How would you name Barts?

[Mendel]

I would call it Rage Fury FFFFuuuuuu

 

[psolord]

The goal of this poll, was to show what people feel, as far as the naming of the Barts cards goes, in conjunction with the rumors we've heard so far.

As Silent Buddha says, the names could change or we could have them all wrong. Whatever the case, when I am attending to B3D guys, I believe that I did not have to explain that Barts is considered (again afawk-lol) the successor of Juniper.

In that respect, I think it's safe to assume that since Barts is the third chip in the row, from top to bottom, as well as a Juniper succesor, we should not expect some crazy performance. I mean at least not *much* higher than the 5870 so to be worthy of the 68XX name.

Maybe I should have asked, how would you name Barts if it was not all that faster than the 5870.

Thanks for your participation and your input guys.

 

[entity279]

Obviously if they have a very fast Cayman, then Barts should stay 6800.

For me (so yeah, IMHO) the x900 series was always meant for the fastest cards of the moment, faster or equivalent to the competition's best. If they can fit a single GPU card there, that's even better. (Yeah, yeah I know about the "measurement error" 2900)

So yeah, that would live barts to wear the 6800 tag.

 

[Squilliam]

I think 67xx. I don't think that just because they have always launched the 7xx parts in the $99-$199 range of prices they will keep them in that range. I would expect that given the fact that all the chips are larger than the previous generation parts we're going to see a price creep.

64xx = $30-50
65xx = $70-99
66xx = $129-149
67xx (Barts) = $199-249
68xx = $299-449
69xx = $599

Or something like that.

 

[Malo]

In that respect, I think it's safe to assume that since Barts is the third chip in the row, from top to bottom, as well as a Juniper succesor, we should not expect some crazy performance. I mean at least not *much* higher than the 5870 so to be worthy of the 68XX name.

If Barts performance is around or slightly higher than Cypress, then it should be 67xx series. Juniper was about as or slightly faster than 4870.

 

[no-X]

HD5770 was about 10% slower than HD4870.

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/775-21/dossier-amd-radeon-hd-5770-5750.html
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/...ire/19/#abschnitt_performancerating_qualitaet

 

[Alexko]

At launch, yes. Now it's about as fast, often a tad faster.

 

[ferro]

It seems to me that Barts is designed to fill the gap that previously existed between the mainstream (57X0) and performance (58X0) chips. The gap that was filled nicely by GTX460.

According to current speculation and leaked pictures, Barts has a 256 bit memory interface and I assume it has enough SP's to make good use of it. Therefore I would tend to name it a 68XX. However, if Cayman is also designed for the performance segment (256 bit but faster?, more SP's), I would go for the following names:

Barts Pro: HD6810
Barts XT: HD6830

Cayman Pro: HD6850
Cayman XT: HD6870

The 6830 would be the logical successor of the 5830. The 6810 get its own new spot in the hierarchy.

 

[Davros]

Possibly by putting some printing on the box

 

[AnarchX]

Barts Pro: HD6810
Barts XT: HD6830

Cayman Pro: HD6850
Cayman XT: HD6870

The 6830 would be the logical successor of the 5830. The 6810 get its own new spot in the hierarchy.

Barts XT as HD 6830 sounds very good, also it could match the rumors that Barts XT is around 2/3 of Cayman XT, like HD 5830 was ~2/3 of HD 5870 performance-wise.
But I would name Barts Pro HD 6770, there are Chinese rumors of a very low power consumption, combined with a good price, it would be a perfect x770-card.

Putting a chip in two performance families is a minor problem against going HD 6800 Barts-only and rebranding Juniper to HD 6700.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

If Barts performance is around or slightly higher than Cypress, then it should be 67xx series. Juniper was about as or slightly faster than 4870.

No no no, don't you see, according to many here...

Successor chips should remain roughly the same performance as the chips they replace.

So going forward, 68xx will be ~same speed as 58xx. then 78xx will be ~the same speed as 68xx. 88xx will be ~same speed as 78xx, etc.

After all, that's progress, and giving consumers good value for money. Don't worry about the name, that's irrelevant for consumers shopping for a video card.

4870 being faster than 3870 was an aberration that needed to be fixed.

Thus Rv740 should have been 4870. Which means 5870 really should have been Redwood. Which means 5970 should have been Junpier and who knows what Cypress should have been.

Regards,
SB

 

[DuckThor Evil]

No no no, don't you see, according to many here...

Successor chips should remain roughly the same performance as the chips they replace.

So going forward, 68xx will be ~same speed as 58xx. then 78xx will be ~the same speed as 68xx. 88xx will be ~same speed as 78xx, etc.

After all, that's progress, and giving consumers good value for money. Don't worry about the name, that's irrelevant for consumers shopping for a video card.

If they halve in price and you still get faster cards with apporiate price tags on top of them, then even your quite absurd situation is not a real problem.