AMD RV770 refresh -> RV790

Makes slightly more sense in terms of performance. Yes, GTX280 league.


What about leakage? :eek:

27% more, I compared it to GTX285 in Firing Squad review, it should be pretty close to the 285 performance in most titles. Actually just doing 1.27X4870 it would edge out the 285 by the tiniest amount in most games, but I guess we'll see less than 27% improvement in practice. The few Nvidia architecture biased titles will still go Nvidia and the ATI ones ATI.

So looks like it will basically equal a 285 if it's a 950mhz 4870. So in price, 299 would be solid and 249..well one can dream :p

Still I dont trust ATI leaks since so many wrong ones in RV770..
 
What's puzzling me is why is it taking so long to produce this chip if it's merely an overclock? Why wasn't it on the market for Christmas?

Will it be 4-6 months late?

Jawed
 
What's puzzling me is why is it taking so long to produce this chip if it's merely an overclock? Why wasn't it on the market for Christmas?

Will it be 4-6 months late?

Jawed

Maybe a question of when this specific process was actually ready?
I don't think we have really heard of any rumored delays, I would expect A12 on retail models at worst.
 
Under the burden of the financial crysis I don't think any answers will be that easy w/o having deep insider knowledge for both IHVs and the 40nm affair.

Who knows maybe neither AMD nor NVIDIA will introduce any 40nm replacements for RV770/GT200b before their next generation arrives. This doesn't necessarily mean that either/or has cancelled anything; it's more likely that rumour mill has made up to now quite wrong estimates.

I haven't a clue how AMD RV770 chip inventory looks like; but at the moment I can't find in my neck of woods even one 55nm GT200b based GPU except the 295's of course which aren't exactly being sold in the same high volumes as a GTX260 for instance.

Frankly if I'd hear that both IHVs have concentrated more on next generation GPU development than anything else, I'd prefer that kind of strategy especially under the limelight of the current financial situation.
 
What's puzzling me is why is it taking so long to produce this chip if it's merely an overclock? Why wasn't it on the market for Christmas?

Will it be 4-6 months late?

Jawed


Whatever it is, it is sure as hell, not just a "bin and overclock" part.
 
Something else silent_guy said a while back:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1162315&postcount=1646

I've written about this before: it's delusional to expect much higher clock speeds in the day and age, unless you also accept a completely new architecture. Current assumptions are that RV770 is on 55nm just like RV670 and that it's an evolution of the same architecture. If that's the case, then there is simply no way the clock is going to be increased a lot. Even if it's the same architecture and on, say, 45nm, I still wouldn't expect much. All the numbers that are going around in the industry indicate that you'll save area and a bit of power, but the era of free speed upgrades is largely over. (Remember those utopian speculations about a 2GHz+ shader clock that some people thought was credible?)

One of the important points to realize is that it's not just 1 or 2 blocks in the whole chip that are limiting the overall clock speed. Closing timing at 800MHz with standard cells is *hard*, no matter which functional block you're talking about. Every designer of every block is designing against the same clock speed specification and all of them struggle to make it, iterating for weeks or months to shave picoseconds from the critical path. So upping the spec from 800 to 900 is a monumental affair that amounts to touching pretty much every block in the chip. For a company with limited resources (all of them) it'd be incredibly foolish to spend time on this, when they should be working on their next major architecture.
So is it feasible that AMD has chosen to bump RV770 clocks by 25%+?

Jawed
 
Wow, almost a match for 4850 at half the price. Now, amd, come and surprise us again with your rv790. :devilish:

BTW, with the preview out, can we expect it to come out within, say 3 weeks?
 
Something is wrong in this preview they say the chip includes 8 render back ends but their comparative table states 16.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Something is wrong in this preview they say the chip includes 8 render back end but their comparative table say 16.

I noticed that too.

AMD's got quite a little monster here. Wonder how low clocks would have to go to remove the external power connector.
 
Very impressive performance! Especially if it means they shift the whole price range once again as the Radeon HD 4870 and Radeon HD 4850 did in regards to the Geforce GTX 280, Geforce GTX 260 and Geforce 9800GTX/+.
 
:oops: That's incredible that such a board has "leaked", theoretically quite a coup.


Theoreticals in comparison with HD4850:
  • GFLOPs - 83%
  • Texture - 83%
  • Bandwidth - 80%
It's averaging 91% of the performance of HD4850. That's pretty amazing.

Jawed
 
Theoreticals in comparison with HD4670:
  • GFLOPs - 173%
  • Texture - 87%
  • Bandwidth - 160%
Average performance is 152%.

I've long argued that HD4870 needs about 100GB/s (accounting for 8xMSAA - could bump that up a bit when accounting for the GDDR5 performance shortfall at the same clocks as GDDR3). That's with 16 RBEs at 750MHz. Assuming that RBEs are dominant, then 8 RBEs at slightly lower clocks, by the same measure, should need no more than about 50GB/s.

As it happens, this "HD4750" (surely it should be HD4770?) has 51.2GB/s bandwidth. Obviously this card has way more than half of HD4870's TU capability, but to compensate this card is more likely to be running 4xMSAA not 8xMSAA - though Left For Dead was tested at 8xMSAA.

So, it seems likely to me that this card has 8 RBEs. Got to remember that HD4850 is short on bandwidth, particularly for 8xMSAA (apparently about 25% short) though only 5%+ short with 4xMSAA.

So, 8 RBEs. That would imply a chip that's very much in the vicinity of 100mm2...

Jawed
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Two of these in CF would be on par or faster than GTX285 (based to anand's dual GPU article). not bad for $200.
 
Back
Top