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

[AlphaWolf]

The 7970 is ~20% faster than a 580, but its 20% more expensive.

I take it math isn't your strong suit.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...esktop Graphics / Video Cards&Order=BESTMATCH

Can you point out which one of those is 20% cheaper than $550 for me (there's one for $489, but it's such a terrible value it's out of stock)? Or better yet point me to the 3GB version that's less than $550 (the cheapest is $589). Interestingly the Galaxy model they compared the 7970 to at HardOCP, is priced at $549.

 

[Dooby]

But the reviews are against a 1.5GB 580GTX, so it doesn't matter how much RAM either card has. I see no defining reason why a 3GB card is better than a 1.5GB card. Of course extra RAM will push up the price of a 580, but if its not needed, there's no point in paying for it, and I suspect most people won't.

EDIT: I was also talking about RRP (580 = $499, 7970 = $549). Not being in the US, I don't check US prices that often. I have no say in what market forces do to a card after release. Given the limited availability, I would expect the 7970 to be more than $549 at most places, thereby making my statement true again. Comparing RRP to current market forces is a fool game, and I will have none of that sir!

 

[AlphaWolf]

But the reviews are against a 1.5GB 580GTX, so it doesn't matter how much RAM either card has. I see no defining reason why a 3GB card is better than a 1.5GB card. Of course extra RAM will push up the price of a 580, but if its not needed, there's no point in paying for it, and I suspect most people won't.

Sure they can pay $549 for the Galaxy OC gtx580 that HardOCP tested with, it only has 1.5GB of ram. At the same price, the 7970 seems like a pretty good deal.

And the 3GB versions fair a bit better in multiple display scenarios.

 

[DarthShader]

Average powerdraw (while gaming) is 21W lower.

TPU have borked performance numbers, so I wouldn't trust any other readings from them.

Those two show higher consumption: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5261/amd-radeon-hd-7970-review/24 http://hardocp.com/article/2011/12/22/amd_radeon_hd_7970_video_card_review/13

While most others show roughly equal consumption +/- a few watts.

 

[Love_In_Rio]

I am going on thinking the problem here is it is a 28nm card is only 20% faster than the fastest 40nm one being in the same power envelope ballkpark.

 

[keldor]

Yeah. If the 7970 is only 30%ish faster than the 580, I don't see how it could stand a chance against Kepler, unless Nvidia screws it up big time. Could this be AMD's GeForce FX?

 

[flopper]

I am going on thinking the problem here is it is a 28nm card is only 20% faster than the fastest 40nm one being in the same power envelope ballkpark.

double the transistors in a tiny space.
new tech and done the same way as Nvidia did with fermi to add compute power.
Nvidia had the same deal wihen they got Fermi out.
good for compute average for gaming.

I find 7970 to be pretty much a sweet card.

 

[AlphaWolf]

I am going on thinking the problem here is it is a 28nm card is only 20% faster than the fastest 40nm one being in the same power envelope ballkpark.

How big is that ballpark?

 

[Rootax]

Yeah. If the 7970 is only 30%ish faster than the 580, I don't see how it could stand a chance against Kepler, unless Nvidia screws it up big time. Could this be AMD's GeForce FX?

I don't think so, at least it performs very well. Maybe not enough against Kepler, but it is still a very good card.

 

[Love_In_Rio]

How big is that ballpark?

250 w - 300 w. A premium card wattage.

 

[Love_In_Rio]

double the transistors in a tiny space.
new tech and done the same way as Nvidia did with fermi to add compute power.
Nvidia had the same deal wihen they got Fermi out.
good for compute average for gaming.

I find 7970 to be pretty much a sweet card.

That´s the reasson. This is the major process jump we have had for graphic cards in years. Double the transistors is what going from 40 nm to 28 nm allows. So Nvidia can if not double at least put 2 billion more transistors than GTX 580 in its new card. And do you think it only will be 20% more powerful than GTX 580?.

As I see it this card could very well end fighting against a GTX-760.

 

[DarthShader]

I am going on thinking the problem here is it is a 28nm card is only 20% faster than the fastest 40nm one being in the same power envelope ballkpark.

The problem is they are not in the same power envelope ballpark, nor in the same die size envelope ballpark, so such comparisions miss the point.

Yeah. If the 7970 is only 30%ish faster than the 580, I don't see how it could stand a chance against Kepler, unless Nvidia screws it up big time.

They already screwed up big time, they are not ready yet and far from it.

 

[Brad Grenz]

EDIT: I was also talking about RRP (580 = $499, 7970 = $549). Not being in the US, I don't check US prices that often. I have no say in what market forces do to a card after release. Given the limited availability, I would expect the 7970 to be more than $549 at most places, thereby making my statement true again. Comparing RRP to current market forces is a fool game, and I will have none of that sir!

OK, but using your numbers it's still actually only 10% more for a 20% performance boost. And you get the improved idle power numbers and future-proof RAM quantity on top of that.

 

[AlphaWolf]

250 w - 300 w. A premium card wattage.

The point is that the 7970 is using quite a bit less power than the 580 (30 watts or so in most reviews), while still outperforming by around 20% in most reviews. (and the die is like 30% smaller than the 580)

Just because it's on 28nm it doesn't mean it's automagically a lot faster and uses less power. Die shrinks haven't been giving anywhere near linear increases (shrink -> performance) since forever. That said, it is faster and uses less power. People who continue to believe in the next massive jump in performance like back in the 9700 days are going to be disappointed just about every time.

I'm wondering if we shouldn't keep all these negative comments on file for kepler (and beyond) and just copy and paste them, because I expect more shattered expectations for the foreseeable future.

 

[seahawk]

An indication where we can expect Cape Verde and Pitcairn?

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7970/1.html

Or where we must expect those 2?

Although 299$ for Pitcairn XT seems to be excessive given that we should not expect more than 6970 results.

AMDs line-up looks strange, if NV does not rise its price points, they look really bad.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Or where we must expect those 2?

Although 299$ for Pitcairn XT seems to be excessive given that we should not expect more than 6970 results.

AMDs line-up looks strange, if NV does not rise its price points, they look really bad.

Look bad against what? If the pitcairn XT performs at 6970 levels, for less money... what is the problem? The prices aren't immovable objects, if there's pressure they can lower the prices.

 

[Mindfury]

Yeah. If the 7970 is only 30%ish faster than the 580, I don't see how it could stand a chance against Kepler, unless Nvidia screws it up big time. Could this be AMD's GeForce FX?

8800GTX(155wTDP)—GTX280（236wTDP）—GTX480（250wTDP，260W under demanding gaming load）

So,Kepler is going to be a 300w TDP single GPU card?

 

[CarstenS]

They already screwed up big time, they are not ready yet and far from it.

Is that you Charlie? Broken and unfixable, no hardware tessellator, GTX580 paper launch?
I mean, you haven't even seen Kepler yet.

 

[DarthShader]

Uhm.. have I missed a soon-to-be-launched announcement or what is your point?

 

[Man from Atlantis]

good amount of synthetic benchmarks..

http://www.ixbt.com/video3/tahiti-part2.shtml