it doesn't make for a better chip in all cases. Besides, by the time we see larabee, we'll see both ATi and NVidia on smaller processes than they presently are, and intel have stated larabee will be 10x the performance of their best IGP, which would only align it with the G80...