GTX 560 Coming soon!

[duploxxx]

That will be added once the testing system is revised later this year.



No. The HD 6870 only gets to that point through rebates which are due to end on the 31st. In addition I think may will agree with me that the GTX 560 Ti is a better all-round card than the HD 6950 1GB. I'm not just talking about straight up performance either; overclocking capability, power consumption and noise all factor into that as well.

If the HD 6950 1GB were the same price as the 560 then we would be talking but at this point I see no reason for the $10 price premium.

in case heat cooling and 560 consumes more..... not less
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/16

both have equal performance, some win some loose, so overall tie no reason at all to select one over another just a personal preference. That kind of noise difference will nobody notice, custom designs on 6950 will also arrive sooner then later.

[SKYMTL]

in case heat cooling and 560 consumes more..... not less
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/16

Different environments, different test conditions, GPU samples, etc can all impact upon the results methinks.

[duploxxx]

Different environments, different test conditions, GPU samples, etc can all impact upon the results methinks.

thx for the try but I do prefer to trust the data provided by anandtech rather then you
sites that measure the total power consumption of the system always end up with higher power consumption with the default cards btw, not mentioning the OC parts....

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1533/17/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/16
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...60-ti-review/7

You have many good points there.

I personally, have always reacted when people argue with die-size, transistor-count, yield (and other manufacturing costs). Because as you've mentioned correctly "costing around 35$ thats not a big deal...". The real cost is in R&D, PR, sales and such. Manufacturing cost is not a big chunk of the total cost. and that's why the sales-volume becomes a really important factor.

AMD could make a bigger 6970 chip and beat/match 580 actually. They could double the transistor-count (for only 35$ +/- some, not a big deal) without hitting the heat or power usage wall. They could easily spend 35$ (+/- some) and do it, but they underestimated the flexibility of Fermi-architecture. They thought 580 was a 480 + "minor"-improvements, and they wouldn't need more to beat it. they didn't expect such a good 580 really. That was the first mistake in this round.

The second mistake (and even bigger) came when they released 6950-1GB. They spend time and money to make a "change", but they chose to "degraded" the 6950-2GB and use it for a mainstream-fight. In my opinion, it was really bad move, they should somehow (i dunno how) "upgrade" the 6970 to take a fight with 580. This move didn't beat 560, but created a big mess for them too. Now they have many cards that "performs the same for most gamers" on their hand.


nVidia did a really good job with 560. They got the upper-hand over 6950-1Gb/2GB, in performance/OCing/power-usage for most gamers, and they priced it under too, at start!

But the mainstream is not about performance-crown, its' all about price/performance-ratio, and as you mentioned, AMD can still drop the prices and put up a good price-fight. They made a good attempt already at the first day of 560-release, but it will be interesting to see nVidia's counter-attack.

AMD may get problems following nVidia in an aggressive price-war tho, because 560 is a mainstream card, and has been developed for a "cheap" marked, while AMD is using those "degraded" high-end cards to fight. It will be interesting to see how far they can follow nVidia in near future.

It can get really ugly, depending on nVidi's resistivity. 560 got a good price already, but I'm still crossing finger for $199. It will be interesting to see that

ATI always use there dual card for the high-end, it was never the intention with 6970 and yes performance wasn't that great from 69xx series, forgot a few months ago where 6870 totally destroyed prices 460-465-470, ah you probably don't, you're still pissed for that.

NV has to regain marketshare and profit these days from there initial fermi losses, so I won't think they will drop 560 any time soon as long as they don't need to, they have upset the board makers a long time with the 2xx and 4xx series.

OH you also need to start talking with few GPU marketing folks from NV and ATI to get a better idea about the market, the 69xx-68xx or 56x are not mainstream cards, they call them performance - enthousiast. The real mainstream is like the 65-66xx series where the mass volume is from OEM supplies

and the best entry level card to get seems to be the 460...

did you ever check any price/performance/power of the 68xx series against the 460???
not to mention NV still doesn't have anything against the 57xx ehh rebranded 67xx series.

[tajoh111]

thx for the try but I do prefer to trust the data provided by anandtech rather then you
sites that measure the total power consumption of the system always end up with higher power consumption with the default cards btw, not mentioning the OC parts....

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1533/17/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/16
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforc...60-ti-review/7




ATI always use there dual card for the high-end, it was never the intention with 6970 and yes performance wasn't that great from 69xx series, forgot a few months ago where 6870 totally destroyed prices 460-465-470, ah you probably don't, you're still pissed for that.

NV has to regain marketshare and profit these days from there initial fermi losses, so I won't think they will drop 560 any time soon as long as they don't need to, they have upset the board makers a long time with the 2xx and 4xx series.

OH you also need to start talking with few GPU marketing folks from NV and ATI to get a better idea about the market, the 69xx-68xx or 56x are not mainstream cards, they call them performance - enthousiast. The real mainstream is like the 65-66xx series where the mass volume is from OEM supplies



did you ever check any price/performance/power of the 68xx series against the 460???

The 6970 was entirely meant to go against the gtx 480. There is no doubt about it(not the gtx 580 which no one expected to even come out this soon). If you look at the power profile of the 6970, it has the characteristic of a high end 500 dollar card.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/H...D_6970/27.html

From a wattage perspective, the 6970 has a more similar power output to the 5970 then any recent single GPU from AMD in the last 3 years. The only thing that approaches this level of power consumption from them is the 2900xt which was definitely AMD enthusiast single GPU card.

In addition, the 6970 itself will probably not be able to make it into the dual GPU 6990, unless they the card savagely underclocked(i.e 650 or less considering the 5970 725mhz speed) or shatter the power barrier(these cards use more power than gtx 285 during gaming and the dual card of that was a disaster).

Considering the power characteristics, the 6950 seems the perfect GPU to put into the 6990 as it has the perfect power envelope and unlike the 5870, it might be able to be clocked closer to its reference clocks even in dual card form.

The 6970 to me was AMD attempt to take back the single GPU crown which they haven't held onto in 4 years. The proof is how many sacrifices they made and how many unwise business decisions in retrospect with the card they made and the pricing they are currently at. The power usage increase between the 6970 and 6950 are too much considering how much performance is gained. The only reason I can imagine why they made this sacrifice was to gain the extra performance needed to beat the gtx 480 and capture the crown.

The 6970 first off uses too much power to be used as a dual GPU part as mentioned earlier. In addition the 69xx series is too cheap a price to be a smart business move for them. The 6950 price is 299 while the 6870 was 239. Considering the 50% die size increase, the 1gb of extra memory, the better vapor chamber cooler, the larger and more complex PCB, the 6950 is too cheap to be a smart business move for AMD. Same with the 6970. It is the same price as the 5870 but sounds significantly pricier to make.

What happened is surprise competition popped up which wrestle AMD down into a lower price point then they wanted. Which is why the 6870 was priced more in line with the features/cost to make because it had no competition initially; compared to the 69xx series which had lots of competition from the get go and had to be priced lower as a result. If NV didn't release the 5xx series, I am certain we would be paying higher prices.