only an 8x6 setup on the XT with a tdp of over 300W
huh
[QUOTE=Odellus;25406789]only an 8x6 setup on the XT with a tdp of over 300W
huh[/QUOTE]
lets see the tdp of a dual gtx 480 card
[QUOTE=Odellus;25406789]only an 8x6 setup on the XT[b] with a tdp of over 300W[/b]
huh[/QUOTE]
that looks like a "less than" sign to me: < 300W
:eng101:
Disregarding actual content, that forum has awesome emotes/smilies/whatever.
[IMG]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/eek.gif[/IMG][img]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/11.gif[/img][img]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/fd.gif[/img][img]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/97.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=Odellus;25406789]only an 8x6 setup on the XT with a tdp of over 300W
huh[/QUOTE]
It's about the same die size as Fermi with 6G per clock throughput; sounds about right.
[editline]14th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=BlkDucky;25407011]Disregarding actual content, that forum has awesome emotes/smilies/whatever.
[img_thumb]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/eek.gif[/img_thumb][img_thumb]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/11.gif[/img_thumb][img_thumb]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/fd.gif[/img_thumb][img_thumb]http://www.chiphell.com/static/image/smiley/default/97.gif[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
They also have better ficons:
[img]http://www.chiphell.com/uc_server/avatar.php?uid=31669&size=middle[/img]
[img]http://www.chiphell.com/uc_server/avatar.php?uid=6727&size=middle[/img]
[QUOTE=Nexus435;25406940]lets see the tdp of a dual gtx 480 card[/QUOTE]
dual 480 wouldn't happen bro, there are never any official dual flagship GPU cards because of dumb PCI spec
[editline]15th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=GWeasel;25406976]that looks like a "less than" sign to me: < 300W
:eng101:[/QUOTE]
woops
[editline]15th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Nexus435;25406940]lets see the tdp of a dual gtx 480 card[/QUOTE]
and afaik cayman is single gpu not dual, antilles is dual
To those of us who don't quite understand exactly what these spec sheets mean, can we get something to compare this to?
[QUOTE=Nilrus;25423469]To those of us who don't quite understand exactly what these spec sheets mean, can we get something to compare this to?[/QUOTE]
doesn't really mean anything except cayman XT should be quite powerful
[QUOTE=johan_sm;25406707]I can't read chinese[/QUOTE]
But I can :smug:
[QUOTE=johan_sm;25406707]I can't read chinese[/QUOTE]
But Chrome can translate! :pseudo:
Still waiting to see how the Caymans are going to perform. Remember that the HD68xx is supposed to be the next gen HD57xx.
[QUOTE=Clavus;25449845]Still waiting to see how the Caymans are going to perform. Remember that the HD68xx is supposed to be the next gen HD57xx.[/QUOTE]
Antilles is going to be a powerhouse, that is for sure.
[QUOTE=Odellus;25449881]Antilles is going to be a powerhouse, that is for sure.[/QUOTE]
Didn't hear that one yet, is that the codename for the dual-chip HD69xx?
[QUOTE=Odellus;25449537][release][img_thumb]http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/6179/74208725.jpg[/img_thumb][img_thumb]http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/9646/52350195.jpg[/img_thumb]
[url]http://tech.sina.com.cn/h/2010-10-16/06171529120.shtml[/url][/release][/QUOTE]
Are you for real? The [b]5[/b]870 outperforms the 6870? I mean sure it's on the hair and it's still unsupported and blablabla but that is not the leap in performance I was expecting from a next generation card.
[QUOTE=Nilrus;25450018]Are you for real? The [b]5[/b]870 outperforms the 6870? I mean sure it's on the hair and it's still unsupported and blablabla but that is not the leap in performance I was expecting from a next generation card.[/QUOTE]
Like I said a few posts above, keep in mind that the HD68xx series (the Bart GPUs) are replacing the HD57xx series. The Cayman GPU (probably HD69xx) is going to replace the HD58xx series.
And yes I think it was a stupid unnecessary move from AMD too but whatever.
[QUOTE=Clavus;25449947]Didn't hear that one yet, is that the codename for the dual-chip HD69xx?[/QUOTE]
yes
if i understand what your saying correctly it sounds like they rearranged the numbering to cover up that the 6xxx series under performs or at the very least performs no better than an equivalent 5xxx (ie a dual chip card replacing a single chip card) unless the 6xxx's are significantly less money they seem a bit pointless, atleast now 5870 prices might became somewhat reasonable and i can finally justify a second card for crossfire
[QUOTE=Odellus;25449537][release][img_thumb]http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/6179/74208725.jpg[/img_thumb][img_thumb]http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/9646/52350195.jpg[/img_thumb]
[url]http://tech.sina.com.cn/h/2010-10-16/06171529120.shtml[/url][/release][/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure all of you can guess what each column is for, but if anyone needs translation, just hit me up.
[QUOTE=waylander;25464922]if i understand what your saying correctly it sounds like they rearranged the numbering to cover up that the 6xxx series under performs or at the very least performs no better than an equivalent 5xxx (ie a dual chip card replacing a single chip card) unless the 6xxx's are significantly less money they seem a bit pointless, atleast now 5870 prices might became somewhat reasonable and i can finally justify a second card for crossfire[/QUOTE]
That's how it appears to me as well. When I heard that ATI wasn't going to get a Die shrink to something smaller than 40nm yet and they weren't doing much in terms of architecture overhaul then the most they can do really is try for a bigger chip.
Considering what happened to Nvidia with Fermi, they gambled hard on a big chip with a new manufacturing technique, and ATI went a little safer with their early test of 40nm with the HD 4770.
Considering how well the HD 4770 turned out for it's price, thermals, and efficiency, it was for a time, competing too well with their higher end cards like the 4850/4870. This gave ATI a good idea of how to go about their 5xxx series, so it seems like the next logical move (profit wise, not so much performance) is to get the most you can out of 40nm with their architecture as somewhat of a re-brand with this 6xxx series. Try to make it look newer then it really is.
[QUOTE=Nilrus;25450018]Are you for real? The [b]5[/b]870 outperforms the 6870? I mean sure it's on the hair and it's still unsupported and blablabla but that is not the leap in performance I was expecting from a next generation card.[/QUOTE]
so far, it looks like the 68xx series are barts, which are like the 57xx series of today, with cayman being the 69xx cards, which are like the 58xx of today
[QUOTE=GWeasel;25465939]That's how it appears to me as well. When I heard that ATI wasn't going to get a Die shrink to something smaller than 40nm yet and they weren't doing much in terms of architecture overhaul then the most they can do really is try for a bigger chip.
Considering what happened to Nvidia with Fermi, they gambled hard on a big chip with a new manufacturing technique, and ATI went a little safer with their early test of 40nm with the HD 4770.
Considering how well the HD 4770 turned out for it's price, thermals, and efficiency, it was for a time, competing too well with their higher end cards like the 4850/4870. This gave ATI a good idea of how to go about their 5xxx series, so it seems like the next logical move (profit wise, not so much performance) is to get the most you can out of 40nm with their architecture as somewhat of a re-brand with this 6xxx series. Try to make it look newer then it really is.[/QUOTE]
It covers costs on a much broader level, and they can amortize restructuring on the architecture in ensuing generations. Pretty smart on AMD's part. TSMC had a crap-fest on die shrinkages above 22nm anyway, which makes the GloFo deal they made even sweeter. Most folks don't realize these specs were decided on about three years ago, and AMD took a huge gamble in pushing for GDDR5 and going ahead with the many cores-on-a-ring architecture, including manufacturing investment. If they can continue to dominate the mid range and high end by simply refining instead of spooling and taping up a completely new architecture, nVidia's gonna have a hard road to climb, especially when they're kicking their AIB partners in the nads and leaving consumers without many cards to choose from, in both variety and actual amount taped out.
[QUOTE=27X;25470480]It covers costs on a much broader level, and they can amortize restructuring on the architecture in ensuing generations. Pretty smart on AMD's part. TSMC had a crap-fest on die shrinkages above 22nm anyway, which makes the GloFo deal they made even sweeter. Most folks don't realize these specs were decided on about three years ago, and AMD took a huge gamble in pushing for GDDR5 and going ahead with the many cores-on-a-ring architecture, including manufacturing investment. If they can continue to dominate the mid range and high end by simply refining instead of spooling and taping up a completely new architecture, nVidia's gonna have a hard road to climb, especially when they're kicking their AIB partners in the nads and leaving consumers without many cards to choose from, in both variety and actual amount taped out.[/QUOTE]
NVIDIA is still better in both high (you can't really compare the 5970 to the 480, and 480 SLI is much better) and mid end (GTX 460), and the only AIB they lost was XFX. Consumers have not experienced any lack of GPUs from NVIDIA, nor in variety.
Wrong. Not the only AIB they lost, and you're completely skating over the fact differing AIBVs control different markets in different regions. I'm talking global, I've haven't the slightest which segment you're talking about, but they've lost at least THREE in every segment. The only card to be broadly spatialized in options in the 460, and custom 480s has only been available in completely custom SKUs for about two months, because the architecture is pretty well stuck in it's current iteration. AMD has SOLD about three times more cards than nVidia has been able to BUILD and the bulk of the released product went straight to HPC market for rather obvious reasons. nVidia got caught with their pants down, and AMD had the perfect product at the perfect time, simple as. Also Toxics/Blacks pretty much kick the shit out of two 480s at the intended resolution (+10-20%, app dependent), ie 1920+ in everything except tessellation. Fillrate isn't even an option. Not even covering that high end users don't care about price, they care about performance.
[QUOTE=27X;25470763]Wrong. Not the only AIB they lost, and you're completely skating over the fact differing AIBVs control different markets in different regions. I'm talking global, I've haven't the slightest which segment you're talking about, but they've lost at least THREE in every segment. The only card to be broadly spatialized in options in the 460, and custom 480s has only been available in completely custom SKUs for about two months, because the architecture is pretty well stuck in it's current iteration. AMD has SOLD about three times more cards than nVidia has been able to BUILD and the bulk of the released product went straight to HPC market for rather obvious reasons. nVidia got caught with their pants down, and AMD had the perfect product at the perfect time, simple as. Also Toxics/Blacks pretty much kick the shit out of two 480s at the intended resolution (+10-20%, app dependent), ie 1920+ in everything except tessellation. Fillrate isn't even an option. Not even covering that high end users don't care about price, they care about performance.[/QUOTE]
what other vendors have they lost besides XFX (and no they didn't lose BFG)
no one cares about custom cards, what has that got to do with anything? The only ones that matter are the ones with better, non-reference design coolers, which there are plenty of, and the cards don't even need them as shown by reference 480s easily reaching enormous overclocks. The amount of cards sold/made is irrelevant, though I'm not sure about regions other than North America and Europe, otherwise, the amount of stock hasn't been an issue. The only time it was really an issue was on release and that was only for about a month.
Toxics/Blacks are garbage and they always have been. You get barely any more performance for a huge markup. And no, they don't kick the shit out of even [url=http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/xfx_hd5970_be_limited/5.htm]stock 480s[/url] (I guess you're talking about the 5970 here. The overclocks on those are pathetic.)
You wanna argue with facts fine, cause you really aren't arguing with me. Nice attempt at steering the argument with BFG, but BFG was an AIB and the fact they started talks with AMD after hearing what NVidia planned to with Fermi is public record. They didn't go out of business by tripping over a rock. Same for PowerColor dropping nVidia and going full team red. [quote]Europe[/quote] Again you don't seem to have the slightest clue how big the pan-asian market is, which renders most of your point... pointless. Where the hell do you think these cards are manufactured? If toxic/blacks suck in your opinion, whatever. The FACT is they're still selling in higher numbers than 480's whether in single or dual matchups, which is made even more onerous that technically a dual set up is 2-1 in favor of nVidia on purchase, and nVidia still can't keep up. [quote]no one cares about custom cards[/quote] [quote] Jon Peddie Research issued a paper that claims 46 percent of dollars spent in 2009 on gaming PC hardware were directed to toward the Enthusiast class. JPR reports expenditures on enthusiast-class gaming hardware were [B]$9.5 billion last year[/B], and expects this will grow to almost [B]$12.5 billion[/B] in 2013. This includes all kinds of top-of-the line stuff, including boutique PCs, high-end processors and graphics cards, solid state disks, gaming mice/keyboards,[/quote] You =/= anyone else.
that quote says nothing about custom cards, just "enthusiast-class gaming hardware" which it states includes "high-end processors and graphics cards"
[editline]17th October 2010[/editline]
also I never though I'd see anyone more more moist for AMD than BmB but here we have it
[QUOTE=27X;25472570]You wanna argue with facts fine, cause you really aren't arguing with me. Nice attempt at steering the argument with BFG, but BFG was an AIB and the fact they started talks with AMD after hearing what NVidia planned to with Fermi is public record. The didn't go out of business by tripping over a rock. Same for PowerColor dropping Nvidia and going full team red. Again you don't seem to have the slightest clue how big the pan-asian market is, which renders most of your point... pointless. Where the hell do you think these cards are manufactured? If toxic/blacks suck in your opinion, whatever. The FACT is they're still selling in higher numbers than 480's whether in single or dual matchups, which is made even more onerous that technically a dual set up is 2-1 in favor of nVidia on purchase, and nVidia still can't keep up. You =/= anyone else.[/QUOTE]
so your only point is that ATI is selling more, so they are better and their cards outperform NVIDIA's offerings
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
