AMD Radeon HD 6870 and HD 6850 confirmed to be launched on 22.10.2010

[[XC] hipno650]

Another angle

maybe im crazy but am I the only one who noticed the fact that there is only one Crossfire X connector on this card which is obviously pointing to a Barts part. now what im really confused about is why everyone thinks this card will be so great because to me a few things just don't add up. The first being how this card offers similar performance to a 5850 (maybe a little faster) while using the same amount of power for the same price and NOT offering Triple Crossfire solutions.... would some one please explain to me why this card is better than a 5850 for the most part.... and to who ever thinks that this will be faster than a 5870 please pass me some of what your smoking..... it has less shadders, way less TMU's, less mem bandwidth and pretty much the same clock speed....

as to the naming, I was really liking what AMD was doing with their naming, it was easy to understand and made sense, but this, this is bad, just plain bad. if it's not faster don't call it faster... seems simple enough, at least the renamed nvidia cards were the same performance not SLOWER.

so unless im missing something I don't see what all the fuss is about...

[zerazax]

maybe im crazy but am I the only one who noticed the fact that there is only one Crossfire X connector on this card which is obviously pointing to a Barts part. now what im really confused about is why everyone thinks this card will be so great because to me a few things just don't add up. The first being how this card offers similar performance to a 5850 (maybe a little faster) while using the same amount of power for the same price and NOT offering Triple Crossfire solutions.... would some one please explain to me why this card is better than a 5850 for the most part.... and to who ever thinks that this will be faster than a 5870 please pass me some of what your smoking..... it has less shadders, way less TMU's, less mem bandwidth and pretty much the same clock speed....

as to the naming, I was really liking what AMD was doing with their naming, it was easy to understand and made sense, but this, this is bad, just plain bad. if it's not faster don't call it faster... seems simple enough, at least the renamed nvidia cards were the same performance not SLOWER.

so unless im missing something I don't see what all the fuss is about...

First of all.... new architecture. None of the numbers you read for specs matter, because its their first new architecture since R600

Second, naming wise, things change... when the 7 series comes out, few might even remember what things were once named. It appears AMD/ATI is going back to making powerful single GPU solutions with the Cayman / 6900 series... had AMD never named the 5870X2 the 5970, people wouldnt think as much about it

[[XC] hipno650]

First of all.... new architecture. None of the numbers you read for specs matter, because its their first new architecture since R600

Second, naming wise, things change... when the 7 series comes out, few might even remember what things were once named. It appears AMD/ATI is going back to making powerful single GPU solutions with the Cayman / 6900 series... had AMD never named the 5870X2 the 5970, people wouldnt think as much about it

well it very well may be a new design or arranging the shadders and whatnot but the compute cores in themselves are relatively the same, yes they will be a tad more efficient but that can only make up so much. also if you look at the marketing slides from AMD themselves they show it just above the GTX 460 and below the GTX 470 AMD has always claimed that the 5870 is faster than the GTX 470 so to show the new card below the GTX 470 on a marketing slide points to it being slower than the GTX 470 AND the 5870, which is totally backed up by the specs.

and yes of course naming changes but the move from 4870x2 to the 5970 made perfect sense considering the 5970 is faster than the 5870. this new scheme makes no sense on any level of performance at all.

and to all those who like to beat the crap out of Fermi all day about power usage you know your right it sucks back the power. but it's also a performance animal. and if you think about all the time in a year your gaming at load (because the differences at idle are small) you spend how much more a year on power? maybe like $50 max if you game lots (granted F@H is a different story) the performance difference however from a GTX 480 of the 5870 is well worth it. I own both a 5870 and a GTX 480 and the jump in performance going to the 480 was pretty outrageous even on my CPU bottle neck.

the 6870 will be a strong card don't get me wrong and im sure it will sell well but its nothing special like the move from 4000's to 5000's and the naming is just plain bad...

[Baron_Davis]

and to all those who like to beat the crap out of Fermi all day about power usage you know your right it sucks back the power. but it's also a performance animal. and if you think about all the time in a year your gaming at load (because the differences at idle are small) you spend how much more a year on power? maybe like $50 max if you game lots (granted F@H is a different story) the performance difference however from a GTX 480 of the 5870 is well worth it. I own both a 5870 and a GTX 480 and the jump in performance going to the 480 was pretty outrageous even on my CPU bottle neck.

Although I've dissed Nvidia in the past, I wanna agree with this. At first, ppl hated on the 480, but I gotta admit it's a friggin beast. Not to mention its younger brother the 470 is the best card for the money out now.

I think ATI is turning into Nvidia Junior and is trying to scam ppl with messed up naming conventions and piss poor power:price ratios.

Perhaps the pessimists will be proved wrong when the 68xx cards come out in a few days, I'm sorta 50/50 right now. I think if the cards are weak, ATI will lower prices, and if they're strong, they may offer good value for the money. Also, there's a decent chance Nvidia will answer with a price cut, so that's good, too.

[hurleybird]

well it very well may be a new design or arranging the shadders and whatnot but the compute cores in themselves are relatively the same, yes they will be a tad more efficient but that can only make up so much. also if you look at the marketing slides from AMD themselves they show it just above the GTX 460 and below the GTX 470 AMD has always claimed that the 5870 is faster than the GTX 470 so to show the new card below the GTX 470 on a marketing slide points to it being slower than the GTX 470 AND the 5870, which is totally backed up by the specs.

This is the same AMD who advertised 4850 as slightly above 8800GT and 4870 slightly above 9800GTX, so I wouldn't go about drawing too many conclusions from that one slide.