I am not. I've shown you 20 cases where I'm right, you've shown 1 where you're right, and another case where it really makes no difference at all.
AMD: Southern Islands (7*** series) Speculation/ Rumour Thread
- Thread starter UniversalTruth
- Start date
I am not. I've shown you 20 cases where I'm right, you've shown 1 where you're right, and another case where it really makes no difference at all.
Isn't it rather logical that 3Gb would help at multi-monitor resolution > 1600p?
I know you can't really do a direct comparison easily with triple 1080p monitors since 580 can't do that (although isn't there some custom 580 some company made for 3 displays on 1 card?)
I know you can't really do a direct comparison easily with triple 1080p monitors since 580 can't do that (although isn't there some custom 580 some company made for 3 displays on 1 card?)
Yes the galaxy card that HardOCP used in their review can do 3 displays, the problem being that it doesn't come in a 3GB version afaik.
Agreed, you have. The point is in the perception that I've made reference to :smile:. Again, the 6970 is now a mid range card.
Sure, the difference in performance is minimal between the 1.5gig and 3gig but it ain't 0 . There is a difference but at times it's minimal. It depends on the game, resolution, etc.
The 30%-40% performance gap between the 7970 vs 6970 is great to me. I would think that the gap would be larger once drivers get better.
Because the performance between the 1.5gig and 3gig is common knowledge is why I question the reference between the 7970 vs 580 1.5gig in price vs 7970 vs 580 3gig in performance. It wasn't intended to suggest that the 3gig version offered a substantial performance increase over the 1.5gig version.
Last edited by a moderator:
Is the PRT-feature automatic, or via API? I'd like to have some more solid info about it (in the form of a paper maybe?). Fe. does it also apply to frame-buffers? How is it connected to frame-buffer compression? The rather low bandwidth of PCIe suggests that FBC was implemented to support/help PRT in the first place.
PRT would require exposure in the main API or extensions to be visible for software writers.
The driver would have full exposure to it, or the subsystems that implement it, which I was curious about with regards to crossfire scaling.
The driver would have full exposure to it, or the subsystems that implement it, which I was curious about with regards to crossfire scaling.
You are correct. Where the 3GB version isn't only *1FPS* ahead in those tests, it is actually SLOWER in Battlefield: BC2, Call of Duty, Crysis Warhead and F1 2010.
I still haven't seen anything that would make me buy a 3GB 580 over a 1.5GB version. It obviously doesn't need it - as I've said, no game suddenly get playable with double the RAM.
The question would be more important to 2012 titles. Will 2012 titles require more vram than 2011 ones and in some cases 2007 games that are still benchmarked to this day ?
By the time any other games come out in 2012/13 that need 3GB, we will have the new 6/780 GTX out. Yes, they will be 3GB most likely, but that doesn't make it any less pointless on a 580. There's only two games currently I forsee even getting the 1FPS difference from 3GB, Far Cry 3 and Max Payne 3 (maybe). All the rest are "low power games" like Diablo 3 and Torchlight 2, or console clones like Mass Effect 3. From what I've seen so far, there is no Battlefield 3 for next year.
It all depends on what section of the game is being tested (as the 2 linked reviews show). Furthermore, it's all about perception. Some still believe that more vram makes games better. The truth is that the 7970 still beats the GTX 580 in all flavors (overclocked, having 3 gigs, both overclocked and having 3 gigs). Which was the point of all this.
Is the 7970 priced accordingly? I would think so since the 580 3 gig which is slower then the 7970 and offers minimal improvement over the 1.5 is priced in that range. Now the question is if the 7950 still beats the 580 as well? If it does then that would show how efficient the design is. In any case, it's still moot to compare the 7970 to a 580 1.5gig prices wise then try to compare it to the 580 3gig performance wise.
Last edited by a moderator:
I will ask for one example only. Either 6028x1200 or 3888x1920 with all option on ultra and 16x AF, 8xMSAA or any SGSSAA where a 1.5GB 580 matches a 3GB 580 at the same clocks. Hires doesn't start until you hit these resolutions.
Oh, be sure not to visit any of HardOCP's reviews involving 3GB cards - you won't find what you're looking for there.
Sorry, but Eyefinity etc is a niche feature. Talk about absolute levels of cherry picking. My original statement was to the gaming community as a whole. My point still stands.
Not the same clocks...nice try
So wait... I post loads of graphs that prove my point, and I get shouted down because theres ONE game that shows otherwise. Someone ELSE posts graphs that PROVE MY POINT, and I still get shouted down.
Am I being trolled? There's way too many fanboi's in this thread.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Really?
If AMD's new 4.3B transistor chip on a 28nm beats basically a two year old 3B 40nm chip that had a makeover year ago, it shows how efficient the design is? Even with the speculated cut downs, the 7950 should be able to beat GTX 580 in most (almost all) cases and that is only par for the course.
I have very mixed feelings about this new chip. On the other hand the price is justified against the competition, but that competition is old news from the past. Hard to get excited if you can beat up a grandpa... Just looking at the performance, I'm wondering whether 7970 is going to compete against the successor to the 560 or 580? I don't want to pay 549$ and have that sort of questions in my head. Still hard to argue with the fact that AMD is probably able to ship quite a few even with these prices.
Good value doesn't exist when only one manufacturer is out...
Right now, there is no other sku to reference from the 7900 series competition so we use what we have. I see nothing wrong with that.
DarthShader
Regular
... while using around 100W of power less...
PS. Charlie says the Tahiti Pro cards will come around 399$. Soundslike a good eal after all, if true.
If Nvidia can beat the performance of Tahiti on a 365mm die I'll be impressed with that too.
Its not really a niche among the populous of Enthusiast graphics cards.
Similar threads
