Is that really the case? From what I've seen the 5850 retains its leadership in perf/W over the 6800s: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6850/29.html
NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation
- Thread starter Arty
- Start date
Is that really the case? From what I've seen the 5850 retains its leadership in perf/W over the 6800s: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/Radeon_HD_6850/29.html
For some reason, TPU's 6870 seems to be quite power hungry, drawing significantly more than the HD 5850: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_580/25.html
That explains the perf/W results. But most reviews I've seen have the 6870 drawing about the same as the 5850, while being faster. That level of power-efficiency isn't bad at all for a 900MHz part.
Now that the 580 is out of the bag, would anyone agree that the GTX 560 actually has the potential to be more impressive (or less unimpressive, depending on how you view it)?
Compared to the GTX 460-1GB, we're talking about 8 vs. 7 SMs, so the theoretical increase in shader- and TMU-power per clock is twice as high compared to 480 -> 580.
Combined with clockspeeds of ~750/1500 for core/shader we'd be talking about ~27% more raw power. Add the improved Z Culling, and we might very well look at performance gains of ~25-30% on average, and over 30% in games with lots of geometry/tesselation.
From what I've gathered, that would be enough to beat the 6870 by ~5-10% on average and by far more in geometry/tesselation-heavy scenarios. OC potential is probably going to be higher as well, AF quality still a bit better.
Perf./W and perf./mm² will most probably remain on AMD's side, but the gap will shrink.
What do you think?
Compared to the GTX 460-1GB, we're talking about 8 vs. 7 SMs, so the theoretical increase in shader- and TMU-power per clock is twice as high compared to 480 -> 580.
Combined with clockspeeds of ~750/1500 for core/shader we'd be talking about ~27% more raw power. Add the improved Z Culling, and we might very well look at performance gains of ~25-30% on average, and over 30% in games with lots of geometry/tesselation.
From what I've gathered, that would be enough to beat the 6870 by ~5-10% on average and by far more in geometry/tesselation-heavy scenarios. OC potential is probably going to be higher as well, AF quality still a bit better.
Perf./W and perf./mm² will most probably remain on AMD's side, but the gap will shrink.
What do you think?
Why would that increase perf over 30% in games with lots of geometry?
Also we don't really know enough about the Z Culling improvements - might not even apply to GF104.
I've always said it looks to me like nvidia could get near HD5870 performance with a fully enabled, ~800Mhz GF104, so what you suggests certainly sounds possible. Though I suspect 750Mhz isn't quite enough to really beat the HD6870 - that looks to me like it would be very close in performance to the 460 GTX FTW (with 7 SMs but 850Mhz), dismissing the z cull or other improvements, i.e. assuming GTX560 could still be based on GF104. But certainly 800Mhz should be doable for a non-OC product too.
I assume (hopefully without making an ass out of u and me 
), that the improved z-cull nvidia is stating is only to be viewed product related, i.e. only due to one more SM being active and thus contributing to the cull rate making it 16/15 the rate of GTX480 per clock. So, sadly, no magic involved there from where I'm standing.
At least, I have not seen any gains in rather directed tests that are not properly explainable by the above.
), that the improved z-cull nvidia is stating is only to be viewed product related, i.e. only due to one more SM being active and thus contributing to the cull rate making it 16/15 the rate of GTX480 per clock. So, sadly, no magic involved there from where I'm standing.At least, I have not seen any gains in rather directed tests that are not properly explainable by the above.
Ok... though I've seen at least a few games where the card showed larger gains than the additional SM+clocks alone should allow for, but of course it's possible that the upgraded TMUs and/or some other changes are the reason for that.I assume (hopefully without making an ass out of u and me
At least, I have not seen any gains in rather directed tests that are not properly explainable by the above.
I was under the impression that improved culling would help not only with tesselation. Some non-DX11 games show over-proportional gains for the 580 (HAWX 1 iirc), and I didn't think the upgraded TMUs alone could result in such gains, but I might be wrong.
I assume (hopefully without making an ass out of u and me
At least, I have not seen any gains in rather directed tests that are not properly explainable by the above.
I've seen some differences (some gain, some loss) but I guess they come from rebalancing the GeForce geometry throughput limitation and from a different "global game profile" for GTX500. (Quadros come with more global profiles and these give different results with triangle throughput tests)
FenderBender
Newcomer
Conspiracy theory ahead:
Is it possible that GF110's new Z-cull boost is not actually new, but it's in GF100 as well, activated only for Quadros? That's obviously done for other parts of the graphics pipeline (which is why Quadros are so much better for CAD/workstation display).
Perhaps the GTX580 has that culling boost unlocked just to give an extra boost to it to give it that much more differentiation from a simple GF100 respin.
It'd be easy to test this by finding a z-cull benchmark and running it on a Quadro 6000, a GTX480, and a GTX580 and adjusting for clock rate and SM count.
(In fact it'd be a terrific theory except we know of the FP16 filtering boost too, so there HAVE been at least one new feature.)
onethreehill
Newcomer
caveman-jim
Regular
That would imply that reviewers would be given advance notice and samples, for their consideration.
http://www.techpowerup.com/134460/Disable-GeForce-GTX-580-Power-Throttling-using-GPU-Z.html
Wow, thats pretty heavy power consumption, even beating GTX480 at Furmark
Wow, thats pretty heavy power consumption, even beating GTX480 at Furmark
Similar threads
- Deleted member 2197
- Architecture and Products
