AMD HD6950/HD6970 1GB in a few weeks (the people's high end gpu)

[LordEC911]

Yea, Cayman based on a 32nm process was supposed to have 1920SPs, it has 1536, and still is in the spitting distance of the 580.
Many tend to forget the simplest of things, Cayman is 380mm2, GF110 is a 520mm2 monstrosity with wider bus.
AMD would have to pull a miracle to get faster.Some people were expecting a bigger die tho.

GF110 is ~550mm2...

[Sam_oslo]

Are you confusing that with a bunch of posts quoted from other forums that said the 6970 would beat the 580?

Why do you keep trying to flamebait the "AMD-fans"? Can't you exhibit a little of that much vaunted impartiality you keep preaching about?

...

I'm not "flamebait the AMD-fans", just talking about my own experience in this forum.

Before the release of 6970, I expressed my meanings, and several times said: "The timing of 570 suggests that it's meant to fight 6970" (or other similar "impartial"-lines) but every time, many AMD-fans (including you) flamebait me (to put it in a mild way). Don't deny it, you know you have been a part of it!

I'm not writing this to "flamebait the AMD-fans". Just trying to say ADM-fans has fought for the supremacy of 6970. besides, we all need to learn from the past to get a better forum for the future.

[Manicdan]

didnt amd slides show that the 6970 was below the 580 and the 6990 was going to be way above it? (or was that a 480?)

[Sam_oslo]

didnt amd slides show that the 6970 was below the 580 and the 6990 was going to be way above it? (or was that a 480?)

Yep, but AMD-fans in this forum had another meanings, obviously somebody had misused their emotions. Somehow they were convinced that 6970 would beat/match 580. They were fighting for the supremacy of 6970, for sure.

I also remember strong reaction when i said "These delays suggests performance-trouble in AMD-camp". But the top of the whole was when the mod deleted a whole threat. Because AMD-fans went really to offensive wen I said "AMD has chickened out" It was when they had delayed 6990 to the nest year.

[cegras]

I'm not "flamebait the AMD-fans", just talking about my own experience in this forum.

Before the release of 6970, I expressed my meanings, and several times said: "The timing of 570 suggests that it's meant to fight 6970" (or other similar "impartial"-lines) but every time, many AMD-fans (including you) flamebait me (to put it in a mild way). Don't deny it, you know you have been a part of it!

I'm not writing this to "flamebait the AMD-fans". Just trying to say ADM-fans has fought for the supremacy of 6970. besides, we all need to learn from the past to get a better forum for the future.

Really? I just looked through my posts and I didn't see anything about me lynching you. Perhaps you are imagining things, or your reactionary attitude is misinterpreting what I said. I keep my daydreams to myself, and don't post what I believe. I would have liked the 6970 to compete with the 580, but it did not happen.

I also remember strong reaction when i said "These delays suggests performance-trouble in AMD-camp". But the top of the whole was when the mod deleted a whole threat. Because AMD-fans went really to offensive wen I said "AMD has chickened out" It was when they had delayed 6990 to the nest year.

And you were wrong. Delays were due to parts problems, and the 6990 is not "delayed."

[tbone8ty]

where's teh antillies rumor thread???



http://en.expreview.com/2011/01/11/a...ary/13822.html

1920x2 SP? uh oh let teh rumors start (if i remember correctly this picture was around a long time ago... November 16-18th to be exact)

[zalbard]

It won't be 1920sp, it's just as likely as AMD releasing 6970 with 1920sp...

[DarthShader]

This fake slide is more than one month old.

[Sam_oslo]

Really?
...
And you were wrong. Delays were due to parts problems, and the 6990 is not "delayed."

You, bet, really.

6990 should be here last year! according to original plans. It has been delayed!, lets hope the "new" improved/redesigned/refreshed (or whatever you want to call it) can deliver what people are expecting.

This kind of forum can be very useful, because some of us have a better insight about HW, and we all can learn from each other about upcoming/actual HW. And make a more educated HW-choices.

But we all have to be fare enough to critises (or credit) AMD, nVidia, Intel, etc.. . You don't have to defend AMD (or nVidia) in every and each move, even wrong one. But some of us has a bit too much brand-loyalty, combined by too much emotional involvement and would rather make a fight out of any different idea (you know who).


But enough about that, no hard feelings here, we all have the same interest for HW and could/should be friends across our different SW-tastes. Lets go back to topic, and talk about these 1GB.

[RaV666]

6990 should be here last year! according to original plans. It has been delayed!, lets hope the "new" improved/redesigned/refreshed (or whatever you want to call it) can deliver what people are expecting.

Um, yea.But "last year" was 2 weeks ago.And initially (like a year ago) antilles was sheduled at the end of the year.So its like 2 weeks late for now.
And its not going to be any new refreshed version.For the sake of it, you can look up HD6950 cfx scores, and it will be around that number.

[RaV666]

Double post.Pls del.

[ohnoitseddy]

What AMD-fans were expecting, as you express it, was actually more like fighting and attacking to prove that 6970 would match/beat the 580. Just ask hard-core AMD-fan in this forum, many of them will confirm it.

What we got after release, was disappointing for many AMD-fans. But it's understandable if they wouldn't admit it publicly. Because many of them have been emotionally involved in fighting for 6970.

AMD or nvidia, doesn't matter which, the high-end is all about performance-crown. Make no mistake!

Indeed I've seen many AMD fans dearly hoping for AMD to "beat" nVidia. And no doubt they were disappointed. But does that mean the HD69xx are disappointing products? Definitely not - they've got excellent bang for buck, and an excellent set of features. The disappointment was in that AMD didn't even try to make the fastest GPU, but rather went for a smaller, more sensible one.

If you don't understand why AMD doesn't go for the single GPU crown, and in spite of all fanboy cravings deliberately hasn't done so in the last two years, please educate yourself by reading the following, truly excellent articles by Anand:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2679
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2937

If you like GPU tech, you'll definitely enjoy it!

[Manicdan]

Indeed I've seen many AMD fans dearly hoping for AMD to "beat" nVidia. And no doubt they were disappointed. But does that mean the HD69xx are disappointing products? Definitely not - they've got excellent bang for buck, and an excellent set of features. The disappointment was in that AMD didn't even try to make the fastest GPU, but rather went for a smaller, more sensible one.

If you don't understand why AMD doesn't go for the single GPU crown, and in spite of all fanboy cravings deliberately hasn't done so in the last two years, please educate yourself by reading the following, truly excellent articles by Anand:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2679
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2937

If you like GPU tech, you'll definitely enjoy it!

theres quite a few ways to beat something
perf/$
perf/watt
perf/mm2
perf/slot
perf/noise
perf scaling across gpus
perf/core


only the last one is what determines whos the winner when its about being the "fastest", but what is sacrificed to do so? who here would buy a card thats 5% faster, 50% more expensive, fills up 3 slots due to the cooling required, and burns out every PSU that dosnt have quadruple digit power output, the xtreme benchers and probably no one else. such cards do exist (like the asus mars) and they are generally not viable for real use.

a sensible person should be able to identify which items listed are important to them and decide which side wins in a realistic manner.

[Sam_oslo]

Indeed I've seen many AMD fans dearly hoping for AMD to "beat" nVidia. And no doubt they were disappointed. But does that mean the HD69xx are disappointing products? Definitely not - they've got excellent bang for buck, and an excellent set of features. The disappointment was in that AMD didn't even try to make the fastest GPU, but rather went for a smaller, more sensible one.

If you don't understand why AMD doesn't go for the single GPU crown, and in spite of all fanboy cravings deliberately hasn't done so in the last two years, please educate yourself by reading the following, truly excellent articles by Anand:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2679
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2937

If you like GPU tech, you'll definitely enjoy it!

Yes, HD69xx are disappointing products, indeed! Bang for the buck is good, but that's in mainstream. The high-end is all about the crown!. That's why you have a gig price-gap between 6970 vs 6950, and 580 vs 570. That's why, 10% more performance costs you 30% more price in high-end, ruffly. This is so clear and obvious that I shouldn't waste time on explaining it.

This doesn't mean HD69xx is a total waste, but don't tell me "bang for the buck" was the plan. AMD tried, but underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture.
As I've said before the release of these round, since they both were using the same old 40nm node, the flexibility of their architecture would deside the outcome. AMD wished, and tried too, with a couple of delays too, but couldn't beat nVidia.

[Eastcoasthandle]

Yes, HD69xx are disappointing products, indeed! Bang for the buck is good, but that's in mainstream. The high-end is all about the crown!. That's why you have a gig price-gap between 6970 vs 6950, and 580 vs 570. That's why, 10% more performance costs you 30% more price in high-end, ruffly. This is so clear and obvious that I shouldn't waste time on explaining it.

This doesn't mean HD69xx is a total waste, but don't tell me "bang for the buck" was the plan. AMD tried, but underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture.
As I've said before the release of these round, since they both were using the same old 40nm node, the flexibility of their architecture would deside the outcome. AMD wished, and tried too, with a couple of delays too, but couldn't beat nVidia.

Well said.

You know what makes me laugh? The 3800, 4800, 5800 and now 6900 series single gpu's have never been "king of the hill" in performance yet they still sell and even stolen market share. Gee, I wonder why.

[Nintendork]

Oh the eternal spiral again.

G110 is near 45% bigger in die size.
They could've tried with 40nm? Yes. They wanted to do it? No.
They gain a lot of marketshare in the process.


Bang for buck is also good in the high-end when possible. 4870 instantly hurt 260/280 sales with some much effect that some partners decided to return $$ to their customers after the drastic price-cuts of the 280. So yes, bang for buck matters. You don't gain nothing with the godzilla chip for bragging rights, especially at gpu's where people are not that zombie-tamed by the likes of intel(cpu). Either of the two can win the marketshare wars.



Since this is all about the 1GB chips:

Sapphire HD6950 1GB is already on pre-order (1-2weeks for shipping)
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=28390

245euros


US prices:
$260-270

[RaV666]

Yes, HD69xx are disappointing products, indeed! Bang for the buck is good, but that's in mainstream. The high-end is all about the crown!. That's why you have a gig price-gap between 6970 vs 6950, and 580 vs 570. That's why, 10% more performance costs you 30% more price in high-end, ruffly. This is so clear and obvious that I shouldn't waste time on explaining it.

This doesn't mean HD69xx is a total waste, but don't tell me "bang for the buck" was the plan. AMD tried, but underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture.
As I've said before the release of these round, since they both were using the same old 40nm node, the flexibility of their architecture would deside the outcome. AMD wished, and tried too, with a couple of delays too, but couldn't beat nVidia.

What a load of ... innaccuracy ;-)
Ultra high end will be the 6990, and it will be faster than 580.
Bang for the buck IS the plan since 3xxx series, in every generation AMD makes a good not big chip,than makes X2 card to get on top or thereabouts.
So that was and is the plan for few years already.
You dont know what AMD "wished" ,AMD probably knows a lot better, specially when they decided once again to go with medium sized chip.
They`ve met they goals, and yes, there was a delay.ONE SINGLE delay of 2-3 weeks, thats not even a month !

[Sam_oslo]

You are right, I don't know what AMD wished, I just know they should try to take the crown. Everybody else has done it in high-end, as far as I know.

Anyways, I hope 6990 can deliver. I would like to see something (anything) that can challenge 580, and start a good price-war from the top.

Nobody is perfect, and I may be wrong too sometimes, I'm just expressing my ideas, and respect others who mean that was the plan!

[zalbard]

I still think AMD is sticking to the plan of beating Nvidia with dual-GPU cards (plus they get to keep decent yields). It's not like they couldn't make an even bigger chip, I think they chose not to.
That way they don't get many bad chips, and both 6950 and 6970 don't cost a lot (and thanks to the high yields they can even offer such a luxury as lower part unlocking).
They might be in for a nasty surprise when Nvidia's dual-GPU card comes out, though...

[DarthShader]

As I've said before the release of these round, since they both were using the same old 40nm node, the flexibility of their architecture would deside the outcome. AMD wished, and tried too, with a couple of delays too, but couldn't beat nVidia.

Define "flexibility". It's a nice catchword, but what does it actualy mean to you?

Is semi-fixing a broken implementation of a new architecture what makes it "flexible"? Is emergeny porting a new architecture meant for 32nm to 40nm making it "unflexible"?

[Nintendork]

580 is more or less in the limbo with 6950/570/6970.

Top dog performance --> HD5970
2xHD6870 cost less than HD5970, cost less than 580 (similar to 280, overpriced card without a reason)
2xHD6870 destroy HD5970 by at least 20%

Even with low clocks HD6990 should outperform 5970 by no less than 25% and a lot more in high res/eyefinity (given that HD6990 comes with 2x2GB). It can be 50-100-200%+ faster because of memory bottlenecks.


It will cost and arm and a leg. You like that Sam_oslo, so that should be your chip.


DarthShader
By history AMD implemented first every new process of TSMC. That 32nm cancel really starved the HD6000, I call flexibility the ability to even do reverse engeneering to 40nm xD.

[cegras]

You, bet, really.

6990 should be here last year! according to original plans. It has been delayed!, lets hope the "new" improved/redesigned/refreshed (or whatever you want to call it) can deliver what people are expecting.

This kind of forum can be very useful, because some of us have a better insight about HW, and we all can learn from each other about upcoming/actual HW. And make a more educated HW-choices.

But we all have to be fare enough to critises (or credit) AMD, nVidia, Intel, etc.. . You don't have to defend AMD (or nVidia) in every and each move, even wrong one. But some of us has a bit too much brand-loyalty, combined by too much emotional involvement and would rather make a fight out of any different idea (you know who).


But enough about that, no hard feelings here, we all have the same interest for HW and could/should be friends across our different SW-tastes. Lets go back to topic, and talk about these 1GB.

Well, so long as we both understand that I never jumped on the 6970/6950 hype train and flamebaited you, then we're cool.

Besides, I'm not defending. I'm pointing out, objectively, what was really the reason behind the Cayman delay. Apparently, at least. I *personally* doubt it was delayed a few weeks due to performance problems.

But yes, look, if Cayman was released with 1 gb for around $50 less, and it performed the same as a GTX570 for mainstream resolutions, that would be an excellent card.

[insurgent]

I'm planning on buying Nv for my next graphics card because of cuda... but I'd like to point out that Sam_oslo is a tool

[kuroikenshi]

You are right, I don't know what AMD wished, I just know they should try to take the crown. Everybody else has done it in high-end, as far as I know.

Anyways, I hope 6990 can deliver. I would like to see something (anything) that can challenge 580, and start a good price-war from the top.

Nobody is perfect, and I may be wrong too sometimes, I'm just expressing my ideas, and respect others who mean that was the plan!

AMD still has the crown with their 5970..... still over a year ago they've had it

[BababooeyHTJ]

Well, so long as we both understand that I never jumped on the 6970/6950 hype train and flamebaited you, then we're cool.

Besides, I'm not defending. I'm pointing out, objectively, what was really the reason behind the Cayman delay. Apparently, at least. I *personally* doubt it was delayed a few weeks due to performance problems.

But yes, look, if Cayman was released with 1 gb for around $50 less, and it performed the same as a GTX570 for mainstream resolutions, that would be an excellent card.

6950 is a great card now. It's around $50 cheaper than GTX570 with very similar performance and can be flashed with a 6970 bios. That alone kind of craps on any performance or yield rumors. It sounds like the rumors about TI vrms being in short supply may have actually been the cause of both the Cayman and Antilles.