AMD: R9xx Speculation

http://www.chiphell.com/forum.php?m...=fastpost&random=0.38606609877944853#lastpost

Barts:
t89dg1.jpg


xndavp.jpg
 
wrt 2 I think it might not improve with Barts (if it has same number of TMUs than Cypress), only Cayman (e.g. there could be a 2 times cache bandwidth improvement for 1.5 times the TMUs)
Patent documents I linked earlier might suggest two cores' TMUs share a single L1. So while Barts might have the same TMU count as Cypress, the bandwidth per L1 from L2 would be much better.

That still doesn't really answer how effectively two sets of TMUs share an L1, i.e. what trade-offs occur.
 
68** series using such low quality cooling solution. never gonna happen. :LOL:

So, you think a 150W+ HD 67xx card seems more probable?

That being said, I wouldn't hold my breath on the cooling solution being used here given that the card doesn't even sport a slot plate ;)

Looking closely, is that the retail-cooler's ouline drawn on the PCB?
 
The PCB's of late have those drawings for "shrouded cooling setup" regardless of the actual used cooler, even HD5750 which has the "egg-shaped" cooler as reference has one drawn on the PCB (and no, it doesn't match the shape of the "egg-cooler")
 
what's wrong with just a shroud over this fan? look at the MSI cyclone and nvidia's gtx460 reference cooler (without shroud.)
 
The PCB's of late have those drawings for "shrouded cooling setup" regardless of the actual used cooler, even HD5750 which has the "egg-shaped" cooler as reference has one drawn on the PCB (and no, it doesn't match the shape of the "egg-cooler")
I was thinking more in terms of PWM placement and the big block of outputs than the silkscreened outline.
 
Still, the PCB seems rather big for an HD67xx card ...

23294125.jpg


Moreover, as for the cooler/shroud design, both the HD5770 PCB (top) and the the rumoured Barts PCB (middle) have "cooler drawings" on them, but the Barts PCB actually seems to have "holes" to fasten one (cf. right hand side).

Also, notice how the ram placing seems very similar to that of the HD5870 PCB (buttom) / green line.
 
That's what I expect though, 68** slower or in a best case scenario equal in performance to the one-year-old 58**... So I really hope AMD is not using NVidia's poor naming methods. It is a kind of lack of taste or I don't know how to call it.... I hope Dave or whoever from AMD is thinking really seriously on this...
 
Back
Top