[UniversalTruth]

AMD Radeon HD 7990 Debuts as a Very Limited Edition in July?

Just a speculation on Theo's part or real deal?
I mean, if true, what the ... for?? Why so late and how many will buy it?

[gkar1]

To beat the GTX690 and claim the single and dual GPU crown. AMD is pulling an Nvidia on Nvidia

[Homeles]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

I mean, if true, what the ... for?? Why so late and how many will buy it?

Why so late? AMD was waiting on process maturity to produce what's been dubbed as "Tahiti XT 2" chips, and also developing their boost tech.

I'd be willing to bet money at this point that it's finally on its way, but I highly doubt it will come in substantial quantities and I'm even more doubtful it'll beat the 690 in anything other than multi-monitor configurations.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Babel-17

HD 6870 owner here and I appreciate being able to play Crysis 2 with tessellation on and playable frame-rates thanks to the adjustment available in the CCC.

Also, IIRC, aren't even the Jersey barriers tessellated to a degree whereby no discernible visual improvements are gained over a much less tessellated version?

If my memory of that is correct then, imo, that is a decisive fact.

AMD did the right thing in addressing such a sad situation.

The only decisive fact that came out of that whining fest was that tessellation in Crysis 2, was well within the allowed range allowed by the DX11 SDK. Whats even more hilarious was how the level of Tessellation in Crysis 2 was almost the exact same as AMDs SubD11 given to microsoft to show what AMD thought was the ideal level for games just prior to them finalizing DX11.

So instead of being a respectable company and accepting that their early DX11 cards flat out sucked at tessellation... AMD executives hoping to avoid blame and keep their jobs decided to invent some non existent scandal in which Crytek and nVidia conspired to give Crysis 2 triangles smaller than pixel level, or is used to create geometry that’s never seen, it’s visually useless but a performance hit!!

And finally.... all of you who hopped on the BS wagon and joined in on the manufactured outrage, did you ever stop a moment and think about how in the months between Crysis 2 being released and the Texture/DX11 pack being finished.... weren't you the same people p*ssed off about Crytek lying about it not having DX11, or being a console port, or not following in the original Crysis' footsteps and having system requirements that slapped your expensive computer around like two dollar ho!

Seriously though... unlike Bioware who refused to listen to millions of fans and get rid of hologram kid and rewrite the ending so it had narrative coherence thus ruining one of the best series ever made.... Crytek actually did listen to the fans, went back to work, and gave them high resolution textures, DX11 features, and b*tch slapped your computer with far more demanding graphics.... only to then get slandered in the media by AMD and all their fanboys as to divert attention away from a failed product. Reminds me of how my 5 year old nephew just drives his older brother nuts and the moment a finger gets laid on him he cries for mommy.

/rant

[UniversalTruth]

Originally Posted by Homeles

Why so late? AMD was waiting...

Yeah, they can and have the right to wait whatever they want. The thing is that we are approaching the time for the second generation on 28 nm. See, AMD releases in few weeks* HD 7990, while NV will be waiting for 2-3-4 months to destroy it again with GTX 790.

Funny, no?

[Grall]

Originally Posted by Andrew

/rant

Wow, you sound like quite the apologist there. I think everyone (except you) agrees that the Crysis DX11 patch was just terribly executed; tesselated water rendered underneath the ground of all levels with water in them, brick walls ludicrously overtesselated, rock faces looking like ridiculous pincushions upclose, and those concrete barriers with millions, if not tens of millions of polys each, all completely wasted on FLAT surfaces...

Even Crytek themselves have said it wasn't much more than a quick hack, and it sure shows.

[Alexko]

Originally Posted by Grall

Wow, you sound like quite the apologist there. I think everyone (except you) agrees that the Crysis DX11 patch was just terribly executed; tesselated water rendered underneath the ground of all levels with water in them, brick walls ludicrously overtesselated, rock faces looking like ridiculous pincushions upclose, and those concrete barriers with millions, if not tens of millions of polys each, all completely wasted on FLAT surfaces...

Even Crytek themselves have said it wasn't much more than a quick hack, and it sure shows.

This.

[3dcgi]

Originally Posted by Andrew

The only decisive fact that came out of that whining fest was that tessellation in Crysis 2, was well within the allowed range allowed by the DX11 SDK. Whats even more hilarious was how the level of Tessellation in Crysis 2 was almost the exact same as AMDs SubD11 given to microsoft to show what AMD thought was the ideal level for games just prior to them finalizing DX11.

Of course it was within the allowed range by DX11. It's impossible to write a DX11 app that goes above tessellation level 64. I don't know where you're getting it's the same level of tessellation as in the SubD11 demo. That demo uses patches with more control points and I believe it caps the level at 32. It also has nothing to do with what AMD thought was ideal.

Originally Posted by Andrew

So instead of being a respectable company and accepting that their early DX11 cards flat out sucked at tessellation... AMD executives hoping to avoid blame and keep their jobs decided to invent some non existent scandal in which Crytek and nVidia conspired to give Crysis 2 triangles smaller than pixel level, or is used to create geometry that’s never seen, it’s visually useless but a performance hit!!

Senior executives probably knew nothing about the minor drama that was Crysis 2's tessellation implementation.

[Kaotik]

http://icrontic.com/article/leaked-b...to-ghz-edition

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1704287

BIOS to turn 7970 to 7970 GHz Edition is now available, though the article itself is a bit misleading I think, as it suggests 7970 GE somehow has "more accurate sensors" which as far as I know isn't true, and that Tahiti XT & XT2 are hardwarewise 100% identical?

[Dave Baumann]

PCB wise they are idential, save for the memory devices. The improved "sensing" is actually part of PowerTune and comes via the software. Anyone trying out "Boost" should make sure they are using 12.7 Beta.

[lanek]

Does that mean Turbo will work with it or only PTE ?

Edit after reading a bit better the result, it look it is the case.

[Gipsel]

Originally Posted by lanek

Does that mean Turbo will work with it or only PTE ?

DTE works with all cards and bios versions using the Cat12.7+ drivers. For the boost thing you need one of the newer 7970 GEs or you try modding a normal one using the bios linked above.

[lanek]

Originally Posted by Gipsel

DTE works with all cards and bios versions using the Cat12.7+ drivers. For the boost thing you need one of the newer 7970 GEs or you try modding a normal one using the bios linked above.

I was not sure at first it concern too the PT Boost.

But anyway, as many mention it: just OC your 7970 and finish.

[gkar1]

So if I already have my cards overclocked to 1.1Ghz core/1.6Ghz memory the only benefit I would see is reduced power consumption via boost's dynamic clock management, correct?

[Gipsel]

Originally Posted by gkar1

So if I already have my cards overclocked to 1.1Ghz core/1.6Ghz memory the only benefit I would see is reduced power consumption via boost's dynamic clock management, correct?

If you did the overclock at stock voltage, no as for the 1050MHz a slightly higher voltage is applied apparently.

[gkar1]

Oh that's right, mine are at stock 1.112v. Thanks.

[UniversalTruth]

AMD Announces New Pricing Structure for 7000 Series Cards

Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition: $ 499
Radeon HD 7970: from $ 449 to $ 429;
Radeon HD 7950, from $ 399 to $ 349;
Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition: from $ 349 to $ 299

[Rangers]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

AMD Announces New Pricing Structure for 7000 Series Cards

Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition: $ 499
Radeon HD 7970: from $ 449 to $ 429;
Radeon HD 7950, from $ 399 to $ 349;
Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition: from $ 349 to $ 299

7950 is the best deal in GPU's for a while now (when overclocked it can run with a 670 or 7970, for much less, also has 3GB of RAM/384 bit bus)

However in the case of these prices in most cases especially with rebates I think the prices are already there or lower. I've seen 7950 for $320 AR and 7870 for 289 AR, etc.

Perhaps these new prices will lead to the street prices going even lower, but I kind of doubt it.

Anyways for those saying this gen didn't gain us anything in pricing, you can now get a 7870 which will run with GTX 580 for ~1/2 the price 580 sold at, I'd say that is pretty good. Or a 7850 which may not be too far behind for as low as $210 AR.

[Homeles]

Still not interested. Lower prices by 25% and I'll consider it.

[UniversalTruth]

Originally Posted by Homeles

Still not interested. Lower prices by 25% and I'll consider it.

Correct. AMD is not in a very pleasant condition right now and if TSMC manufacturing capacity is a limiting factor, then they should at least try to flood the market with cheap 100-120$ Radeon 6870s.

And- set the price of all 7800 and 7900 correspondingly, so demand outstrips supply, don't let any of those get dust in the stores. I want to see people waiting for relatively cheap 7800s and 7900s because those are sold out.

[jimbo75]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

Correct. AMD is not in a very pleasant condition right now and if TSMC manufacturing capacity is a limiting factor, then they should at least try to flood the market with cheap 100-120$ Radeon 6870s.

And- set the price of all 7800 and 7900 correspondingly, so demand outstrips supply, don't let any of those get dust in the stores. I want to see people waiting for relatively cheap 7800s and 7900s because those are sold out.

If people are so whacked they can't see the value in a card that is half the price of the 580 gtx while performing the same, a few extra bucks isn't going to change their mind either. If the 7870 was called the GTX 660 ti, it would cost $350 and Nvidia fanboys would be lauding it as the greatest deal ever seen.

[Homeles]

Originally Posted by jimbo75

If people are so whacked they can't see the value in a card that is half the price of the 580 gtx while performing the same, a few extra bucks isn't going to change their mind either. If the 7870 was called the GTX 660 ti, it would cost $350 and Nvidia fanboys would be lauding it as the greatest deal ever seen.

The issue is that everything this generation is overpriced.

[jimbo75]

Originally Posted by Homeles

The issue is that everything this generation is overpriced.

AMD's graphics division made ~$40 million in Q1, while Nvidia basically made a loss on Geforce. I'm not convinced that they are so overpriced, but we'll see in a few days when AMD posts their Q2 and when Nvidia posts theirs a few weeks later. I really don't think either will be awash in cash, which makes me wonder about the viability of consumer GPU's if they are supposed to be overpriced right now.

You're right that they are overpriced compared to last gen, but last gen they were both barely breaking even. This isn't a viable business and it may well be a choice of "overpriced" or "nothing at all".

[UniversalTruth]

Originally Posted by jimbo75

If people are so whacked they can't see the value in a card that is half the price of the 580 gtx while performing the same

GTX 580 can be bought for 430$, so now, be so kind, tell us which card costs 215$ and is as fast (and also as reliable, because this is even more important and results in overall better reputation for nvidia ) as the 580.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814133456

Originally Posted by jimbo75

a few extra bucks isn't going to change their mind either

With such a way of thinking the worst for AMD is yet to come. It's not about value, which obviously is not there. It's about the customers ability and willingness to buy. Tell me, exactly what AMD does to convince customers that their products have value. They have it but at much lower prices.

Originally Posted by jimbo75

AMD's graphics division made ~$40 million in Q1, while Nvidia basically made a loss on Geforce. I'm not convinced that they are so overpriced, but we'll see in a few days when AMD posts their Q2 and when Nvidia posts theirs a few weeks later. I really don't think either will be awash in cash, which makes me wonder about the viability of consumer GPU's if they are supposed to be overpriced right now.

You're right that they are overpriced compared to last gen, but last gen they were both barely breaking even. This isn't a viable business and it may well be a choice of "overpriced" or "nothing at all".

I am not sure who even cares about these sheet numbers. Even the guys in AMD. It's not about the money, people said. It's about the attitude.

Profit can be the result of total quantity of units sold with a reasonable margin on top, not of highest possible margin on an individual product with much less total quantity.

[jimbo75]

Originally Posted by UniversalTruth

GTX 580 can be bought for 430$, so now, be so kind, tell us which card costs 215$ and is as fast (and also as reliable, because this is even more important and results in overall better reputation for nvidia ) as the 580.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814133456

And how much were both at release? Obviously the 580 is going to tank in price as only the ultra-clueless are still buying them. The fact that you mention the 580 at $430 and don't say anything about how ridiculously overpriced it still is speaks volumes.

With such a way of thinking the worst for AMD is yet to come. It's not about value, which obviously is not there. It's about the customers ability and willingness to buy. Tell me, exactly what AMD does to convince customers that their products have value. They have it but at much lower prices.

That's exactly my point. If being the same speed (not to mention how much less power draw) than the competitor's card, at a much lower price isn't enough, then why would dropping prices be enough? There is something wrong in the heads of these people - they won't buy AMD even when it's clearly a much better deal, but if this was the 660 Ti they'd be lapping it up at the same price. Maybe because the collective press would be falling over themselves to declare it the "midrange champion" or something similar?

I had to question the Hexus author's review after he gave Pitcairn 3 stars out of 5. 12 months before the GTX 580 had been given 4 out of 5. It didn't matter that it was so much cheaper and had so much better power draw at the same performance level - all that mattered is that it was an AMD card and it was "overpriced", and why not wait on the 660? Why not wait on the 8780, I'm sure it'll blow the 660 Ti away at a cheaper price as well.

Not only that, remember when Cape Verde was "overpriced"? How "overpriced" does that look now in front of the laughable GT 640?

If AMD is to be successful in the graphics business they won't do it by being known as the cheap option when they are clearly the superior choice.

Whether it's ignorance or being slaves to advertising I don't know - I guess a combination of both. Either way AMD dropping prices isn't going to change anything regarding these people. They rather spend $100 more and lose out on $100 of free games, on a gtx 680 that is 10% faster (equal with overclocking) than the 7970.

You might call it a stronger brand, I call it plain stupidity.