Doesn't match the Caicos specs form this slide
From that Caicos seems too close to let juniper go on (when it arrives).
AMD: R9xx Speculation
- Thread starter Lukfi
- Start date
Doesn't match the Caicos specs form this slide
From that Caicos seems too close to let juniper go on (when it arrives).
Antilles should NOT be 6990 because it looks minor upgrade from 6970 (Cayman) "Reminds me HD4870 and HD4890 minor upgrade"
Antilles should be called 6970X2 it will make more sense vs. 6990.
EDIT: I assure everyone that Dave Baumann will NOT comment on this........
Antilles should be called 6970X2 it will make more sense vs. 6990.
EDIT: I assure everyone that Dave Baumann will NOT comment on this........
Last edited by a moderator:
IMHO;
the "problem" with Barts as 68x0 has nothing to do with the die-size but with a altered strategy from AMD.
RV840/HD57x0 was only half the size and performance and less than half the prize of the RV870/HD58x0
Now, if we believe the leaks AMD has changed the strategy (also to counter the GTX460):
Caicos seems to be a 1RPE GPU
Barts seems to be a 2RPE GPU
and Cayman is a 3RPE GPU.
Therefore the performance difference between the parts will be smaller and the huge gap in the lineup of the HD5000-series will be gone. BUT now AMD has a problem. Between the HD57x0 and the HD58x0 there is no "marketing number" left to fill the gap. Therefore AMD had two possible ways to handle it:
1) name the successor of the HD57x0 HD66x0
2) name the successor of the HD58x0 HD69x0
Also you have to take into account that the coming fusion APUs will need a place in the naming scheme too. Therefore AMD seems to have gone with number 2 above.
Would AMD have been able to avoid all the bad mouthing and outright attacks when they would have gone with number 1 above.
Maybe, maybe not. Barts based cards will be far more expensive than the RV840 based HD57x0 cards, therefore in the reviews they would be attacked for the very expensive mainstream HD67x0 cards and most likely consumers would be turned off too, due to the very expensive HD67x0 "mainstream" cards.
Anyway, AMD choose to go with option 2. IMHO they made the right decision. At first I was rather against it, but now I can see the reason for it and think it was the correct decision.
The only problem left is the naming scheme for the X2 cards. But it seems they found a good solution for that too if you believe the rumours on the net: naming the X2 cards HD6Xx0 (X for X2, and also X=10) is rather cool IMHO.
According to these photos from Chiphell, Caicos is a 64-Bit entry part: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=258682
So this slide is a fake or the maker confused Caicos with Turks.
You should also remember the Catalyst 10.8 atiicdxx.dat:
223,CAYMAN GL XT (6700),NI CAYMAN
224,CAYMAN GL XT (6701),NI CAYMAN
225,CAYMAN GL XT (6702),NI CAYMAN
226,CAYMAN GL XT (6703),NI CAYMAN
227,CAYMAN GL PRO (6704),NI CAYMAN
228,CAYMAN GL PRO (6705),NI CAYMAN
229,CAYMAN GL (6706),NI CAYMAN
230,CAYMAN GL LE (6707),NI CAYMAN
231,CAYMAN GL (6708),NI CAYMAN
232,CAYMAN GL (6709),NI CAYMAN
233,CAYMAN XT (6718),NI CAYMAN
234,CAYMAN PRO (6719),NI CAYMAN
235,ANTILLES PRO (671C),NI CAYMAN
236,ANTILLES XT (671D),NI CAYMAN
237,BLACKCOMB XT/PRO (6720),NI BLACKCOMB
238,BLACKCOMB LP (6721),NI BLACKCOMB
239,BLACKCOMB XT/PRO Gemini (6724),NI BLACKCOMB
240,BLACKCOMB LP Gemini (6725),NI BLACKCOMB
241,BARTS GL XT (6728),NI BARTS
242,BARTS GL PRO (6729),NI BARTS
243,BARTS XT (6738),NI BARTS
244,BARTS PRO (6739),NI BARTS
245,WHISTLER XT (6740),NI WHISTLER
246,WHISTLER PRO/LP (6741),NI WHISTLER
247,WHISTLER XT/PRO Gemini (6744),NI WHISTLER
248,WHISTLER LP Gemini (6745),NI WHISTLER
249,ONEGA (6750),NI TURKS
250,TURKS XT (6758),NI TURKS
251,TURKS PRO (6759),NI TURKS
252,SEYMOUR XT/PRO (6760),NI SEYMOUR
253,SEYMOUR LP (6761),NI SEYMOUR
254,SEYMOUR XT/PRO Gemini (6764),NI SEYMOUR
255,SEYMOUR LP Gemini (6765),NI SEYMOUR
256,CAICOS GL PRO (6768),NI CAICOS
257,CASPIAN PRO (6770),NI CAICOS
258,CAICOS PRO (6779),NI CAICOS
224,CAYMAN GL XT (6701),NI CAYMAN
225,CAYMAN GL XT (6702),NI CAYMAN
226,CAYMAN GL XT (6703),NI CAYMAN
227,CAYMAN GL PRO (6704),NI CAYMAN
228,CAYMAN GL PRO (6705),NI CAYMAN
229,CAYMAN GL (6706),NI CAYMAN
230,CAYMAN GL LE (6707),NI CAYMAN
231,CAYMAN GL (6708),NI CAYMAN
232,CAYMAN GL (6709),NI CAYMAN
233,CAYMAN XT (6718),NI CAYMAN
234,CAYMAN PRO (6719),NI CAYMAN
235,ANTILLES PRO (671C),NI CAYMAN
236,ANTILLES XT (671D),NI CAYMAN
237,BLACKCOMB XT/PRO (6720),NI BLACKCOMB
238,BLACKCOMB LP (6721),NI BLACKCOMB
239,BLACKCOMB XT/PRO Gemini (6724),NI BLACKCOMB
240,BLACKCOMB LP Gemini (6725),NI BLACKCOMB
241,BARTS GL XT (6728),NI BARTS
242,BARTS GL PRO (6729),NI BARTS
243,BARTS XT (6738),NI BARTS
244,BARTS PRO (6739),NI BARTS
245,WHISTLER XT (6740),NI WHISTLER
246,WHISTLER PRO/LP (6741),NI WHISTLER
247,WHISTLER XT/PRO Gemini (6744),NI WHISTLER
248,WHISTLER LP Gemini (6745),NI WHISTLER
249,ONEGA (6750),NI TURKS
250,TURKS XT (6758),NI TURKS
251,TURKS PRO (6759),NI TURKS
252,SEYMOUR XT/PRO (6760),NI SEYMOUR
253,SEYMOUR LP (6761),NI SEYMOUR
254,SEYMOUR XT/PRO Gemini (6764),NI SEYMOUR
255,SEYMOUR LP Gemini (6765),NI SEYMOUR
256,CAICOS GL PRO (6768),NI CAICOS
257,CASPIAN PRO (6770),NI CAICOS
258,CAICOS PRO (6779),NI CAICOS
There is no XT part of Caicos, which is common for the desktop entry parts.
thatdude90210
Regular
Someone else put forth the theory that had the .32 node not been canceled, NI would have possibly looked like this:
Barts = 2RPE
Cayman = 4RPE
In this scenario, it would have followed a similar path as Evergreen.
90% of buyers don't know/don't care. For those that do, they buy perf/watt or $, and couldn't care less which name the card has. I know I won't loose sleep over what 5770 replacement (read more perf/$) will be named, I just care about the end result (fps at 8xAA on my 22"). I really don't get all the fuss over all this naming thing. FX5200 sold well although it was worthless at DX9. G92 got rebranded many times and was a cash cow for NV. History teaches us one thing, marketers from both IHVs know better than B3D forum fillers
Can we now wait for NDA expiry or some hard facts? Please?
Babel-17
Veteran
I'm hoping the naming confusion is just a result of clever AMD marketing. Something along the lines of planting the seed of the idea of "The 6770, the mid-range card so powerful that AMD nearly branded it as a 6870".
That inspires relief and even joy at getting it well below 5870 prices.
AMD would be happy to sell it like hotcakes at prices well above the 5770.
Just spitballing. I'm mostly concerned about price and gaming IQ and video quality.
It could make a nice Christmas present to myself and I could hand down my 5770 to my nephew and brother-in-law.
Not a compelling upgrade for me right now seeing that what I play doesn't overly tax my 5770.
Improved anti-aliasing techniques in games like Fallout New Vegas might help me in deciding to get one. I don't think that game will push my 5770 beyond its limits.
That inspires relief and even joy at getting it well below 5870 prices.
AMD would be happy to sell it like hotcakes at prices well above the 5770.
Just spitballing. I'm mostly concerned about price and gaming IQ and video quality.
It could make a nice Christmas present to myself and I could hand down my 5770 to my nephew and brother-in-law.
Not a compelling upgrade for me right now seeing that what I play doesn't overly tax my 5770.
Improved anti-aliasing techniques in games like Fallout New Vegas might help me in deciding to get one. I don't think that game will push my 5770 beyond its limits.
caveman-jim
Regular
If you think of Barts as being an additional product slotting into the line up, it makes sense. Do you push down the rest of the product lines, reducing their relative performance (out of line against their strategic value) or do you bump up the enthusiast cards, reinforcing their high end positioning?
Aside from which, bringing the the x700 series pricing up to $200+ leaves a gap lower down, which you can't then fill as easily in an more competitive market.
Aside from which, bringing the the x700 series pricing up to $200+ leaves a gap lower down, which you can't then fill as easily in an more competitive market.
Or nVidia's margins are very low? Look at the financial results, maybe you'll change your opinion regarding ATi's very high margins
last Q
nV -$141.0M
ATi $33M
Juniper rebrand... 67xx
Why is it good for the middle class will not know what's new in the 6000 Series ? I am thinking here of the UVD. Caicos, Turks, Barts, Cayman, Antilles both know what's new in the UVD 3.
The best-selling mid-range UVD 2 will be able to because of the Juniper. So many users will miss this UVD 3. Wrong decision would be true if the renaming of this.
Why is it good for the middle class will not know what's new in the 6000 Series ? I am thinking here of the UVD. Caicos, Turks, Barts, Cayman, Antilles both know what's new in the UVD 3.
The best-selling mid-range UVD 2 will be able to because of the Juniper. So many users will miss this UVD 3. Wrong decision would be true if the renaming of this.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
No, that would not have solved anything, as the whole discussion is predicated on whether or not 68xx will be a significant performance increase over 58xx. Whether 59xx or 69xx is dual GPU or not is irrelevant in that discussion.
Die size is irrelevant with regards to product branding. Product branding is established so that your customers can differentiate your products and have an idea of how it compares to the rest of the current lineup and optimally to past lineups.
The only thing that a customer will notice or care about is how a product performs, what features the product has, and the price of a product.
With regards to price, 5770 launched at 169 USD while 5870 launched at 379 USD. Which makes more sense? 6770 moving up to 200 USD price range (say 200-249)? Something every consumer in the world would expect as inflation is a fact of life? Or 6870 moving down into the 200 USD price range (200-299).
So rather than keeping your branding consistent with performance, features and price. We are staring solidly at a situation where none of those are consistent with the branding. How in the world does that possibly best serve your customer? It only serves to mislead and confuse...
Of course, if performance of 6870 is a significant upgrade over 5870 and it's cheaper? I'm sure people won't complain. But if performance isn't an upgrade and it's cheaper? That won't matter, since people are still expecting 6870 to be better than 5870. That's been the established and marketed reality of the branding that has been established since 3xxx.
Again, if they wish to reshuffle performance expectations, they should come up with a new naming scheme. Nvidia got flak for this (8800 GTX -> 9800 GTX), Intel got flak for this (Pentium 3 -> Pentium 4, thus prompting Intel to come up with their new naming schemes since then), etc...
90% of buyers don't know/don't care. For those that do, they buy perf/watt or $, and couldn't care less which name the card has. I know I won't loose sleep over what 5770 replacement (read more perf/$) will be named, I just care about the end result (fps at 8xAA on my 22"). I really don't get all the fuss over all this naming thing. FX5200 sold well although it was worthless at DX9. G92 got rebranded many times and was a cash cow for NV. History teaches us one thing, marketers from both IHVs know better than B3D forum fillers
For that "90% of buyers don't know/don't care", branding is the ONLY way to judge performance. Price will give them an idea if they may or may not be getting a good deal, but branding, and more importantly consistent branding, is the most visible and most used criteria for many consumers that don't have the time to do extensive research.
Companies either remain consistent and provide good products with consistent branding to their customers, or they are inconsistent and rip off their customers. Companies that do that consistently end up suffering the consequences over the long haul as they slowly sink to the bottom of the barrel while companies that provide consistent and non-misleading branding usually rise to the top.
Regards,
SB
Or nVidia's margins are very low? Look at the financial results, maybe you'll change your opinion regarding ATi's very high margins
last Q
nV -$141.0M
ATi $33M
What do bumpgate damages have to do with chip margins?
That's not completely accurate.
Who decides what the yardstick is anyway? Is it only pure performance? If so then they would just keep increasing die sizes and power so as to continue improving performance.
If Barts XT is 10% slower than the 5870, but $150 cheaper, silent at full load and is 25% less power hungry, you can't tell me that's a bad deal overall. On pure performance sure but everywhere else it's a good deal.
Now say you are one of the 5870 owners and you know what to expect from Barts XT. You could ebay your 5870 right now and buy the new 6870 with the cash. Would you do it? I would. I'd give 10% pure performance for the rest of that in a heartbeat. And I'd even have money left I bet.
Everything considered, AMD can only do so much on the same node and not everybody can be happy. If it was 28nm this wouldn't be a discussion. AMD don't even have to release Northern Islands, you know what maybe they shouldn't bother if this is what their efforts are going to get them.
All the bitching and moaning didn't stop G92 and its various incarnations from being one of the most successful chips ever. Calling it a GTX 280 in notebooks was pretty evil, too. Juniper going 6700 has nothin on that.
It's all just business strategy. We know the real specs and how the cards perform. Whatever the companies want to call them doesn't really matter in the end.
Calling it a GTX 280 in notebooks was pretty evil, too. Juniper going 6700 has nothin on that.It's all just business strategy. We know the real specs and how the cards perform. Whatever the companies want to call them doesn't really matter in the end.
Ha, AMD is selling Juniper as 58xxm, which is slower than a 5770...
This would be the second renaming of Juniper.
You forget the other metric, price. Parts are distinguished by two metrics price and branding, not just the branding. Typically if you go into a store and you buy a $199 Nvidia or a $199 ATI you'll probably get around the same performance or thereabouts. It doesn't matter if you don't understand the branding on the card, most of the time you'll get about the same level of performance for your dollar. Its something that enthusiasts who argue over the 10-20% difference and forget how powerful each card is overall don't get.
See above to that chart of the various die sizes and model names. The 5870 was the mistake and the 6870 if its Barts is the correction. Traditionally a part that big would have been a 9xx part. This change is a return to consistancy, its not breaking it. It is dealing with the feature creep / performance creep that cards have experienced over the past few generations. It means when they return to the normal scheme of naming their cards they can keep the marketing consistancy so people know when they buy an x8xx or an x7xx card that they are getting what they think they are getting.
I understand your anger, but I feel with all due respects that it is unwarranted. I don't think AMD/ATI have done anything deliberately untoward with the express desire to rip off their loyal customers.
Agreed.All the bitching and moaning didn't stop G92 and its various incarnations from being one of the most successful chips ever.
It's all just business strategy. We know the real specs and how the cards perform. Whatever the companies want to call them doesn't really matter in the end.
Second compared to G92's nth renames? You've got a good comparison there. Oh wait, its Sontin, never mind then.
hoom
Veteran
I might have missed it amongst all the Barts = 6770/6870 stuff but:
Seems that Fermi was some kind of market leading product afterall O_O
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/10/08/amd-barts-turns-out-be-radeon-hd-6800-after-all/
http://www.computerbase.de/bildstrecke/30921/11/
Seems that Fermi was some kind of market leading product afterall O_O
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/10/08/amd-barts-turns-out-be-radeon-hd-6800-after-all/
http://www.computerbase.de/bildstrecke/30921/11/
Another thumbs down for the new HD6 series, still half vent openings...we get it AMD...you want to market Eyefinity as a "major feature"...but i bet with you...even less gamers care about Eyefinity than 3D....so losing more exhaust cooling to this "feature" makes the realist gamer a sad panda.
I personally don't think they'll rename Juniper to HD 6770 - but they'll make sure it fills in that important spot until Turks is ready.
Similar threads
