AMD Cayman info (or rumor)

**hurrdurr** · 12-14-2010, 05:13 PM

Why so late? I thought it was only 4 hours until the NDA lift, not 7.

**xBanzai89** · 12-14-2010, 05:14 PM

I did too. It is possible he got it wrong though.

**TheBreezyBB** · 12-14-2010, 05:18 PM

7 hours is not that long if you look at how long this thread is!

**zerazax** · 12-14-2010, 05:25 PM

It's 12am EST for lift

**kam03** · 12-14-2010, 05:25 PM

7 hours? are you mad? more like 3 hours max! they already have everything typed, so they only need to edit some of the text and input the new benchmark data. Installing new drivers only takes 10 mins and all you are left with is benching each game which is 2 hours max.

**bill_d** · 12-14-2010, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by zerazax

It's 12am EST for lift

thats 9pm in az

wonder what time for newegg they had the 570 at 12 mid pst i think

**zerazax** · 12-14-2010, 05:29 PM

Youre right actually 12 pst sounds correct

**Johnny87au** · 12-14-2010, 05:40 PM

hopefully reviews will be done with 10.12 not crappy 10.11, supposely increases performance by up to 20% with new drivers... I think amd did this on purpose and bang new drivers= unreal... Only 4 hours for a great review!

with the final driver 10.12 it should be around 15-20% better perf,. that makes it around 24500 to 25500P.. add another 11% for OC on stock volts and go :loco

**Solus Corvus** · 12-14-2010, 05:40 PM

I don't think it is at all fair to expect reviewers to redo their review with newer drivers on such a short time scale. Quality work takes time.

But if new drivers significantly affect performance then I do expect that they eventually get the updated results up in a new review or update the old one. If the results of a review are invalid by the time a card is released or shortly after and the reviewer doesn't do anything to correct it how could I consider them trustworthy?

Not that I believe these magical driver rumors. It is certainly possible, being a new architecture and all. But it sounds mostly like wishful thinking at this point. Usually driver evolution takes months, not days.

**zalbard** · 12-14-2010, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

I don't think it is at all fair to expect reviewers to redo their review with newer drivers on such a short time scale. Quality work takes time.

But if new drivers significantly affect performance then I do expect that they eventually get the updated results up in a new review or update the old one. If the results of a review are invalid by the time a card is released or shortly after and the reviewer doesn't do anything to correct it how could I consider them trustworthy?

Not that I believe these magical driver rumors. It is certainly possible, being a new architecture and all. But it sounds mostly like wishful thinking at this point. Usually driver evolution takes months, not days.

I agree with all of your points!

**jazkat** · 12-14-2010, 05:44 PM

very tempted to put my order in right now:

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/search...ch=radeon+6970

**tifosi** · 12-14-2010, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by Chickenfeed

I'd only consider the 6950 CF option, going from a 580 to a 6970 would be pointless unless single card eyefinity or DTS HD passthrough are features you want.

HD audio pass through exists even in 68xx cards, so 6950 should be alright

. I guess, even Eyefinity is supported... but wait till you find that one out...

**Johnny87au** · 12-14-2010, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

I don't think it is at all fair to expect reviewers to redo their review with newer drivers on such a short time scale. Quality work takes time.

But if new drivers significantly affect performance then I do expect that they eventually get the updated results up in a new review or update the old one. If the results of a review are invalid by the time a card is released or shortly after and the reviewer doesn't do anything to correct it how could I consider them trustworthy?

Not that I believe these magical driver rumors. It is certainly possible, being a new architecture and all. But it sounds mostly like wishful thinking at this point. Usually driver evolution takes months, not days.

Well i kinda agree with what your saying but i think this was AMD's whole strategy. basically make the public think the amd 6970 is great price/performance value but at the same time it actually competes with the 580.. Funny how they have a few drivers already made and ready to go though? Like u said takes months.. makes sense ?

**cowie** · 12-14-2010, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

I don't think it is at all fair to expect reviewers to redo their review with newer drivers on such a short time scale. Quality work takes time.

But if new drivers significantly affect performance then I do expect that they eventually get the updated results up in a new review or update the old one. If the results of a review are invalid by the time a card is released or shortly after and the reviewer doesn't do anything to correct it how could I consider them trustworthy?

Not that I believe these magical driver rumors. It is certainly possible, being a new architecture and all. But it sounds mostly like wishful thinking at this point. Usually driver evolution takes months, not days.

Why should the review people have to go out and look for better drivers on a card that is released tomorrow show your best right?? or excuses? if amd super drivers are so super then they had alot of time to get the drivers ready for when people buy them. or last week when review cards went out.

That is only if they drivers are slow,if the drivers are that slow i think they did it for a reason.

**cold2010** · 12-14-2010, 06:15 PM

HD 6900 PDF

**blindbox** · 12-14-2010, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by cowie

Why should the review people have to go out and look for better drivers on a card that is released tomorrow show your best right?? or excuses? if amd super drivers are so super then they had alot of time to get the drivers ready for when people buy them. or last week when review cards went out.

That is only if they drivers are slow,if the drivers are that slow i think they did it for a reason.

It's to be fair for the readers who read their site so that they don't mistakenly buy the wrong card, as everyone is going to use 10.12

It's not that hard to understand. 1 hour 45 minutes left I think.

**Kensek** · 12-14-2010, 06:17 PM

On Newegg Now.

Got all mine

**Solus Corvus** · 12-14-2010, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by Johnny87au

Well i kinda agree with what your saying but i think this was AMD's whole strategy. basically make the public think the amd 6970 is great price/performance value but at the same time it actually competes with the 580.. Funny how they have a few drivers already made and ready to go though? Like u said takes months.. makes sense ?

With this being a new architecture there are probably going to be improvements between some minor driver versions. Specific games/benchmarks or specific situations (tessellation) may indeed get improvements from a small change, fixing a bug, etc. But major across the board improvements often take longer to materialize. They could be sandbagging as you say, though I don't see any specific reason to assume that is true.

Originally Posted by cowie

Why should the review people have to go out and look for better drivers on a card that is released tomorrow show your best right?? or excuses? if amd super drivers are so super then they had alot of time to get the drivers ready for when people buy them. or last week when review cards went out.

That is only if they drivers are slow,if the drivers are that slow i think they did it for a reason.

Sounds like an excuse. They should (re)review with newer drivers if those drivers significantly change the results because they expect us to trust them. If their reviews don't reflect the real performance I'd get out of a card then why should I trust their reviews in the future?