AMD's Radeon 7000M and Nvidia's GeForce 600M Mobile GPUs

[dragonsqrrl]

A photo of a supposed HD7900 series card leaked earlier this week...


http://www.guru3d.com/news/amd-tahiti-radeon-hd-7900-photo-surfaces-on-web/

It has a 384 bit memory interface, a first for an AMD GPU, although I only count 11 memory chips for some reason. It also looks like it uses 8+6 pin cables for power, which probably means anywhere between ~230W - ~300W power consumption.

 

[youssef 2010]

Looks like rebranding an existing product really pays off these days

 

[machvelocy]

radeon 7500?? isnt it released over a decade ago?? 😀

 

[dvo]

dont forget these are also the lower end - mainstream mobile GPUs. im sure the 78xx/79xx mobile chips will not be complete rebrands. they did the same thing last time around. the middle and lower 6000m series were rebranded 5000m chips, but the 6990m was certainly new and not a rebranded 5870m. i currently have a 5870m and the 6990m would have been a fair upgrade, but im holding out for the 7990m chips to make it more worth it. i just hope that the 7990m's still use the MXM 3.0 slot connector. im not currently aware of any new MXM standards, i believe 3.0 is still the current version...

 

[enkichild]

I'll wait for AMD 8000

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]machvelocy[/nom]radeon 7500?? isnt it released over a decade ago??[/citation]
lol these are the radeon "HD" series now. 😛

 

[sayantan]

What happened to XDR2 ??

 

[nottheking]

Well, in all fairness, a lot of the sub-top GPUs are re-brands of older ones, or at least recycling the same architecture. On the Radeon side, the HD 4000 series literally added nothing more than scaling the 3000 series, at least for consumers. (the main difference was making the SPs smaller) The 5000s were new, but the 6000s were largely re-makes, barring the 6900s which actually introduced WLIW4.

From what I've seen elsewhere, VLIW4 is now being used for at least the desktop chips, with the 7900 using GCN; though I wish this would also extend to the (generally better bargain) 7800 series.
[citation][nom]dragonsqrrl[/nom]I only count 11 memory chips for some reason.[/citation]
I believe I see the connections for the 12th above the CPU, just past the "noon" position. The blurryness makes it hard to see the actual metal parts, but I feel that the near set of four square "pads" mark the corners, just like for the other positions. Not sure why it's not highlighted like the others.

Also, as far as the power connectors go, I looked more closely, and it seems ALL SORTS of wierd. A number of questions I asked myself:

- If there's two different-sized connectors, why does the board clearly show 8 contacts for power on each? (my guess: either they prepared for a higher TDP, or perhaps it shares design with the 7990)
- Why do the two cards show the plugs flipped around? Notice the yellow wires are shown on top for the top card, and are on the bottom (or colored black?) for the other. This is the one question that I can't really answer.
- What kind of 6-pin power connectors both with the middle yellow wire? It doesn't connect to anything. (for all I know, plenty of PSUs do it anyway)

Though in all honesty, I think that it's actually using a pair of 6-pin connectors. That still doesn't explain the black wires on the bottom card, though...

[citation][nom]sayantan[/nom]What happened to XDR2 ??[/citation]
That's for the desktop GPUs... And only the high-end ones (the 7900 and maybe 7800) at that.

 

[DaveUK]

I'm very, very surprised that companies are actually allow to rebrand existing products with a higher number to make them appear to be a newer or more advanced model. I would personally consider numerically increasing the model number of an existing product to be false advertising.

Nvidia have been terrible for doing this, for years. Why has no agency stepped in to stop customers doing this?

Once a product is released, it should have it's model number set in stone. Worried customers won't buy it because it is the generation behind? Well guess what, IT IS. And consumers have a right to know that when they buy.

 

[masterofevil22]

[citation][nom]DaveUK[/nom]I'm very, very surprised that companies are actually allow to rebrand existing products with a higher number to make them appear to be a newer or more advanced model. I would personally consider numerically increasing the model number of an existing product to be false advertising.Nvidia have been terrible for doing this, for years. Why has no agency stepped in to stop customers doing this?Once a product is released, it should have it's model number set in stone. Worried customers won't buy it because it is the generation behind? Well guess what, IT IS. And consumers have a right to know that when they buy.[/citation]

Amen to that

 

[dragonsqrrl]

More leaked images of an HD7900 series card (likely the HD7950), this time with a die shot:

http://www.guru3d.com/news/more-amd-tahiti-7900-pics-surface/

...and you were right about the memory chip nottheking. Very odd placements on these new cards, missed the chip between the GPU and the PCIe slot. So this basically confirms the 384-bit interface. The die also has a very interesting looking heat spreader, I haven't seen one quite like it before.

 

[eddieroolz]

At some point one must ask the question: are rebrandings really that necessary? Especially if consumers have just caught on to the previous rebrand/new product introduction.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]amk-aka-Phantom[/nom]Great, even MORE re-branded GPUs to remember! Good thing I deal only with desktops lately. It'll be a major disappointment for everyone if AMD/nVidia will also pull rebranding trick on their next-gen desktop cards.[/citation]

They will. Everything but the top end set tends to be rebranded.

But the good thing here is that even though it is a rebrand its running on 28nm which means less power.

For the HD7K series, I am willing to bet that everything except the HD79X0s are just rebranded and shrunk HD6XX0s.