UniversalTruth
Veteran
In any case, the upcoming 6800 will not be so much faster than 5800 as 4800 was over 3800, and 5800 over 4800. 
AMD: R9xx Speculation
- Thread starter Lukfi
- Start date
In any case, the upcoming 6800 will not be so much faster than 5800 as 4800 was over 3800, and 5800 over 4800.
because you can't compare them to HD5800, a different price bracket all together.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Really? Why? As I said before, the price itself is an artificial thing and can be manipulated in whatever manner you like.
And of course, everyone sane should expect 5800's performance to be cheaper one year later. It is natural.
And of course, everyone sane should expect 5800's performance to be cheaper one year later. It is natural.
Besides, all naysayers actually think that HD68x0 is going to be slower than HD58x0
Are you saying it isn't?
Comparing P and 06 scores without even mentioning the cpu (let alone if the geforce cpu scores are correct) is pretty worthless... We know the cpu of the alleged 68x0 numbers, but not the rest..
5850 is already just a notch above 200, isn't it? Launch prices don't count, cause that's not what people base their buying decisions on.
Unknown Soldier
Veteran
Once the 68xx comes out the prices for the 58xx series should drop a little from it's current state and when Cayman arrives those prices(58xx) might drop even further.
I expect the 6870 to come in at $250 and 6850 at about $200 or less with the 5870 at about $300 and 5850 at $225. Cayman will be the $300-$500 range and Antilles from $500-$600.
That's my opinion.
I expect the 6870 to come in at $250 and 6850 at about $200 or less with the 5870 at about $300 and 5850 at $225. Cayman will be the $300-$500 range and Antilles from $500-$600.
That's my opinion.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
See! ... then it's all good!
I think it's better for AMD (or their image) to EOL all 5000s and to set the launch price of 6800 series at the level of 5700s'.
Then it will be a real replacement, because now it seems like... a g_y trick. So they took the previously revealed numbers and put them in ... what? Not context, b/c they don't mention CPUs, like Psycho said. I tried finding some context with somewhat recent Vantage X #s.
But I'm not buying 960 shaders. The earlier leak of 1280 seems more believable, considering the Vantage X scores (moreso TechGage's, b/c their 5870 vs. 5850 difference tracks closer to the GFLOPs or Gtexels difference than Xbit's). Whether Barts is now VLIW-4 or is just 4/5 of a Cypress, dunno.
Code:
FLOPs Gtex/s Xbit TechGage
5850 2,088 52.2 7483 7005
6870 2,304 57.6 7538 7538
10.3% 10.3% 0.7% 7.6%I am buying 1280 all wheel drive.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
In which case it should have just been called 67xx if it's coming in at a lower price. The ONLY reason to call it a 68xx is to deceive and mislead the consumer. Hence, it is complete fail, IMO.
Not to mention making a complete mockery of the consistent and practical naming scheme since 3xxx. We're basically going back to the dark ages of naming schemes where performance is just randomly assigned numbers with virtually no consistency. Again, even more fail...
Regards,
SB
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Besides, all naysayers actually think that HD68x0 is going to be slower than HD58x0
As I've said if 68xx is significantly faster than the 58xx parts it replaces, then kudo's to AMD. I have a hard time giving that much credence at the moment. However, all will be clear in a few weeks.
This, leading to the following comment...
See! ... then it's all good!
Means, that 5870 (Cypress) should have been priced under 200 USD since 4870 had already fallen below 150 USD by the time it launched.
And I believe was closer to 100 than 150 USD at many places already when 5870 launched.EOL prices rarely bear any relevance to the launch price of the replacement parts.
Regards,
SB
Are consumers that are buying 5800 series class card really so dumb you can deceive them so easily?
I think price/performance plays a major role here and not a fraking name. Else everyone would buy GTX 465 instead of GTX 460 thinking its better cause the number is bigger.
Give me a break.
I think price/performance plays a major role here and not a fraking name. Else everyone would buy GTX 465 instead of GTX 460 thinking its better cause the number is bigger.
Give me a break.
Counterpoint: $200 Geforce FX5900 1GB
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Jawed
Legend
Sigh, the next pile of shite from Futuremark, you mean?What if 6870 will be faster in DX11?
I hope it is only one or maximum two weeks left to wait.
If barts is anywhere close to 58xx's levels, then people will be falling over each other to leak the results (amd provided ones, of course) after the press event.
PS: When is the press event due anyways?
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
Don't underestimate the stupidity of the customer. Not just those who haven't got a clue, but those who have a little bit of knowledge and think they know a lot more than they do. Most everyone thinks bigger/newer number = better (or that it should be). Those are the expectations.
Similar threads
