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

[Solus Corvus]

No it is not an up-clocked and modified 5830. It's far smaller than a 5830

I said IF. But I'm sure you realize that 5830 has the same size as the rest of the Cypress line, just with some shaders disabled.

[generics_user]

I said IF. But I'm sure you realize that 5830 has the same size as the rest of the Cypress line, just with some shaders disabled.

performance is higher, shaders are same / or less (depending on the model); it has more ROPs and TMUs; so i guess it's not just a new 5830...

[tajoh111]

performance is higher, shaders are same / or less (depending on the model); it has more ROPs and TMUs; so i guess it's not just a new 5830...

TMU's are both 56 on both cards. ROPs are twice as high on the 6870 though.

[zerazax]

Aside from the fact that the number 4 is bad luck in a lot of circles, I don't think the naming scheme will matter much when the 6900's come out, and everyone is looking at those

I said IF. But I'm sure you realize that 5830 has the same size as the rest of the Cypress line, just with some shaders disabled.

That's what I mean by smaller. Barts is 255mm^2, Cypress is 334mm^2

[Solus Corvus]

That's what I mean by smaller. Barts is 255mm^2, Cypress is 334mm^2

Right, but a 5830 just has some of the cores disabled, it started life as a potential cypress chip. They could, however, make a chip that only includes 1120 shaders from the start, based on an upgraded/modified cypress architecture.

Most of the rumors so far pointed to a 4d design and that's what I had hoped for. But the early numbers and AMD slides have given me pause. Perhaps we won't get the 4d arch until Cayman or even 28nm. I suppose we will find out soon enough.

[zerazax]

Right, but a 5830 just has some of the cores disabled, it started life as a potential cypress chip. They could, however, make a chip that only includes 1120 shaders from the start, based on an upgraded/modified cypress architecture.

That's what I mean, Barts was designed from the get-go to be smaller. One could just as easily call it a re-designed compact-er Cypress, but one could also call it a beefed up Juniper mated to a 256-bit interface.

Most of the rumors so far pointed to a 4d design and that's what I had hoped for. But the early numbers and AMD slides have given me pause. Perhaps we won't get the 4d arch until Cayman or even 28nm. I suppose we will find out soon enough.

I think given that AMD found out about the cancellation of 32nm relatively late in the game, they decided they needed a product to fill the gap between old 40nm products and when 28nm is ready, and hence NI is going to be a half-way architecture. That is, Evergreen 4+1 shaders but the new front end

Actually that makes Cayman more interesting, because even if it isnt 4D, the fact that Cypress is (allegedly) very ineffcient despite all its functional units (its literally 2x Juniper on a single die, yet 2 x Juniper in CF beats it often), that the front-end changes might affect Cayman a lot more

[Solus Corvus]

That's what I mean, Barts was designed from the get-go to be smaller. One could just as easily call it a re-designed compact-er Cypress, but one could also call it a beefed up Juniper mated to a 256-bit interface.

I see what you are saying. Maybe my choice of words wasn't the best. I guess calling it a scaled up juniper or cut down cypress depends partially on if you are trying to convey a negative or positive impression. "Modified Evergreen" might be a more neutral way of putting it.

I think given that AMD found out about the cancellation of 32nm relatively late in the game, they decided they needed a product to fill the gap between old 40nm products and when 28nm is ready, and hence NI is going to be a half-way architecture. That is, Evergreen 4+1 shaders but the new front end

Actually that makes Cayman more interesting, because even if it isnt 4D, the fact that Cypress is (allegedly) very ineffcient despite all its functional units (its literally 2x Juniper on a single die, yet 2 x Juniper in CF beats it often), that the front-end changes might affect Cayman a lot more

I never believed the rumors about a frankenstein between cypress and NI. Making parts of two separate architectures work together would be an incredible amount of work and has so many potential pitfalls that it doesn't seem like a sound backup plan, IMO. Now they may have back-ported some of the lessons learned in developing NI to a modified Evergreen, but I doubt it would be the full NI front end.