So, do we know anything about RV670 yet?

[Shtal]

Based on this image; GPU and Memory has some headroom.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

Check the screenshot on the third page. Mad overclock on the core:

 

[Shtal]

Check the screenshot on the third page. Mad overclock on the core:

For some reason 3DMark score does not match ?

12232 vs. 12961

 

[Sound_Card]

Considering you cant tweak the voltage in Overdrive, I would say their is massive head room. 860mhz on stock volts and cooler. Hmmm, I wonder what it would be with higher volts and a nice water block?:smile:

 

[weeds]

Check the screenshot on the third page. Mad overclock on the core:

Why are the scores different?

 

[OpenGL guy]

For some reason 3DMark score does not match ?

12232 vs. 12961

12232 is the results of the previous run. Looks like they overclocked the board in-between runs. 12961 is the new result.

 

[no-X]

Score in main window isn't updated until you close window with actual score. So it shows results of previous run (probably on lower frequencies)

//ed: OpenGL guy was faster..

 

[Geeforcer]

Considering you cant tweak the voltage in Overdrive, I would say their is massive head room. 860mhz on stock volts and cooler. Hmmm, I wonder what it would be with higher volts and a nice water block?:smile:

1.2GHz?

 

[BRiT]

Why are the scores different?

Others indicated why...

 

[Sound_Card]

1.2GHz?

Well that never happend. They seemed to hit a wall at around 900+mhz with water. Maybe due to the power leakage? Either way, the HD 3870 looks alot more promising in that department now.

 

[Shtal]

Radeon HD 3870 (777/1126MHz) 47C
Radeon HD 3870@ (860/1351MHz) 66C

Big jump in temperature when over-clock 41C vs. 66C
Don't understand why so much?

When I over-clocked my HD2600Pro w/stock fan from 600MHz to 660MHz in catalyst overdrive utility - it when from 44C to 47C.

 

[Plano]

Radeon HD 3870 (777/1126MHz) 47C
Radeon HD 3870@ (860/1351MHz) 66C

Big jump in temperature when over-clock 41C vs. 66C
Don't understand why so much?

It looks like in both cases card is already running @ "2d clocks", CCC says that current clock settings are 300/1126. Maybe that oc shot was taken right after 3dmark run when another one after some idling at desktop.

 

[trinibwoy]

Considering you cant tweak the voltage in Overdrive, I would say their is massive head room. 860mhz on stock volts and cooler. Hmmm, I wonder what it would be with higher volts and a nice water block?:smile:

Isn't a 10-11% OC on stock volts and cooler pretty standard? Granted it's dual-slot but my current GTS OC is 20% core and 33% shader.....

 

[Shtal]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_ati_radeon_hd_2900_xt_performance_preview/page8.asp

Looks like HD2900XT scores
SM2.0 4625
SM3.0 5206

http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?t=202510
Comparing to Radeon 3870
SM2.0 4386
SM3.0 5005

If I was informed correctly that HD3870 should be 10% faster vs. HD2900XT in 3DMark06.
Edit: Maybe because WinXP vs. Vista

 

[digitalwanderer]

Shtal, those are two completely different test rigs that they were benched on.

 

[Shtal]

Shtal, those are two completely different test rigs that they were benched on.

Fair respond....


Edit:

different test rig

Under Intel Q6850 & ATI Radeon HD3870
SM2.0 4449
SM3.0 5040

Under Intel E6850 & ATI Radeon HD3870
SM2.0 4518
SM3.0 5051

Edit: Maybe Catalyst 7.11 will boost higher score! for SM3.0 in 3DMark06

 

[2900guy]

yeah i guess even if ATI could have fixed AA for the 3800 series doing so would have caused people to gobble up every single 3800, something that would be obviously be bad for business.

 

[2900guy]

also looks like ATI did something to the texture units sine it outperforms the XT without filtering, and something the 30mhz core difference would not explain. doesnt matter I suppose, since AA/AF are mandatory for many.

 

[CruNcher]

if you look @ my calculations (some pages back) based on Crysis 860MHz won't beat a GT @ 700MHz (wich is the AVG overclockability of most Reference Cards) it needs more most likely 40MHz (890-900MHz) more to be as fast as the G92 really.

 

[Sobek]

Looking at these supposed scores and such, i'm having a hard time understanding who they're selling these cards to. Surely not owners of current HD29xx cards. It's supposed to be really cheap though right? If so I guess that makes sense, it's just that anyone who's still interested in this kind of card from AMD is bound to be running some mid to highend part allready from the 2xxx lineup and it just doesn't look like this part is all that pallatable... Or i'm missing something.

Tell me I'm missing something. Please?