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

[informal]

No PhysX and not as good 3D tech, though... Eyefinity, on the other hand, is much nicer than Nvidia's alternative.
I still want to see tessellation performance. Metro bench, for example, does not look too good.

Didn't AMD bring 3D tech on NV's level with 6xxx series?

[ToxAvenger]

Didn't AMD bring 3D tech on NV's level with 6xxx series?

Only for 3D Blu-Ray. For gaming, it's still easier to just go out and buy a 3D Vision kit and hook it up. With AMD, you have to get everything yourself and hope it works.

Not a deal breaker for me because I'm not really sold on 3D gaming, but for people that want to get into it, Nvidia makes it much easier IMO.

[kadozer]

Only for 3D Blu-Ray. For gaming, it's still easier to just go out and buy a 3D Vision kit and hook it up. With AMD, you have to get everything yourself and hope it works.

Not a deal breaker for me because I'm not really sold on 3D gaming, but for people that want to get into it, Nvidia makes it much easier IMO.

Their way was smart for HTCP people (automatic to get a receiver, TV, and playback software) but will be interesting to see how their decision on non proprietary for 3d gaming plays out. Too early to tell, because if they get alot of 3rd party support it will be a non issue. If the standard magenta/cyan (or whatever color) cheapo glasses work for example it would be an advantage by offering more choices for consumer.

[Lanek]

Only for 3D Blu-Ray. For gaming, it's still easier to just go out and buy a 3D Vision kit and hook it up. With AMD, you have to get everything yourself and hope it works.

Not a deal breaker for me because I'm not really sold on 3D gaming, but for people that want to get into it, Nvidia makes it much easier IMO.

I was ask me too when i have see 1 month ago the UVD3 " rumoured " spec...

Still i think they should make a contract with a specific 3D systembrand and work with them for the driver, but i m not really interested ( only for fun sometimes) for this 3D stereo system...

I don't know how it will turn, but all the industry is having now their own systems ( from MS, Sony for gaming, to Samsung,LG, Panasonic etc etc ), i believe AMD don't want develop a proprietary system for see it drop in the trash in 1 year when some " standard " for it will appears.

[zalbard]

Didn't AMD bring 3D tech on NV's level with 6xxx series?

Not according to the article.

AMD HD3D

All new is AMD HD3D - it is comparable to NVIDIA's 3D Vision and thus brings 3D display support for games, movies and videos to the AMD Radeon lineup of graphics cards. This of course will require separate 3D Goggles. HD3D includes support for Blu-ray in 3D third-party 3D applications.

The new implementation is very tricky and in it's default setup, far far away from what NVIDIA's does (and i do mean that in a negative way). Now, 3D Blu-ray support will only need you to have the right hardware (glasses, graphcis card, 3D TV/monitor HDMI 1.4a cable) and a software playback solution supporting it.

3D Gaming wise ... AMD waved everything away, and that's where we think AMD HD3D is going to fail.

There are no kits, there is no real driver support within the Catalyst drivers. You can play games in 3D yet you'll need to actively get support for this yourself. Meaning AMD handed out 3D game support to 3rd party vendors. To get 3D Game support you must buy software from a company like DDD (Dynamic Digital Depth), the software implementation costs 50 USD (temporary priced at 25 USD), this will allow you to play games in 3D. Unfortunately these known methods in the past always have proven to be a little icky with lack of native game support. Next to that you'll need to seek and purchase a 3D Monitor with goggles and/or find a kit that provides these.

We're sure that the actual 3rd party vendors really like this as it will boost their sales, we however doubt very much the end-user will share that sentiment as well.

[informal]

Not according to the article.

Thanks,I couldn't read the article since it was down. Well AMD"s approach is clearly still inferior to NV's native 3D support for games so they have to work on that part more.It's a start though.

[zalbard]

Thanks,I couldn't read the article since it was down. Well AMD"s approach is clearly still inferior to NV's native 3D support for games so they have to work on that part more.It's a start though.

They just need a decent driver implementation, really (AMD and drivers...), and some sort of standard for 3D glasses (I think they have one already, but not sure) and it should be about as good!

[Sn0wm@n]

They just need a decent driver implementation, really (AMD and drivers...), and some sort of standard for 3D glasses (I think they have one already, but not sure) and it should be about as good!

what's wrong with amd and drivers ????


maybe they will figure it out maybe not ....

[Kaboka]

wtb more crossfire reviews :o looking at the 2x6850 scaling shown at guru3d i dunno if it will be worth selling my 5850 or get a 2nd one used. But the cards looks great so far

[DilTech]

Can't say I'm all that impressed...

It looks to be great bang-for-buck, but honestly I've been sitting, watching, and waiting for the next KO gpu. Also, the fact that the GTX 460 still beats it in tessellation according to that chart makes me a little worried.

As for them using the GTX 460 launch numbers, correct me if I'm wrong but the GTX 460 performance has gone up pretty nicely since launch. My question for the review is, was that a reference GTX 460 or one of the high clock ones. No, I'm not saying they should pit it up against one of the 800mhz monsters, but that is very good information to know, because if the 6850 is beating THOSE cards that solidly then it is, indeed, a very fast card if the $200 price point remains true.

Either way it'll be a nice card for people with $200'ish to spend. I just hope those over-clocking numbers are a fluke, or that they used an overclocked 460 and not a stock one. If that's a reference one, then I'm not nearly as impressed, as even the 800mhz+ GTX460's are pretty cheap these days.

At any rate, Cayman should be a monster if these specs vs performance numbers are anything to go by. It's about time AMD listened to everyone saying 5D was NOT the way to go. When it comes to unified design, the simpler it is, the more efficient it probably will be too.

[Motiv]

Thanks,I couldn't read the article since it was down. Well AMD"s approach is clearly still inferior to NV's native 3D support for games so they have to work on that part more.It's a start though.

It's shockingly bad unless one of the resellers starts selling the gear, with their cards. Until that point, it's rubbish.

While I don't care for 3D or Physx, I do realise that people in the near future will start thinking of 3D gaming more and more. AMD need to get their partners to sort something out, physx is purely a fanboi thing.

[zalbard]

While I don't care for 3D or Physx, I do realise that people in the near future will start thinking of 3D gaming more and more.

Me neither right now. Then again all people are different, and there is very little sense in alienating [perhaps a very small] part of the market.
These are not must have features for most right now, but they are nice to have, and this "nice" can [potentially] sell quite a lot of cards.
Gogo OpenCL! I'm still waiting for AMD to start supporting and promoting one of OpenCL engines...

[generics_user]

Thanks,I couldn't read the article since it was down. Well AMD"s approach is clearly still inferior to NV's native 3D support for games so they have to work on that part more.It's a start though.

true; they need to aquire one of the 3rd party providers OR release a bundle with 3rd party software + 3d glasses together with their board partners

[RPGWiZaRD]

What I care about with 3D support is that they support 120Hz LCDs running properly in 120Hz then I'm fine, couldn't care less about gaming in 3D. IMO 120Hz/FPS gaming >>> 3D 60Hz per eye/FPS gaming.

[xdan]

What about their HD5850 and HD5870 results though? Are those outdated as well cuz that's the first comparision I made how they stand to HD5850 and HD5870 not NVIDIA and for me they suprised me a bit positively, I had been happy seeing HD6870 being just tiny bit in avg front of HD5850 and many times around the same.

Guys with all respect i think this is an unprofessional review, not to be trusted...It's a crap, they are f***ing liyng
So today with Catalyst 10.10 or whatsoever, i don't care, in Crysis Warhead 5850 scores 38 FPS( 1920*1200, 2AA)....
Good...

On 30 september with Catalist 8.66(more than a year ago)
5850 in the same game, same settings score just , that 38FPS
Se here http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon...w-crossfire/15

Far Cry 2 today 50 FSP, check the rar archive...
Than , on 30 september, Catalyst 8.66 , 5850 scored even 1 FPS, more ,51 FPS
http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon...w-crossfire/11