gamervivek
Regular
Is anyone else here NOT excited about this launch?
Please all remember that this launch represents the death of the ATi brand, and show a little respect and reverence.
not excited, bad bad.
AMD: R9xx Speculation
- Thread starter Lukfi
- Start date
not excited, bad bad.
http://www.nordichardware.com/news/...d-6870-and-6850-launches-on-october-18th.html
Why nordichardware claim that Barts PRO / XT is Radeon 6850 / 6870 ?? instead 6750 / 6770 series graphics!
This is stupid because BartsXT is NOT real replacement of HD5870!!!!! (Theatrically BartsXT will not match HD5870 in RAW performance)
The nature of any GPU or CPU company is to release something faster - but this NEW naming scheme got me confuse for new GPU's...........
Why nordichardware claim that Barts PRO / XT is Radeon 6850 / 6870 ?? instead 6750 / 6770 series graphics!
This is stupid because BartsXT is NOT real replacement of HD5870!!!!! (Theatrically BartsXT will not match HD5870 in RAW performance)
The nature of any GPU or CPU company is to release something faster - but this NEW naming scheme got me confuse for new GPU's...........
Last edited by a moderator:
Wait, let me get this straight.. you're saying that Barts offers no improvements at all over Cypress?
I think you need to wait, relax and see what Barts is about in reviews.
I think ATI made improvements and will catch up to Nvidia Fermi in tessellation 3D rendering - so BartsXT will be better in DX11 over CypressXT but NOT in DX10/DX9 games.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you should decouple Barts and HD6800 in your brain.
Just the number HD6870 makes you (and a lot of other people) go nuts while you forget what kind of product Barts is.
If, what was suggested by Fudzilla, that Fusion parts will be Radeons too, AMD is going to need a lot of new part numbers if they don't want to rebrand in that crappy 545v or whatever parts again. That way, it would be logical to see parts move up.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
What kind of product is Barts? But before saying anything, try to memorise what you are saying and I will remind you that when Crysis 2 is launched or another new game.
But before saying anything, try to memorise what you are saying and I will remind you that when Crysis 2 is launched or another new game.
Last edited by a moderator:
Is anyone else here NOT excited about this launch?
Please all remember that this launch represents the death of the ATi brand, and show a little respect and reverence.
Well generally speaking, for end-users, moving to new lithographic processes bring more tangible benefits. This is the third product generation on TSMC 40nm, after the 4770 and the 5xxx series. It's difficult to imagine drastic advances in performance/power draw, which is pretty much the only development that concern me much these days. If they can get rid of the problem that makes the 5xxx series displayport incompatible with the iMac 27", I may still upgrade - it was the only reason I went from the 4770 to the 5750, so it was a major annoyance to find out about the problem, and that it couldn't be solved in software/firmware.
If you're not excited, that may be a sign of healthy maturity brought on by advancing age and experience, or that the new owners of your favourite football club decided to change its name. Pick one.
I was around in 3D before Silicon Graphics was founded. Having seen how they tried to transform from a graphics workstation company into a high performance computing company before fading into obscurity, it is both ironic and sad to see nVidia desperately trying to transform their business in a similar way. Not too surprising I guess, given the personal history of many there. At least Silicon Graphics used their experience to build entirely new (and pretty good) systems for the purpose, rather than as nVidia trying to adapt their gaming accessories for computation while still selling them to WoW players.
ATI used to be in the same boat as nVidia, but with AMD as owners their old strategic roadmap no longer apply and they can potentially choose to more efficiently target their actual customers, PC game players. This is a competitive advantage. Given their financial situation they should, IMO, exploit it to the fullest.
Last edited by a moderator:
leoneazzurro
Regular
If Barts is a 6870, and it should eventually come also to the notebook space maybe this will also end the silly different naming scheme for the Mobility series as well.
It may be also connected to die-size, TDP and price.
if we compare the 48xx series and 58xx, they are really different.
HD4850 MSRP was 199$,130W of TDP, but HD5850 MSRP was 259$,151 W
HD4870 MSRP was 299$, 150 W but HD5870 MRSP was 379$, 188 W
The die-size of Cypress is also 25% bigger than RV770.
Also
4770 MRSP was 109$, 80 W TDP, while 5770 MRSP was 159$, 108 W TDP.
The situation is actually more confusing now, where series number are NOT a clear indication of TDP, price, but just of performance.
Maybe with the new naming scheme they want to tie the series number to TDP and price point for good.
Example:
Discrete parts:
x9xx, >299$, 300 - 150 W, performance 100%, > 300 mm^2
x8xx, > 199$, 150 - 100W, performance 50% of high-end, 250- 200 m^2
x7xx, > 99$, 100-50 W, performance 25% of high-end, 200-100 m^2
Fusion parts:
x6xx Llano
x5xx Llano
x4xx Zacate
x3xx Ontario
And dual-card from now on may always have the x990 name.
if we compare the 48xx series and 58xx, they are really different.
HD4850 MSRP was 199$,130W of TDP, but HD5850 MSRP was 259$,151 W
HD4870 MSRP was 299$, 150 W but HD5870 MRSP was 379$, 188 W
The die-size of Cypress is also 25% bigger than RV770.
Also
4770 MRSP was 109$, 80 W TDP, while 5770 MRSP was 159$, 108 W TDP.
The situation is actually more confusing now, where series number are NOT a clear indication of TDP, price, but just of performance.
Maybe with the new naming scheme they want to tie the series number to TDP and price point for good.
Example:
Discrete parts:
x9xx, >299$, 300 - 150 W, performance 100%, > 300 mm^2
x8xx, > 199$, 150 - 100W, performance 50% of high-end, 250- 200 m^2
x7xx, > 99$, 100-50 W, performance 25% of high-end, 200-100 m^2
Fusion parts:
x6xx Llano
x5xx Llano
x4xx Zacate
x3xx Ontario
And dual-card from now on may always have the x990 name.
Last edited by a moderator:
onethreehill
Newcomer
HD 5850 MSRP was 259$ at launch
UniversalTruth
Veteran
Yeah but that doesn't mean you have to take those two values, find their mean and write it as MRSP.
Last edited by a moderator:
Won't work when there are more than only a single multi GPU card.
What about reviving the X2? Works quite well for AMD's CPUs.
PSU-failure
Newcomer
Naming scheme...
Why did nobody think of a misunderstood leak as the reason for all these "Barts = 6800" & co. ?
ATi brand is gone, so there's the possibility they change the naming scheme too, while keeping the "Radeon" brand.
With this in mind, someone hearing about Barts not being "HD6.7k" could conclude it's "HD6.8k" whereas it's "Radeon P1000" or whatever codename they choose.
Why did nobody think of a misunderstood leak as the reason for all these "Barts = 6800" & co. ?
ATi brand is gone, so there's the possibility they change the naming scheme too, while keeping the "Radeon" brand.
With this in mind, someone hearing about Barts not being "HD6.7k" could conclude it's "HD6.8k" whereas it's "Radeon P1000" or whatever codename they choose.
I don't think there will be the need for two dual-gpu solution.
If they change completely, i hope it will be clear as this one or better.
Well I'm old, but the term "healthy maturity" doesn't resonate well with my personality/history...I think I'll have to fall in the latter category.If you're not excited, that may be a sign of healthy maturity brought on by advancing age and experience, or that the new owners of your favourite football club decided to change its name. Pick one.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
If that's the case, I won't have any problem with it as it's not trying to piggyback a lower tier chip on a higher tier established naming scheme.
However, if Barts = 68xx and is roughly similar in speed to 58xx overall, I'll put Radeon graphics cards on a 1 or 2 product personal buying ban similar to what I did with Nvidia products this year. And I'll urge everyone I know in RL to do the same just as I did with Nvidia cards.
Lucky for me, Nvidia is finally starting to be competitive again, and my 2 product cycle ban on them is about over.
And to Neliz for needing more room on the product naming scheme, there's far more room below 68xx then there is above it for products. x1xx and x2xx haven't been used much. x3xx and x4xx haven't even been used every product generation since the whole naming scheme reorganization started with 3xxx.
I'd imagine your customers would be happier if there was a performance bump at each of those lower tiers with products moving down, rather than potentially stagnant performance at x8xx and x9xx having x8xx performance.
Then again, perhaps Barts is "on average" 50% faster than Cypress. If so I'll certainly be surprised, and will recant everything I've said against naming it 68xx. I find this situation extremely doubtful however.
Regards,
SB
Similar threads
