AMD Entry Level Radeon HD 7790 Revealed

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
shame on you amd for confusing customers with your sku-ing. if it's a 22nm gcn 2.0 card, it belongs to a seperate series.
no, rebadging it when new lineup comes out doesn't make it any better. 🙁
 
[citation][nom]madjimms[/nom]22nm? saweet! Is lower power consumption something we can assume?[/citation]
Looking at the Wiki page comparing AMD graphics cards I see that even the 8XXX series is only 28nm.

What gives?
 
[citation][nom]Rick_Criswell[/nom]I would assume poor yeilds again.First time ever to release the low level cards first.[/citation]

That's possible, but even if true, I highly doubt that poor yields are the only reason for not releasing high end cards yet. AMD has little reason to release high-end cards in a time where they'd be difficult to really stress and most gamers who'd consider buying them would probably wait until there's more reason to upgrade. It'd take more sense to release them later when they'll be in greater demand and that gives AMD more time for improvement too.

It most certainly wouldn't be the first time that AMD introduced lower end cards first.
 
[citation][nom]Rick_Criswell[/nom]I would assume poor yeilds again.First time ever to release the low level cards first.[/citation]
They been doing that for a while, new architecture on lower end first before higher end.
 
If it is 22nm, then this card will play the same role as the Radeon 4770- a run on a new process to learn from and work out the kinks for the later 8000 series cards.
 
how does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me
 
[citation][nom]Jarred Ibarra[/nom]If it is 22nm, then this card will play the same role as the Radeon 4770- a run on a new process to learn from and work out the kinks for the later 8000 series cards.[/citation]

If this is the case then this could explain them pushing back the release date of the 8000 series.
 
[citation][nom]heero yuy[/nom]how does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me[/citation]

Nvidia is no less guilty of confusing things than AMD. For example, several of their low end 600 series cards have Fermi GPUs (from the GTX 400 and 500 series) and even more confusing, some of them are die-shrunk Fermi.

Nvidia's GTX 650 is literally just a GT 640 with GDDR5 memory and a higher GPU frequency. The GT 650M is a GT 640. the GTX 660M is a GTX 650. There are three different types of OEM GT 640 cards, at least one of which is a Fermi model desptie having the exact same name as the Kepler models and there are similar situations with some of their higher end cards.

Point is that both AMD and Nvidia do these tricks. A famous example is how many times Nvidia reused their G92 GPU. A similar example for AMD could include their Redwood GPU.
 
22nm? That'd be an shocker. I didn't think we would see them till next year. This is just going to give us a taste of the real dish.

[citation][nom]de5_Roy[/nom]shame on you amd for confusing customers with your sku-ing. if it's a 22nm gcn 2.0 card, it belongs to a seperate series.no, rebadging it when new lineup comes out doesn't make it any better.[/citation]

Your actually getting an better product and you _itch.
 
[citation][nom]heero yuy[/nom]how does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me[/citation]

AMD works exactly the same as nvidia, higher number indicates more powerful card in each respective series. So 7000 series and 7980 is the most powerful single chip card. Nvidia is in fact more confusing since they add in "ti" and other suffixes that mean its a step up from that specific model but not as good as the next one up. Aka 650
 
[citation][nom]heero yuy[/nom]how does the AMD graphics card naming work? I know with NVidia the 600 series is the latest and the 690 is the most powerful but amd confuses the hell outa me[/citation]

bigger numbers are better. same as Nvidia. it's just there are more numbers...

anyways, the first number "_XXX" is the number of the series. the second number "X_XX" is the subseries (this generally depicts the GPU inside. for example, the 7970 and 7950 have tahiti GPU's, the 7870 and 7850 are on pitcairn, and the lower cards are based on the cape verde processor. this card, as mentioned, is based on a new GPU, which is on GCN 2.0 - probably an early run to see real-world performance specs and ready drivers for higher end cards) the third number "XX_X" tells you which cards are in what order in the subseries (7750 is below 7770, 7850 is below 7870, 7950 is below 7970, so on so forth) the "9" digit at the end is reserved for a dual-gpu card (6990, third party 7990s)

a few exceptions to the rules I put out above: the 7870 XT should really be a 7930, as per naming rules. (it's better than the 7870, and runs on the tahiti core, but it's below the 7930)

basically, bigger numbers are better. the first number denotes the series, the second number denotes performance range (7 being an entry-level card, 8 being mid-range, 9 being enthusiast or high-end) and the third number tells you the order in that performance range.

make sense?
 
[citation][nom]tipoo[/nom]That's got to be 28nm, unless Intel is fabbing it (which ain't gonna happen, otherwise we would have heard of it).[/citation]

Intel is not the only company with a 22nm process technology. I agree that if these really are 22nm, it's surprising, but it is possible and it most certainly isn't necessarily Intel who made the GPUs if that's true.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]That memory would have to be clocked pretty high to keep performance only 10% lower than the 7850. It's probably running at 1.5GHz, if not higher.[/citation]

-3 and counting... Why the hate on speculation for the memory frequency?
 
Calm down guys (and gals?). If you check the source, it says it's based on the 28nm Bonaire, not 22nm. Also, the author of the Guru3D source article was merely speculating on the amount of RAM and the memory interface, and the author of this Tom's article is misrepresenting that speculation as fact.

So, unless the author knows something his sources don't, it's 28nm with an unknown amount of RAM and an unknown memory interface.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom