AMD: Southern Islands (7*** series) Speculation/ Rumour Thread

[lanek]

I don't think AMD would launch something 1.2ghz. Not worth their time and long term stability could be an issue.

This chip was clocked low for a reason and long term stability is likely one of them.

Hardocp got to 1190 with an MSI lightning which has all the above(improved cooling components and etc). Hexus reached 1.175ghz upping the voltage to 1.25 volts on top of putting a extreme accelero cooler on top of the thing(this thing is a 100 dollar cooler). 1.2ghz is pretty high and most 7970 don't reach that with stock volts.

What I mean to get at is getting to 1.2ghz is not as simple as binning when others are failing well before that. A chip has to be supremely stable in all these conditions and more for the lifetime of the product. That means a chip has to be 1.2ghz stable for atleast 3 years and under scenario's the chip hasn't encountered yet.

A lot of people have been having problems with the Leo demo with their overclocks even though they are ok for games. A 1.2 ghz chip would be a long term headache for the company and the binning effort would make way more trouble than its worth to find these golden samples. You would be better off finding these chips and selling them as high end firegl cards than selling it to consumers.

They absolutely dont need to release a 1200mhz card... a 1050-1100 will not be a problem, 1100mhz is easy to do with no voltage increase using CCC . ( max is 1125mhz in CCC and i have yet to see a card who was not stable at this speed. )


Outside difference in some specification ( turbo, size and some features ) clock to clock, i think we have never get an Nvidia and AMD card so close of each other.

Edit:
I have make a little compilation between the 680 vs Asus DirectCU II ( 1000mhz / 5600mhz ) 1900x1200 based on Guru3d reviews for both 680 and Asus DirectCU II ( for an unkown reason he have not put the 680 results in the DirectCUII reviews ( who should have been made after his 680 review )

( i dont put FC2 and MW2 this bring no difference there )

Anno2040:
- GTX 680: 119fps
- HD 7970: 122fps
- 7970 1ghz: 129fps

Anno2070:
- GTX 680: 87 ( 1600p= 55fps )
- HD 7970: 82 ( 1600p= 55fps )
- 7970 1ghz: 87fps ( 58fps 2560x1600 )

Metro2033:
- GTX 680: 39fps
- HD 7970: 44fps
- 7970 1ghz: 45fps

Cryis2: ( 7970 allready win at 2560x1600)
- GTX 680: 63fps
- HD 7970: 61fps
- 7970 1ghz: 66fps

BF3: ( 7970 stock is faster without FXAA of the 680 )
- GTX 680: 57fps ( 1600P 38fps )
- HD 7970: 46fps ( 1600P 34fps )
- 7970 1ghz: 51fps ( 1600P 36fps )

AVP DX11:
- GTX 680: 52fps
- HD 7970: 55fps
- 7970 1ghz: 61fps

LP2: ( testB )
- GTX 680: 54fps
- HD 7970: 44fps
- 7970 1ghz: 46fps

Dirt3 will be a pure win for the 680, but i dont have the numbers.

Asus 7970 review http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-radeon-hd-7970-directcu-ii-review/22
GTX680 review http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-680-review/24


Looking at thoses result, i dont think AMD will really release another card. This is just a 1000mhz 7970 .. I dont even see why AIB would decrease their price. They just have to release different OC models.

 

[Rangers]

Looking at thoses result, i dont think AMD will really release another card. This is just a 1000mhz 7970 .. I dont even see why AIB would decrease their price. They just have to release different OC models.

They could still do a ghz 7970 and offer overclocked models.

I'm getting the feeling they wont change anything though. Typical AMD not being aggressive. Or maybe they dont want to piss off early adopters (though, the coming 50-100 cut would seem to do a much better job of that anyway).

The perception out there is the 680 is significantly faster than the 7970, a 1ghz model could help change that. Mainstream opinion is not going to subtly parse the fact that overclocked 7970's may close the gap.

PS, sign of things to come? I see the first 7950 on newegg at $429...pretty much the first SI I've seen below MSRP ever in fact http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161400

 

[AlphaWolf]

They also have the HIS 7970 for $20 below MSRP.

 

[Rangers]

Still a terrible buy...they're going to have to go to $450, no doubt about it. People wont care it has it's corner case advantages, in general it is slower than GTX 680.

7870/50 might stay untouched though, even the rumored GTX 670/Ti (faster but more expensive as rumored) might not cause it problems.

Might end up like:

$500 680
$400 670 Ti
$300 670

$450 7970
$370-$400 7950
$330-$350 7870
$250 7850

Wild guesses...

 

[Mianca]

Still a terrible buy...they're going to have to go to $450, no doubt about it. People wont care it has it's corner case advantages, in general it is slower than GTX 680.

Might be a terrible buy, but at least it's a buy you can make.

I'm sure HD 7970 will go down to $450 once GTX680 is in acceptable stock.

At this point of time, it's basically still a ghost product - so AMD is better off fighting it with a Proton Pack than with a price drop.

 

[UniversalTruth]

Might be a terrible buy, but at least it's a buy you can make.

Well, I doubt that matters. I mean people who do wait for GTX680 to become available, are not sitting without any card. They are using their current one.

I'm sure HD 7970 will go down to $450 once GTX680 is in acceptable stock.

As pointed out earlier nvidia's more expensive products outsell their cheaper competition. Do you think that 7970 at 450 will offset that difference? I doubt it. I mean it should be even cheaper- something like 300-350$ and GTX680 should stay at 500$.
So, this brand loyalty can be 200$ worth.

 

[LordEC911]

Don't expect lower than $479 after MIR in the next few months...

 

[Mianca]

Well, I doubt that matters. I mean people who do wait for GTX680 to become available, are not sitting without any card. They are using their current one.

Yeah. But would those people that are explicitly waiting for an GTX680 actually buy an HD7970 if it was cheaper?

And even if they did, why would AMD want to compromise profits per card without any real market pressure on them?

I mean it should be even cheaper- something like 300-350$ and GTX680 should stay at 500$.
So, this brand loyalty can be 200$ worth.

You're making it sound as if HD 7970 was a bad choice. It's not.

It's misleading to think it should retail for $200 less than GTX680 just because the latter is about 10% faster @ medium resolutions.

HD7970 is neck-to-neck with GTX680 @ 2560x1600, seems to have more average overclocking potential, destroys GTX680 in compute heavy tasks, has 50% more memory (important for future games - even if the actual performance difference doesn't seem that big just yet) - and it is actually available.

I'm not saying GTX680 hasn't got its own advantages, too - but it's certainly not like buying an HD7970 over an GTX680 is a terribly bad deal.

 

[psolord]

AMD could very easily release 7970s and 7950s with 1.5GB framebuffer, call them gamer editions or whatever, clock them a bit higher and instantly have a tie with Nvidia at up to 2560X1440.

The power draw that would be saved due to the less memory, could be put to good use for a bit higher clocks.

They could still sell them 150$ less than what they sell the current models.

 

[Man from Atlantis]

AMD could very easily release 7970s and 7950s with 1.5GB framebuffer, call them gamer editions or whatever, clock them a bit higher and instantly have a tie with Nvidia at up to 2560X1440.

The power draw that would be saved due to the less memory, could be put to good use for a bit higher clocks.

They could still sell them 150$ less than what they sell the current models.

It is still 12 chips@6gbps, cant save power here.. It would be true if there is clamshell on 7970.. sure it'll be cheaper due to lower density memory modules..

 

[UniversalTruth]

Yeah. But would those people that are explicitly waiting for an GTX680 actually buy an HD7970 if it was cheaper?.

If it is noticeably cheaper, yes, at least they would try to think about an alternative option.

why would AMD want to compromise profits per card without any real market pressure on them?

So, they don't compromise profits per piece but instead they compromise overall profits, obviously at the moment 7970 supply is good enough (or the demand is low enough, for that matter) to sustain lower prices.

You're making it sound as if HD 7970 was a bad choice. It's not.

It's misleading to think it should retail for $200 less than GTX680 just because the latter is about 10% faster @ medium resolutions.

HD7970 is neck-to-neck with GTX680 @ 2560x1600, seems to have more average overclocking potential, destroys GTX680 in compute heavy tasks, has 50% more memory (important for future games - even if the actual performance difference doesn't seem that big just yet) - and it is actually available.

I'm not saying GTX680 hasn't got its own advantages, too - but it's certainly not like buying an HD7970 over an GTX680 is a terribly bad deal.

I'm not saying that 7970 is a bad choice.
It's not about this performance difference, be it plus 5-10% or minus 5-10%. It doesn't matter so much.
What matters most is the general customers' perception of the brand. Why do you avoid to comment on that? That is something AMD should think of more deeply and in the long run, not about some current sales...

 

[psolord]

It is still 12 chips@6gbps, cant save power here..sure it'll be cheaper..

Shouldn't there be less power consumed, since there would be less transistors involved?

I mean for example, do 128MB, 256MB and 512MB memory chips consume the same power, if they are manufactured at the same process?

I don't know. I am just asking.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

So, they don't compromise profits per piece but instead they compromise overall profits, obviously at the moment 7970 supply is good enough (or the demand is low enough, for that matter) to sustain lower prices.

Eh?

How are they compromising profits, they still appear to be selling all the 7970's they can make. Models are still going in and out of stock a week after GTX 680 hit stores.

If they did reduce the price, that would have an immediate negative impact on profits on the other hand. Sure the cards might sell out faster, but you can't sell what you don't have. Something Nvidia is experiencing at the moment as the GTX 680 is most definitely priced too low compared to demand.

If anything, I'd say the earliest we might see a price reduction is 3-4 weeks from now. And even that isn't guaranteed if demand for GTX 680 continues to outstrip supply.

Until the demand vs. stock situation changes, AMD as a corporation would be foolish to reduce prices.

Of course, me being a consumer, I certainly hope they reduce prices. But looking at the current state of affairs, I don't see why they would.

Regards,
SB

 

[lanek]

Still a terrible buy...they're going to have to go to $450, no doubt about it. People wont care it has it's corner case advantages, in general it is slower than GTX 680.

7870/50 might stay untouched though, even the rumored GTX 670/Ti (faster but more expensive as rumored) might not cause it problems.

Might end up like:

$500 680
$400 670 Ti
$300 670

$450 7970
$370-$400 7950
$330-$350 7870
$250 7850

Wild guesses...

Im not right with you, any 1ghz version is faster, equal in most cases.. it loose in some, but this is really a tie, something AMD should understand and push 1ghz version from AIB.

Basically, a 1000mhz 7970 = a 680 1006mhz... i come back again to that, but i have never see 2 architectures so different from AMD and Nvidia so close of each other. ( ofc a card win in a case and loose in other game, but the results are extremely close ).. This is offcourse even more visible AMD have release their cards 2 months before Nvidia, who have been able to adapt their base and Turbo clock for be there.

There's too a second underlying problem.. basically there's not so much new games compared to the 5870-480 - 6970-580 period.... i was looking reviews and there's nothing really new outside ME3, Skyrim. ( a lot of new games have been or will be soon released. But not so much. )

This is a real marketing problem... I dont understand why AMD is not reacting fast... but you know, strangely the 7970 are good sellers, and im sure the 7870-7850 will be too. Here it is nearly impossible to find an 680.. ( some was in stock, but, only few parts ( this should be different in other country, i dont say they are not available in other country, or there's a problem of avaibility, just here it is the case ).

 

[Dave Baumann]

What matters most is the general customers' perception of the brand. Why do you avoid to comment on that? That is something AMD should think of more deeply and in the long run, not about some current sales...

Ever considered that price drops may not be conducive to building a brand?

 

[kalelovil]

Basically, a 1000mhz 7970 = a 680 1006mhz.

Keep in mind that "1006mhz" GTX 680 could well be operating at 1097mhz most of the time due to GPU Boost.
A 1100mhz HD 7970 decisively beats the GTX 680 at very high resolutions, but that is probably mostly due to the Radeon's greater memory bandwidth.

I don't think AMD needs to drop the 7970 down to $450, if they price it directly against the 680 it should be a decent competitor and still serve some niches the Geforce can't.

 

[Rangers]

Basically, a 1000mhz 7970 = a 680 1006mhz... i come back again to that, but i have never see 2 .

Hmm, the benchmarks I have seen, just giving the 7970 8% more performance in line with 1000/925 clock increase (and that might be generous as it assumes perfect scaling), would not be enough to push it from loss to win in the vast majority of games.

Keep in mind that "1006mhz" GTX 680 could well be operating at 1097mhz most of the time due to GPU Boost.

Yeah, that's pretty damning. I'm afraid AMD might need to counter with it's own boost (I can easily imagine a 7970 boosting to ~1100mhz obviously). That might mean it would tie with 680 right now. A major change in perception.

I doubt they will though as they never seem to do anything. At least it will take like a year even if they decide too.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Hmm, the benchmarks I have seen, just giving the 7970 8% more performance in line with 1000/925 clock increase (and that might be generous as it assumes perfect scaling), would not be enough to push it from loss to win in the vast majority of games.

It doesn't need to win the vast majority, it already wins some, just needs to win a few more.

 

[UniversalTruth]

Ever considered that price drops may not be conducive to building a brand?

No, I have always thought that price discounts is exactly what will attract customers the most, they always welcome this and they are looking for that.

You can, at least, think about some discounts for your loyal customers, if one owns an AMD videocard, then their new buy could be cheaper by 10-15%. Ever considered such ideas? Or the idea to get rid of those partners because they only add additional "value". Just launch graphics cards like you have already done with memory modules. Am I right?

 

[Alexko]

No, I have always thought that price discounts is exactly what will attract customers the most, they always welcome this and they are looking for that.

You can, at least, think about some discounts for your loyal customers, if one owns an AMD videocard, then their new buy could be cheaper by 10-15%. Ever considered such ideas? Or the idea to get rid of those partners because they only add additional "value". Just launch graphics cards like you have already done with memory modules. Am I right?

Partners are essential: they handle distribution, provide additional marketing and exposure, go the extra mile with special overclocked versions, custom coolers, beefed-up VRMs, and just about everything you can think of.