AMD Cayman info (or rumor)

[Dimitriman]

AMD good job on 6800 series, complete fail on 6900 series. drawing close to 570 is PATHETIC. thats all I have to say.

2x 6850 is a much better deal than Cayman any day.

.

[WintersSC]

AMD good job on 6800 series, complete fail on 6900 series. drawing close to 570 is PATHETIC. thats all I have to say.

2x 6850 is a much better deal than Cayman any day.

.

I still say that we must wait for the 10.12 drivers, hope Im not mad xD

[zerazax]

AMD good job on 6800 series, complete fail on 6900 series. drawing close to 570 is PATHETIC. thats all I have to say.

2x 6850 is a much better deal than Cayman any day.

.

How'd you conclude that. Based off 3dMark?

Why don't you wait for actual games?

sigh

Transcendentals will be calculated with 3 out of 4 Shaders inside the SP of the VLIW-4 architecture in Cayman. The problem is that calculating Trancendentals in this way could be slower by 10% vs the old VLIW-5 in Cypress/Barts.

Thank you for that. That would explain why some shader compute synthetics show it being barely better than a 5870

[informal]

AMD good job on 6800 series, complete fail on 6900 series. drawing close to 570 is PATHETIC. thats all I have to say.

2x 6850 is a much better deal than Cayman any day.

.

Actually perf./mm^2 is much much better with Cayman. Even though it's a bit larger chip(380mm^2?) than Cypress,card based on Cayman XT (6970) should be 1.3-1.5x faster than 5870. That's a whole other level of perf./mm^2 when compared to ~530mm^2 Fermi. Mind you both are made on 40nm process node.

[tajoh111]

I still say that we must wait for the 10.12 drivers, hope Im not mad xD

That guy appears to have a retail sample. I doubt he's a reviewer. If AMD didn't provide working drivers for the retail samples in the box, that's total fail.

As he had a gtx 480 before, I doubt he had those old driver in and just popped a new card in over the gtx drivers.

If AMD is not including working drivers in the box then AMD has reached a whole new level of stupidity to try to maintain secrecy. This is one or two week's before and NV couldn't respond if they wanted to. As someone else said, it takes months to change speeds on a cards.

Hopefully this is not the case and people do not need to download drivers to get the real performance out of a 6970. Because we know a lot of people just buy out of the box and don't bother to update.

If this is what the card performs like with broken drivers(we can extrapolate alot from crysis and vantage), then there is no wonder there was a delay. It could also explain why such old drivers were put into the box. They needed to work hardcore hard to get faster drivers and delayed it till mid december.

[LordEC911]

That guy appears to have a retail sample. I doubt he's a reviewer. If AMD didn't provide working drivers for the retail samples in the box, that's total fail.

As he had a gtx 480 before, I doubt he had those old driver in and just popped a new card in over the gtx drivers.

If AMD is not including working drivers in the box then AMD has reached a whole new level of stupidity to try to maintain secrecy.

Hopefully this is not the case and people do not need to download drivers to get the real performance out of a 6970. Because we know a lot of people just buy out of the box and don't bother to update.

So AMD is now putting driver discs into AIBs retail boxing???

Edit- That driver is obviously working or he wouldn't be using the card...

[xBanzai89]

Actually perf./mm^2 is much much better with Cayman. Even though it's a bit larger chip(380mm^2?) than Cypress,card based on Cayman XT (6970) should be 1.3-1.5x faster than 5870. That's a whole other level of perf./mm^2 when compared to ~530mm^2 Fermi. Mind you both are made on 40nm process node.

I don't really care how each performs relative to the size of the dye. I only care about actual performance of the card. I do hope AMD pulls an upset here. I am || this close from ordering a GTX 570 off EVGA's site.

[SKYMTL]

I wouldn't, unless AMD are sandbagging. I would expect a far greater improvement over the coming months, due to the different architecture though. Possibly something similar to the "big bang" drivers, that you reviewed for Nvidia.

Wouldn't you say, in your non biased view?

An unbiased review should be about WHAT IS not WHAT MAY BE.

[Nintendork]

That guy appears to have a retail sample. I doubt he's a reviewer. If AMD didn't provide working drivers for the retail samples in the box, that's total fail.

As he had a gtx 480 before, I doubt he had those old driver in and just popped a new card in over the gtx drivers.

If AMD is not including working drivers in the box then AMD has reached a whole new level of stupidity to try to maintain secrecy. This is one or two week's before and NV couldn't respond if they wanted to. As someone else said, it takes months to change speeds on a cards.

Hopefully this is not the case and people do not need to download drivers to get the real performance out of a 6970. Because we know a lot of people just buy out of the box and don't bother to update.

If this is what the card performs like with broken drivers(we can extrapolate alot from crysis and vantage), then there is no wonder there was a delay. It could also explain why such old drivers were put into the box. They needed to work hardcore hard to get faster drivers and delayed it till mid december.

What about an autoupdate option and just disable 10.12 from the servers until they're offically released in retailers.

This is probably not the case but it happens with other hardware/software (SC2 I think).

[zshadow]

One thing to consider is that there may be a Powerplay issue with these drivers, ie throttling under high load conditions.

I haven't seen any screenshots of the actual GPU load from this guy.

[Loque]

anyone here has an account there ?

curious about gpu load..

[Dimitriman]

no high end gamer cares about perf/watt. Every high end gamer will have a decent psu and case and all gamers care about is perf/dollar, or even more importantly is perf/pci lane. They will always stick whatever is faster in their pci lane and they couldnt care less if it runs hot or not. Its the fps on the screen they care about and Amd needs to start pushing more out of their chips especially if they have the headroom for it. The best they can do within 300w is what they need to do and not this perf/watt bull. That is only relevant for mainstream players and htpc users.

[Solus Corvus]

Another thing to consider is that maybe AMD didn't make a card based on your expectations but rather based on their own goals.

As interesting as these new screenshots are, they don't tell us the whole story. There are so many unknowns that it is laughable to conclude anything as fact yet. Piling on more speculation isn't going to clarify anything.

[zerazax]

I am || this close from ordering a GTX 570 off EVGA's site.

So why don't you wait 3 days for actual #'s? 570's arent magically going to go up in price overnight And if you're lucky, they may even go down

[Dimitriman]

Another thing to consider is that maybe AMD didn't make a card based on your expectations but rather based on their own goals.

As interesting as these new screenshots are, they don't tell us the whole story. There are so many unknowns that it is laughable to conclude anything as fact yet. Piling on more speculation isn't going to clarify anything.

ye we can tell ourselves that but how many times before this much info has converged right before release and turned out to be wrong? almost never.
info leaks at this point are 80% true and if several sources are leaking 1600 shaders and gtx570 performance, thats whats likely to come. And talking about synthetics, if we looked at vantage alone I would ignore it but all benchmarks show similar results. When was the last time a card from any camp did mediocre in synthetics and awesome in games? There may be a difference, but it is often not so substantial that would put the card in a different level.
I think at this point wishing for magic drivers and miracle game performance is straight up denial or wishful thinking. Were looking at a competitor for the 570 and thats the truth. 580 will reign supreme as single chip and Amd will throw antilles against it but it will not be as attractive as 5970 was one year ago. Back then it had no competition so people cared less about xfire issues. It will not be the case this time. Many will still take the 580 over antilles for being single chip.

/end rant

and this coming from an Amd customer since 2007

[migunani]

recent info only leads to one thing : F A I L U R E

hopefully not.

[zerazax]

recent info only leads to one thing : F A I L U R E

hopefully not.

Good thing no one uses only 3dMark to review

Edit: there are some seriously ridiculous people here.. first some ridiculous expectations, then a few 3dMark scores and its doom and gloom - scores I already explained about synthetics - and scores from a guy who refuses to show a comparison with the 480 or even a GPU load screenshot /sigh

[[XC] hipno650]

I don't really care how each performs relative to the size of the dye. I only care about actual performance of the card. I do hope AMD pulls an upset here. I am || this close from ordering a GTX 570 off EVGA's site.

^THIS

no high end gamer cares about perf/watt. Every high end gamer will have a decent psu and case and all gamers care about is perf/dollar, or even more importantly is perf/pci lane. They will always stick whatever is faster in their pci lane and they couldnt care less if it runs hot or not. Its the fps on the screen they care about and Amd needs to start pushing more out of their chips especially if they have the headroom for it. The best they can do within 300w is what they need to do and not this perf/watt bull. That is only relevant for mainstream players and htpc users.

^THIS
Nice to see that at-least 2 people have common sense

lets get real here. why do you buy a graphics card? to play games (or run benches if thats your type of thing) you don't buy a graphics card because it is eco friendly or because it has a smaller die size... for example lets say we have a card that uses 50watts under load and has a die size of 1MM X 1MM (impossible i know) but only has the performance of a 5750 but is being sold as a high end card at a high end card price point... how many people are going to by it? nobody! cuz if it can't game for the price your paying whats the point...

to be honest I had really hoped for more out of Cayman then what we are seeing now, and the whole argument that Cayman only performs bad in Synthetics is weak. as bad as 3DMARK is it still gives a general idea on how games perform and there are a few games that fit right in line with the numbers it puts out. the biggest thing that concerns me are the heaven numbers, yes it is way better then the 5870 and almost as good as the 5970 but for a 6970 to be slower then a GTX 570 after all the effort they put into Tessellation improvements is a little depressing. lots of people are quick to discount heaven as another synthetic but just remember that in 2011 there is a good number of games that will be using it's engine (about 5 games I think but i could be wrong) so the performance of heaven is extremely relevant IMO.

However I am going to give AMD the benefit of the doubt and wait for the hardware Canucks review before I make up my mind. i just think that so many people hyped it to be the next R300 which it obviously won't be... now all we can hope for it that it won't be the next R600

[migunani]

To save our A$$, we need to list some more excuses if this failure turns out to be true.

[Loque]

Good thing no one uses only 3dMark to review

Edit: there are some seriously ridiculous people here.. first some ridiculous expectations, then a few 3dMark scores and its doom and gloom - scores I already explained about synthetics - and scores from a guy who refuses to show a comparison with the 480 or even a GPU load screenshot /sigh

actually he's been benching with the 480 now:

http://translate.google.com/translat...768017-27.html

[tajoh111]

Good thing no one uses only 3dMark to review

Edit: there are some seriously ridiculous people here.. a few 3dMark scores and its doom and gloom - scores from a guy who refuses to show a comparison with the 480 or even a GPU load screenshot /sigh

None the less, AMD has lost a vary valuable marketing tool. If AMD cards become a nonfactor on HWbot, then alot of people won't buy them(benchers).

I benched just as much as I gamed before so it is a real significant factor for me.

I don' think it's doom and gloom if they are priced right then it can be a decent product. It's just this being xtremesystems, people expectations for this card were sky high, when they don't come off as close to matching expectations. The dreams of 30-40% faster than a gtx 580 are gone and all that is being left is a sobering reality. It doesn't have to be bad if we control our expectations before hand. My prior performance expectations were realistic compared to most people on this board, I got caught in the hype a bit. But I still feel this card can be a good card if priced right.

If this card is priced at around 400 dollars, we can thank the gtx 570 and 580. Maybe spurs will get to stay on this board too, but because the 6970 performed well below expectations .

[Biker]

With regard to not caring about performance per $ I have to disagree.

I consider myself to be a pretty high end gamer but I do care about prformance / watt as well as outright performance.... that is probably why I still have a 5870 in my rig and have not jumped on a 580

....anyway roll on the 15th so we can safely let this mostly useless thread die

[eric66]

actually he's been benching with the 480 now:

http://translate.google.com/translat...768017-27.html

pretty much in line with 480 in those sentetics hope in game perf. is much better

[cold2010]

http://twitter.com/carstenspille

[eric66]

who is that guy and what is he trying to tell ? lol i missed the point is he pissed at amd cause of the leak or something ?