AMD: R9xx Speculation

Which games are that, Heaven and Stone giant? 50% faster is quite on par with GTX580.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_580/27.html

 

No not really. Almost all twmtbp games maybe, 50% higher in everything else would generally end up a win for Cayman by a few percent.

 

yeah I'm in no mood to sit here and list review numbers and multiply them by 1.5 times, go ahead and try I already did them in my head and what I stated holds true .

EDIT And when the f*ck did this place become like Hardforum!

 

The general concensus has always been 580 is 35-40% faster than 5870 (as in, tad slower than 5970 overall, but much faster in some nvidia optimized games) so if the 6870 is 10% slower or so, I don't see why 50% faster wouldn't put it near the 580, but I don't want to bother checking 20 reviews

 

definitely near, in the 10% range, but not faster. Again we are basing it on what someone said without launch divers and final bios, which can have a pretty dramatic effect.

 

Facts are that you and I and everyone else here except for AMD personel dont have a freaken clue what Cayman is gonna bring to the table. Cayman is a new design so we have nothing to go by except the leaks that AMD PR let go and you know how that can come back to bite you.

 

If I believe in what that guy said Yes it would but do I

 

Not sure why the downplaying has begun so early, I'm sure trinibwoy would agree ..

 

Translation: This could mean delay till Dec 13, 2010 to increase GPU clock speed.

 

Exact. But if Cayman is slotted at U$299(Pro)-399(XT) price point and you dont have large stock how long should pass until it become vaporware or retailer once again rise prices, as they did with HD6870, caused by high demand and extremely low stocks.
So it would in fact serve nvidia better than now when their "limited offer" aka. vaporware keep its prices high but retailers still moves old HD5800 piled cards

And somehow i think even limited GTX580 aint so popular after all when at launch week they already have 10% promo discounts on insanely priced cards, thou they're already priced less than original MSRP $599.


Just hope AMD wont go for overfilling their pockets for next year keeping new Caymans limited and at high prices as they did with EG_Cypress HD5800 series, which most of their life were selling at higher than MSRP point due to "yield issues".

Yep that was really poor nVidia decision to introduce 8800 series too early and rave looses on 7900 Even if they have to write off loses during G80 launch quarter, they easily split them by selling highly overpriced 8800GTS320/640. And as early execution sideffect they demolished competition performance wise to debris size for next 7Q in a row by promoting their dx10 implementation. And that totals to 3yr while twimtbp hype last. Aside to that they had problematic 80nm/65nm designs that degraded thru cooling down cycles and even pads break thru from nv designed pcbs, but that's something well hidden under carpet and never recognized as design problem.
Now when we overlook the past, i'd say that was good execution no matter what some PR said about their losses (poor nv's ), yet measly one, on good selling and not nearly overpiled 79x0 cards, and even oem/retailers won their piece of cake by nv's discarding their old chips at popular prices.

But AMD today is nowhere near that excellent moment for nvidia. Unified shaders are four year old story and competition has strong dx11 cards. Early introduction of vaporware cards would only harm their rep, as nvidia's infamous Fermi(x2) did, while at the same time it would reduce prices of HD5800 cards below value mainstream Barts. And paying off for retailers virtual losses isnt something they want while current cards are still strong sellers.

I also keep my fingers crossed for more reasonable 300$ pricing. But who knows, it might be just strategic delay for AMD to see how high they could price their cards. And maybe they think now when GTX580 isnt something revolutionary we could spice up our profits and put $349(Pro) and $499(XT) prices "to better reflect on competition offerings". Sadly, that might be true reason behind "The Delay"

 

Clocks are decided by process characteristics and chip architecture. None of which can be fixed in a few weeks.

 

If you are correct; then other possibility is drivers, AMD might need to polish drivers or AMD discover some bugs in drivers.

Other clue could be final BIOS was not ready in time.

 

What's overclocking then?

 

Good point.......

It could well mean that AMD left some headroom for overcloking in catalyst control center under overdrive option, but now AMD might reduce headroom in CCC and clock cayman higher to compete with GTX580.

 

Clocks limits are decided by ^, not exact retail clocks. Both AMD and Nvidia clock their cards depending on product positioning, how many chips are able to work on set parameters, desired power draw and TDP, opponent cards in that price bracket and so on.

Thats why 6870 were pushed to the limits and are poor overclockers. If for example 6900 were left with a bigger headroom, and after seeing GTX580 average speed bump (yes, 15-20% extra speed for a refresh isnt inspiring), AMD could postpone launch for 3 weeks (they knew what GTX580 are capable of even longer), so they could do final clock tweaks to be more competitive.

I dont know if thats a true reason, but if lets say 6970 was 5% slower than GTX580, it would make a perfect reason for AMD to make a final speed bump and in return rake higher profits. Or as someone said if 6950 would be in GTX580 ball park, that wouldnt be pretty. Total domination, I hope it wonnt happen for our sake

 

You mean 6970!

 

Yes, edited now

 

Exploitation of statistical distribution.

 

Why would you need an extra few weeks to figure out the sweet spot for clocks?

 

AMD might have several sweet spots But the best option with lower power consumption!