AMD Radeon HD 7970 Design Details Leak Out

[cinergy]

Nvidia loses the game, again.

 

[airborne11b]

[citation][nom]redeemer[/nom] Btw my GTX 580 blew up and so did my Intel cpu, ha talk about quality issues![/citation]

Right! Because AMD CPUs and ATI GPUs NEVER have defects... /sarcasm

Right now I have 3 480 GTXs in tri SLI and my wife's PC has 2x 580 GTXs in SLI. In fact I've built well over 100 PCs over the years for friends and family and myself and I've never had to RMA any Nvidia or Intel products.

But that's not to say that every product that comes off the line is perfect (Anyone who's been dealing with electronics for more then a couple months knows that bad-batches are a fact of life).

But poor driver support is on a completely different level and is unacceptable imo. But to each their own.

P.S. ATI 3d technology sucks compared to 3D vision 2 lol.

 

[airborne11b]

[citation][nom]Uberragen21[/nom]The $1000 CPUs are not intended for businesses, so your comment is moot.[/citation]

Actually, $1000 CPU's are more for professional applications, not gaming / "enthusiests".

My X58 920 that I bought 2.5 years ago overclocked to 4.2 ghz on non-watercooling setup still plays games just as good as the most expensive CPUs on the market.

Same with the 2500k, it's a really cheap CPU, overclocks very high 4-5ghz range, and performs just as well as equally clocked $1000 CPUs.

Where they lack is in professional / business applications.

Any person who buys a $1000 CPU for gaming is a moron (regardless of how much cash that person has to spend) Considering that in game FPS would be the same as an equally clocked $200-350 CPU.

 

[dharmenparikh]

zxZ

 

[clonazepam]

[citation][nom]airborne11b[/nom]Right! Because AMD CPUs and ATI GPUs NEVER have defects... /sarcasmRight now I have 3 480 GTXs in tri SLI and my wife's PC has 2x 580 GTXs in SLI. In fact I've built well over 100 PCs over the years for friends and family and myself and I've never had to RMA any Nvidia or Intel products.But that's not to say that every product that comes off the line is perfect (Anyone who's been dealing with electronics for more then a couple months knows that bad-batches are a fact of life).But poor driver support is on a completely different level and is unacceptable imo. But to each their own.P.S. ATI 3d technology sucks compared to 3D vision 2 lol.[/citation]

I remember about a decade ago, UPS contracted Gateway as its supplier of vast amount of computers for warehouse shipping. Micron/Crucial makes excellent products. Well, the blew it, and supplied Gateway a crapton of defective memory, pretty much the whole batch order. It got through Micron's, Gateway's, and UPS's "quality checks" and into shippers' hands before someone said, "oh, wait a minute, something's wrong!" With that said, it happens. The only product I RMA'd was one I physically broke. They didn't mind, phew... I'm also with you that nVidia graphics seems to be the safer bet for game support / drivers. AMD seems to come after the fact, with patches and updates, rather than having a hand in the games' development to avoid those pesky release issues.

All that said, its still a small minority that ever have issues.

Some statistic once said, a person complains to 11 people when they have a bad experience, and tell only 1 person about the good experience. Take that however, but it has a ring of truth for sure.

It's still too soon to say a lot about the these cards though. The stats sound crazy. It's like its designed with well beyond gaming in mind, unless it just takes that to make a difference in performance. Is bit-coin mining still going on? I see a lot of these there. Another will be the dual-gpu versions kicking a$$ in 3x2560x1600 setups... where it'll really shine, if the game says its ok.

I wonder if AMD delves in the closed loop cooling setup for some of these cards.

 

[de5_Roy]

if these cards perform as well as they promise, they could become must-buys in case >24" 2560x1600 displays and smaller, high resolution displays become the norm.
the cards do seem to be packing features that don't directly relate to gaming... may be amd was hoping to couple the bd cpus with the new cards to create some kind of a high performance computing platform (which seems strange since the cards are rumored to support pcie 3 and zambezi supports only pcie 2).

 

[jmm5351]

I favor both companies because I like to buy what suits my needs at the time I am interested in a new video card. Before my 6970's I had 5870's and before them 2 GTX 280's. But I think NVIDIA is digging themselves a hole. AMD was first with 40nm GPU with 4000 series, first to out Direct X11 GPU, about to be first to release 28nm GPU, and also first to release a PCIE 3.0 GPU. That is not something easy to accomplish against a great company like NVIDIA so this really only proves AMD GPUS department is very strong and doing a fantastic job. Also NIVIDA has been playing catch up a little bit lately. They skipped 300 series to 400 series ... The 400 series also was very very hot and performance wasn't good compared to the amount of power they needed. AMD has been coming out with a refresh of new GPU's every year now. If NVIDIA isn't releasing their flagship single GPU card until really late this year or early 2013 AMD is going to have their next refresh of GPU's ready around the same time...NVIDIA is slowly slipping up in the GPU space (I mean consumer GPU space) compared to what they were back before AMD's 4000 series cards. AMD is on a role.

 

[clonazepam]

[citation][nom]dalauder[/nom]If you understood math a bit better, you'd get that there's no more accurate statistical performance graph than one that shows 100% and scales everything off of that baseline linearly. Just to be clear, that 1.0 = 100% for the 6970 on that chart.[/citation]

Looking at tesselation performance, with the 6970 as the baseline, where would you put a gtx 580 on that same chart?

 

[tecmo34]

[citation][nom]clonazepam[/nom]Looking at tesselation performance, with the 6970 as the baseline, where would you put a gtx 580 on that same chart?[/citation]
I would put it in between the two... Here are some early benchmarks but expect to see a nice review from Tom's coming soon!!

http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbildungen/amd_hd7970_presentation_32.png
http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbildungen/amd_hd7970_presentation_33.png
http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbildungen/amd_hd7970_presentation_34.png
http://www.3dcenter.org/dateien/abbildungen/amd_hd7970_presentation_35.png

 

[clonazepam]

[citation][nom]tecmo34[/nom]I would put it in between the two... Here are some early benchmarks but expect to see a nice review from Tom's coming soon!![/citation]

That's pretty cool. Kinda goes with what I supposed earlier, that this is a killer product for all the 2560x1600 users. I expect to see a lot of new hardcore builds w/ quad crossfire and eyefinity at the high-res.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

That's pretty cool. Kinda goes with what I supposed earlier, that this is a killer product for all the 2560x1600 users. I expect to see a lot of new hardcore builds w/ quad crossfire and eyefinity at the high-res.

These are absolutely killer benchmarks. So how much will the 7970 cost? Also wonder about 7950... I think I won't bother with 560 Ti SLI and just wait till next-gen cards, they seem to be pretty damn good!

 

[Uberragen21]

[citation][nom]airborne11b[/nom]Actually, $1000 CPU's are more for professional applications, not gaming / "enthusiests".My X58 920 that I bought 2.5 years ago overclocked to 4.2 ghz on non-watercooling setup still plays games just as good as the most expensive CPUs on the market.Same with the 2500k, it's a really cheap CPU, overclocks very high 4-5ghz range, and performs just as well as equally clocked $1000 CPUs.Where they lack is in professional / business applications.Any person who buys a $1000 CPU for gaming is a moron (regardless of how much cash that person has to spend) Considering that in game FPS would be the same as an equally clocked $200-350 CPU.[/citation]

Sorry, but you're a bit off here. The Intel E series are marketed as "enthusiast" CPUs straight from Intel. They're only found in $3000+ gaming machines that you will NEVER find in a company, other than a gaming company that needs that kind of power to test their games. The CPUs you're thinking of are the Xeon or server CPUs. They can be just as expensive if not more so, but companies will happily invest the money in server equipment.
i7 E3960 : $1049

The Xeon or "server" CPUs are NOT designed for desktop use, but if you have enough money to blow, I'm sure you could rig one up in a full tower case.

Xeon range from $600-$1700 but go in $10,000 to $1,000,000 servers.

 

[youssef 2010]

Great new GPUs.