NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation

Me neither.

More like a dual 570 at 480 clocks (or lower) is what I'd expect.

In any case, my question is this. According to hardware.fr's power consumption measurements of the 6970/50 review, the 6970 consumes as much as a GTX 570 in 3dmark06. Actually the 570 was a tad lower.



It seems very natural for everyone to expect a 6990 with two Cayman XTs but very impossible for a GTX 595 to feature two GF110s. Why?

You forgot to mention that it was about 35watts higher at max usage.
 
Hope this is the right place for this question.

Wanted to get advice some from you guys as I've been off the PC scene for a while. I have an i7-920 and I'm looking to upgrade my graphics card. Do you guys think it's worth waiting for the 595 (or even the 6990), or should I just get a 580 given the amount of power and heat the 595 will probably generate? (I have a 650watt Corsair PSU btw).
 
It should be 2x GF114's:
gtx590.jpg

Is it possible that both a 590 AND a 595 will come out?

First with dual GF114s and the second with dual GF110s? Both cards should end up faster than 580, but the latter would be a bomb.

Hope this is the right place for this question.

Wanted to get advice some from you guys as I've been off the PC scene for a while. I have an i7-920 and I'm looking to upgrade my graphics card. Do you guys think it's worth waiting for the 595 (or even the 6990), or should I just get a 580 given the amount of power and heat the 595 will probably generate? (I have a 650watt Corsair PSU btw).

Hey VIC.

I've been testing my 570 SLI the past couple of weeks. Upgraded from two 5850s.

I've been doing all tests on a 850Mhz clock on the 570s, since I found it to add no noise over the stock freq/voltage. That's all I ever wanted really, since a 570@850Mhz is around 50% faster than a stock 5850. At the end of the day, one 570 is more than enough for most games. Even with a single 570@850Mhz, my i7 860@4GHz found itself having a hard time keeping this beast fed with data, let alone both of them.

Truth be told, from a gameplay perspective, they are quite a good match.

I have uploaded a quadrillion benchmarks and gameplay videos in both single and SLI mode which you can find in my Youtube channel if you are interested.

For what's it worth, a 570@850Mhz is equal to a stock 580, so you'll get a pretty decent idea of what you get. I strongly advice against a 580 and save yourself the money, but that's your call really. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey VIC.

I've been testing my 570 SLI the past couple of weeks. Upgraded from two 5850s.

I've been doing all tests on a 850Mhz clock on the 570s, since I found it to add no noise over the stock freq/voltage. That's all I ever wanted really, since a 570@850Mhz is around 50% faster than a stock 5850. At the end of the day, one 570 is more than enough for most games. Even with a single 570@850Mhz, my i7 860@4GHz found itself having a hard time keeping this beast fed with data, let alone both of them.

Truth be told, from a gameplay perspective, they are quite a good match.

I have uploaded a quadrillion benchmarks and gameplay videos in both single and SLI mode which you can find in my Youtube channel if you are interested.

For what's it worth, a 570@850Mhz is equal to a stock 580, so you'll get a pretty decent idea of what you get. I strongly advice against a 580 and save yourself the money, but that's your call really. ;)

Wow that's a very comprehensive set you have there. Do you have Metro 2033? I'm getting it next week as it's only £10, though I may wait until I have my new card before playing it - currently I have a 4890.

Interesting point about the 570 which I was orginally was considering. Problem is, I've never overclocked a card before :rolleyes:.

Btw, nice wallpaper you have on your desktop!! (Crysis gameplay vid, bottom-left corner) Who is that?
 
It seems very natural for everyone to expect a 6990 with two Cayman XTs but very impossible for a GTX 595 to feature two GF110s. Why?
I'd expect more like 2 Cayman Pro (well maybe with all simds enabled, not that it would help performance a lot). Don't forget that the HD 6950 has better perf/power as tHD 6970 - same is true for GTX 570 vs. GTX 580, because the top models operate above the ideal clock/voltage (from a perf/power perspective).
But ultimately what makes 2xCayman at "reasonable" clocks easier is imho PowerTune. The chip can enforce the TDP by downclocking when necessary. That should have less of a performance impact than just lowering clocks statically (which is presumably what you'd need to do with 2xGF110).
 
Wow that's a very comprehensive set you have there. Do you have Metro 2033? I'm getting it next week as it's only £10, though I may wait until I have my new card before playing it - currently I have a 4890.

Interesting point about the 570 which I was orginally was considering. Problem is, I've never overclocked a card before :rolleyes:.

Btw, nice wallpaper you have on your desktop!! (Crysis gameplay vid, bottom-left corner) Who is that?

Thanks! :p

Let's take this on PM! :)
 
Hope this is the right place for this question.

Wanted to get advice some from you guys as I've been off the PC scene for a while. I have an i7-920 and I'm looking to upgrade my graphics card. Do you guys think it's worth waiting for the 595 (or even the 6990), or should I just get a 580 given the amount of power and heat the 595 will probably generate? (I have a 650watt Corsair PSU btw).

As far as I know, the GTX 590/595 is still hypothetical, but the 6990 is expected this quarter, probably this month, so it doesn't hurt to wait a bit and see what happens.

Plus, the GTX 560 might shake things up a little bit, and a Crossfire/SLI of 6950s/560s is worth considering, methinks.
 
I'd expect more like 2 Cayman Pro (well maybe with all simds enabled, not that it would help performance a lot). Don't forget that the HD 6950 has better perf/power as tHD 6970 - same is true for GTX 570 vs. GTX 580, because the top models operate above the ideal clock/voltage (from a perf/power perspective).
But ultimately what makes 2xCayman at "reasonable" clocks easier is imho PowerTune. The chip can enforce the TDP by downclocking when necessary. That should have less of a performance impact than just lowering clocks statically (which is presumably what you'd need to do with 2xGF110).



Probably I'm wrong, but has AMD ever used PRO chips for their top-of-the-line GPU product? :oops:

I mean that your statement contradicts itself. Cayman PRO but with XT shaders and probably lower frequencies. That doesn't make it Cayman PRO. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Probably I'm wrong, but has AMD ever used PRO chips for their top-of-the-line GPU product? :oops:

I mean that your statement contradicts itself. Cayman PRO but with XT shaders and probably lower frequencies. That doesn't make it Cayman PRO. ;)
Well, call it XT with PRO frequencies then. Who cares about name. Fact is, both for performance and power consumption it's way closer to 2xPRO than 2xXT (for the HD5970 - I don't expect HD6990 to be any different, if it will indeed have all simds enabled). Those additional 2 simds give you about 2% more performance, so it's no big deal either way if AMD would disable them.
 
Well, you are right. ;) This particular name doesn't matter, more important is the actual performance and when, if :LOL:, AMD will decide to release the product. :LOL: Funny, isn't it? :oops:
 
As far as I know, the GTX 590/595 is still hypothetical, but the 6990 is expected this quarter, probably this month, so it doesn't hurt to wait a bit and see what happens.

Plus, the GTX 560 might shake things up a little bit, and a Crossfire/SLI of 6950s/560s is worth considering, methinks.

Yes that is another consideration. It seems as though people expect efficient power and heat consumption. I guess the only concern here is price, the 5970 was more than £500 at launch I believe.

I've heard some hype about Antilles and how it might alter the landscape, but how much of that is fanboy hype, when you consider it in respect to Fermi....
 
I'm quite sure it'll be 2x Cayman XT @ Pro speeds, just like 5970 was 2x Cypress XT @ Pro speeds
 
I'm quite sure it'll be 2x Cayman XT @ Pro speeds, just like 5970 was 2x Cypress XT @ Pro speeds

Probably a bit lower, since even Cayman Pro is a 200W card. Power containment will help, but only up to a point. That said, I expect AMD to fit the card with two 8-pin connectors and play the overclocking card the same way they did with the 5970, perhaps emphasizing it even more this time.

Edit: then again, in practice it seems to draw less than the 5870, so…
 
Probably a bit lower, since even Cayman Pro is a 200W card. Power containment will help, but only up to a point. That said, I expect AMD to fit the card with two 8-pin connectors and play the overclocking card the same way they did with the 5970, perhaps emphasizing it even more this time.

The real-life powerdraw of 6950 is easily below 5870, though
 
Isn't it less than 30% faster, in fact? :???: And if it is an OCed part, then it might not look so imressive (let's use this word, although it's not accurate). :D
 
Isn't it less than 30% faster, in fact? :???: And if it is an OCed part, then it might not look so imressive (let's use this word, although it's not accurate). :D

If you want to be so exact, 31.4% faster in Vantage and 30.2% faster in that "2.1 thingy" that appears to be Heaven:?: ! Didn't do exact calculations previously. 1/3 faster is not too far off.

From what I've gathered, 832Mhz will be the stock clock. It's about this stock clock that I said it seems kinda high.

They don't mention which 460 this is though, because there are three already.
 
Back
Top