AMD: R8xx Speculation

Discussion in 'Architecture and Products' started by Shtal, Jul 19, 2008.

?

How soon will Nvidia respond with GT300 to upcoming ATI-RV870 lineup GPUs

Poll closed Oct 14, 2009.
  1. Within 1 or 2 weeks

    1 vote(s)
    0.6%
  2. Within a month

    5 vote(s)
    3.2%
  3. Within couple months

    28 vote(s)
    18.1%
  4. Very late this year

    52 vote(s)
    33.5%
  5. Not until next year

    69 vote(s)
    44.5%
  1. no-X

    Veteran

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,336
    Likes Received:
    297
    It would be better, maybe. My English isn't good enough to discern between nomenclature nuances :)

    Anyway, I have no idea about real power consumtion difference. Some reviews showed power drain similar to HD4870. Maybe these reviews tested the less power hungry part, which could be used for dual-configuration. But that's only my guess..
     
  2. AnarchX

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,559
    Likes Received:
    34
    There should be no consumption difference, since leakage also effects consumption.

    For X2-cards they need low-leakage and low-voltage parts or they have to reduce clock significantly.
     
  3. nAo

    nAo Nutella Nutellae
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    4,332
    Likes Received:
    119
    Location:
    San Francisco
    That's sarcasm..right?
     
  4. Kaotik

    Kaotik Drunk Member
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2003
    Messages:
    9,052
    Likes Received:
    2,925
    Location:
    Finland
    The real-world application power consumption seems to be +-10W from HD4870 depending on app
     
  5. Cypher

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    1
    Every bit of it :)
     
  6. 3dilettante

    Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    8,361
    Likes Received:
    3,940
    Location:
    Well within 3d
    Is this hardware threads or marketing threads?
    I'm saying that AMD is calling each element in a 64-element thread or in the case of graphics terminology calling each pixel in a 64-pixel batch a thread.

    The idea that the slide's 32K means a full hardware thread would require over a thousand addresses in the register file just for a single-register allocation in the shader.
     
  7. elsence

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Redwood & Cedar predictions:

    Cedar:

    From 675MHz up to 825MHz core and with 500MHz DDR2 up to 900MHz DDR3

    1. 4ROPs / 8TUs / 80SPs (around 290 million transitors & 51mm2) (64bit memory controller)


    2. 4ROPs / 16TUs / 160SPs (around 350 million transitors & 62mm2) (64bit memory controller)


    3. 8ROPs / 16TUs / 160SPs (around 420 million transitors & 73mm2) (64bit memory controller)

    I like scenario 1. (with only 675MHz SKUs)

    Price will be 30$ for 512MB DDR2 version.
    AMD will need in Q1 2010 an extrenely cheap AIB in order to entice potential Intel customers (Clarkdale with IGP launch in Q1 2010...) and give them cheap alternative solution. (entire range)

    For example in Q1 2010 we will have in the $200 range:

    i5 660 3,33GHz dual core (4Threads) +IGP $196
    Another alternative will be:
    i5 760 2,8GHz quad core (4 Threads) $196 + $30 5350 (scenario 1)

    Also it ($30) will be much faster than G 210.

    Redwood:

    From 675MHz up to 825MHz core and with 900MHz DDR3 up to 1GHz GDDR5

    1. 8ROPs / 32TUs / 320SPs (around 550 million transitors & 93mm2) (64bit (or 128bit) memory controller)

    2. 16ROPs / 32TUs / 320SPs (around 680 million transitors & 115mm2) (128bit memory controller)

    3. 8ROPs / 24TUs / 480SPs (around 660 million transitors & 112mm2) (64bit (or 128bit) memory controller)

    I like scenario 1. (5670 825MHz + 512MB 1GHz GDDR5 & 5650 675MHz with 900MHz DDR3) (there is a possibility for a 128bit memory controller design with DDR2 500 (5650) & DDR3 900MHz (5670), we will see...)


    Its easier for AMD to take the RV730 and make it DX11 (easier on the hardware side & on the software side)
    Also the 5670 version (around $59-69) will be as fast as the higher priced 550MHz GT240 900MHz DDR3 version, so no worries there.
     
    #4327 elsence, Oct 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 14, 2009
  8. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,515
    Likes Received:
    934
    Does anyone know how much GDDR5 costs compared to standard DDR3? I was wondering whether using GDDR5 might make sense on Redwood and Cedar. Presumably it would make it possible for them to have a 64-bit and a 32-bit memory bus, respectively. Bandwidth might be a little tight, but that seems to be the road AMD is taking on Evergreen.

    elsence > I can't imagine Redwood having less than 400SPs. It's supposed to replace RV730, it has to have a least a few more SPs.
     
  9. elsence

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alexko>

    it's not me speaking it's the Ouija board.

    lol



    O.K. i will add a third Redwood prediction just for you.
     
  10. LordEC911

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    795
    Likes Received:
    78
    Location:
    'Zona
    No idea about DDR3 but supposedly GDDR5 vs GDDR3 is only ~10% price increase.

    Edit- elsence, I like your third option the best for Redwood. It was what I was speculating it to be quite awhile ago.

     
    #4330 LordEC911, Oct 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 14, 2009
  11. Alexko

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    4,515
    Likes Received:
    934
    That's very nice of you :) But I know you were moving the planchette...

    I agree. I think this is the best way to get optimal performance/mm² while keeping board costs at a reasonable level, though it would help to know if a 64-bit board with GDDR5 costs more or less than a 128-bit board with DDR3.
     
  12. w0mbat

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    5
    A wider memory interface doesnt only increase the die-size but also makes the PCB more expensive. Smaller interface + faster memory is most times cheaper.
     
  13. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,875
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    :lol: It doesn't matter which actually. But for the sake of clarity, a hardware thread can only access 127 addresses (excluding shared registers).

    32768 marketing threads ("markethreads"), at 64 per hardware thread, is 512 hardware threads. This is the count of threads that was introduced by R520:

    http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/27/4

    And seemingly it's never gone up since then. Just the capacity of a thread has increased.

    Jawed
     
  14. mczak

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,018
    Likes Received:
    114
    Oh finally some new speculation about the evergreen parts we don't know yet :).
    We already have 256bit gddr5 (32rops) and 128bit gddr5 (16 rops) parts. I think it would make sense to continue along those lines hence redwood would have 8 rops, and probably 128bit ddr3, and cedar is probably 4 rops, 64bit ddr3 (now ddr2 would just totally suck, and imho at this time with ddr3 chip prices nearly the same as ddr2 make no sense).
    You could argue about 64/32 bit gddr5 instead, but it makes not much sense since the biggest chips you can get are 1gbit, so even if the gddr5 chips are 32bit you still need at least 4 for a 512MB card (and 8 for 1GB - OEMs absolutely love large video memory...).
    Dunno about the shader / texture count though. I think low end versions will keep the tradition of having smaller simds (hence higher tex:alu ratio) though to what degree is anyone's guess - I wouldn't be surprised if the ratio gets adjusted a bit. So simd width 12 at least for redwood would make sense imho, it could have maybe 6 such simds hence 24 texturing units and 360 shader units. This should have comparable performance to HD4670 (hence handily beat the GT220 with similar die size).
    For Cedar maybe 2 simds with size 12 (8 tmus / 120 shader units) or 3 simds with size 8 (12 tmus / 120 shader units) sounds like it would be very small and still more than enough to beat the competition (g210).
    And all cards still with 3 display outputs would also be nice... (though in fact I'm curious how many display controllers juniper has - we've been hinted that those additional display controllers were driven by the needs of notebook manufacturers, hence Juniper might still have 6 since Cypress doesn't really make sense in a notebook?)
     
  15. Groo The Wanderer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2007
    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    2
    http://www.semiaccurate.com/2009/10/06/nvidia-will-crater-gtx260-and-gtx275-prices-soon/

    The numbers in this (about 2/3rds down) are *SLIGHTLY* blurred from real volume prices. Getting hard number on this stuff is hard, but you can if you try. Basically 10% more from GDDR3 @~1GHz to GDDR5@1GHz. Going to GDDR5@1.25 adds about another 10%.

    The question to ask is how much PCB cost, and pin/package costs does it save by going from 3 to 5? Low bin GDDR5 has more or less the same bandwidth (1) as GDDR3 at the top bin with double the bit width. That is significant, especially on a small die.

    -Charlie

    (1) Unless your GDDR5 controller is totally hosed. No names. In totally unrelated news, did you see Fudo posted a story ~2 weeks ago about the cool new feature of Fermi? It supports GDDR3! I wonder why? 384 bit GDDR3 feeding 512 shaders is how much more than 512 bit GDDR3 feeding 240 shaders? My calculator must be broken, it keeps putting a dash in front of the results.
     
  16. ninelven

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,712
    Likes Received:
    131
    ECC, guess it sucks to be AMD :roll:.
     
  17. Arty

    Arty KEPLER
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,906
    Likes Received:
    55
    Well isnt the the GDDR3 support in there because there is no ECC GDDR5 in existence yet? Just saying .. (I'm also completely illiterate when it comes to GPGPU performance with lowered memory system bandwidth)
     
  18. Blazkowicz

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    5,607
    Likes Received:
    256
    The one relevant, supported memory type other than GDDR-5 is standard, regular DRAM DDR3. It will be replacing DDR2 on budget cards, and is an option for Tesla, using ECC memory.

    For instance there could be a faster Tesla board with 3GB GDDR-5, and a slower, lower voltage one with 6GB ddr3 ECC.
     
  19. hoom

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    547
    I thought DX11 requires 1024 threads, up from 768 in DX10?
    Or is that a different type of thread again :???:
     
  20. 3dcgi

    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    2,439
    Likes Received:
    280
    The question is... which of those two numbers is correct. :wink:

    That's how many per thread group. I think that's thread block in CUDA terminology.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...